User:SupaStarGirl
I am one of the most private users on Wikipedia. All the "private" information I'll give out to you is that I'm from the eastern U.S. Bet you can't find me!
However, I will tell you what I do on Wikipedia.
What I do on Wikipedia
Originally, I wrote mostly about roller coasters. I created articles on Jr. Gemini and Woodstock Express (ridden both!). When you see the stats on these coasters, you'll see that I'm a wimp when it comes to coasters! I also wrote some text on the controversy about Superman: The Escape. It's universal that Superman tied with Tower of Terror for fastest track ride from 1998-2001. The question is whether the two are roller coasters.
I later became an anti-vandal warrior. Nowadays, most of my edits are vandalism reverts. I've found everything from blank articles to a list of six expletives, repeated about a hundred times (maybe more!). I find the vandalism by clicking on the "Recent changes" link. Pretty much all the vandalism on Wikipedia is new (it's reverted quickly).
My opinion of Wikipedia
I'll also tell you my opinion of Wikipedia. Fun site to edit! However, it is not as reliable as Encyclopaedia Britannica, and an OK source. Format and grammar errors are more common than content errors, and a LOT more common than vandalism and hoax (fake) articles. The reason why I've found all the vandalism is because I've been looking for it by clicking the "Recent changes" link at left. Wikipedia is more reliable than SuspiciousBlogSite.com, but less reliable than RespectableEncyclopedia.com. If you see a suspicious article, don't trust it, or, if you want, edit it!
I've been to the site and seen the good, the bad, and the ugly. Here's what to trust and what not to trust.
What to trust (that is, if you trust anything on Wikipedia)
- Articles that lots of people visit (like the article on a famous person, etc).
- Articles about pop culture- the common people know pop culture!
- Articles that no one wants to vandalize (like, say, an article about a rare subspecies of zinnia).
- The featured article- when it's not obvious vandalism. The article is promoted to featured status because it's a good article. However, because of its easy access from the main page, it is a target for vandalism.
What not to trust
- Be careful with articles about controversial subjects. They might be biased.
- Articles marked with a "Factual accuracy disputed" template or the like.
- Articles written in bad format.
- Wikipedias in languages that nobody knows how to speak (like Chamoru or Hiri Motu). Nobody knows how to speak these languages, so growth of those Wikipedias is very slow. English-speaking vandals come to the site and wreck it. Even the articles that are not vandalism are often written in bad format. The Simple English Wikipedia is in simple English, but not very many people know about it, so I wouldn't trust it.
My three articles
I have created three articles on the English Wikipedia. Jr. Gemini, Woodstock Express, and Wikipedia:Edits with silly edit summaries. The edit summary article was part of a series of pages of funny vandalism called Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense. It was deleted because it wasn't as funny as the others. I agree with them! :-( However, in response, I created a user subpage devoted to silly vandalism. (And don't worry, it won't be deleted!) User:SupaStarGirl/Silly Vandalism
One last note
This page has been tested or vandalized a couple of times. If you want to test out Wikipedia, use the sandbox instead. If you want to insert nonsense, go to User:King of Hearts/Notepad/Vandalism on Wheels!. There, you can vandalize, and it's perfectly fine! Or, if you don't just want nonsense, but want to show your sense of humor, check out Uncyclopedia.