This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 2602:306:cc6b:6b90:953e:cf78:4c31:415f (talk) at 21:28, 7 June 2012 (→stop vandalizing bo guagua page). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 21:28, 7 June 2012 by 2602:306:cc6b:6b90:953e:cf78:4c31:415f (talk) (→stop vandalizing bo guagua page)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
.jpg){kind=link}
The bat-like creature flying through a night sky declares the subject of this famous engraving: Melancolia I. That dark temperament is personified by a female figure seated in the foreground. The winged infant beside her is a 'genius' (in the ancient sense, meaning an accompanying spirit).
Melancholy has wings and from her belt hang keys and a money bag, symbolizing power and wealth. She is surrounded by measuring instruments. Above her head is a panel of 'magic' numbers (they add up to 34 in all directions). At her feet are the tools that can fashion the material world. Yet she does nothing: lost in thought, she turns away from the light.
I have two longstanding fields of interest: one is cultural theory and criticism, philosophy, and the humanities; the other is Chinese politics, religion, and history. Since becoming a Wikipedian I've also become interested in financial topics. Misplaced Pages is a complex place, especially when it comes to contentious topics where editors have strong opinions and are committed to seeing the Misplaced Pages pages on those topics represent those opinions. I used to be quite sanguine about the encyclopedia, but the issue of persistent POV-pushing coupled with aggressive and disruptive behavior is a difficult and complex one to deal with. No suggestions for a solution to that problem, though the thoughts here seem a good start. (This is mainly in reference to the Falun Gong family of articles and some articles on China, with which I have been involved.)
Misplaced Pages is interesting for another reason, I guess it is a kind of systemic bias though it is not all that serious: it is simply that some types of articles get little attention. For example, the articles on Finance, generally, are poorly sourced, often poorly written, and are not all that useful (I'm not speaking of all of them, but a goodly number). I can only guess that this reflects the biases of Wikipedians writ large, because they just don't care about that stuff so much. In other article spaces, an unsourced sentence won't be allowed for a second. On Mergers and Acquisitions, however, you get sentences like "There are some elements to think about when choosing the form of payment. When submitting an offer, the acquiring firm should consider other potential bidders and think strategically." as though this were a how-to guide! I want to build out some of those articles with good sources and make them more informative.
I have two modes of editing: one is the general grazing, where I cruise around, fix things, nip things, join in arguments, tidy up sentences, and sometimes delete or rearrange paragraphs, sections, or even pages. The other mode is a more focused, and therefore rare, state, where I go and get some books, or pick a topic and find some online reliable sources, then go and build out, create, or rewrite pages. I do that more rarely because it is more intellectually taxing.
Essays of interest
- Vine, Richard. "Foucault's gay science," New Criterion, January 1992.
- Orwell, George. "Reflections on Ghandi," Partisan Review, January 1949.
Quotes
"A sense of irony is the first victim of utopian dreams." — Theodore Dalrymple
"The fact of the matter is that editors who care about Misplaced Pages lose to editors who desire only to make articles reflect their viewpoints." — user:Hipocrite
Funny diffs
Articles
Created
Contributed to in what I believe was a noteworthy manner
stop vandalizing Bo Guagua page
if you think that anything is not correct, edit them, do NOT delete all of them. stop saying they are "original research", tell me why they are not FACTS. I will be HAPPY to delete any of the "original research".
and that is the full name of the award, if you think that it is ridiculous, that was the name that it was given to him.