User:Ethnic laundry

Ethnic laundry Says Hello!
I am a leading-edge U.S. baby-boomer who has lived in the Midwest, the Northeast, and presently reside on a well-known hill in Northern California.

I'm male, married to a Gaddang woman from the mountains of Northern Luzon, Philippines.

I bailed-out on my formal education short of my Masters at Cal Arts, because I saw no future delight as an academic. Nevertheless, I have taught at a variety of institutions, including Harvard and the San Mateo County Regional Occupational Programs. Because I worked in anthropology, I have an excellent grounding in (as well as nit-picking quarrels with) varieties of academic referencing.

How I Get Involved
Lots of times I run across an article on something I know about from personal experience which I feel needs my attention; particularly stubs or out-of-date articles. I tend to look for sources that address my experience and am limited (as are we all) by the vast waters and distant shores of my own ignorance.
 * Should I feel the article does not present the subject completely, or some part seriously misses the mark, I try to amend it (an example is Jimmy Garrison).
 * If the article is a stub or is (to my mind) poorly-organized, I will do a major re-write; I did this with Stanley Dance and Fred H. Lau.
 * Where I feel an extant article needs further, related article(s) to be created, I'll do that: Gaddang language -> Gaddang people. (This was my first article.)
 * I will beat the drum for a subject I personally feel is significant and unaddressed: Clifford Thornton.
 * I also re-visit articles (whether or not I have created/edited them) and act if people want more clarity or references: Proto-Indo-Europeans.
 * I'm not very prolific - I've made fewer than 2,700 edits (and have created a mere 120 new pages) over nearly eleven years as an editor.

Some Peeves
I understand that Wikipedia depends not only on people who are willing to do research and to write, but also on folks who define and enforce standards.

However:
 * Standards are necessary - but must be applied to all articles in the category. Please - don't start a crusade by messing with someone's well-intentioned contributions - unless you're willing to make the effort review and repair the same problems in articles on all subjects in the same class. Examples might be: sports-teams, universities, newspapers, congress-people, &c. Don't enforce standards on the Padres if you let the Yankees (or the Astros) get away with flouting them.
 * Reference-paring to support a particular opinion or POV happens! Google is amazing.  But the internet is also mutable.  Dead-links YES!  Purposeful misunderstandings and supression NO!
 * Experts (particularly those who are self-appointed and have no witnesses to their impartiality) must recognize that different viewpoints can be valid. Particularly when those varying views get thoroughly referenced...
 * Identifying, describing, and referencing multiple opinions and/or interpretations on a subject should be a common technique and an important Wikipedia goal.
 * Humility is really quite useful...

Badgee Things
.