Hello. I live in a medium-size town in the middle of North America. I was a newspaper editor for many years, and although I have several years of recovery from that, I still believe that the editorial process is one of the best ways ever devised to ensure a publication remains as factual and unbiased as possible. Unfortunately, it is as imperfect as humans are—especially editors—and, as always, a tough readership is perfectly willing to ascribe to malicious conspiracy errors that are just as likely to have originated in incompetence or intoxication. Since then, I've lost my thirst for both controversy and alcohol, which makes it very unlikely that I'll ever wish to return to journalism, or indeed, modern life in general.
One of the things that I appreciate about Wikipedia culture is the presumption of good faith, and I will try not to put it to the test any more often than necessary. I welcome constructive feedback because, like most people, the older I get, the more ignorant I become. That is, I have as much to learn as ever, and probably more, so if you have reached this page to see what kind of yahoo might have made such a grave error in your favorite Wikipedia article, behold!
Now you know.
I am likely to make small grammatical and minor factual edits on any random article, but perhaps most likely on those about literary figures, old movies, cultural institutions of bygone eras, language quirks, art, music, mathematics or computer science. I will attempt to avoid quarrels in articles on topics whether sensitive or insensitive but, like almost everybody, I have my personal opinions. And, while there is no shame in defending one's opinions when necessary, and indeed, under certain circumstances it becomes necessary and, the way certain people do it, even admirable, I'm not one of those gifted and rare individuals. So here at least it seems best if I can try to go as long as possible before making my opinions obvious.
Feel free to ask questions or leave comments as appropriate.
