![]() |
|
|||||||||||||||||
User:AvrietteAlex Avriette (me), Mojave Desert, 2004, at a Moontribe festival.
IntarwebWikipedia HistoryWell, my first appearance on the wikipedia under my own account seems to be on 29 June of 2004. I'm present on freenode as keats. I use irssi and won't notice you talking to me unless you send me a private message, which will spawn a new window with a pink 9 indicating I've got a new message. My first foray into technical writing was at the age of 17, when I wrote The Datura FAQ. I have since ceded all rights to it to Erowid, who at one time I was friends with (Earth, I miss you).
My contributions to the wikipedia have been mostly focused into three areas. First, I have been cleaning up, adding content and images to, categorizing, etc, military technology articles. This isn't necessarily focused on weapons systems, but also on vehicles and other things of that nature. This is both difficult to do and easy to do. Difficult because sometimes the military doesn't like to share information about its toys. Easy because once you find the information you want, it's copyright-free, and you can simply copy-paste. Although usually they're such horrid writers, I wind up doing a read-and-rewrite-better sort of thing. Second, I go through random pages looking for typographical issues, grammatical issues, categorizations, stubs which I can expand, and so on. This is work more wikipedians should be doing, there are a lot of typos, misspellings, grammatical errors, etc, out there. I'd even advocate a "no new articles day" just to see if we could get people to pretty up the 'pedia. This sometimes gets me into a hornets nest, which is my next and last general area. Third, I may be what some wikipedians call a deletionist. I am generally in favor of a delete in VfD's. This is not to say that I feel that we should wantonly delete material from this fancy encyclopedia we have. It is simply that I feel that some material does not belong here. Specifically, things like "articles" about fictional characters in television shows. In general, if you wouldn't find it in Encyclopedia Britannica, or you would be embarassed to ask a librarian to find you information on it, I don't want it in the wikipedia. I don't feel this makes me a deletionist per se, I think it just makes me a hardass. And every FOSS project needs at least one hardass to make sure stuff gets done.
I donate. You probably should too.
Adjectives and affiliations
Favorite Wikipedia NodesI reserve the right to expand this to include other Wikimedia nodes as needed in the future. Miscy
PlantsPlanesWeapons SystemsShips
The Big StuffNodes I'm going to write one day
Hawaii Stuff
Military Hardware
The Broken Shit I'm going to fix
Star Trek-specific cruft
Look at nodes like Danube class starship and the gigantic template of crap that exist in this database that simply don't belong here. We are not the encyclopedia of arda, nor memory alpha, nor anything of the kind. In fact, Memory Alpha is a mediawiki, not a WikiWiki as I had previously thought. It is also hosted on wikicities. So what is so hard about moving the Star Trek stuff over there? Why are so many people obssessed with having Zefram Cochrane in this encyclopedia? Furthermore, "specifications" are lifted from sources which we do not have rights to, and articles such as Reptilian ship are lifted from memory alpha, transplanted HERE. Why? Generally speaking, encyclopedias are FACTUAL repositories of information. Contrary to what SimonP and others may believe ratio of fiction-article-creators to fact-article-creators, I think we can assume that the vast majority of users of the wikipedia prefer factual articles. The only way to fix the problem is to approach the authors individually and tell them what they are doing is wrong. The "move to memory alpha" template is a good start. Quote from SimonP's usertalk page:
Weapons systems needing images or updatesSub-Pages
Everybody ELSE Has a License Template...The contents of this article are licensed from Wikipedia.org under the GNU Free Documentation License.
How to see transparent copy 01-04-2007 01:21:04 |
|





