As I revert vandalism on a regular basis, I may end up reverting something you think is a legitimate edit. Please don't take it personally. Tell me about it on my talk page, I will gladly apologize if I messed up. Thank you.
I completely agree with all the Wikipedia philosophies of user Kafziel [1]. Here are some of my favorite excerpts:
| “ | Featured Articles of the Day become Featured Articles of the Day because they are Featured Articles. A brand new editor has never shown up, made a major improvement, cited his sources in the proper format, and made everyone say, "Wow. That contribution was so awesome, it made the past five hundred vandalism reversions worth it." | ” |
| “ | If Wikipedia isn't a democracy, one perfectly reasoned argument should be able to counteract 100 pile-ons to the contrary. But it doesn't. | ” |
| “ | Although I believe in assuming good intentions, it may become clear to me that a user's intentions are not good. As the guideline says, I don't need to "assume" anything if I have facts to the contrary right in front of me. | ” |
So far created articles:
And countless edits to other articles...
And in case you haven't noticed, my general activities on wikipedia define me mostly as a Wikignome.