Jump to content


This user helped get "32 Old Slip" listed at Did You Know on the main page on 4 September 2014.
This user helped get "Domino Park" listed at Did You Know on the main page on 29 June 2018.
This user helped get "MTA Arts & Design" listed at Did You Know on the main page on 4 May 2015.
This user helped "Nine Inch Nails" become a featured article.
This user helped "32 Old Slip" become a good article.
This user heavily contributed to "Amnesiac (album)" become a good article.
This user helped "Better Out Than In" become a good article.
This user heavily contributed to "Clarence Chesterfield Howerton" become a good article.
This user helped "Hasil Adkins" become a good article.
This user contributed to "Jessica Gomes" become a good article.
This user heavily contributed to "Kowloon Walled City" become a good article.
This user made modest contributions to "Second Generation (advertisement)" become a good article.
This user is a member of the Bot Approvals Group.
This user is an edit filter manager on the English Wikipedia.
This user has interface administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia










This user is a sysop (verify) and has logged 21647 admin actions.
Action Count
Total edits 127100
Live edits 120815
Pages deleted 5992
Pages restored 157
Users blocked 8032
Users reblocked 585
Users unblocked 95
Pages protected 4535
Protections modified 614
Pages unprotected 363
Revisions deleted 801
User rights modified 424
Pages merged 11
Pages imported 32
Edit filters modified 3181
Users created 27
Mass messages sent 22
This user fights vandalism.
This user writes software
This user believes in civility and assuming good faith.
This user tries to do the right thing. If he makes a mistake, please let him know.
This user is proud
to be a Wikipedian.
My conscious is a jukebox


Plato said "To do is to be". Jean-Paul Sartre said "To be is to do". Frank Sinatra said "Do-be-do-be-do".

I live in New York City. Musician, photographer, web developer, chess player. Knowledge hungry, always seeking something new.

I began in 2003/04-ish as a casual reader of Wikipedia, making occasional minor edits as an IP user. My first registered edit that I'm aware of was made in June of 2006. I have had at least one other (now abandoned) account since then, before settling on this username in 2011. My addiction grew, and in May 2012 I finally decided I wanted to give back to the community and start making more substantial contributions, and since March 2013 I've been here almost daily.

Although I work for the Wikimedia Foundation, all statements and contributions made from this personal account are my own, and may not reflect the views of the Foundation.


My philosophy as a Wikipedian is pretty straightforward. I try to make it fun and avoid disputes. I sometimes create new articles when I see the need for one, but in general I enjoy improving existing ones. I love music and am fascinated by big cities, and tend to focus my editing on these topics. Content creation is important to me, but the bulk of my 100,000+ edits are owed to fighting vandalism. It keeps me engaged and I get the same rewarding feeling. As of late a lot of my focus has been with my steward role, as well as technical contributions such as bots, tools, various scripts, and MediaWiki itself.

As an administrator I'm heavily involved with maintenance of the project. As always I spend much time in preventing abuse of the wiki, but I try to help out anywhere there's a backlog. I probably lean more toward an inclusionist except for recently created articles with major fallacies. I am an absolute stickler about verifiability, and have very little patience in dealing with BLP violations and spam.

Edit warring is particularly baffling to me. I don't like how many people think or assume WP:BRD is something you are required to follow, or an excuse to revert. I'm all for the philosophy, but incorporate it into your own editing and don't try to force it onto others. Citing BRD in your edit summary feels aggressive. Your rationale should explain why you reverted, not that BRD says you should, or that you can. Instead, something like "Reverted good-faith edits..." can make a world of a difference when reverting disputed content. It is more friendly and conducive to a collaborative environment, and helps prevent any potential temperament.

I have a lot of faith in new users. Technical mistakes are simple and you should help them, and while it's improving, Wikipedia isn't incredibly user-friendly. On a more social level, it's crucial to give newcomers a good impression of the community. In my early days I was accused of sockpuppetry. Fortunately I was resilient. I believed in Wikipedia and did not want to give up. I feel like many users would have been scared off and abandoned the project altogether. The experience shaped the Wikipedian that I am today. It taught me how important it is to be careful with new users, and always assume good faith. It makes me wonder how many other would-be long-lasting contributors we must have lost...


I use a modified version of the Vector skin with the Monobook background. My wikieditor is monospaced with syntax highlighting enabled. I find these tools indispensable:

Recent progress

RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report
RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report

No RfXs since 00:50, 23 June 2024 (UTC).—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online

New userspace draft

Use {{db-u1}} for user speedy deletion of own pages.

Find sources: Books · Scholar · Recent news · Free images · Archive.org · New York Times · Wikipedia Reference Search

User toolbox
Key Wikipedia policies and guidelines
Nutshells: Article writing Civility Consensus Deletion Neutral point of view Notability Verifiability
    Committed identity: 0c656ae1a8003b763764c0ee8c0d1acf54d9a11160a991ac05ffae1dfaf0637618eada9bc03fada05d196f57c18a31b12850536112f0f997832f24973ef86e0f is a SHA-512 commitment to this user's real-life identity.