Gaylor Lakes, Yosemite National Park; another place I like to go sometimes. You can't see my house from here.
Music, mainly. So far I have mainly focused on writing articles on "early music" (Medieval, Renaissance, and early Baroque), because I love it, I know a bit about it, and when I joined Wikipedia, no one else bothered with it. Once in a while I contribute to articles on 20th-21st century composers, music, practice, theory, etc. I usually, but not always, avoid the common practice period, since there are plenty of other contributors capable of writing in this area; why not focus on a spot where I can use my specialized knowledge? A lot of the time when I'm feeling uncreative I do RC patrol and eradicate all the vandalism I can find. It's addictive, and once in a while I have to remind myself to stop and write articles again.
As a break from music sometimes I write articles on California geography and history, since I've lived here a while, have studied geography and geology, and have a pretty good library of books on local history. Also sometimes I click on random page and copyedit, if I don't get hooked on reading. Is anyone else surprised at the sheer amount of things you have learned on Wikipedia? In my opinion this is one of the most wonderful things about this project.
Some other random interests: Classics, literature, history, military history, earth sciences, mountaineering, birds, trees, religious traditions, data forensics, European and eastern philosophy. I read a lot, especially English literature, as well as a lot of stuff in translation. While I'm fairly knowledgeable on topics such as Shakespeare, the existentialist writers, Swift, Greek tragedy, epic poetry, and European, Middle Eastern, and South Asian history, I don't usually contribute to articles on those topics; I don't feel my knowledge rises above the high amateur into the "sufficiently expert". There are other writers here who are better, and who know more than I do, and for now I'm going to leave it there. I would politely ask others to at least consider the depth of their knowledge before tackling detailed subjects around which their own experience is limited; but then who am I to tell other people what to do? Do as you will, says Rabelais, but prepare to be reverted (not by me, necessarily, but by someone who actually has studied the topic). This is an encyclopedia, not a trivia site.
Wikipediholic score is usually in the "productive" range; the scores are meaningless since people keep changing the test, and it keeps getting sillier, but it's still fun to take.