|
Illustrations on this page are examples of topics I am most likely to be editing.
I am also a "drive-by editor". If I think of something at random that might be interesting to work on, or if I happen to see something interesting that someone else might be working on, I might work on it also.
I try to write well, in proper American English, but I was not a journalism major, so I am perfectly happy with better writers improvin' on my writin' style.
I think the focus of every article should be on organized, readable presentations of facts, using good English, rather than on pedantic obsessions about "fair use" illustrations and "trivia" lists. Some editors use the term "encyclopedic" when they actually mean "boring".
I am not that keen on infoboxes, highly-formalized citations, overly-detailed categories, and other fancy stuff, as they are constantly being tinkered with. I like to provide basic info, basic citations, and basic categories -- and leave the minutia to those who are interested in it and good at it.
I like to find unusual and interesting facts that, although verifiable, are not necessarily well-known. For example, the fact that Mordecai Brown injured his hand twice while a child, further handicapping him on his road to the Baseball Hall of Fame.
I might argue with you on points of fact or philosophy, but I will refrain from vulgarity, I will try to answer reasonable questions and comments, and I will not slam the door in your face. However, I do occasionally get fed up.
I believe in working things out rather than "running to Mommy" about every little thing. But just in case... List of administrators WP:ANI
I like for wikipedia to be truthful and verifiable (which are etymologically the same thing) and to be more than just a "me too" rubber stamp of standard information. d:)
I come to wikipedia to find information about something. If I can't find it here, I might start an article on it. So I would probably be classed as an "inclusionist" (as opposed to a "deletionist"). I want wikipedia to be the go-to place for information, which I consider to be a more important axiom than the capricious and arbitrary "notability" argument which is often used as a club by deletionists. I want wikipedia to be all it can be, and not to be confined to a box.
|
