The Linux Documentation Project is a brilliant idea as well, and I'm obviously interested in figuring out ways to improve and extend Wikipedia's mission, especially in relation to other projects (e.g. Project Sourceberg). --TheCunctator
I hope you've noticed that my tone and approach varies wildly, from overly combative to vulnerable to hortatory to ambitious to analytical. And that's even ignoring my dominant approach on Wikipedia, which is simply to edit and create entries.
In other words, I think that my writing is rarely combative. The combative writing is more noticeable (which is part of the point), but it's really only a very small part of the time and effort I've spent on Wikipedia. In fact, I doubt that I've written much that could reasonably be considered combative other than How to Destroy Wikipedia.
So I largely agree that my "cause would be better served by a less confrontational approach", but I reserve the use of that approach within the context of a holistic method of dealing with issues. As long as I can convince people that I'm not treating them like scum, I think using an exaggerated tone to tackle the most negative side of issues directly, could be beneficial to the community. I didn't provide that context with Destroy, but I'm attempting to do so in retrospect.
I'm assuming when you ask me to consider a less confrontational approach you weren't implying that I never use one, because that would be annoying. I'm assuming what you meant was that I should consider not using a combative approach in the future if I contemplate doing so. --TheCunctator
Me too; I want you to know that your criticism is constructive (even though, as I explain here, I find the concept of "constructive criticism" to be poorly defined and misleading). --TheCunctator
Dmerrill, It sometimes looks like you are following people around changing what they've just done. I do this too. And so do many other Wikipedians.
However, please be careful about changing the "see also"s to REDIRECTS - maybe the subjects really deserve two separate entries/pages. If you're already doing this, fine - my comments are intended in a friendly tone. Have a good one! :-)
(I see somebody just did this with Oscar -> Academy Awards. Now somebody else is going to be bent out of shape because we've co-opted the page he was going to use for "Oscar, King of Prussia" or something like this. Comments?)
Apparently Wikipedia and Wikipedians are working the way they should: I left it a "see also" because I wasn't sure, and you made it a REDIRECT because you were. Good on us! For anybody else who may stumble into this conversation, Naming conventions/Disambiguating may be of interest. Cheers.
If you want do Redirect German Bundeslands then do so with all and not just occasionally with some (e.g. Rhineland-Palatinate =>yes, Lower Saxony =>no)
I just created a stub Discrimination page and linked it to Homophobia. I see that that page mentions hate crimes and violence (which are hopefully not day-to-day occurrences for a majority of GLB folks), but doesn't say much about minor snubs and hassles. You want to put in a line or two about this? Cheers.