User:Jkwhinfrey

I have a lifelong interest in big ideas and the underlying concept of Wikipedia is one of the biggest: providing a central, accessible repository for the combined knowledge of the human race.

Objectivity
Which author, on or offline, is totally neutral in their viewpoint? Isn't history written by the winners, or those with the power? The strength of Wikipedia content is in the universal editorial access provided by the medium: if you disagree, change it.

That which is free has no value
I would heartily disagree, and support the notion of keeping Wikipedia a largely voluntary organisation. Those willing to give their time for a project tend to be more dedicated, after all they're doing it for it's own sake.

My agenda
I've done quite a lot of mark–up in my time and would like to improve my wiki skills, so I've decided to volunteer for WikiProject Wikify. I hope I can make a useful contribution.