I am a neutral and unbiased Wikipedia Newbie (see Wikinewbiepedian, a Wiki entry that does not yet exist but looms large in my mind's eye), having only a few weeks experience with the strange demimonde of the Wikipedian, and the Wikiwork of writing and editing a Wikipedia entry. So far, it feels like handling a wet sack of cats.
"For a Wikinewbiepedian, Sebastian Lake is a fantastic editorial talent and a promising up-and-comer," said Sebastian Lake in a recently published Wikipedia User Page. [1]
In communications work, I've drafted many Wikipedia entries, but the slugging-it-out (see In the Trenches, a stub that could now use a disambiguation page, see below) has been handled by Wikipedia experts for hire. Thus, as I begin to learn the Wikiropes myself, I am stunned and amazed that there are Wikipedians in the world who have time to nitpick (see: Life is short, below) as though there's nothing better to do.
Although a Wikinewbiepedian, I am a seasoned journalist, photographer and creative producer with a bazillion bylined (see byline) articles in leading consumer magazines and a Big Deal international newspaper. My expertise is design, architecture, spirits, food, gardening and pop culture -- all things domestic. Also, a cyclist.
I am accustomed working on collaborative teams, and prefer conversation and consensus. Please do.
I aim to create informative content in Wikipedia categories that are currently not well-covered, or are underserved, and welcome your suggestions about where you perceive gaps and opportunities.
I am easily annoyed by nitpicking and frivolous changes without discussion. (See snark, a disambiguation page that does not yet include the most common and frequently-searched use of the word snark. That's a little snarky of me to mention, come to think of it.) Anyway, I refer here to obsessive nitpicking in the Wikipedia editing process, not the cooties, sucking louses and other louses also mentioned in this WIkipedia disambiguation page: nitpicking.
I will go to the mat over work I believe in, and can back it up with objective reasoning and references. I am happy to defer and concede to professional, orderly advice about how to improve my work. I always seek out mentors (see mentorship), and welcome the good advice of those Wikipediavets with patience to guide me along.
For starters, I dislike disambiguation pages like the one linked here about neutrality, which bury the lede and manage to make everything more ambiguous, not disambiguated. This one (neutrality) is technically a redirect page to a disambiguation page, but you catch my drift. There's gotta be a better way and I'm willing to collaborate to fix it.