User:Iacobus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Iacobus is a regular user of Wikipedia, and a casual contributor since September 2005.


Contents

[edit] Random thoughts on Wikipedia

Read these thoughts and you might understand a little more about Wikipedia and how to use it.

[edit] Use published sources

Wikipedia contributors should rely on published sources. Way too many articles are either straight dumps of Encyclopedia Britannica 1911 text, or they rely on other web sources of unkown quality. Try reading a book, or chasing up published information over the internet. Discovery Channel or someone's pet theory web site just don't cut it.

[edit] Primary and secondary sources

Don't reference primary historical sources in Wikipedia articles unless you are quoting. Primary sources need interpretation. Lots of qualified historians have published those interpretations. If you rely on primary sources, you are either naively taking at face value things that historians have found a need to interpret, or you are doing that interpretation, which is not what Wikipedia is for. More than likely, people quote primary sources but are actually relying on secondary sources for their interpretations. Cite the secondary sources.

[edit] Images in Wikipedia

Copyright paranoia means that the quality of images on Wikipedia is generally poor. It is embarassing to read articles of living persons and have only fan snapshots at public events to illustrate them. I hate copyright paranoia!

As a related grumble, why do so many Wikipedia articles on historical persons have anachronistic images of those persons or events from centuries (even millenia) later. If you can't find an image of a tenth century French king, then don't insert an image from a nineteenth century history book!

[edit] Write for the general reader of English

There are many Wikipedia articles that are not very clear unless you have training, or have read widely, in the relevant field. This is a problem with Wikipedia: those with knowledge (and probably enthusiasm) in a particular field will probably write an article, but they may not be able to explain it to someone with no particular knowledge in that field. I have found that this applies to articles on technology, science, and even history! The opening paragraphs of such articles must be written to be intelligible to any informed "layman." Technical issues can be reserved for later in the article, or even left out altogether. Some historical articles insist on using names unfamiliar to the English reader, instead using names and terms appropriate for another language (see, for expample, the great naming debate on the Kings of Scotland). Users of Wikipedia should only be expected to be fluent in the English language, and names and terms should be those commonly used in English. See also Wikipedia:Make technical articles accessible

[edit] Creations

Articles I have created.

[edit] 2008

[edit] 2007

[edit] Expansions

Articles I have expanded or to which I have made significant contributions.

[edit] 2007

[edit] 2006

[edit] 2005

[edit] Other contributions

A selection of other contributions.

[edit] 2007

[edit] 2006

[edit] 2005


[edit] Librarything

I've just discovered Librarything. Nice toy! See my User Page

[edit] Age of Minority/Majority

Thanks for your note on my Talk Page. There are no worries in the least - I make similar slips all the time. All best wishes, John Hill (talk) 05:31, 1 May 2008 (UTC)