User:ChrisJMoor

Hello and Welcome to my Userpage
Search user languages

You can view my edits here if you are interested

Current project (you can help)
I have decided to use temporary personal sandboxes to complete major edits of particular articles. This avoids naffing the actual article page up with mistakes or leaving it in a mess for some time while you do numerous edits. When I'm done with the page after copying its source over the original article, I'll ask someone to delete it and its archives to save a little space. This seems to be a good idea to me. Even better might be to link to it via here and the actual article talk page. I'll do that in a bit.

Who am I
You can see a few of my attributes as infoboxes above. I have been using wikipedia as a source of information since about mid 2004 and continue to do so today. I finally got bold and decided to sign as a member in about late December 2004 and shortly afterwards created my first signed article, David Rovics (although I previously created the article Pop feminism while unsigned).

I hold a BSc degree in genetics from University College London. Around the time I was collecting my degree, the draft of the Human genome project was being cleaned up and was almost in its final state. It was quite a priviledge to be an undergraduate in the subject at the time. Specific interests in the field include Microevolution, selfish DNA, ageing and human disease genetics. For some reason, I havent made many edits on articles on these subjects. Probably because I would make them too technical for encyclopedic status, plus I prefer to make edits on subjects where I am having to learn on-the-fly. Paradoxically, being less clued-up on a subject makes me write a better article!

Other interests include art, fiction, economics, philosophy, politics and Religion (okay, I find almost everything in the whole sphere of human knowledge interesting). More specific interests (current list) include Africa, Japan, independent/foreign films, sustainable development, alternative building techniques and architecture and utopian/dystopian novels and films.

What I do on Wikipedia
I tend to simply edit articles on subjects that interest me as I find them, mainly to improve or expand content, occasionally to improve wording and grammar. I have started several articles, typically after being inspired by something interesting I have seen or read. My first signed article, David Rovics, was created after I saw a live performance by the artist himself at the Strawberry Fair, Cambridge, England. I started the Adrian Mole and The Weapons of Mass Destruction article after reading the book and a Times article on Sue Townsend. Notice a pattern here? I have stated above that I hold a degree in Genetics. However, my edit count in these areas is limited. I think this is because I would tend to make the articles too technical. I generally leave suggestions on talk pages on how to globally improve articles or improve content. Occasionally I chew the article out a bit for POV or other bias. As a commentator on articles, I try to apply nonviolent communication (essentially an umbrella term for almost all wikietiquette policies). On more technical subjects inwhich I am not conversant, I often leave questions. I hope these serve as both a primer for other people to improve article content and added insight for other people like me who are less knowledgeable on the subject. Occasionally, I have left comments that turn into a fully-blown debate that is relevant across the whole Wikipedia. (see Talk: Male Lactation. I occasionally peruse the current list of newly-created articles. On several occasions I have improved stubs left by others or left comments for the starting authors of the articles. My most recent new article work is flooded engine. However, I do not act as a member of the new pages patrol as such. I have on occasion contributed to debates about wikipedia policy. If I can make an effort to become highly conversant in established policy, I might do this on a regular basis in the future.
 * Editing
 * Starting Articles
 * Expert Editing
 * Talk page comments
 * New Page Patrol
 * Wikipedia Policy

A few opinions on wikipedia
Content I regard wikipedia as the future of the paper encyclopedia. Conversely, it does not need to be nearly as brevitised or restricted as an encyclopedia. Some users seem to think that only content that would get into the Encyclopedia Britannica is suitable. Others think that any content is acceptable. I stand somewhere in the middle here (and somewhere towards the the more liberal side of the arguement at that.

My criteria for what is acceptable content is simplistic, perhaps overly-so: 'Make Wikipedia the only source of human knowledge that a person will ever need to become fairly knowledgeable on a subject. If they want to become minor experts, they should consult wikibooks as well. If they want to become experts, go to university or get a job in that field'.

A few specifics on Content

A separate article for a particular episode in a TV series is usually acceptable provided it is reasonably brief. This is especially true to notable or famous episodes If a TV series has a short run (say, six episodes), editors should try to include synopses of each of these on the series' master page. Alternatively, synopses for each season of the series can be used. If is preferable to follow this format if the storyline is serialised across episodes so that an overview of the storyline is visible in one or several articles.
 * Television shows: Specific Episodes