I have been making edits to Wikipedia for years. I find the wiki concept to be both amazing and dangerous. The danger is in the uncouth collective mindset of bias. Under this categorical and primitive mind delusion, an individual or group of individuals may infer upon themselves the prerogative to project their subjective version of reality onto others. One of the easiest means for them to do this is the world wide web. Resting and building upon that framework is Wikipedia, a spectacle that is accessible by all. The difference between Wikipedia and the dredges of the internet is only a covariant product of its progenitors. And like any source that which one depends upon, it must remain pure. To that end, I am a purist; I fight for balance and neutrality on Wikipedia. I officially have no stance, except the justice of polices that ensure information is brought to light. I believe that darkness comes in many forms. In a space where the evil thoughts preceding the actions have become visible for all to see, I consider it my solemn duty to reveal them for what they are. If Wikipedia wants to be the sum of human knowledge, then it must have a vanguard of protectors to ensure that it is free from the crime of bias, bigotry, delusion, and hatred. Indeed, a source should be a reliable one. A reliable source does not refract the light of its knowledge like a prism, but allows it to flow through it, unchanged and unimpeded, leaving the reader illuminated.

    The brilliance of Wikipedia is that it does work. That there is more good than bad here. The fact that Wikipedia has grown to such an extent is proof that there is hope for humanity after all. I have been a skeptic of humanity for a long time. I have been educated by its systems and certificates and various perceptions, doctrines, and philosophies on existence. I have enjoyed much of the company of the people I have met and have made a few enemies on the way. I have realized the ephemeral nature of not just mine, but everyone's existence. I have come to the conclusion that the only observable impact I can achieve is through actions that leave lasting impacts. What happens at the cessation of my consciousness in biological death is something I am far too busy to concern myself with. I am busy fighting to end suffering, something I vehemently abhor. Wikipedia is one of the many ways that I contribute to humanity in my quest to end suffering in all levels. I feel that to do otherwise is to be indifferent and to allow misinformation to persist is to, by inaction, spread ignorance. And thus, I have illustrated my two most hated fundamental evils of humanity: indifference and ignorance.

    I also partake in 3rd opinion and scan a wide array of articles that may be in trouble. I pay special attention to biographies of living persons and articles of controversy, such as religion, philosophy, and metaphysics. I monitor various scientific articles for factual accuracy and general copyediting, as many of them are factually accurate, but lack composition and proper writing. I hate peacock and weasel words. I hate criticism sections in articles, where the article could be written in a neutral point of view. I love when new editors come to Wikipedia and add information that is valuable, but would have never been thought of by someone else. I love when I look up one thing and end up learning something new about a completely different subject. That is only possible with an online encyclopedia. I love when an article changes for the better, and that is always my goal. I look forward to working with my fellow editors to ensure that these goals happen.

    If you have found yourself in opposition to me, I can be a relentless and determined defender of neutrality and Wikipedia policy; however, I will always try to take all perspectives into view, as much as it is humanly possible, and I am always open to new perspectives and knowledge.

Warm Regards,
☯Lightbound☯