User:ACK-47
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Who I Am
Hello there. I registered this account on 7 August 2005, although I've been editing off and on since 6 April and I've been browsing about Wikipedia much longer than that.
Logged off, I edit as 68.96.162.252.
I am an American, born and (mostly) raised in the west; I stand strongly on the political and economic left on a great majority of issues, although I'm not readily pidgeonholed into any mass political organization. Bear in mind that I try to keep my politics out of anything I write here.
I am studying political science at UNLV, for what it's worth.
I know a little about a lot, but most of the topics I have a great and particular interest in - political science, history, literature, etc. - are already being covered by people with more professional background on them, and my role in Wikipedia in the near to immediate future is probably going to be more a janitor than a carpenter. Also note that I'm not such a slick editor yet, so you'll have to forgive me if I make any terrible newbie mistakes. Either that or be really angry for no good reason, I suppose.
As I'm currently too lazy to find the language stickers at present, and I feel uncomfortable applying a grade to myself, I'm a native speaker of English and have a bit of French and Japanese on me too.
[edit] I Admit My Biases
I:
- Am pro-underdog
- Am anti-neoliberal
- Am pro-science
- Am a passionate rationalist
- Am a general-purpose contrarian
- Am strongly critical of the US and the Catholic church, but find outside criticism of either faintly distasteful
- Consider puppies adorable
- Am a feminist and an everything else-ist while I'm at it
- Think there's more than enough people in this world
- Have a Politicalcompass score around -9, -9
- Hate imperialism and its peanut gallery
- Am not a Democrat, but feel forced to vote for them
- Have modernist sensibilities when it comes to literature
- Abhor South Park and can't put my finger on why
- Am made of poison
- Am unfashionable when it comes to the third world insomuch as I sympathize with it without treating it like three billion children
- Am a product of the welfare state, just like you
- Actually enjoy Penny Arcade
- Consider kittens adorable too
- Am a straight white middle-class American man
- Consider Wikipedia biased
- Think loving England and hating France is where America first went wrong
- Believe an article isn't worth reading until it has illustrations of celestial bodies or boobies in it, and when it has both it is perfect
[edit] My work on Wikipedia
Pages I have worked over, am working over, or plan to work over:
- Comprachicos
- Sam Webb
- The kana in general
- Victoria (computer game)
[edit] Accuracy disputes
On top of all of that, I run on a maxim that has already gotten me into some mild disputes: any significant assertion requires significant proof. I am apparently in the minority among Wikipedia contributors in that if information is remotely dubious I favor removing it, or at the very least noting it as dubious. The converse policy turns Wikipedia into a misinformation vector, particularly favoring already-popular misinformation (urban legends and the like).
Articles wherein I have been engaged in such a dispute:
- Beaver: Has the Catholic Church ever considered beavers fish for fasting purposes? I thought not; as it turns out, yes. Citations have been improved and the tidbit about that removed from its previous station of prominence and they all lived happily ever after.
[edit] Tragedies
The following articles make me very sad, but I will not be messing with them, as they are well-supported by a cadre of loyal editors and in an area of expertise I am not prepared to muck around in:
- Race presupposes that 'race' is a valid concept to begin with and gives a pedestal to some of the dumbest misscience in human history.
- Gold as an investment systematically favors the idea gold has inherent value, from the name down.
- Cleveland Indians allows one of the more disgusting instances of racist imagery in popular culture to go entirely without comment.
