Badanagram

Random Stuff About Me

en

This user is a native speaker of the English language.

fr-1

Cet utilisateur peut contribuer avec un niveau élémentaire de français.

This user is proud to be British.

Asp

This user has been diagnosed with Asperger syndrome.

This user contributes using Firefox.

This user has been on Wikipedia for 19 years, 6 months and 13 days.

43Y

This Wikipedian was born on 2 May 1981 and is 43 years, 6 months, and 27 days old.

This user reads Metro.

This user does not smoke.

Secondhand smoke is one of this user's pet peeves.

This user is an editor on Wikivoyage.

This user supports sustainable living.

R

This user is a member of Rotaract.

This user wants to own one or more cats.

Introduction

If you have any concerns - e-mail using the link here >>>[1] .

Badanagram is the internet nickname for the user who created this user page. He currently classifies himself as a Clueless Newbie as far as editing and contributing to Wikipedia is concerned, although he has been an avid user - mostly as a researcher, very rarely an editor nowadays - of the site for a long time and has been using computers ever since he could walk.

At the time of writing the initial introduction, this user thought it would be a semi-amusing take on Wikipedia to write the article in third person, this is an example of dry wit.

Articles what I've written about

Paul Miller - I've been listening to this bloke on the radio for a number of years and thought he deserved his own article. I keep meaning to contact either his agent or himself to get a bit more of background info. I suspect that in the world of Wikipedia though, that something straight from the horses mouth would not be eligible for entry in to his article as it would be difficult to prove.

Out of boredom I was going to write a stub about Walford East Tube Station, the fictional underground station in the programme Eastenders, even though I don't watch the show, but in the 5 years since I thought about it, the page has gone from being redirected from the Eastenders page to its own page.

I also created a stub for Pui Fan Lee who played Po in the Teletubbies. This appears to have been expanded but not by very much.

I created an article for the regular Guardian columnist Lucy Mangan. War were declared....

I generally do not make huge edits to articles. Most edits I have made are to update information or to change future tense in to past tense when an event described on wikipedia has passed.

What I like about Wikipedia

It is a collaboration, but not necessarily a community.
As the articles are for reference and not promotion, you can create or read about a page about anything that interests you. For example you can read a page about Jihad or Ku Klux Klan without being drawn in to the belief system that surrounds either of the practices, or be accused of wanting to join the Ku Klux Clan or start a holy war/personal struggle for self improvement. Ego to Badanagram: Notice how I chose two articles which are related to eachother but on polar extremes of the same scale to demonstrate what a balanced thinker I am? I think I should be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for my beigeness. Ho Ho Ho....
Even if you don't have a high level of technical formatting or HTML knowledge, you can create an article and sooner or later it will be re-formatted. In other words, you don't have to be a 'computer geek' to write your chosen subject.
Similarly, you can be a geek in your chosen subject and get away with it!
There is a good balance of articles on both serious and off-the-wall subjects.

What I don't like about Wikipedia

Lately, it's begun to crawl up its own arse, letting bots do all the work. No one can edit certain pages without automatic reverts.
IRCOps
A lot of the sources for articles are purely from web pages, as the internet is a dynamic medium itself and doesn't always contain factual information, it can lead to disputes.
A lot of the sources for articles are purely from web pages - read a book!
A lot of the sources for articles are purely from web pages - this had led to a belief among self appointed editors that if a source for an article is not on a linkable web page, it cannot possibly be fit for publication on Wikipedia. Do these people not realise that some of the contributors may be personally involved in the articles they write? Even if you can't write an article about 'The Toy Train Set I made' as it is self-promotion, you can still write about 'Hornby Miniature Narrow Gauge Wide Gauge Semi-Automatic Class 105 Deisel Steel Locomotives' if you own such a piece of equipment and know the history of it. PS. I doubt such a thing exists as I made it up.
Sometimes people write articles which go straight in to technical information without giving a brief explanation of the subject matter that is understandable to 90% of English speaking people, that relates to the article title. This is most noticeable when it comes to scientific articles.

Papers I read

Some people like to form arbitrary opinions of you based on the newspapers you read. To humour this group, who often describe themselves as Intellectuals, here is a list of newspapers I read.

Papers I occasionally read: Metro

American Papers I like to read if I have the chance: The Washington Post, The New York Times.

Something I've learned

Do not **** the admins off! More specifically, do not **** the admins off who still think having 'powers' over other people on the internet is a really good thing.