NOTE: Since 2007, when I stopped having the free time to remain a highly-active Wikipedian, 95% of my contributions have been anonymous minor edits to various pages. Most of that is copyediting; some of it has been quite substantial, but uncontroversial, overhauling. I only log in when I am making (1) substantial changes that are (2) to a controversial article, or if I see a discussion on a Talk page that could benefit from my perspective. Anyone looking at my contribution log would think I'm some kind of inconsistent controversy-monger, but rest assured that the vast majority of my work is just too boring for login to be beneficial to myself or the project.
Contents
BCSWowbagger[edit]
Hello. I am me. You are not.
Please respond to anything you find objectionable on my Talk page, to which I will link as soon as I figure out the code for it.
BCSWowbagger
| ||||||||||||||||
|
Major Contributions[edit]
-Ran Star Trek XI with an iron fist during the rumor-filled days of 2006-2007. Only a bit of what I wrote is still there, although some of my notes on The Beginning have ended up mirrored on Memory Alpha.
-The first paragraph of Abortion still contains the word "death." Yes, the second-greatest contribution of my brief career was holding on to one single word after an epic debate that, I think, demonstrated true wikispirit on the part of all participants--even the ones with whom I vehemently disagreed. Abortion for FA!
-Bits and pieces of the otherwise defunct WP:Abortion were also tended to by me.
Hobbies[edit]
I'm a tremendous Star Trek nerd. I know it all. I play an RPG and all that. I'm also into: Stargate SG-1, Stargate: Atlantis, Battlestar Galactica, Serenity, etc., etc., etc. You might know me as Wowbagger from BCS:TNG, the greatest mod group for Star Trek: Bridge Commander in history.
I also produce a Star Trek-based audio drama, but the article's veteran editors don't consider it sufficiently notable for article inclusion, so I won't bother naming it here. ;)
I'm a hardcore Quiz Bowl-er (formerly did KMO, too, but now entirely NAQT), and a C-SPAN-watching political junkie.
Various Abortion-Related Disclaimers and Explanations[edit]
Well, I'm getting ready to jump into the WikiProject: Abortion fray, so a few disclaimers will be in order, starting with this one:
My Position[edit]
Well, I'm going to get found out sooner or later. I'm anti-abortion. I believe abortion takes a human life. I believe this is an obvious, easily proven fact that anyone who owns a dictionary or has taken a biology course knows, in his or her heart of hearts. I believe America is responsible for the greatest Holocaust in world history, and I can barely comprehend the billion-plus casualties worldwide. I am what some would call a radical or revolutionary, but I also firmly believe in the power of the truth, and am quite fixated on the rules of logic and non-religionism in debate over the legal merits, entering religious and philisophical territory only when my opponent chooses to do so.
Just the kind of balanced mind you'd want to see on an Abortion WikiProject, no?
Seriously, I respect Wikipedia and the NPOV rules. I don't need to skew an article to win converts: I am right.
Language[edit]
This is a biggie, and I'll probably have to subdivide this section later, but, for now, here's my thinking on the Big Two Phrases in this debate.
Pro-life and pro-choice are both indisputably loaded terms. I mean, pro-life? Easy reply: "Do you support the war in Iraq?" "Yes." "Hypocrite." Conversation over. Come on! "Pro-life" has reference, in 99% of cases, to one thing: opposition to abortion, which takes a human life. Anything more generalized than anti-abortion is imprecise, nastily rhetorical, precludes serious debate, and bogs anti-abortionists down in a morass of unrelated issues. Except for the rhetorical value, it's stupid, and I think even that value is beginning to wear off.
The equally ridiculous term pro-choice is not, however, off the hook. I like to think of myself as pro-choice as well: I believe in school choice, gun choice, net neutrality, voting choice, religious choice, the works. Pro-choice is another intentionally vague term used for rhetorical purposes. Insisting on the phrase pro-abortion rights instead of pro-abortion is an attempt to draw attention away from the main issue (that is, whether abortion is murder or the removal of a cyst). Furthermore, the people I know who insist on adding "rights" tend not to grant the same distinction to those who are pro-gun rights or pro-voucher rights. The addition of "rights" is something exclusive to the abortion debate, and it's just not consistent with the way we argue in the political arena.
Having said all this, I am glad to use the more popular pro-life and pro-choice in articles, just to avoid an extended semantic debate/NPOV accusations (from both sides) over a relatively minor point.
Barnstars[edit]
Barnstar table layout filched from the user page of Severa. Which, in turn, was filched from RoyBoy's. I could have just as well filched it from Andrew c, but then I would have had to mention him, and that just would have been ridiculous, wouldn't it?
| Award | From |
|---|---|
|
I award you this Barnstar in recognition of the patience, kindness, and understanding you have displayed toward new users (and as a new user yourself), and for the polite, reasoned input you have given to WikiProject Abortion and related articles. Severa (!!!) 22:33, 17 November 2006 (UTC) |
|
The Half Barnstar | |
| I award this to you, for bringing a new perspective to the Abortion Debate article. This is an shining example of the ideals of consensus building and of being a wikipedian. Thank you. Paranormal Skeptic (talk) 14:39, 10 June 2009 (UTC) |