User:Orchastrattor



WikiDragon and general enthusiast. I suppose my main strengths are literature and critical theory, which I am currently studying at a very nice university in my home country of Canada, but I usually end up just editing whatever I happen to be reading. There's always more work to be done! Prose is absolutely my forte and lifeblood (being a lit student will do that to you) and I love working with WP:READER improvements where I can, with things like MOS:LEAD, structure/captions, info parity between related pages, and MOS:SUMMARY.


 * Pronouns = They/Them


 * Age = at least 2, possibly more


 * Gender = to busy ????

Create Draft

WPLibrary

Published

 * Reception of the American Loyalists by Great Britain in the Year 1783
 * Martin Luther in Nazi Germany
 * Mononormativity
 * ''Mukokuseki
 * Women in prehistory
 * Deconstructed cuisine
 * Southern chivalry
 * Jacob Geller
 * Queer manicure

Forks, finds, and rescues

 * James Tissot
 * Currency of Armenia
 * Prop design
 * Masters of Atlantis
 * The Romans in their Decadence
 * Casu martzu

.
I'm not really sure where I fall on the Inclusionist-Deletionist spectrum, but my two cents (i.e. incoherent rambling) is that barring immediate factual errors, all good-faith claims included on Wikipedia are there because the user who added them had a genuine, legitimate reason to believe in their accuracy. Whether or not such reasons are good reasons will always be a matter of identifying and qualifying these claims based on their sources rather than just going through the motions of contesting, deleting, and then arguing about WP:Potential for three days straight.

Ignoring the heat death of the universe, I am of the belief that all appropriate information available to humanity will, eventually, find its way on to wikipedia, it merely has to assume the right presentation and qualification to be allowed here, even if it brings us into the realm of infinite monkeys. I welcome the chivalric valor of the deletionists, but only as long as they can understand that within a rounding error they are merely delaying the inclusionists' dream of the sum total of human knowledge being compressed onto a single site. Call me an Eternalist or a Qualificationist or something, IDK.

On a side note I actively point and laugh at people who argue deletion, but simultaneously complain about maintenance tags per WP:READER, should a reader not be informed as quickly as possible if the information they are consuming is problematic?