User:Paulsanjose

I was trained in history by Robert Dallek (NBC News, CNN and Daily Show contributor), protege to Pulitzer Prize historian Richard Hofstadter. I live in the original Silicon Valley, California and have for almost all of my life.

My interests include Silicon Valley politics, California politics, U.S. politics, U.S. history, U.S. presidential biographies, media bias, Star Trek, James Bond, and many other classic movies and television shows.

I became an editor, because I grew annoyed by inaccurate facts on Wikipedia, which I use regularly. For example, I recently edited an article on Wo Fat from the original Hawaii Five-O. The Wo Fat article before my edit, misidentified the evolution of the character and his fictional role with Chinese counter-intelligence in the Pacific theater during the shows run. That just annoyed me. I also edited an article San Francisco Giants pitcher Tim Lincecum during the 2010 World Series because I became annoyed that information was missing. So, the bottom line is that I mostly edit when I become annoyed.

As for BLPs (Biography of Living Persons), my belief is that Wikipedia should be a source to look up individuals that make a verifiable contribution to society and that there are too many individuals that do good, verifiable work, but go unrecognized. Encyclopedias prior to Wikipedia were written by "elites" and had a distinct bias toward identifying BLPs of national and international repute, even though in smaller geographic regions, individuals are just as noteworthy on a local, county or state level.

Individuals on a local, county or state level may be more difficult to verify, but if there is verification through reputable third party sources, then they should be considered noteworthy. Under WP:Notability, I believe in the policy: "The topic of an article should be notable, or 'worthy of notice'; that is, 'significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded'. Notable in the sense of being 'famous', or 'popular'—although not irrelevant—is secondary."

Over the last few months, I have become increasingly concerned that some Wikipedia editors have become overly critical and eager for deletion, even when third party references are available. It strikes me as "elitism" to believe that individuals that work at the local, county or state level are not notable. I am concerned that the editor's ego has grown so large that he or she believes that he or she is the arbiter of notability, as opposed to a real consensus of Wikipedia editors.

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, even in the world of Wikipedia.