Being pretty obsessive by nature, I'm also planning to take a sweep through the various Shakespare-related categories on Wikipedia, starting at Category:William Shakespeare, and making sure they are all properly tagged with the WikiProject banner, have the appropriate structure and membership, and attempt to resolve the circular mess and overcategorization in some areas. And should that prove insufficiently pedantic, it might be followed by going through all the pages with WP:BARD templates and add categories.
Not being overly prone to excessive, or even moderate, humility; I've some achievements on Wikipedia of which I am sufficiently proud to wish to, well—not to put too fine a point on it—shove them in the face of any poor confused soul stumbling onto my user page. In no particular order, these are the articles Judith Quiney, Thomas Quiney, and Hamnet Shakespeare which I rewrote and significantly expanded; and which subsequently were reviewed as fulfilling the Good Article criteria. My exuberant pride in this should not, of course, be construed as a slight against those other editors who went before, contributed during, or have come after, to the articles in question: the sense of achievement is entirely subjective, and the validation from external review, here, mere scorekeeping.
I commend you for all of your hard work on William Shakespeare. To compose and copy edit articles with multitudes of other people is never easy. You have helped produce a fascinating and eminently readable article. Think how many high school essays will reflect your language! :) Awadewit | talk 04:52, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
The Reviewers Award
Thank you for your exceptional review of John Boydell! Your attention to linguistic detail, illustrations, and sourcing were exemplary – Wikipedia needs more reviewers like you. Awadewit (talk) 02:42, 24 July 2009 (UTC)