"What are words for - when no one listens anymore"
Skraelinger has a particular interest in Canadian and other hillbilly issues.
In real life, Skraelinger is desperately trying to prove that he was on Wikipedia before Jimmy Wales, but since at that time he was already on youtube and didn't find the time to keep record of his first blog entry in 1989 and his first vlog in 1991 at a time where he was the first person ever to use a broadband internet connection and the forgotten mastermind behind Web 2.0 which he has now replaced with his very own Web 3.0, this can never be determined. Skraelinger is just 11, has years of experience in the IT-Business, is male and female, whenever it fits the situation, is shareholder of a hedge fond conglomerate that holds 51% of all hedge fonds of the world which themselves control world economy, politics and society. Skraelinger is able to maintain his self in several coexisting realities at once and sometimes gets lost in technicalities that bear resemblance to a giant poopenschaft.
"Architects of the world"
Wikipedia should only be considered a trustworthy source of information on topics with no econmical or political interest behind it. From what I experienced, the lobbyists are most persistent in pursuing their goals and will often pose as Wikipedians striving for NPOV. So my advice is - generally hesitate to believe anything that positively mentions a company, their products, politicians, parties or religious movements. Try to stay critical and don't let any article change your mind, try to imagine what motivation may underlie a certain claim. Of course it is more difficult to unmask articles, where the actual true information is not just falsified but missing or deleted. Just check several alternative sources yourself. This is my advice. Now have fun, 'cause there really is a lot of good stuff to discover as well on Wikipedia.
"You want to know by now"
I am not neutral and I guess nobody is, only multiple inputs make an objective output.
I am a Wikipedia inclusionist, more money is always better independent of the value.
I usually contribute to inexistent or niched articles.
I don't always know the fancy expressions of contemporary English language, but my spelling is correct most of the time, otherwise I might just have had a bad day.
I think the selection of wikipedia-admins should be randomized. The current method is nepotism in my opinion.
Books:
LOTR, Kurt Wallander crime novels, The Shining
Movies/TV:
LOTR, Das Experiment, Boogie Nights, The Pledge, Minority Report, Arlington Road, Breakdown, 12 Monkeys, Vanilla Sky, The last of the Mohicans, Falling Down, American History X, Running Scared, Final Destination, Frailty, Identity, Spy Game, X-Files, Millenium, Lost, 24 (4th season), Southpark (sometimes)
Hobbies:
Playing, repairing and listening to analog Synthesizers; travelling (backpacking and shit); snowboarding; daydreaming; Lucid dreaming; accumulating a wealth of undesired knowledge (that is something wikipedia is good for); creating logos (with Inkscape); trying to discredit mathematics as something of no belonging.
