From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
This user lives in or hails from the state of Minnesota. |
|
|
|
 |
This user is interested in history research. |
|
|
|
 |
Editing Wikipedia is something this user does as a hobby. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| your/ you’re |
This user thinks that if your grammar is incorrect, then you’re in need of help. |
|
|
|
| its & it’s |
This user understands the difference between its and it’s. So should you. |
|
to / too
/ two |
This user thinks that too many people have no idea how to use words that they should have learned in grade two. |
|
| their / there / they’re |
This user thinks that there are too many people who don’t know that they’re worse than their own children at spelling! |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
This user is interested in Utilitarianism, the belief that a moral action is one which increases the total happiness of humanity. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
This user has Polish ancestry. |
 |
|
 |
This user is of Irish ancestry. |
|
|
|
 |
This user is of German ancestry. |
|
 |
This user is proud to be of Kashubian ancestry. |
 |
|
I am the son of Aeneas, founder of Alba Longa, and progenitor of the House of Julius.
Some online blog once commented that if they went to a New Order concert and heard only a 90-minute version of Temptation, they would not leave entirely disappointed. I couldn't agree more.
Professionally, I have a scholarly interest in Psychometrics, especially: Computerized adaptive testing, Item response theory, Criterion-referenced test, Computerized classification test, and the Sequential probability ratio test.
However, my greatest scholarly interest is in the confluence of urban geography, development geography, and economic geography; namely, why is a city founded and why does it grow? Is it:
- a natural harbor (Milwaukee, WI as well as many supercities like New York, Hong Kong, and the San Francisco area)
- the first available river crossing (Rome and London)
This editor is an
Apprentice Editor, and is entitled to display this
Service Badge.
 |
|
The Working Man's Barnstar |
| I hereby award you this barnstar for all the work you are doing on towns and counties in Minnesota. The quality and quantity is admirable.--Appraiser (talk) 14:53, 8 February 2008 (UTC) |
Two great statements I found (if the powers that be had any clue, some limits would be put in place):
Wikipedia's days are numbered, I fear, consumed by its own nonfeasance. Tribes of influential (= have the most free time on their hands) admins and editors have decided that WP policies say something other than what they actually say. They want to have loose reins to make WP their playground for their own particular agendas. People who follow strict and standardized interpretations of policies threaten that and must be stalked and rebuffed.
The problem on WP is not so much the obvious trolls but the ones who make editing painful for other editors by repetitive questions, tendentious editing, private agendas hidden beneath yet lord of all arguments; immature teenagers and college students who view biographies of living persons as their private political platform rather than a task requiring the utmost responsibility and mature outlook, all in recognition that words can be like flames and real lives can and sometimes really are ruined or at least permanently altered; people who fill up talk pages with nonsense, who see the truth of contrary arguments yet refuse from selfishness to acknowledge them; who endlessly Wikilawyer the most obvious points, and enforce not the policies but the policies as they privately interpret them through the grid of their own private agendas.
Most people like me ended up at Missing Wikipedians much sooner, and many such people are enjoying the heck out of other, more responsible wikis, and some enjoying reading the jabs at places like Wikitruth. The price that has been paid and will continue to be paid until something changes is a Project in the guise of an encyclopedia that cannot even be cited by 1st graders, lest high schoolers. Welcome to your Wikipedia. I am done. CyberAnth 20:43, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Given the level of dysfunction that has come to prevail on Wikipedia, the most appropriate course for a principled scientist is to withdraw from the project.
The bureaucracy should either take corrective steps to fix this situation, or else suffer the eventual loss of huge amounts of valuable talent and volunteered resources.
If you agree with this statement, post it to your pages, and pass it on. (discuss this here)
