From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
Userboxes
 |
This user is of Indian ancestry. |
 |
| UCT |
This user is an Ikey.
|
|
Hi all.
Welcome to my user page.
I've simply put one up for the sake of not seeing my name in red all
the time. I'm sure if you're resourceful enough you can find me on
Google. Or you might try looking at my contributions to profile me.
[edit] Travels
| Visited: |
      (  )      |
|
| To visit some day: |
         |
|
Idea and layout adapted from User:Lionchow who adapted it from User:Guinnog who adapted it from many many others. |
[edit] Wiki-philosophies
I am a deletionist exclusionist editor. I think that WP:CSD is the best thing since sliced bread and wish it could be expanded. I judiciously try to apply WP:IAR when it can speed up a process. I also subscribe to the philosophy of WP:SNOW.
As an exclusionist my favourite policies are WP:NPOV, WP:V, WP:RS, WP:NOR and WP:NOT, and my favourite template is {{fact}}. I use these tools mercilessly to remove any content or claim that is unsubstantiated. I believe in a philosophy of quality over quantity; that pruning existing content improves the encyclopedia to a greater degree than adding new content.
I don't support editing by anonymous users, and propose that all new articles go through a vetting process before being incorporated into the 'pedia. I subscribe to the bold, revert, discuss philosophy and tend to rewrite articles from the ground up rather than make incremental changes. I am not an eventualist, nor am I an immediatist, I am a "3-monthist": I believe any new article should be able to be brought up to Wikipedia standard within three months, and if it can't be or no-one can be bothered to do it, then it should be deleted.
When I'm not editing I prowl WP:AfD, policy pages and guidelines, the Village pump, Special:Recentchanges and Special:newpages. I very rarely actually read the encylopedia any more, although I do occasionally check the Main Page. I do not ever want to be an admin.
I don't take Wikipedia seriously as a reference tool, and if I were a lecturer, I would not accept any of my students using it as a source. I believe that Wikipedia does not hold itself up to a high enough standard, and that there is too much cruft and poor articles floating around in proportion to the really great ones. I believe it could become a well-respected source if stable versions of articles were implemented, or if the very best content were published to CD or DVD.
I think the wiki-philosophy of editing by consensus is a great way to find a middle ground between editors with opposing viewpoints, if editors on both sides are willing to compromise and to concede that the other person has a valid point of view.
[edit] Wiki-interests
My interests on Wikipedia centre largely around two topics: sports cars and South Africa. I also monitor (but rarely edit) Islam-related topics. My favourite edits, especially articles that I have rewritten, include:
