User:Triangleman3: Difference between revisions
Triangleman3 (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Triangleman3 (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 109: | Line 109: | ||
{{User:Triangleman3/Userboxes/Destroyer of Words}} |
{{User:Triangleman3/Userboxes/Destroyer of Words}} |
||
{{User:UBX/Twinkle2}} |
{{User:UBX/Twinkle2}} |
||
{{Template:user Barnstaraward| |
{{Template:user Barnstaraward|8}} |
||
{{User:Malik Shabazz/Userboxes/Edit count| |
{{User:Malik Shabazz/Userboxes/Edit count|700}} |
||
{{User MadeArticles|1}} |
{{User MadeArticles|1}} |
||
{{User:Gracefool/humility|1}} |
{{User:Gracefool/humility|1}} |
Latest revision as of 01:11, 28 October 2018
Hello, my name is Triangleman3, and I have been reading wikipedia for over 10 years. For me wikipedia has been more than just a reference tool, as it has provided me with hundreds of hours of interesting reading material and has been an important part of my education. I have created this account so that I can give back, and help to build and improve this valuable platform from which I have taken so much. My main interests are economics and history, although I typically work on a random assortment of pages which have nothing to do with either interest. In my career as a Wikipedian I have engaged in a number of constructive activities, which include fighting vandalism by patrolling the recent changes log, copyediting articles in on the list of Wikipedia articles needing copy edit, and creating pages from scratch. When I first started working on wikipedia, I conceptualized the project as a kind of Encyclopedia Galactica; a repository for all human knowledge. Perhaps I imagined myself as an editor on the planet Terminus, working away on a project that was far greater than myself in both time and space. As things progressed, however, I have become more of a minimalist. I found that the thing that makes wikipedia great is the fact that many articles are well written and contain only reliable information. As I began to read more and more pages which are poorly written and under-sourced, I slowly realized the importance of quality, as opposed to the quantity focused view that I previously held. I came to believe that, while a repository for all human knowledge is a grand goal, the wikipedia project in its current state is not remotely close to such a feat. I now believe that the site should instead focus on the quality of its articles, and on the veracity and style of the articles which exist. Heres a drastic (and probably impossible) solution to the problem: as a community, let us delete the 1,000,000 worst pages on the site. Then, let us focus on working with the remaining pages with the intent to make as many as possible into Good Articles.
|
|