Jump to content

User:NYArtsnWords

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


NY Arts n Words

About me

[edit]

Hi. I'm just getting back (4/2012) from a loooong wikibreak (a couple of years, really).

I have been contributing to the Wikipedia since May 30, 2004. Original contributions were anonymous as 67.100.49.26, 67.101.24.96 and 216.165.4.213. As of May 2012, I'm up to around my 11,000th edit under this user name.

I work mainly on articles concerning Medieval and Early-Modern European literature, history and culture (particularly French literature and culture) and articles on contemporary art. I tend to work on the wikipedia when I have a little free time as a kind of hobby or when I'm reading/studying a particular subject area and find a lack or problem on the wiki.

Wiki outlook

[edit]

I am a strong believer in the Wikipedia, and while there are problems (especially vandalism) that make me have doubts, I find the goal of working collaboratively on a resource based on NPOV and truth to be a worthy ideal.

I find the quality of information in major Wiki articles (those with many editors and constant vigilance) on (especially anglosphere) historical and cultural topics to be good.

I don't get a lot of traffic, edit wars or complaints in my corner of the wikipedia, which is just fine by me, but there is a downside: since there are very few wikipedians working actively in my areas, there are very few people around to revert vandalism, fill in gaps, and correct errors (including mine). I am often amazed and depressed to see articles I wrote seven, eight, nine or more years ago with almost no changes or improvements, and policing vandalism on sleepy pages is a wearisome task. I have a lot of academic and professor friends who check out the Wikipedia all the time, and constantly complain about this or that, but who never sit down and spend a few hours on a weekend doing some much needed expansion, correction and writing, sources on hand, of articles that are in their academic speciality. Why is that? A quality article is not created by a dozen minor edits of commas and spelling; it's made by spending hours with books and sources and synthesizing readings.

I tend to be an inclusionist and I generally leave the AfD's on notability guidelines and fancruft for others.

I do not want to be an administrator. I do not want to spend my time on community tasks; I prefer working on articles.

Wikiethics: Neutral Point of View, Act in Good Faith, Counter Systemic Bias, Ignore All Rules, Be Civil and Discuss and Work Toward Agreement.

I try to assume that other editors (even unregistered users, provided they give edit summaries) are acting in good faith, this even when the tone of edit summaries or talk page comments can sometimes appear shrill or uncivil (HINT: work on your "online tone"; try to avoid sounding pompous, angry, dismissive, prickly, etc.). I hope other editors will assume the same of me. If I make a factual, spelling, logical, grammar, or stylistic mistake, just let me know on my talk page.

Note: Working toward consensus with reasonable people can sometimes be a time-consuming process... but trying to reach a consensus with unreasonable people is an impossible task. When discussion fails, avoid becoming one of the lamest edit wars ever... take a break, cool down, and (if applicable) ask for mediation or arbitration.

Also: I Do Not Feed the Trolls.

Some things make me laugh... the "encyclopedia style" is hopelessly inadequate for describing the mudane, ephemeral and sentimental, and shouldn't be used for such. For example, this was on the article Beach : "A walk along the beach is also popular, including a long walk in the case of a long beach, for example from one seaside resort to the next. People usually walk the beach with bare feet. It is typically done near the shore line, where the sand is wet and therefore more convenient to walk on. One may or may not walk with the feet in the water, and this may also alternate with the waves."

[edit]

I've been responsible for and/or active on a number of French/France-related projects:

  • Portal:France - I used to maintain the French wikiportal (which became a Featured portal in December 2007), but I've slacked off.
    • People and article of the month are chosen by the following criteria:
      • The article must be well written, free of wiki conflicts (POV, clean-up tags, etc.) and have a picture. Featured articles or articles that have gone through peer review are prefered, but this is not always possible for less famous (at least from the English wiki point of view) individuals.
      • The person of the month alternates between women and men.
      • Each person of the month should show different aspects of the French experience: historical figures, politicians, writers, artists, sports figures, scientists, etc.

Contributions

[edit]

These are some of the articles I started, wrote, translated or significantly contributed to. I also do lots of category work and clean-up. I don't always keep this up to date, but it shows some of my interests.

Early Modern language and literature

French art, artists and culture

French history

Modern France

Other artists

Barnstars

[edit]
I hereby award this French Barnstar of National Merit to NYArtsnWords for his interest (and patience) in the promotion of fact in all things Paris. THEPROMENADER 23:08, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Here's your first Barnstar. More to follow if you keep it up.
Averross (u♠t♠c) 17:58, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
In recognition of your contributions to the French Portal, I give you this French Barnstar of National Merit. ChrisDHDR 17:53, 8 December 2007 (UTC)



Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:NYArtsnWords&oldid=1217781392"