User:Ihuntrocks

About Me
I'm from Texas. I'm literate and legalistic (not always a good combination here). My interests include, but are certainly not limited to: Geology, information security, Presbyterianism, and United States politics and political figures (mostly current).

I created my account back in 2013 with the intention of editing, but that never really happened. My editing adventure began on March 19, 2019, with removing an incidence of vandalism. A long pause ensued as I moved and few times and adjusted to a new job. I now have considerably more free time and have returned. I hope to do what we're all here for: to make Wikipedia better than when we found it, one edit at a time.

My hobbies include learning additional languages, microscope photography/videography, and finally getting around to editing Wikipedia.

Pages On Which I've Worked
The Rubin Report | Removed vandalism

Scott Presler | a work in progress

Jack Posobiec | a work in progress, see talk page, NPOV noticeboard, and BLP noticeboard

Dave Rubin | see talk page

Rachel Maddow | see talk page

Useful Links
I'll continue to update this as I go along, but the following links are very useful:

Wikipedia's three core policies:

Neutral Point of View, Verifiability, No Original Research

Other useful policy pages:

Policies and Guidelines, Onus (Verifiability does not guarantee inclusion) Reliable Sources, News Organizations (from Reliable Sources), Recentism, Biographies of Living Persons, Fringe Theories, Edit Warring, Three-Revert Rule (from Edit Warring), Dispute Resolution, Consensus, Coatrack, Post-1932 United States Politics (American Politics 2)

Noticeboards:

Administrators' Noticeboard, Administrators' Noticeboard (Incidents), Arbitration Requests/Enforcement, Neutral Point of View Noticeboard, Reliable Sources Noticeboard, Biographies of Living Persons Noticeboard

Things I've Learned As An Editor
1: Some things are not amenable to change, even if all indicators, reason, and just plain common sense would point to a need for change and illuminate a clear path to it.

2: There is a vast gulf between policy and practice in editing. This is unfortunate.

3: The best way to learn conduct policies is to enter a discussion about a contentious subject and offer a cogent, well-reasoned argument. If you do this, you are almost guaranteed to be bitten and will receive an absolute deluge of conduct policies as responses, rather than a treatment of whatever argument it is you have raised. This will likely happen even if none of the policies are applicable to you or your behavior. It's great for getting people to provide you with links, but not great for making progress in a discussion. You have been warned.

4: Consensus in other areas of life can be a good decision-making system, despite potential drawbacks. Consensus, as practiced on Wikipedia, may not always reflect how it is practiced elsewhere, and also may not reflect how it is outlined in the guidelines. Approach this process with caution.

5: Consensus may be a good process for deciding what to do. It is not, under any circumstances, a good process for deciding "what is." In short, "consensus reality", as encountered on Wikipedia, is a fundamentally dangerous thing. This is particularly true in biographies of living persons. It is most especially true in post-1932 United States Politics topics. (See above section on "Favorite Quotes From Other Wikipedia Editors", first entry.)

Disclaimer On Shared Living Space/IP Address
I share a house with, and may occasionally share an IP address with, a family member who also has an account. Username Mongreltaceae. Aside from this, I have no other connections to any other Wikipedia editors to disclose and I have no other Wikipedia accounts.