User:Light current: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 02:57, 31 March 2006 view sourceLight current (talk \| contribs)30,368 edits →It's my parents fault that I am:: Im obsinate← Previous edit		Revision as of 04:43, 31 March 2006 view source Light current (talk \| contribs)30,368 edits spaced outNext edit →
Line 13:		Line 13:
	'''Readers should not be misled when referring to what is supposed to be an accurate repository of knowledge (Misplaced Pages)'''		'''Readers should not be misled when referring to what is supposed to be an accurate repository of knowledge (Misplaced Pages)'''

	To that end, I would rather see something that is inaccurate removed rather than remain on the article page to confuse the innocent. The inherent weakness/strength of a Wiki is, of course, that anyone can contribute and edit/revert. However if any one can contribute, and the editors do not know whether the contribution is right or wrong, the article can remain visible for a long time steering readers in completely the wrong direction. Since I have been editing Misplaced Pages, I have been truly horrified at the number of inaccuracies and sheer poor quality of writing on many subjects with which I am familiar. My purpose therfore is to try to correct those articles in the subject areas with which I am familiar so that readers like myself can have confidence in the accuracy of Misplaced Pages. I'm sure I read somewhere on 'pedia that CREDIBILITY is (rightly) one of the main concerns of the organisers. I have to tell you that, certainly in the field of electrical, electronic engineering, Wikpedia is certainly NOT credible at the moment. I am prepared to, and already have started to, help correct that situation in those subject areas.		To that end, I would rather see something that is inaccurate removed rather than remain on the article page to confuse the innocent.

			The inherent weakness/strength of a Wiki is, of course, that anyone can contribute and edit/revert. However if any one can contribute, and the editors do not know whether the contribution is right or wrong, the article can remain visible for a long time steering readers in completely the wrong direction.

			Since I have been editing Misplaced Pages, I have been truly horrified at the number of inaccuracies and sheer poor quality of writing on many subjects with which I am familiar. My purpose therfore is to try to correct those articles in the subject areas with which I am familiar so that readers like myself can have confidence in the accuracy of Misplaced Pages.

			I'm sure I read somewhere on 'pedia that CREDIBILITY is (rightly) one of the main concerns of the organisers. I have to tell you that, certainly in the field of electrical, electronic engineering, Wikpedia is certainly NOT credible at the moment. I am prepared to, and already have started to, help correct that situation in those subject areas.

	Written August? 2005		Written August? 2005

Revision as of 04:43, 31 March 2006

This user is a member of WikiProject Electronics, an attempt to provide a standard approach to writing articles about electronics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

This user is a native speaker of the English language.

This user contributes using Firefox.

My editing philosophy and the Credibility of Misplaced Pages

I base my editing philosophy on the basic premise that

Readers should not be misled when referring to what is supposed to be an accurate repository of knowledge (Misplaced Pages)

To that end, I would rather see something that is inaccurate removed rather than remain on the article page to confuse the innocent.

The inherent weakness/strength of a Wiki is, of course, that anyone can contribute and edit/revert. However if any one can contribute, and the editors do not know whether the contribution is right or wrong, the article can remain visible for a long time steering readers in completely the wrong direction.

Since I have been editing Misplaced Pages, I have been truly horrified at the number of inaccuracies and sheer poor quality of writing on many subjects with which I am familiar. My purpose therfore is to try to correct those articles in the subject areas with which I am familiar so that readers like myself can have confidence in the accuracy of Misplaced Pages.

I'm sure I read somewhere on 'pedia that CREDIBILITY is (rightly) one of the main concerns of the organisers. I have to tell you that, certainly in the field of electrical, electronic engineering, Wikpedia is certainly NOT credible at the moment. I am prepared to, and already have started to, help correct that situation in those subject areas.

Written August? 2005

One page editor??

Unlike some others, I am not a One page editor unlike:

Username XXXXXX
Total edits 1425
Image uploads 3 (3 cur, 0 old)
Distinct pages edited 486
Edits/page (avg) 2.93
Deleted edits 12 (browse)
First edit 2004-02-01 14:01:02
Edits by namespace Namespace Edits
Articles 666
Talk 137
User 24
User talk 126
Project 408
Project talk 20
Image 27
Template 5
Template talk 2
Category talk 1
enwiki_p: Portal 9

Freedom of Speech/Spirit of Misplaced Pages?

Extracted from actual talk page discussions but modified. The names have been changed to protect the guilty! You can easily find them with a little effort.

Does this chain of events feel familiar to anyone?

Editor A (you)
Editor B (another user or admin)
Admin C (only a small, but executive part to play)

A: I have edited the article to correct the error which said that 'black is white'

B:Youre edit is wrong - Im reverting it

A:No, Im sure Im right because black looks different from white, black is absence of reflected light, white is all light reflected, and its common sense etc...

B:Well..., you may be right but you must provide a reference.

A:OK after a lot of searching Ive found a suitable ref by an expert in the field to support my edit. It says that black is definitely not white (in black and white)

B:That reference is no good I don't accept it.

A: Why not?

B:I have many other books that dont say that. In my book by 'Minstrel' it says 'black is white' and thats the book we used in college! So I believe it!

A: So what? Anyway its patently obvious that black is not white!

B: My books are better than your book. Revert!

A:Look can we discuss this sensibly on the talk page?

B:I dont think theres any point discussing it further. You are plainly trying to disrupt Misplaced Pages

A: All right then, How about saying that black is a dark shade of grey, and white is a lighter shade of grey?

B:(silence)

A: I have put in the new form of words. What do you think of it?

B:Please stop vandalising Misplaced Pages. Weve been through all this before Black is white! That is the consensus of opinion! Revert.

A: It isnt! REVERT!. Please be careful you have only one revert left!.

B:I dont see the point in arguing this anyway. Who cares what color black is (or white for that matter)?

A: I do, and the readers shuld not be misled

B: Youre wasting everyones time now. If you don't stop these sorts of edits to the article I won't hesitate to block you temporarily for vandalism and disruption.

C: You're trolling. If it continues, you may be reported and blocked for disruption. And finally (to A's talk page)

WP:3rr violation on Black/White

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. --BigWheel | silly talk 05:00, 35 Octember 200X (UTC)

A:(enforced silence)

B:(silence)

(end of conversation? freedom of speech?)

It's my parents fault that I am:

Argumentative (I enjoy a good philosophical argument -even if I lose it, Ive learned something!!-its one of my hobbies and keeps the mind sharp!) Dad
Contrary (like Mary)- Mum
Forthright
Individualistic (some people say awkward!) Dad
Insistent
Outspoken never rude or offensive
Orderly (usually)
Perverse (not perverted) Mum
Radical
Stubborn (some people say awkward)- Mum
Unconventional (some people say awkward!) Mum?

Why do people keep saying I'm an awkward b*****d? -- I cant think!

Actually the correct word to describe me is OBSTINATE (its genetic)

I am a self declared:

Perfectionist
Exclusionist (not Deletionist to which I take exception)
Immediatist it needs doing now - not next year!!
Obsessionalist?
Accurist (not a wrist watch nor to do with firearms)

Also, I sometimes like to wind people up! But it may not be obvious (even to me) that Im doing it!

Other attributes will be added as I think of them

Edit count

My article to article/talk edit ratio seems to be converging to 2:1. I dont know what that means! Can any one tell me if its good or bad?

More detailed stats

I intend to stop at

~~7000~~ edits
~~8000~~ edits
~~9000~~ edits
~~10000~~ edits -- Achieved 29 Jan 2006
~~11000~~ edits -- Achieved 12 Feb 2006
~~12000~~ edits -- Achieved 02 Mar 2006 (well I did have a Wiki break!)
~~13000~~ edits -- Whoops Ive gone over (18? March 2006)
14000 edits (please.....

please......WP, release your grip!!) Im trying to stop -honestly....

Aaarggh.. my watchlist is calling!!

Only one thing for it - take (another) Wiki break!

Strategy For Indenting Replies in Discussions

   Under each new heading,

   Originator =0:

   respondent 1 =1:

   respondent 2 =2:

   etc.

Simple!--Light current 20:50, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Yes my favored method, altho' its not approved of (yet) is for each respondent to keep the same number of indents under any new heading. Its then much easier to see whos talking and where! THis encourages users to start new hdgs which helps to break up the page and aid navigation.--Light current 05:59, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Here on WP, one can learn how to communicate civilly (but not necessarily lamely) with others whilst still having a good robust discussion/argument. That, maybe, will be one of Misplaced Pages's greatest lasting achievements.

I would like to thank everyone with whom I have had contact since I joined WP for broadening my mind and showing me how to conduct myself on this medium but Im still learning to avoid the bear traps!

Some of the articles Ive started

Articles on which I have had substantial input and/or arguments

My Interests

Cutting out any nonsense / bullshit

Simple solutions to complex (engineering) problems:

Everything should be as simple as possible,(but no simpler) 'Keep.It.Simple.Stupid'.

Electronics/electrical engineering generally

High quality test equipment

Analogue electronics including: Clever little circuits, High speed circuits, precision measurements, oscilloscopes, RF systems (a bit),

Playing bass in a big bands and smaller jazz combos

Listening to Big Band Music and 'Modern'(Cool) Jazz

Learning to play an EUB. Have a look at it here Electric upright bass. Aint she a beaut? It comes on a stand I havent shown but its here

Awards

I award this award to Light Current for his lightning work on Wikiproject Electronics. --Davy Jones 08:00, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Well Thank you Davy for the Award! I'm sure I dont deserve it. But I'll try to live up to the ideals for which it was awarded.

User:Light current/My Sandbox

Categories: