This user has rollback rights on the English Wikipedia.


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
National Park Service 9-11 Statue of Liberty and WTC fire.jpgThis user is a member of WikiProject Terrorism
Island of Ireland NASA.pngThis user is a member of
WikiProject Ireland.

This editor is a
Yeoman Editor
and is entitled to display this Service Badge.

GoldenRetrDark6 wb.jpgThis user is
a Golden Retriever lover.
enThis user is a native speaker of the English language.
Screwit.svgThis user reserves the right to completely screw up their own edits.
<ref>This user recognizes the importance of citing sources.
<ref>This user would like to see everyone using inline citations. Please...


Wikipedia provides us all with an opportunity to create articles that are important, but also well written, researched and neutral.

In writing, words are important. Terms that display a political bias or are otherwise disparaging and/or intended to impart the author's point of view should be avoided. A good writer and editor is above the fray in this regard. Cites should generally be from an accepted, verified and most importantly neutral, respected source. A writer should never use an opinion piece to impart a thinly veiled political message. This is not the appropriate forum for such actions. A writer has an obligation, particularly in the internet age, to use sense when creating a story.

I am committed to these ideals. So if your article feels my editing touch, keep that in mind. It's nothing personal.

On the Matter of Vandalism Patrol

Many viewers may be here because I changed an edit. Aside from the obviously crude (and often insane) edits I change on Wikipedia, you may be asking "why did he rollback my edit?"

As a starting point, I am not perfect, and I make mistakes. When I revert an edit, it's nothing personal, it is the result of reading hundreds of edits on a special feed, and choosing which ones should be changed. Often, these edits are claims that are made in good faith, but lack the necessary scholarship to survive my review, or are so poorly written they appear to be nonsensical to the practiced eye. In other cases, your edit may violate neutrality (and this goes to the left or the right) and violate Wikipedia's guidelines in this area.

I ask anyone reading this to consider that when editing on this site, Wikipedia is at its core a scholarly project. When you make a claim within an article, support it with a citation or source. Write in a clear, concise style, and try to avoid spelling errors. Oh, and one more thing, only edit when you are sober and fully awake.

If I have made a change that you dispute, let me know on my talk page. I am always willing to make contructive suggestions, or to modify my stance on a change after a healthy debate. In the end, I want to make anyone who debates with me a better editor. Debate profits all of us.

Useful Links


Articles I Have Written

Articles I am improving or working on