[WikiEN-l] Improve quality by reviewing all new articles

[Anthony DiPierro]

On 12/16/05, Rob <gamaliel8 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I'm sorry, but if you don't think that the assertion
> that someone was involved in both the JFK and the RFK
> assassination is not some sort of lunatic fringe claim
> that at least deserves some sort of cursory
> verification, then I don't think the suggestion that
> you should not be editing an encyclopedia is all that
> outrageous.
>

To be honest, if you asked me a month ago whether or not RFK was
assassinated, I'd have told you I wasn't sure.  Now that I think about
it, I guess that fact was mentioned in Forrest Gump.

I guess I shouldn't be editing Wikipedia.  If I see a spelling error,
I'll just leave it.  If someone writes about the POOP equation in a
physics article, I'll just treat it like any other crappy article I
see on the Internet.  When I take a picture of the [[Borgata]] or
[[Philadephia]] or [[Pittsburgh]] or a [[wye appliance]], I'll keep it
to myself.  I won't bother tagging hundreds of images with their
copyright tags.  Seriously, Jimbo.  Unless you take back what you said
(or someone replaces you), I won't make any more edits in the
Wikipedia article namespace.  Can I still participate on the talk
pages, or is maybe that too much for me too?

I'm an accountant, not an historian.  My degree is in Computer
Science.  I fully admit to stupidity when it comes to historical
facts.

Anthony