| Revision as of 05:54, 28 May 2010 editBruceSwanson (talk | contribs)974 edits revised statement.← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 02:07, 30 January 2012 edit undoBruceSwanson (talk | contribs)974 editsmNo edit summary | ||
| (100 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| am a proofreader and copy editor living in the ] area. I have written Misplaced Pages's ] article, an example of pure original research (see the deleted sections ]) that gets hits a day during the week and about half that on weekends. It's taken from ''Proofreading: The Street Bible with Apocrypha''. I have also posted ''Keystroke Lotteries: A Speculative Essay'' on the future of typesetting, proofreading, copy editing, and translations. Both postings can be found . | |||
| The orthodox ] hypothesis as it is found in Misplaced Pages articles and Talk pages cannot be maintained ''in detail'' by editors using their real names. That's because it is so fundamentally dishonest that anyone trying to validate its logic and assumptions would necessarily damage their personal and professional reputation. However, the existence of , of which I am a layman , would seem to indicate that AIDS-dissident viewpoints ''can'' be maintained by people using their real names. I recommend three simple rules to guide their edits: | |||
| ]: {{cquote|''All Misplaced Pages articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing fairly, proportionately, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources. This is non-negotiable and expected of all articles and all editors.''}} | |||
| and | |||
| ]: {{cquote| ''Primary sources should not be cited in support of a conclusion that is not clearly made by the authors or by reliable secondary sources ''}} | |||
| and | |||
| ]: {{cquote| ''Primary sources that have been reliably published may be used in Misplaced Pages, but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them. Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation. A primary source can be used only to make descriptive statements that can be verified by any educated person without specialist knowledge.''}} | |||
| Since many of my current edits deal with ] I should probably point out that as a ] in excellent health whose only recreational drugs are found in ], ], and an occasional ], my viewpoint is merely that of an incredulous bystander, not someone active in or threatened by the carnival of lies passing through our time. | |||
| --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | |||
Latest revision as of 02:07, 30 January 2012
I am a proofreader and copy editor living in the Los Angeles area. I have written Misplaced Pages's proofreading article, an example of pure original research (see the deleted sections here) that gets 500-600 hits a day during the week and about half that on weekends. It's taken from Proofreading: The Street Bible with Apocrypha. I have also posted Keystroke Lotteries: A Speculative Essay on the future of typesetting, proofreading, copy editing, and translations. Both postings can be found here.