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

Keφr is me. Please spell it with a φ (the Greek letter "phi") if you can, though I will not insist too much.

I am a deletionist (and immediatist at that), though I do give some benefit of doubt in favour of keeping articles about general, abstract subjects (as opposed to specific companies, people, software, etc.). I believe that articles better be deleted than stay unsourced, and that deletion should not be considered a prohibition from recreating the article, when sources are brought or circumstances change. I am also a moderately mergist (in that I believe it is better to have fewer articles unless there is a strong need for a split), mesopedian (though I sympathise with exopedians more), mediawikianist (as you can tell by my scripts), individualist sceptic. Last but not least, I think a little sarcasm does not hurt anyone, and the worst kind of joke is the one spoiled beforehand.

As for the social side of Wikipedia… There is not a single userbox on this page, and for a good reason. I think they make people forget that Wikipedia is not a place to advertise your views or post excessive volumes of silliness, especially not related to building an encyclopaedia which it is supposed to be. I like user pages that are clean, minimalist and try to integrate as much as possible into the project-wide aesthetic, as opposed to those which try too hard to be fancy. (I might not be the best on the minimalist front myself, though…). Barnstars…? I do not mind them.

I have little time for content improvements, so I mostly stick to cleaning tasks; looking for issues, adding templates, markup fixes, page patrolling and bringing especially bad articles to justice.

Hit list[edit]

(i.e. list of things I would like to, but will not do very soon, for various reasons. Why "hit list"? Well, "To-do list" is too boring. You are free to implement some of the ideas listed herein, if you have the time. Just drop me a line.)




  • Do something to stop the massive growth if metaspace. I am not sure what it should be.
  • Write an essay on the obsession of (at least some part of) the community with "civility", "assuming good faith" and "WikiLove", which I think only serves as an excuse for long and bitter disputes on one hand and making Wikipedia a social network on another.
  • Write an essay on the (currently rather unspoken) principle of "describe, not influence", to supplement WP:OR. Is there one already?
  • Write an essay on the current practice of applying WP:OR to images; currently, some original research is accepted in images, but there are certainly cases in which it goes too far. I dealt with such cases a few times - it's not so frequent, but probably needs to be addressed.
  • Research anti-patterns in Wikipedia editing. WP:ATA lists some discussion anti-patterns. Good, but it's not everything. WP:BEANS is irrelevant here - I am talking about good-faith edits that turn out to be bad. Things I could think of:
    • Many sections that are one or two sentences long. This makes articles hard to read, and is often a sign of WP:EXAMPLEFARM (See also: WP:Me too!).
    • Putting phrases like "is a term" into the WP:LEAD. Per WP:NOTDICT, articles generally should not be about terms, but about the subjects they name.
  • Think about how WP:V and WP:OR apply to mathematical proofs.
  • Complete Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Register.
  • Write something similar to the above for discussions about reliability of sources.
  • Create an award for people with tasteful user pages (or an anti-award for people with distasteful ones). I am so sick of people sticking gratuitous userboxes, rounded corners, and animations everywhere, especially outside the content area. Even more if they do it on their talk pages.
  • Get Wikipedia:Pseudo-namespaces deprecated.

Source hunt[edit]

If you find a source you consider reliable, about a topic I usually edit, please add it here.

Proposals worth attention[edit]

My essays[edit]


  • Unclutter — removes excessive warnings (which you have presumably have already read) and unnecessary editing helpers.
  • Rater — aids in article assessment.
  • Enchanted Preview — minor tweaks to article editor.
  • Table Editor — adds table editing helpers to the toolbar
  • cksyntax — checks JavaScript syntax for errors. Obsoleted by JSHint integration.

Not mine, but recommended:

Good essays[edit]

(Or maybe not that good, but I mostly agree with them)

Quote of the day[edit]



Especially strange pages:

Curious lists:

See also[edit]