This one goes out to everyone thinking about sending me angry email; I'm a chick born in the 1970s and not a dude born in the 1990s. Just a heads up since I seem to revert a fair amount of fiction related interpretation that seems to lead folks to wildly erroneous conclusions on that score. If you're going to slam me for my gender, at least try to get it right.
I can has words
Writing is my first love. Which is not to say I'm great at it. I mostly just don't suck; I can string a decent sentence together, but I am the queen of typos. Consequently, my primary focus on Wikipedia is likely to be sections of articles where the text itself is the major problem. I guess it's no surprise I got sucked into plot summaries right off the bat. I mostly play with movie plots but I've poked at plots for video games, TV episodes, and books, too.
I welcome suggestions on my talk page, if you know of a plot that needs whacking. I'm mostly a genre nerd so the odds of my working on an article dramatically increases if it involves time travel, space battles, zombies, or wizards. That said, as long as Dane Cook is not involved, I'm willing to give a romcom a try.
Peeves (as in pet)
Irregardless: If you use this "word" I will have a very hard time taking you seriously. I will probably mock you mercilessly. IMO, it's worth getting banned for it if just one person realizes they are speaking gibberish.
General consensus: Redundant redundant
It is shown that "it is shown" may be one of the most abused phrases in the fiction related articles on Wikipedia.
The film begins is no way to start a plot summary.
Mixed to generally positive reviews is sort of to essentially meaningless.
He is the secondary antagonist of the film And wikipedia is not your book report. Reverted.
An American Crime - reception section - First part is written on my flash drive. Finish up this weekend and transfer. UG Major delay. Flash drive got eaten. Never rewritten, yet. I'm sorry dude. I have forgotten I just have to find the re-write motivation.