User:Daytona2
 | John is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
Hello 
I've signed up to Wikipedia as it continues the grand internet tradition of free information dissemination and as such, makes the world a better place by empowering individuals. For more than a decade now, I've been using forums and newsgroups in a bid to help people, and I see Wikipedia as the latest incarnation of that.
Rather than launching out on projects, I try to fill in gaps in the lesser known areas. I spread myself thinly over many newsgroups and web forums, and do not have much time to spend on Wikipedia (so expect slow responses ).
I am in awe of the level of sophistication that Wikipedia has achieved and, in some ways, am intimidated by it. It will prevent some people contributing, but perhaps that's no bad thing. I do not have the time to grasp the editing minutiae, reasoning that as long as I add something useful, whilst obeying Wikipedia's Five Pillars, I may confidently leave such refinements in the hands of others.
My areas of interest and experience are -
- personal finance
- motor sport
- backpacking
- landlord and tenant law
- reading
- nature
- technology
- democracy
I live in
Cheers
John
Musings...
After some four years editing the encyclopedia, I find that it's credibility has been eroded by the mass of unsubstantiated material added by editors who have no interest in veracity. I stumbled across this comment from Jimmy Wales, to which I couldn't agree more -
"If it is true, it should be easy to supply a reference. If it is not true, it should be removed."
"I really want to encourage a much stronger culture which says: it is better to have no information, than to have information like this, with no sources. Any editor who removes such things, and refuses to allow it back without an actual and appropriate source, should be the recipient of a barnstar." - Jimmy Wales, 19 July 2006
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2006-July/050773.html