User:Rusty Cashman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Professional history 2 Personal interests 3 Brief history as a Wikipedian 4 Personal beliefs relevant to Wikipedia 5 Useful links

[edit] Professional history

I am a software engineer who has worked on embedded system software and on data communication protocols, on devices such as cable modems, VoIP systems, and wireless comunication devices. I played a role in the early development of both the CDPD and DOCSIS systems, and I am culrrently working in the areas of Ultra-wideband and IEEE 802.15.

[edit] Personal interests

Besides the areas where I have professional expertise, I have a strong interest in many areas of science, and in particular in evolutionary biology. I am also somewhat of a history buff, especially the history of science.

[edit] Brief history as a Wikipedian

Userboxes This user is a member of the Good Article Wikiproject. This user is a member of the History of Science WikiProject. This user helped promote the article Alfred Russel Wallace to featured article status. This user helped promote the article History of biology to featured article status. This user helped promote the article History of paleontology to good article status. This user helped promote the article History of evolutionary thought to good article status.

I have used Wikipedia as a reference for years, but I only recently became a Wikipedian, when I stumbled across an incorrect fact in the polar bear article. Naturally, after I corrected it, my edit was reverted out (probably by someone who thought I was a vandal) the next day. I managed to find some online references to support my position and managed to make my edit stick. Once I made one edit to the article I just had to make a few more improvements...

Articles I started:

• Nylon eating bacteria - My first
• History of paleontology - Just made GA!
• John Jenner Weir
• The Malay Archipelago
• Charles H. Smith (historian of science)

The last 3 grew out of my work on Alfred Russel Wallace.

I am particularly proud of my contributions to:

• Alfred Russel Wallace - My biggest project, finally promoted to FA!
• Georges Cuvier
• Catastrophism
• History of biology
• History of evolutionary thought - Just made GA!
• Modern evolutionary synthesis - Much improved but still needs work.
• Bernhard Rensch -- ditto
• Stratigraphy
• Wallace effect

I am a member of the Wikipedia:WikiProject History of Science project and its sub project the Wikipedia:WikiProject History of Biology.

Here is my edit count. I am not a big edit count guy, but I find the statistics about what I have been working on interesting.

Some awards/milestones I am particularly proud of:

Alfred Russel Wallace - Promoted to featured article status May 27, 2007.

		The shiny new Darwin-Wallace medal
		For your dedicated work on Alfred Russel Wallace - Shyamal 02:30, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

		The Bio-star
		En avance de bringing Alfred Russel Wallace to FA status, and for some earlier contributions. Samsara (talk • contribs) 09:37, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of National Merit
		For excellent, dedicated and ongoing efforts to Alfred Russel Wallace -- --Merbabu 17:37, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Personal beliefs relevant to Wikipedia

• I believe it was no accident that the greatest literary project of the enlightenment was an encyclopedia.

• I believe that Wikipedia represents a major step towards Isaac Asimov's Encyclopedia Galactica, a nearly comprehensive summary and distillation of human knowledge.

• I also believe that Wikipedia is one of the best practical realizations of Ted Nelson's hypertext concept even though he probably hates it. Whenever I use Wikipedia as a reference I never stop with the article I started with, so I believe that cross linking between articles is incredibly important and I try to spend time adding cross links wherever I find them missing.

• I believe that Wikipedia should be as easy to use as possible so I also spend time adding redirects.

• I believe that many otherwise reasonably good articles on scientific topics don't have enough historical context.

• I believe that biographical articles should always tell you why the subject was important enough to merit an article. In particular I think that means that a biographical article on a scientist should always include some discussion of the subject's work and how it fit into the historical development of whatever scientific field that person contributed to, not just a laundry list of career achievements.

[edit] Useful links

A tool for counting hits on articles.

Rusty Cashman 06:26, 17 September 2006 (UTC)