User:Billscottbob/User Page Archive

My View on Wikipedia
Despite continuing controversy in my school community, I am still a strong believer of Wikipedia. Although anybody can edit it, the intricacy of policy and the commitment to solving issues by editors is phenomenal. I cannot think of any other instance on the internet where a service is so well democratically self-governed. I agree with my school in the sense that Wikipedia should be used with caution. However it is a great place to start and should not be banned. All facts should be verified (as with any source) with another source. Once, a person within my class used Wikipedia. He was not exactly that bright and ran into a page fraught with vandalism. He did not notice this and wrote a paper about it. Cornelius Vanderbilt acording to the page was from a family of "molesting masterminds". When the teacher asked him about this he simply stated that he had use Wikipedia. We were banned from Wikipedia ever since. Due to his stupidy, we cannot use Wikipedia. Wikipedia is a good source to start, and should always be used with caution, like any source.

In conclusion Wikipedia is an amazing site, especially for off-the-wall and rapidly changing topics but must be used with caution, as you would with any other source.

If you disagree with this, Wikipedia will provide you with a strong argument at Criticism of Wikipedia.

Wikipedia Tips for Beginners
Wikipedia is unique and must be used with caution used differently from other sources. Certain parts may be true but others may be biased. Here are some tips:
 * Due to constant peer editing, announcements will be made at the top of articles with content that may be biased, un-cited or any other aspect that may make the page questionable. If you see these messages use extreme caution.
 * An article that is fraught with citation is a good indicator of accurate content. Even if it says "citation needed" it means that the contributors to the article are thinking about the accuracy of the article.
 * A page that has been "locked" for vandalism is a very good indicator of questionable content. Even though the page has been "locked", almost all users can still edit it if it is only semi-protected. A page that was "locked" led to the incident mentioned in the section above with a classmate.

I would like to commend...

 * all those contributors that spend so much time making Wikipedia better
 * editors commited to stopping vandalism
 * editors commited to ensuring sources are well cited
 * editors commited to neutrality and civility
 * users that patrol

My Contribution to Wikipedia
My contribution to Wikipedia has been quite conservative. I guess it could be said that I emulate WP:CIV more than WP:BOLD.

I like to educate myself and act upon Wikipedia policy. If you feel that my interpretation of such things are at fault, please do not hesitate to contact me, with civility.

Interesting/Funny Links

 * How we should solve vandalism A humourously outlandish essay on vandals

Embarassing Links about My Home-country

 * Sexual Sterilization Act of Alberta and Eugenics
 * "The worst result [for Earth Hour] was from Calgary, Canada. The city's power consumption actually went up 3.6% at the hour's peak electricity demand." - Earth Hour
 * "As of 2005, all provinces [in Canada] (except Alberta) and territories had included 'sexual orientation' in their human rights laws" and Alberta tried to over-rule federal descision that same-sex marriage was legal. - LGBT rights in Canada

My links

 * User:carmabelle7912
 * User talk:139.142.154.105
 * Administrator intervention against vandalism
 * Patrol Templates
 * Sandbox and Personal Archives
 * Wikipedia Icon Gallery and Nuvola Icons