User:The Hokkaido Crow
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome to my user page. If you see vandalism on this page feel free to revert it, but for all other comments or corrections, please direct it to my talk page.
If there were a verb meaning 'to believe falsely,' it would not have any significant first person, present indicative. --Ludwig Wittgenstein
Contents |
[edit] About me
I am an improving writer and am still learning all the nuances of Wikipedia. My pet projects here are neutralizing bias as I see it, copyediting, supplying requested articles (or as much as I can find from Google).
My areas of expertise include subjects related to computers, scientific topics, and Japanese. In other words, your basic 3 nerd food groups. I lived in Hokkaido for about a year (hence my username) and wish I were still there.
[edit] Dear Wiki Diary
[edit] Contention and the editing process
Few people have the time or ability to create a fantastic article alone. On the other hand, it tends to be useless to say "Hey everybody, let's go write a great article together." People are more willing to say "don't do that" than suggest what you should actually do. Rather than take offense, adhere to WP:CIVIL and you may find this is a starting point to gathering productive ideas and contributions.
[edit] Don't sweat AfD
If you get an article referred for deletion, don't sweat it. The probability of the article actually being deleted is low due to a strong keep bias on Wikipedia, also known as inclusionism. Consider it an opportunity to consult the community for concerns on the article. Often it will result in improvements and assistance that wouldn't have happened otherwise.
[edit] Consensus and assuming good faith
Today I learned the importance of assuming good faith and consensus. These sound easy enough. Many feel that it is second nature, an instinctual ability. And it certainly is incredibly easy to repeat the words or pay lip service by slapping a happy userbox on your page. However, these are skills that require practice. Most of us aren't very good at it without trying and failing a few times. It requires some strength and presence of mind to restrain oneself when someone is acting like... oh, let's not mince words, just being a nutsack in general. Sure, you are within your rights of free speech to call them a nutsack and shoot down every silly point they make, but will either of you contribute any work from that point? Probably not. Ultimately, the measure of success is not who is demonstrated to be a nutsack, but whether the most and best editing work has been squeezed out of all parties concerned. Even nutsacks have something to offer. It takes humility and patience, but the end product (and lack of stress) is worth it.
[edit] My thoughts on Wikipedia
[edit] In which I gush about Wikipedia
I think Wikipedia is fabulous, just fabulous, and I have my own perspectives on what it is and isn't. I don't really think Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, as there is too much systematic bias which cannot be countered. However, I think it's important that Wikipedia wants to be an encyclopedia, because that goal is generally a positive influence on the style and balance. In my view, what Wikipedia ends up being is an abstract of the most useful information on the internet, a Reader's Digest version if you will (meaning a summary that is consistent in spite of systematic bias). What an important thing! Think about the keyword spam that arrives in your mailbox every day. Viagra, porn, mortgage rates, hydrocodone, gambling offers, etc. Think of the auto-generated portals that compile "articles" heavy with keywords designed to pull you to a commercial site.
What if you had a real, practical or academic need to learn more about these exact things? Or what if you were searching for things that shared keywords, such as a notable person who shared the same name as a porn star? All the promotional spamming and auto-portals make it difficult to find information about these and other topics. But thanks to Wikipedia being somewhat of a digest, you actually have a fighting chance of finding useful information or links. To me, this is really the most important service that Wikipedia delivers. I hope I am adding to its usefulness.
As with anything important that I'm involved in, I have some gripes and complaints about Wikipedia, specifically the editing and authoring culture. Below I'll list some of my criticisms. Above all, it is my opinion that Wikipedia is overwhelmed by advocacy, bias, and the non-neutral point of view.
[edit] Wikipedia criticisms
Wikipedia is good for reminding one (and by "one" I do mean "me" as well as anyone else) of one's fallibility of knowledge and personal bias.
Things that bug me here: (although I probably have done them from time to time)
- fancruft
- porncruft (Does every article need a "Some people consider <insert topic here> to be a source of intense sexual arousal"?)
- trivia accumulation (Eventually, every article needs to become an article)
- factionalism (Even though your buddy wrote it, it's still a dicdef).
- advocacy and bias
- original research (I have softened a bit on this one but it bugs me when people abuse it)
- Blatant misuse of terms like intellectual dishonesty.
- Level-1 language boxes. Elementary language proficiency is as bad (or maybe worse) than having none at all. Don't wave it around as some badge of pride.
- The words "iconic" and "canonical". Pretentious fluff for a thin article, probably some kind of cruft.
- Incorrect use of "point of view". NPOV just means writing in a way that the reader can't determine who you are or what you think about the subject. That's all. People use it as a bludgeon for much more serious charges around here.
[edit] My outside projects
[edit] Takipedia
I have also created a wiki called Takipedia which is intended to capture information beneficial to English-speaking expatriates living in Japan. It has a small degree of overlap with Wikipedia and slightly different standards, such as Japan-centric POV, original research, signed non-neutral contributions, and things that might be considered too obscure or non-notable by the population outside of Japan. If you live in Japan or are interested in Japan, please consider contributing.
[edit] Takicards
Takicards is yet another kanji flashcard learning based on the Heisig Method. Not affiliated or endorsed by Dr. Heisig, but consistent with the method.
