I created the Wikipedia Service Awards, which I conceived, wrote, made the images for, published, and shepherded thru deletion attempts. (Other talented editors and better artists have since expanded and improved the awards, of course.)
If I should ever abruptly stop editing, the explanation is probably related to this.
I have no particular focus and perform a number of random tasks depending on fancy: translating articles from the Russian Wikipedia, writing articles, article cleanup, watching pages, participating in discussions, closing an occasional RfC, and other stuff. I have no areas of content expertise, and write, translate, and edit articles on a wide variety of subjects.
Two articles I started did become Good Articles (Revolt of the Lash and Village East by Angelika) but obviously all I did on those was get the ball rolling. (I think the GA/FA program is a fine thing, it just don't seem to grab my interest; I guess starting articles or improving articles from "not really all that good" to "not so bad", and working on my own, suits me better.) I have 12 DYKs: . Most of my stuff is serious, but I do have at least two articles at Wikipedia:Unusual articles.
I've drawn or patched together a few article graphics, and graphics for internal use such as vandal-warning templates. I mean I'm no artist (I have been informed) and some of them were made in PC-Paint, but still, I made them and I might as well own up to them I guess.
Some sample graphics
Small craft advisory. (Low to moderate level of vandalism) 2.95 RPM according to EnterpriseyBot08:10, 21 June 2024 (UTC) change
(In the last one, I only added the dollar bill and the "no" circle-slash to an existing graphic of a handshake.)
I'm a former administrator on the English Wikipedia. I was made an admin in 2006 but I was recalled for cause in 2010, which is how it's supposed to work. My admin logs: block, deletion, protection. When I stopped keeping count, I had the following AfD contribution stats: of 607 AFD comments, 32% were "Keep" and 68% were "Delete"; but 25% of the articles on which I voted "Keep" were deleted, while only 16% of the articles on which I voted "Delete" were kept. These stats indicate that I'm slightly more inclusionist than the general population. UPDATE: found this cool tool which seems to show that I'm just about at the center of the deletionist–inclusionist bell curve.
I guess was an OK admin... I don't believe I got any complaints for any of my blocks, discussion closes, page protections, or any other admin actions, or for being uncivil. If I am recalling correctly, which possibly not. I did close one requested move wrongly, when this was pointed out I undid it. I was never taken to deletion review or (if I recall correctly) WP:ANI for any admin actions I don't think. (After I was kicked out of the admin corps I figure I don't have to be be so agreeable so I've been in various arguments and hassles for various things, and been hauled to ANI more than once, and sometimes yelled at altho never sanctioned.)
Modo aliquid addere debebam ut insigne not tatam paginae format, sic hic accedit.
Solus editor sum, qui se sponte obtulit ad revocandum et processum usque ad finem secutus. Unicus. Sperabam fore ut haec praxis interdum regularus fieret et auxilium impediret vel saltem tardaret, ah processu cui omnes humanae consociationes subiciuntur.
Certe nigrum novum non fiebat, quod dissapointum sed non miror, et non est futurum etiam si vellemus. Vides ergo ubi sumus, aut fortasse non. Alioqui homines, et de eo nimium solliciti esse non potes.
Iuppiter, imple vacuum. Recte igitur hoc: "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua... tristique senectus. Pellentesque habitant morbi tristique senectus et netus et malesuada fames. Et malesuada fames ac turpis... Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet... memento mori." -- Ethan Shredlew
Of these 8 (*) are arguably questionable as 1) logrolling (barnstars received from someone to whom one has given a barnstar), 2) barnstars from a Wikifriend, 3) barnstars in excess of one received from the same person, or 4) barnstars received from someone whom one has supported on some issue or in some situation.
Of these 2 (*) are arguably questionable as 1) logrolling (barnstars received from someone to whom one has given a barnstar), 2) barnstars from a Wikifriend, 3) barnstars in excess of one received from the same person, or 4) barnstars received from someone whom one has supported on some issue or in some situation.
This userpage or its subpages have been Visigothed by more than a dozen different mefandissimi Langobardi. Why should the Vandals get all the bad press? How would you like it?
I've been ripped to shreds on Encyclopaedia Dramatica. For backgr... never mind. But the link is https://encyclopediadramatica.rs/Herostratus (you have to copy and paste it, as spambot doesn't allow an active link).
I haven't been ripped to shreds on Wikipediocracy, but I've been insulted in a kind of offhand and desultory way ("idiot" and so forth) a couple times, more just a function of their autonomic nervous system firing than over any particular matter I guess. I don't have the links because tedious. Ooh, "bloviator" 3/26/16... heh, somebody got a grownup to help with words!
* {{subst:uw-vandalism1|PageName}}~~~~ (unintentional vandalism/test)
* {{subst:uw-delete1|PageName}}~~~~ (unintentional removal of content)
* {{subst:uw-vandalism2|PageName}}~~~~ (suitable for intentional nonsense or disruption)
* {{subst:uw-delete2|PageName}}~~~~ (variant for removal of content)
* {{subst:uw-vandalism3|PageName}}~~~~ ("please stop" for use after level 2 warning)
* {{subst:uw-delete3|PageName}}~~~~ (please stop removing content)
* {{subst:uw-vandalism4|PageName}}~~~~ (last warning for vandalism)
* {{subst:uw-delete4|PageName}}~~~~ (last warning for removing content)
* {{subst:uw-vandalism4im|PageName}}~~~~ (only warning; for severe or grotesque vandalism only)
* {{subst:uw-delete4im|PageName}}~~~~ (only warning; for many blankings in a short period of time)
''{{interlanguage link|Hooglede town hall|nl|Gemeentehuis van Hooglede}}'' gives "[[Hooglede town hall]] [nl]" which points to the Dutch Wikipedia article "Gemeentehuis van Hooglede"
{{Do not move to Commons}}, used when the file would violate Commons policy
{{Keep local}}, used when the file is probably eligible for Commons but you prefer that a local copy be kept too
Enable ProveIt at your preferences under 'Gadgets'; it will then appear in in the edit box. Create references by filling in fields such as URL, page title, etc.
Search database at https://books.google.com with desired keyword(s). Once you find a page containing what you need, copy and paste page URL into the Citation Tool, and it will instantly generate a ref you can add directly to Wikipedia
The free Google Newspaper Archive is a searchable database of old newspapers. Once you find the article you need, copy/paste URL, date, author, etc. into ProveIt.
WP:NOT EVIL. I wrote this quite a long time ago, as a kind of attempt to deal with some of the issues that were eventually addressed by WP:BLP (which was being created around the same time). I actually proposed it as a policy (rejected), which is why it is bound about with weasely exceptions, in an attempt to be adopted. I wouldn't write it that way now.
Content Disclaimer Parody (I wouldn't have written this on Meta, which IMO is for Serious Business, but this page already existed there, and it wasn't funny, and they wouldn't delete it, so I had to do something.)
Some quotes (by other people, not by me) that I find interesting or instructive.
Quotes
This list is incomplete. That is its nature.
From the crooked timber of mankind, no straight thing was ever made.Immanuel Kant. The Wikipedia is populated by human beings. If you were expecting to find a place that did not sometimes have politics, unfairness, nice guys and bastards, stars and outcasts, leaders and toadies, cliques and backbiting and all the rest, Nirvana is down the hall to the left. Look: talking monkeys is your basic bad idea. They should have started straight off with the robots. But we have to deal with what we have.
I am a man. Nothing human is alien to me.Terence. If I object to your editing, that does not mean that I belittle your circumstance. (Applies particularly to certain editors, you know who you are.)
To denounce moralizing out of hand is to pronounce a moral judgment.H. L. Mencken said that. You never cease being a moral player on this planet. Never, not for one instant. I said that. Sitting down at a keyboard does not remove you from the moral universe, and "I was only following orders" was ripped to shreds at Nuremburg. Remember that Great Darwin, who lives in the sky, will presently call you to account before His mighty seat of judgment.
It is incumbent on all ACM members to contribute to society and human well-being, and avoid harm to others.Association for Computing Machinery Code of Ethics.[1]
Pornographer: Noun. One who is involved in the creation or dissemination of pornography. Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary.[3] If this term applies to you, don't blame the dictionary or the person citing it.
No man can serve two masters [...] You cannot serve God and mammon.Matthew 6:24. If you're editing the Wikipedia for pay, then either you are subverting the Wikipedia to your client's interest or you are not. If it's the former, you should not be here. If it's the latter, your client should fire you. There is no third path.
The graveyards are full of indispensable people.Charles de Gaulle. If you have 87 featured articles or whatever but are not willing to abide by the rules, we'll manage without you.
To be uncertain is to be uncomfortable, but to be certain is to be ridiculous.Voltaire.
I will fight it out on this line if it takes all summer.Ulysses S. Grant.
I don't know.Bob Dylan, on being asked by an interviewer "Are you being deliberately rude, or are you just bored?"
No.Elvis Presley, on being asked by an interviewer, "Elvis, have you learned anything from all this criticism of you?"
Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe. Ha, great quote to sum up values clarification in one sentence. The only attribution I can find right off is to Alex Trebek and maybe that's right. What you do speaks so loud that I cannot hear what you say. (Emerson) is a similar thought.
Old archives, garbage, &c. solely of interest to Herostratus and kept for his personal use.
Random clutter
Hi, I see you're looking for information on [subject]. We could have an article on this subject. In fact we did have an article on this subject, a nice one. But we deleted it! Because, while we are here to provide information, we don't think you should have too much information.
But we wish you luck on your Google search on this topic, and we hope and assume that you have time, interest, and skill to re-create the equivalent collection of sourced data on your own (just as all the other people reading this message will have to do individually, unless they just give up or settle for a lesser amount of information). Have a nice day!