|— Wikipedian —|
|Current location||Portland, Oregon|
|Education and employment|
|Occupation||Technical Support Representative|
|Joined||June 1, 2006|
|Picture of the day|
The domed ceiling of Sheikh Lotfollah Mosque, a 17th-century mosque located on the eastern side of Naqsh-e Jahan Square in Isfahan, Iran. The eight-fold symmetry of the dome's interior is created by rings of ornamental bands filled with arabesque patterns that become smaller and smaller towards the top. Such use of symmetry is common in Islamic architecture, which tends to emphasize aniconism through its use of geometric patterns and calligraphy.
|Some of the earthquake articles that I've contributed to|
Content – When I started here in January 2007 I was ready and willing to write, but before joining WP:Earthquakes in January 2012, there really wasn't much to write about. I found little projects here and there, but nothing compared to what I've been able to do with the earthquake articles. As opposed to just telling everyone how many people were squished, I found that it's satisfying to be able to tell a complete story about some of these incidents. There have been many articles that are lacking basics details and I found that an editor like myself can do a lot of damage with just an elementary understanding of seismology, so that is what I have been doing for the last couple of years. I know that people with traditional ideas of art won't understand this, but that's what the construction of these articles has become to me. A stack of books, a couple of subscriptions, and some spreadsheet-based catalogs have provided enough material to keep me going.
Speaking of material, I would definitely say that I’ve been lucky with a few of these articles that I’ve expanded. How these articles turn out in terms of completeness and readability (especially with regard to how the different elements are tied together) really comes down to the sources. Since all I’m really doing is paraphrasing them, it really depends on whether 1) they’re readily translatable by a novice and 2) if they compliment each other in some form. If neither of these two factors exist, the article is going to be on the crappy side, but if everything comes together, a very nice article can result.
AWB – The times on WP where I’ve been very active with content creation may have peaked. I was extremely active expanding existing articles or starting new articles from 2012–2014. Beginning in early 2015, I began experiencing a series of difficulties that have prevented me from continuing to write at that pace. What I’ve been doing to fill my time instead has been to rely on AWB more, and it's part of the reason for my high edit count. I used to run just about anything through it, but lately I’m a little more particular about which types of articles are modified and why. It's not that I've given up on content creation—it's far more satisfying than doing menial but helpful AWB runs—but right now it’s really just about a lack of focus. I still have quite a few articles that I'd like to expand or create.
Mistakes – Since jumping in head first with all this material that I'd been curious about for so long, I found myself making mistakes. Some of them were not caught for a long time, and I've been getting better, but you'll still see some blunders. Early on, I expanded an article and about two years later it was nominated for GA. When I reread the material, I was horrified that people were actually reading (or trying to) read it. I found that a portion was unreadable and very hard to make sense of, so I spent some time rewriting or removing some of it. That was in 2014. I've been much more cautious about getting ahead of myself these days, but it still happens. I'm a student at this stuff, and it's self paced and slow (I'm a low energy person). And by the way, I had the luxury of having those that came before me to learn about the style and content for these types of articles. All I’ve really done is applied what I learned on a large scale.
These days mistakes are usually because I've gotten ahead of myself somehow and have blurted something in an edit summary. A lot of times it's something that I haven't figured out yet, and by typing what I'm thinking for the first time and hitting save, I realize that what I'd written maybe wasn't quite right. We can't go back and change an edit summary (which I prefer everyone use every time – at least in the article space) but there have been occasions where it's been necessary to go back and rewrite something in an article because it was lacking.
Manuel Berberian made his one and only edit to the English Wikipedia. I reverted the edit. At the time, I was unaware, but when I realized who it was that I had crossed paths with, I wished that I could redo that moment. Berberian is an Iranian-Armenian scientist that has has had a long career in seismology and is arguably the preeminent seismologist regarding the tectonics of Iran. How cool would it be to sit down and have a cup of coffee with that guy. Anyway, whats done is done, and one of the only things that I could do to make myself feel better was to pick up a copy of his most recent books. Sigh.. I had the unfortunate distiction of being at home one evening working my watchlist when it appears that
My dad – It was a weird moment when I discovered one of my father's books (a naval nut) being used as a source in a featured article.
My bike – I ride a 1985 Honda Sabre 700. It's old, heavy, and under powered, but it's a head turner. It's getting pretty rare to see one in decent condition, especially with the Hondaline fairing.
|WikiProject Earthquakes articles by quality and importance|
|WikiWork factors (?)||ω =6,337||Ω = 4.97|