I mainly make contributions to Rugby articles; I'm a member of WikiProject Rugby Union. I contribute to Rugby related articles not because I'm a player, referee, or closely related to the sport but because I don't think there are enough editors contributing to rugby related articles. I live in the North Island of New Zealand, and am self-employed.
You can have a look at the article I created here. It's not a complete list. Maybe one day I'll make a more comprehensive one.
Need help?
If you want me to help with anything then I will do my best. I'm not always going to be able to, but if I can I'm willing to help with a GA review, peer review, FAC or anything where people want input and feedback regarding their articles. Obviously there are going to be subjects on which I have more knowledge then others, but I'm willing to do my best.
Also if anyone wants specific help or collaboration then I may be able to contribute there as well. It doesn't necessarily need to be a rugby or sports related topic. Just leave a message on my talk page if you have any queries.
Thomas Eyton • James Scott (rugby) • Jack Taiaroa • Jack Lawlor • Pat Keogh • George Dixon (rugby) • Vic Cavanagh
Wikiphilosophy
After reading about this (see more here and here), I thought I would make it very clear my thoughts on wikipedia. I believe that the main reason anyone should be on wikipedia is to contribute to articles. Surely the main goal should be to increase the number of high quality articles, especially the number of good articles and featured articles. It does concern me that many people seem more concerned with increasing bureaucracy, and exercising various forms of influence, then contributing. There is no doubt that it is necessary to have people clarifying policies and guidelines, assisting newbies, blocking and reverting vandals, fixing minor errors, removing inappropriate material (copyrighted, libellous, vandalism, spam etc), and resolving disputes. However I am always suspicious when someone's sole function is to perform one or more of these tasks. There are many great admins out there, however I do feel that many people are more interested in power and influence then getting the job done. If this were not the case then there would never be the need for such lies as those above (and no, trying to maintain ones anonymity does not require the lies alluded to).
Barnstars
The Original Barnstar
For your fantastic work on rugby-related articles. Cvene64 14:17, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diligence
My final act - but I might end up editing again --HamedogTalk|@ 05:41, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For your very many priceless edits to rugby union pages GordyB
The Running Man Barnstar
For your massive and devoted contribution to the improvement of Wikipedia's coverage of rugby union football, please accept this Running Man Barnstar. --ROGER DAVIEStalk 08:04, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
It gives me great pleasure to thank Shudde for outstanding contributions to Wikipedia's coverage of rubgy with this Imperial Napoleonic triple crown. You are a Napoleon among editors.
