User:Nossac

 My Contribs

Wikipedia: Pages I am interested in / Find Useful

 * 1) ‎Editor review
 * 2) ‎Enforce inclusion of categories
 * 3) ‎Esperanza/Programs
 * 4) ‎List of encyclopedia topics
 * 5) ‎Policies and guidelines
 * 6) ‎Ten-million pool
 * 7) ‎WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles
 * 8) ‎WikiProject Wikify
 * 9) ‎Category:Wikipedia backlog
 * 10) ‎Category:Wikipedians looking for help
 * 11) Template messages
 * 12) Categorical index

Stuff I've worked on
Traversed edges per second - created stub

Whitney's Theorem

Lennard Jones potential

Lowe Alpine Mountain Marathon - My first orginal article (although, yes I know it is not 'my' article!)

BabyCentre - My second Article (and related redirects)

The Blunkett Tapes - My third new article

David Blunkett

KIMM

LAMM

Penrose process

Ergoregion

Martyn Joseph

Wikify Project

Stuff I might work on
Can write article on Hydrovane

Can write article on Atlantic Rally for Cruisers

Can start article on Shirley Heights

Can start article on Falmouth Harbour

Can expand article on Mirabella V and add photos

Can expand article on English Harbour

Can start article on Antigua Race Week

Can help expand Quinzee

Can help expand Arua

Can start article on Martyn Joseph - beaten to it

Can help expand list of Munros and contribute photos

A bigger article that involves more interaction with other eidtors.

Random stubs or requested articles or something at the village pump.

About me
An early career plasma physicist, parallel programmer, and supercomputer user.

Hobbies include: Mountaineering and Sailing. Interests include:, Science and Technology (in particular Energy), Literature, Economoics, Politics, any intelligent debate.

I help administer a pmwiki for my mountaineering club, which explains why I often get media wiki markup wrong where the two differ.

A rant
It makes me laugh when academics and others criticise Wikipedia for its lack of authority. The misconception lies believeing that any source is inherently reliable. There is no absolute definitive source on anything - as anyone who has explored the mire of academic articles referencing each other will know. Where Wikipedia will always win hands down is its breadth of content, and the speed at which one can get an introduction to any given subject. Of course it will not be suitable for in depth or primary study, but that is not the function of an enclyopedia.

Wikipedia's strength is its breadth - I have no truck with mindless deletionism.