User:HWV258

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] My Username

My username refers to a work by George Frideric Handel called Zadok the Priest. That work has a HWV number of 258. Not necessarily my all-time favourite work, but one I picked in a hurry in order to get an anonymous user name at WP.

[edit] My role at Wikipedia

To help expand articles - mainly in music-related areas, but primarily to do with the collation of information in list format.

[edit] My strategy at Wikipedia

  • Collate information from outside of WP.
  • Transfer it into WP.
  • Move on to some other area so as not to indulge in a sense of ownership. If other people want to edit (or even remove) what I've contributed - so be it.
  • To not get bogged-down in edit wars. Been there, done that, hate it. At best, I'll make one attempt to explain why I've done something. If the 'war' continues, I'll withdraw and simply update my philosophy on this page.

[edit] My philosophy of Wikipedia

  • WP was created to hone in on accurate definitions by repeated edits over time. It's a common mistake to act on an article under the misapprehension that its current state is complete. I feel it is better to try and fix or add to a page, rather than criticise or delete it.
  • Stub pages are better than no page. With a stub, at least there's something to encourage others.
  • More and more information should be moved into WP from external sources (not left as citations from within WP). External sources are not always easy to obtain, and can change without notice. By bringing the external information into WP, watchable information can be easily referenced.
  • In the purest sense of the word, everything is 'notable'. Can, what someone is trying to 'note' in the future, really be anticipated?

[edit] My pet dislikes at Wikipedia

  • 'Editors' who believe a good day's work is to summarily delete other people's work (especially when they could spend time helping to expand the work). At worst, deletes should be preceded by talk.
  • Over-linking of the words on a page. Only the first occurrence of a word should be linked, and only if the word is closely related to the topic.
  • Linking of dates in articles in order to adhere to a pseudo-standard date format.
  • Almost all citations - especially when made to external internet pages. The concept of repeated edits honing in on accurate information should obviate the need for citations. I'm aware I'm in the minority with this view, however I believe the fundamental basis of WP is the convergence on accuracy. Citations can even act as a hand-brake on that process.
  • Editors who want to turn WP into The Encyclopaedia Britannica. WP can be so much more, however with more and more pseudo-rules being imposed, I fear WP will be forever held back from what it could be.
  • The justification for deletion seemingly granted by the word 'notable'. I fully encourage any contributor to create a page, no matter how little it is of 'note' to another reader. The point being that if it isn't 'notable' it won't be found by people who aren't looking for it. One person's trash is another person's treasure.
  • The use of the word 'unencyclopedic'. I'm not sure which part of 'comprehensive' the people who justify deletions by quoting 'unencyclopedic' are missing.

[edit] My significant contributions at Wikipedia