|This is a Wikipedia user page.
This is not an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at
I'm in a bit of a Wikifunk as of April 2015. Other things going on in my life have limited the amount of time I spend on Wikipedia.
Multilicense -- see bottom of page. Today's date is February 13, 2016.
The English Wikipedia has 1,316 admins; 5,078,286 articles; 38,500,641 pages and 27,485,022 users ... and is still growing.
I am a Systems Engineer living in Atlanta, Georgia USA. I have an AAS in Engineering and a BS in Electrical Engineering from the Rochester Institute of Technology. I have worked in Rail Transportation and Electric Power industries for over 30 years. My personal motto is "to make life easier for everyone, including me". To that end, I strive to help put the most complete, correct and easy to find information possible in Wikipedia.
In my opinion, the most important Wiki policy is WP:BOLD.
My Wikipedia Philosophy, or Wikilosophy, is not a set of hard and fast rules. I prefer shades of gray, making appropriate choices based on each situation. Having said that, I believe in processes, and my actions typically follow what's described below.
Deletionism and Inclusionism
I tend towards Inclusionism. If someone has taken the time to do something, whether that be creating a new article or modifying an existing one, that is important. So long as the work falls within the clear guidelines as to what can be included in Wikipedia: verifiability, no original research, and neutral point of view, I accept the work as-is. If it falls outside the guidelines, I prefer to take action. I usually prefer discussion to resolve questions, although I do not hesitate to suggest speedy delete or PROD for articles that obviously violate Wikipolicy. Quick action is often the best course in the case of blatant vandalism.
Immediatism and Eventualism
This one is tough for me. I fully believe in the value of improving articles over time, and I see nothing wrong with a weak article that can and will be improved. After all, Wikipedia didn't suddenly become what it is today, it evolved over time. I am someone who desires consistency and professionalism, and I generally do not hesitate to make format changes and general copyedit so that articles on similar topics have a similar professional look-and-feel. For example, I routinely add or update an infobox to articles about schools so that most school articles look the same. And I often edit articles for consistent layout and format (especially dates) as described in the Wikipedia Manual of Style.
I tend to be an Exopedian. The encyclopedic value of Wikipedia (providing useful information to our readers) is why we are here, so that should be the most important. I edit mostly on my own, and also value interacting with others; it's the way I learn, and hopefully, the way I help others learn too.
Exclusionism and Inclusionism
I tend towards Inclusionism for information inside articles, and Exclusionism for the articles themselves. I have no problem including various facts about a topic in the article, so long as the article's topic is notable. Non-notable topics are candidates for deletion, using the clear deletion policy.
Notability is not an opinion, it is based on facts and a set of Wikipedia policies. A topic is notable if it has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, reliable published works, whose sources are independent of the subject itself. Enforcing notability criteria for articles is important, and ensures that articles meet core criteria such as verifiability and no original research. It is less important for the specific content of articles ... that is more subjective and is usually resolved by the opinions of the community as a whole. I generally try to avoid notability discussions about music, especially bands and band members; my personal idea of notability in those areas does not agree with many others.
My contribution to Wikipedia
I have been a Wikipedia user for several years. In March 2007, I became an active member of the Wikipedia community. In my spare time, I often cruise around various Wikipedia articles, educating myself, adding bits of information as appropriate, and helping to clean up and organize. Occasionally, I may create a new article about an interesting and informative topic. I often check New pages and Recent changes to see what's new, to make sure changes are appropriate and to perform general copyedit and article improvements. I am not afraid to tag an inappropriate article for speedy delete, PROD or AfD; or to seek the help of a Wiki admin. I also use Random article, which is an interesting way to see what's out there. I am often surprised by the breadth of information in Wikipedia, as well as recognizing that some of it could use updates and improvements.
I often take part in notability and deletion discussions, as well as suggestions to modify Wikipolicy. It's an interesting part of the Wikipedia experience, and an important one as well. After all, Wikipedia's rules and guidelines have been developed by the members themselves. And it is important to review them from time to time.
Following the Wikipedia style guide, I believe in consistency (it makes things easier to understand), and I sometimes make minor edits to an article so that it is consistent within itself, with other similar articles and in agreement with Wiki guidelines. I copyedit and try to simplify text by removing peacock terms and unnecessary and over-used words like but, however and currently; and the over-used comma punctuation mark.
I often spend quite a bit of time in the following areas:
In June 2007, I scored 517 on the Wikipedia:Wikipediholism test, which rates me as a person with few edits. My retest in August 2007 scored 3784 points, which rates me "officially addicted". I took the automatic test in May 2008 and scored 4792 points, which makes me an official "Wikipediholic". In December 2011, I took the test again and scored 17174 points, which makes me (according to the test) "Only the world's best psychiatrist, physiologist and witch doctor combined can cure your Wikipediholism at this stage. Normally you would get off of Wikipedia and go find those people... Normally...".
Though not a Wikipedia admin (I believe I can be more helpful as an editor), I am an admin and key user of a separate Wiki where I work. My experiences on Wikipedia help the work wiki and vice versa.
I believe that quality of edits is more important than quantity. I have seen several editors with more edits than I have in the same (or less) amount of time. Having said that, keeping a record of edits can be interesting.
As of December 2010, a bot decided that I am one of the 3000 most active Wikipedians (#2517 as of July 11, 2012; #2370 as of October 17, 2012; #2340 as of January 20, 2013; #2271 as of May 17, 2013; #2230 as of September 1, 2013; #2194 as of March 16, 2014, #2204 as of November 3, 2014)).
My edit milestones are:
Some of my contributions have appeared on Did you know?:
I avoid editing musical group articles whenever I can. It's generally not an area that I'm familiar with, and much of the information in such articles has questionable notability and is there for political (not encyclopedic) reasons.
I sometimes contribute to other versions of Wikipedia:
My To-Do list
Articles to check
What others think
For both business and pleasure, I have done a lot of traveling, and enjoy meeting people from different countries and cultures. I have completed three round-the-world trips by plane (all on business), two going East-to-West and one West-to-East.
Countries I have visited
My world vision
In 2008, according to The Political Compass test, I am slightly Libertarian (-1.13) with Leftist (conservative) (-4.25) economics, which puts me in good company with Nelson Mandela. I took the test again in 2010 with similar results: slightly Libertarian (-0.97) and less Leftist (-3.62) economics. In 2011, I took the test again with minor changes: a little more Libertarian (-1.90) and less Leftist (-1.88) economics, similar to Gandhi. In 2012, I took the test again with minor changes: a little less Libertarian (-1.75) and less Leftist (-1.33) economics, again similar to Gandhi. In 2013, I took the test again with some changes: a little less Libertarian (-1.33) and more Leftist (-2.38) economics, similar to Greek election candidate Alexis Tsipris.
Useful wiki stuff
Most popular articles
Random wiki stuff
Interesting articles and categories