This user is a member of WikiProject Skepticism, which seeks to improve the quality of articles dealing with science, pseudosciences and skepticism. Please feel free to join us. The only thing that benefits from doubt is truth.
I got interested in Wikipedia when it kept turning up in my Google searches. As soon as I realized how comprehensive Wikipedia is, I was hooked.
In the Fall of 2005 I started using Harvard referencing on practically everything. Harvard referencing "is one of three citation styles recommended by Wikipedia" (see Wikipedia:Harvard referencing and Wikipedia:Citing sources). The system has some pros and cons, see Harvard referencing#Pros & cons. The only real "con" is that it takes up more space, but "Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia", so space matters little. In addition to the pros listed there,
it is better for readers since he can see who said this and when, without having to go to the footnotes.
it is better for editors since the bulk of the information is down in the reference section rather than embedded in the text.
I use reliable sources. I try to adhere to "One of the keys to writing good encyclopedia articles is to understand that they should refer only to facts, assertions, theories, ideas, claims, opinions, and arguments that have already been published by a reputable publisher.", from Wikipedia:Verifiability. (I violated that slightly in stalemate, Chess endgame, and king and pawn versus king endgame, now at least partially rectified.) In accordance with WP:NPOVUW, I am against giving undue weight to the opinions of crackpots.
I am in favor of the Chicago Manual of Style guideline for spelling out exact numbers (things you count rather than things you measure) up to one hundred and all round numbers that can be expressed in two words. At least spell out any number no larger than one hundred that doesn't require a hyphen. (Turabian 1973:20). I like Harvard Referencing.
For the first six months of 2006, I've spent more of my free time improving Wikipedia than anything else. I'm having to cut down.
My spelling is terrible. I make typing errors and my grammar isn't up to par.
I make a lot of typos. For fifteen years I typed with my keyboard in my lap, but that seemed to be bringing on Carpal tunnel syndrome. Since somewhere around 2000 I started typing normally, and my CTS symptoms went away, but for some reason I started making a lot of typos (usually off by one key).
There is only one problem with the "anyone can edit" policy, and that is that anyone can edit.
At my daughter's school, when they do reports they can use two types of references: encyclopedias and internet sources. So which does Wikipedia count as? Or does it count as both? Actually, it counts as neither. What does that tell you?
Why I like Parenthetical referencing (also known as the author-date system and Harvard Referencing)
This is the best method for the reader because it tells you - right there - who said it and when, which is often important. Also, if there are several references, the reader can immediately tell if this is from the same source as previous references. Also, this immediately shows that it is a citation rather than an informative note. (With a footnote, you can't tell if the footnote is a citation or contains other information without going to the footnote. This is irritating for the reader.) And if the reader is familiar with the literature, you often know what it is without looking. For instance, if you are a chess player and see (de Firmian 1999) you automatically know what that is.
This method is better for the editors too. It cuts down on redundancy if the same work is referenced often. It is easier for an editor to edit the references if they are in the reference section rather than scattered throughout the text of the article. It is easier for editors to edit the text of articles because you don't have the full text of the reference interrupting the flow of the article. It is better than the footnote method for a dynamic text such as these articles because if you use an Ibid footnote, and then insert another reference, that invalidates the Ibid, and that either makes more work for the editor or makes the reference wrong.
Favorite car I ever had: 1973 Pontiac LeMans Sport Coupe (the original Bubba '73). It has a 400 in³ V8 with a two-barrel carburetor and dual exhausts. The color is ascot silver and maroon; it has the slots on the small rear window, and has extremely rare body stripes.
Volume four of The Art of Computer Programming. Volumes 1 through 3 of the planned seven-volume set came out in 1968, 1969, and 1973 (resp). In 1980 Donald Knuth said that volume 4 would be out in a year or two. Volume 4A came out in January 2011.
Don't you believe in flying saucers, they ask me? Don't you believe in telepathy? — in ancient astronauts? — in the Bermuda triangle? — in life after death? No, I reply. No, no, no, no, and again no. One person recently, goaded into desperation by the litany of unrelieved negation, burst out "Don't you believe in anything?" "Yes", I said. "I believe in evidence. I believe in observation, measurement, and reasoning, confirmed by independent observers. I'll believe anything, no matter how wild and ridiculous, if there is evidence for it. The wilder and more ridiculous something is, however, the firmer and more solid the evidence will have to be." (Asimov 1997:43)
Here is another quote I like to remember:
The gazing populace receive greedily, without examination, whatever soothes superstition and promotes wonder.
After I had been editing Wikipedia for several months, I was wearing my Wikipedia t-shirt at the grocery store. The teenage kid bagging groceries noticed my shirt and we started chatting about Wikipedia. He said that he used it, but he hasn't edited yet, but he was going to. After we left, my wife said "He's allowed to edit - just as you are?" I grudgingly had to admit that yes, he is.
The encyclopedia where you can be an authority, even if you don't know what the hell you are talking about.
I've been asked about my user name. Above I mentioned my 1973 car named Bubba. I loved the car so much that I couldn't part with it when I got a new car. Then when my sister had no car, I let her use it. It had some age on it by this time. Her roommate said that it was the type of car that someone named "Bubba" would drive. The name stuck to the car.
Secondly, we live in what used to be the shrimp capital of the world. I think we should take advantage of that and have them for dinner frequently, but my family isn't so positive about it. I'll ask them what they want to have for dinner: boiled shrimp, broiled shrimp, deep fried shrimp, pan fried shrimp, stir fried shrimp, shrimp et tu fe, Cajun shrimp, shrimp creole, shrimp gumbo, shrimp jambalaya, shrimp scampi, shrimp with lobster sauce, ... And that's about it. There is a resemblance between me and the character of "Bubba" in the movie Forrest Gump:
Shrimp is the fruit of the sea. You can barbecue it, boil it, broil it, bake it, sauté it. Dey's uh, shrimp-kabobs, shrimp creole, shrimp gumbo, pan fried, deep fried, stir-fried, there's pineapple shrimp, lemon shrimp, coconut shrimp, pepper shrimp, shrimp soup, shrimp stew, shrimp salad, shrimp and potatoes, shrimp burger, shrimp sandwich. Th-that's about it.
Shortly after I got my first digital camera, I went to take a photo of a historic African-American church in a nearby small city. This was one of the first photos I uploaded to Wikipedia. I didn't know exactly where it was, so I stopped in city hall, since it was within a block of two of where the church is. I asked the white person there where it was. They said that they didn't know but they would call someone. They carried on a conversation with someone who was probably black. One of the things the person in city hall said was "a white guy with a camera". Then they told me where it was. So I'm a "white guy with a camera" (well mostly).
This Barnstar is awarded for diligence in keeping Wikipedia sane Ansell 00:46, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
The Running Man Barnstar
Hi Bubba73! Although I am usually very skeptical of skeptics :-) I liked your article about King and pawn versus king. Thank you for writing it. Ioannes Pragensis 11:03, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
The Editor's Barnstar
For rewriting Chess from a poor "brilliant prose promotion" to a featured article, helping retain its star on review, I award you The Editor’s Barnstar. Nice job, excellent effort, and thankless work! Sandy (Talk) 02:44, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar
I'm awarding you this Barnstar for your valiant work on improving Wikipedia! Wikidudeman(talk) 05:05, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
I'm awarding you this barnstar for helping to defend Wikipedia from being used for fraudulent purposes. Wikidudeman(talk) 07:45, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
The Chain Barnstar of Recognition
For making a difference! This Barnstar isn't free, this is a chain barnstar, as payment please give this star to at least 3-5 others with 500+ edits but no barnstar. So that everyone who deserves one will get one Pseudoanonymous 19:37, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
The Writer's Barnstar
For your prolific and consistently excellent contributions to chess articles, I award you this barnstar. Krakatoa (talk) 05:18, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
The Writer's Barnstar
For having improved Rules of chess up to GA-class, I award you this barnstar. SyG (talk) 18:33, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For endless useful contributions to chess topics. SunCreator (talk) 16:11, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Bubba73, a barnstar to say thanks for your endlessly good contributions to WikiProjects Chess. Regards, SunCreator(talk) 13:30, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
The Chess Barnstar
I award you for massive contributions to chess related articles NovaSkola (talk) 01:04, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
The Surreal Barnstar
(This is meant to be a "Defender of the Wiki" barnstar, but I think that graphic is boring and I happen to like surrealism, so you get this one!) Seriously, thx for your tireless defenses/defences of chess articles from the mold of mediocrity. Sincere, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 02:44, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Fabulous images of the gargoyles on the Union Bank article! Kudos on the article and the images. Zpeopleheart (talk) 06:53, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
You've got my back, barnstar substitute
You're an eloquent, inteligent person and a credit to wikipedia society.
If there were ever a full-scale wikipedia edit war across all articles, I'd want you on my side because I know I could rely on you to watch my back.Simondrake 22:24, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind and timely contribution of photos for Dawson Woman's Club, within the October 2018 Clubwomen WIR editing campaign and other generally great contributions of photos and info about women's club buildings and other Georgia NRHPs. I particularly appreciate your helping with WomenArtistUpdates' and my efforts to develop about the Dawson club. :) Doncram (talk) 06:05, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
Given that information, I'd recommend the "Winning Chess" series by Yasser Seirawan, a seven-book series. Start with "Play Winning Chess" (you can probably skip or skim the first chapter). If that goes OK then both "Winning Chess Tactics" and "Winning Chess Strategies". To go beyond that "Winning Chess Openings" and "Winning Chess Endings". I haven't seen "Winning Chess Combinations", but maybe it could be the sixth one. "Winning Chess Briliancies" would be optional at the end. See Yasser Seirawan#Books. I think that is appropriate for a teenager on up. For a bit younger, probably A World Champion's Guide to Chess, by Susan Polgar. Also, there is a lot of chess information on Wikipedia.
2:23 All measurements are expressed in figures. The general rule is to spell out all [exact] numbers through one hundred (e.g. thirty-five) and all round numbers that can be expressed as two words (e. g. five thousand). Exact numbers over one hundred are written as figures.
2:24 When numbers of the same thing which are above and below one hundred appear in a group, write as figures.
2:25 A sentence should never begin with a figure.
2:26 Several round numbers occurring together are usually expressed in figures.
2:27 Very large round numbers are usually expressed in figures and in units of millions or billions.
2:28 Figures should be used to express decimals and percentages. The word percent should be written out, except in scientific writing, where the symbol % may be used.
2:52 continued numbers
First number
Second number
Examples
Less than 100
use all digits
3-10; 71-72
100 or multiple
use all digits
100-104; 600-613
more than 100 but less than 110 (in multiples of 100)
use changed part only, omit leading zero
107-8; 1002-3
more than 109 (in multiples of 100)
use last two digits (or all of more than two change)
121-25; 415-532; 1536-38; 1890-1954
From Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Numbers as figures or words: As a general rule, in the body of an article, single-digit whole numbers from zero to nine are spelled out in words; numbers greater than nine are commonly rendered in numerals, or may be rendered in words if they are expressed in one or two words (16 or sixteen, 84 or eighty-four, 200 or two hundred, but 3.75, 544, 21 million). This applies to ordinal numbers as well as cardinal numbers. However there are frequent exceptions to these rules.
The common noun moon denotes any natural planet-like satellite of a planet, whereas the proper noun Moon references a specific moon, that is, the Earth's moon. Dictionaries descriptively reflect that the latter sense is "often" capitalized (by which they imply "often [or usually] capitalized in educated writers' published writing".
The same status described above for moon/Moon also describes sun/Sun.
From WP:FN: "Three-column lists (and larger) are inaccessible to users with smaller/laptop monitors and should be avoided unless they are supporting shortened footnotes."
^Well, that isn't exactly true. I like fresh shrimp - ones that haven't been frozen. I don't like ones that are not from local waters - freshness is very important in seafood. A pet peeve of mine is that I live in what used to be called the shrimp capital of the world, yet some restaurants use farm-raised shrimp imported from Taiwan when they could (in some cases) literally walk across the corner and get fresh shrimp.
This is a Wikipediauser page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bubba73.
The red menace is spreading through southeast Georgia and a little of S.C. and Florida, August 2018
Georgia counties
NRHP sites as of 2016
_counties_map.png)
United States
Georgia
Florida
South Carolina
North Carolina
Virginia
West Virginia
D.C.
Maryland
Delaware
New Jersey
New York
Pennsylvania
Ohio
Indiana
Illinois
Kentucky
Missouri
Arkansas
Texas
Louisiana
Mississippi
Alabama
Tennessee
New Mexico
Arizona
Utah
Colorado
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Connecticut
Maine
Kansas
Nebraska
Wyoming
South Dakota
Iowa
Canada
Ontario
Mexico
Yucatán