Page semi-protected


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

If you use the E-MAIL THIS USER feature to contact me and I don't know you, please make sure you indicate your Wikipedia user name in the message otherwise I cannot help you or reply. Thanks.

This editor is a Labutnum of the Encyclopedia and is entitled to display this Book of Knowledge with Coffee Cup Stain, Cigarette Burn, Chewed Broken Pencil, Sticky Note, Bookmark, and Note from Jimbo.
Wikipedia Administrator.svgThis user is a former administrator on the English Wikipedia (verify) whose administrator rights were suspended due to inactivity.
One-ton weight.svgThis user has a ton of edits.
wiki-4This user is an expert Wikipedia editor.
This user will not post any more images, as he/she feels the image policy is unfair.
FU This user supports the use of fair use images on Wikipedia.
Commons-emblem-copyright.svg This user finds copyright paranoia disruptive.
Image-request.svgThis user believes that articles are useless without images.
a collection of booksThis user is a member of the Novels WikiProject.
TARDIS-trans.pngThis user is a member of
WikiProject Doctor Who.
007This user is a member of WikiProject James Bond.
Trivialpursuit Token2.pngThis user is a member of
WikiProject Popular Culture
enThis user is a native speaker of the English language.
vnThis user page has been vandalized.
No Vandalism.svgThis user has a zero tolerance policy on vandalism.
Crystal Clear action run.svgThis user has beaten ClueBot NG to reverting vandalism.
Wikipedia-logo-v2.svgThis user likes "Trivia" and "In popular culture" information, and supports their inclusion.
toolsThis user reverts vandalism manually, without the help of any tools such as Twinkle.
CG This user enjoys Corner Gas.

23skidoo is a trivia fanatic in Calgary, Alberta. His expertise includes James Bond, Modesty Blaise, Doctor Who, Bill Haley and His Comets, Star Trek, Buck Rogers, Enya, Laurie Anderson, television, music, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan (his hometown), movie musicals, Eleanor Powell, Simon Templar (alias "The Saint"), and just about anything else that catches his fancy. He's also on the watch for vandalism, speedy deleteable nonsense articles and other silliness. He does not, however, support the philosophy of deletionism. Nor does he support current image use policy on Wikipedia on the grounds that it keeps changing all the time; for this reason he will no longer contribute images to the project nor will he attempt to "rescue" the hundreds of images (mostly book covers) that he has contributed over the last 4 years.

When he isn't spending far too much time on Wikipedia, he works as a freelance journalist, photographer, and book editor.

For an explanation of what "23 skidoo" means (or may mean), see the Wikipedia article on the subject here or read The Illuminatus! Trilogy by Robert Shea and Robert Anton Wilson.

To leave him a message, please go to his talk page.

NOTE: Please do not add this user to any Wikipedia User Categories without his permission. This has occurred several times and I do not approve. And I don't believe in giving polite warnings to vandals; no one accidentally or in "good faith" vandalises a userpage and I will permaban anyone who vandalises this (or any) user page without further warning. THIS constitutes the only warning such vandals will receive.

My AFD philosophy

I'm a frequent visitor to the Wikipedia:Articles for Deletion discussion pages. I consider my WP inclusion philosophy to be more "inclusionist" than "exclusionist". I feel Wikipedia should be "about everything" within reason because this isn't supposed to be a carbon copy of things like Britannica, but more like The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy -- a compendium of all knowledge. But within reason. I look at articles based upon their "viability" more than notability. I firmly believe that WP:OSTRICH plays a role in many article nominations, as does WP:IDONTLIKEIT which often rears its ugly head when articles about porn actors or TV series come up. I also feel that there is difference between articles with content issues and articles with viability issues. I will vote keep on some articles that require a lot of work and sourcing if I feel the subject is sound and worthy of an article; I am not frightened of stubs and if an article sits for a few years as a stub before someone with knowledge expands it, then so be it. I also tend to automatically vote "Keep" on articles that are re-nominated less than 3-4 months after a previous keep decision (but not "no consensus" or "delete"); I feel articles must not be renominated repeatedly in a short period of time. To me that's gaming the system, whether intentional or not. I have long advocated a minimum time limit between nominations of at least a year for articles that pass AFD, and a permanent AFD moratorium for some articles that are repeatedly renominated due to controversial content, WP:IDONTLIKEIT issues, or vandalism.