What I Do at & for Wikipedia[edit]
User:Lquilter is an Administrator who has been editing Wikipedia since 2004, and under the Lquilter user name since January 2005.
These days I primarily work on creating, maintaining, and improving articles, doing minor fixes, and training new editors. I rarely get involved in Wikipedia bureaucracy or policy discussions. I prefer to discuss article content on the talk page for that article, in the interests of greater transparency and findability.
 |
This user has been editing Wikipedia for more than ten years. |
See what I've actually DONE (in various lists) at User:Lquilter/done.
Below is information about philosophy, goals, etc.
Notwithstanding my beliefs and philosophies (such as those listed below), I'm also open-minded and committed to writing that is informative and honest and believe that the NPOV will help us get there.
I want to hear other peoples' perspectives and I want to hear their criticisms. I believe in dialogue and communications and if you give me criticism in a helpful and friendly way I'll listen to it and try to understand it, and if I think you're right I'll change my behavior. Even if I think you're wrong I'll learn from hearing from you, perhaps enough to better explain my position.
I research, read, and write for a living. Good writing in articles is important.
I'm a Wikipedia administrator, and I am willing to stand for recall; if you think there's a good reason, let me know.
- Nitpicky things
I am opposed to spoiler warnings in encyclopedias and other reference works.
I have a sockpuppet account (User:Owlqueue) which I use solely for purposes of testing. The account should not be responsible for any significant content or project edits. If it is, notify me ASAP -- I've been hacked! (Thanks)
- What I do & why I do it -
- Writing & editing articles - Substantive work on articles of particular interest to me, from the real to the unreal: science, science fiction, copyright. See User:Lquilter/done for my list of articles.
- Remedying systemic bias is one of my core concerns. Systemic biases at Wikipedia result from a lack of diversity in the pool of contributors, and lead to a poorer encyclopedia. A larger and more diverse pool of contributors will enhance Wikipedia's coverage of pre-Internet era topics, non-English language topics, topics of interest to senior citizens, academic subjects (cf. pop culture), humanities (cf. science & technology). It will also help remedy neutral point of view problems and make policies and guidelines better, fairer, more informed, and more realistic. The best way to remedy systemic biases is to cultivate a diverse pool of editors with a wide variety of subject expertises, skill levels, and interests. In addition to countering systemic bias through work here on Wikipedia, I do a certain amount of real-world propagandizing of wiki-editing, setting up wikis & teaching wiki-skills, and welcoming of newbies. (Also, it's systemic, not systematic, which is another thing entirely.) See (CSB, Jmabel's essay on SB)
- Article creation - Articles on or relating to women and people of color, especially in science, law, academia, or activism.
- Rescue - I sometimes rescue articles that ought not be deleted; these come to my attention thru systemic bias watches (e.g., academic deletion watch) or rather more quixotically. (CSD, AFD)
- This includes a certain amount of vandal patrol, particularly reverting vandalism on the frequently targeted biographical articles of women and people of color. Vandalism that is racist, misogynistic, or homophobic, is not just disruptive in the ordinary course of affairs, but also discourages contributions to — and use of — the encyclopedia. (aiv)
- Organize information - Categorization, organization, and presentation of information in useful ways; particularly working on category structure, standards, and relation to other aspects of Wikipedia organization (lists, indexes, portals, seriesboxes, templates). I don't like overcategorization because it makes it hard to use the categories at the bottom of pages, and because it's hard to police inclusion & exclusion of categories. See (WP:CATP ... WP:CFD ... cats need attn ... people need cats ... no cats ... uncatted pages)
- Engage in civil conversations with people of good faith even when they are wrong, especially if they are newbies. <g> Harmonious editing makes Wikipedia a welcoming and productive project. Pile-on and "me-too" assents in AFD and CFD are unfriendly and not useful, so I try to avoid them, unless (a) there needs to be a clear second; (b) someone else has said something beautifully that wholly expresses my feelings. Welcoming & providing helpful advice to people who are doing good work (or trying to) also helps encourage the good. Helping wikipedians.
- Admin - Administrator as of Jan. 30, 2008. (RFA)
- How I got started -
- Starting in 2004-ish I began gnomishly fixing typos & grammatical problems that bugged me (e.g., comma splices). I also occasionally added little bits of data to articles on occasion, chosen at random from whatever I happen to be looking up that needs attention.
- In January 2005 I added a username. (Although, I have sometimes forgotten to log in if I'm just trying to make a quick grammar or punctuation fix; see my sockpuppets.) Also, I hardly ever remembered to put in an edit summary until I added confirm-without-edit-summary as my default option.
- 2006 onward: Much more significant editing, characterized by significant wikibreaks and sporadic bursts of activity. I focus on areas of specific interest (history, remedying systemic bias, science, law, academia), and categorization issues. I think it's important to work on countering systemic bias in recruitment & retention of editors, as well as in content creation and maintenance.
- See also
|
