User:Collectonian/Me and Wikipedia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I hit Wikipedia anywhere from 4-10 times a day. In any one visit, I may spend as little as 10 minutes on the site, or work as long as 5 hours, depending on the day and the demands of work and life in general, and the current state of the writer in me. During a typical visit, I check my watchlist to see what edits have been made to articles there, revert any vandalism and unsourced/OR additions, make any grammar/spelling fixes if needed, and response to any messages on talk pages of interest to me or directed at me.

After that, if I'm doing more than just a quick 10-20 minute check, I'll generally work on improving articles of interest to me, particularly items listed in my "to do." Sometimes, particularly when I'm feeling a little wiki-fatigued, instead of editing, I'll spend time going through RfAs and adding support/oppose comments, visiting various AfDs to leave my views there, and occasionally I'll do some new page patrolling, update the Anime and manga portal (as needed), etc.

Contents

[edit] Why I contribute

Many a person I know in real life (and a few online) have asked why I'm so into contributing to Wikipedia. Really, its a three-fold reason, I think. I love to write, both fiction and non-fiction. Wikipedia gives me a quick, short way to indulge my writing in ways my workings on my novels do not. I also love researching various topics, which working on the wide range of articles I do also allows me to indulge in. Finally, I'm a long term Wikipedia user, so being able to give back and help clean up articles is my way of contributing to the overall improvement of the quality and breadth of Wikipedia articles.

[edit] Editing philosophy

My fuller prosy editing philosophy type stuff will come here...one day...meanwhile, short shots:

  • hate trivia type sections, incorporate and destroy - Wikipedia is not a indiscriminate collection of random tidbits
  • "In Popular Culture" type stuff is rarely useful and has no place in biographical, scientific, or similar articles
  • sources are good when they are good sources
  • plot summary is okay, plot is better, but keep it concise
  • Wikipedia is NOT a spoiler free zone, if don't like being spoiled, read about your topic elsewhere
  • yes, headers should have first letter of each major word capitalized, but this goes against the MOS, so be good, and capitalize only the first letter and proper nouns (user pages excluded)
  • I'm not a grammar cop, and I do make grammar and spelling mistakes sometimes, but please at least make an attempt at decent, coherent English when working on articles or leaving messages
  • don't play with public user boxes that others are using unless its to fix minor things (like spacing)
  • read the bleeping "welcome" stuff before going out and making 25 edits someone else has to revert/fix
  • vandals: shoot first, ask questions later
  • people who give the appearance of being new yet have strong points of view that contradict standing Wikipedia guidelines and policies, actively disregards any guidelines they disagree with, and knows obscure pages and shortcuts; all would would generally require more experience than they appear to have - presume they are socks or new accounts of banned people, treat accordingly
  • Almost no individual television episodes are not notable and should not have their own articles, nor should every last character in a television show or move (or even most of them), or every DVD release, etc.

[edit] My RfA Support Criteria

[edit] My RfB support criteria

[edit] Good article, featured article, and featured list participation

Note: for GAs, FAs, and FLs I've nominated myself and that have passed, see my page of accomplishments. This section is for detailing GA reviews I've done, good article reviews I've started or participated in, and for FA/FL reviews I've done, along with their results.

~~coming soon~~