The Trifecta is a very useful philosophy, and in most senses I subscribe to it.
- Information needs to meet WP:V. So so so many people think that "uncle joe" is a reliable source. Sorry, he isn't.
- I believe that articles should be aesthetically pleasing.
- I believe that you need to cite that the sky is blue, and then some.
- I believe in being kind to newcomers, but biting vandals. In the words of my loving father, "Never let anyone give you shit."
- There is not enough WikiLove on this site. Everyone deserves a kind word, or a nice barnstar for their barn.
I suppose you could say I subscribe to a deletionist philosophy, in contrast to inclusionists - I'm pretty harsh about articles jumping the bar for inclusion here.
New Page Patrol
PageCuration, having been built by those evil liberal Californians Fox tells me about, is clearly mimicking it's creators by clamping down on our god-given right to effectively discuss and purchase firearms. An alternate explanation might be "it looks like Page Curation bugs out when it sees articles that start with a full stop", but that's clearly nonsense.
I believe that NPP privileges should be given only to confirmed or autoconfirmed users who have created at least five articles that were not immediately deleted. This is a low, easy-to-jump bar and would stop problems with new users who simply mark everything as patrolled like it's some kind of strange race - something I was guilty of when I first started patrolling. It would also prevent people from tag-teaming with their friends to patrol advertising that would otherwise be deleted.
I primarily patrol new pages, the upload log, and on occasion usernames. I almost never patrol recent changes. I try to patrol from the back of the queue - usually, if you catch me patrolling the front, it's because I accidentally refreshed the entire page instead of just the new page feed, and my browser snapped to the front and I didn't notice. I patrol with a combination of Twinkle and the PageCuration tools, which is why my CSD and PROD logs are inconsistent.
Adminship and userrights
I have little to no interest in adminship as I believe most of the tools offered to sysops would not help me improve Wikipedia. I have no interest in either "passive" or "active" admin work and I have no interest in being knotted up in admin drama. I do most of my work patrolling new pages, creating requested articles, and working at AfC; admin rights wouldn't help me substantially with any of these areas.
I requested and was granted Reviewer rights by User:INeverCry. I requested these rights as I enjoy and had experience patrolling articles and this opens up another 'area' of Wikipedia for me to keep an eye on. User:Salvidrim! granted me Autopatrolled rights soon after, as in addition to trying to reduce the NPP backlog, I have a tendency to not help the problem by creating lots of stubs for WP:RA.
Breed article standards
I use a special, personal guideline when evaluating if a breed (not a species) of any given species (dogs, cats, cattle or otherwise) is suitable for inclusion. I defer to WP:SPECIES for species. The bar I set for notability is as follows:
- The breed is recognized by at at least one extant registry, applicable to that species, including but not limited to the following:
- NOT the Continental Kennel Club, which recognizes any breed provided the breed promoters are willing to pay a fee to have their breed registered with them.
- NOT the breed's own breed club when that breed club is unrecognized by a kennel club or kennel council.
- OR The breed is an extinct breed or previously recognized breed well documented in literature, either modern or historical
- OR The breed is an otherwise unrecognized crossbreed well documented in literature (Labradoodle and numerous B. taurus hybrids, for example)