Articles that I originated or to which I supplied major portions:
- Antonio Vivaldi
- History of ancient Israel and Judah
- History of the Internet
- Max Headroom
- Prairie dog
Random articles that I have contributed to are now listed in /Contributions.
Much of my contributions have been items from other public domain resources. All help in wikifying is greatly appreciated.
I have posted a significant number of the articles from the first volume of the 1911 Encyclopedia Bri... whoops, I mean the Project Gut... whoops, I mean an unnamed encyclopedia from 1911 whose copyright has expired. I am now done with that initial project.
As of December 2001, I am importing articles on historical people from the [Christian Classics Ethereal Library], another
online book initiative.
I also have some pictures that don't go with any article yet. See /Pictures without an article
I have been participating in Wikipedia since July or August 2001. I was one of the influx from the big Slashdotting.
I am a Christian. I'm not a theologian but I play one on Wikipedia :-) and I am open to input on any topics. I'm learning quite a bit here. Actually, posting old encyclopedia articles even inspired me to go read a book on the Crusades and start a shell of an entry for it.
I heartily endorse the neutral point of view goal but it is easier said than done :-)
I am a computer geek. I have been programming since 1979 and working in Information Technology since 1984 in various roles including programmer/analyst, network engineer, and system administrator.
I enjoy the diversity of Wikipedia and seeing the mutual encouragement. Keep up the good work everyone!
You can e-mail me at a m 1 2 @ b o l i s . c o m . No spam, please :-)
My web site is at http://www.bolis.com although there isn't anything interesting there at the moment.
someone (216.99.203.xxx) went through and redirected all the Alexander I,II,III, etc. imports to Pope Alexander I, II, III, etcs. I liked your link pages (e.g., Albert I) much better. --MichaelTinkler
Thanks. I may have goofed in some updates myself. Looking at it at now (August 24 2001), the index pages for Alexander I, II, and III are listing all the various Alexanders, so it looks correct now. I know there is some nomenclature reshuffling going on for a number of the Pope pages, and I see some redundant entries for Russian Tsar's also. Hopefully we can clean this up to everyone's satisfaction. -- Alan
Congrats on inputting all those encyclopedia articles! It's heartening to see them all in now; I had put in the first couple dozen of them, and know how much work it can be - especially trying to sort out which ones should be in and which shouldn't. Anyway, just wanted to throw some appreciation and thanks for a job well done. :-) -- BryceHarrington
Thanks, Bryce! And thank you from me to Bryce and everyone else who is doing the much-needed wikification of the articles after the initial posting. -- Alan
thanks for the LXX revisions, Alan! I was doing them when I noticed them (at best!). --MichaelTinkler
Oops! Duh... I guess I was rushing too much. That one is from NOAA. Thanks for catching that. --Alan Millar
Thanks for all the historical uploads, Alan. I just linked 11 occurrences of Eusebius to the Eusebius of Caesarea entry! --MichaelTinkler
Question on harp picture copyright issues moved to Public Domain Resources/Talk
Alan - a question on the CCEL (or the other sources of the same info). After wikification on things like Tertullian and Origen I got tempted to start having links at the bottom of the entry to works mentioned in the entry. Sound like a good idea?
I like the idea. I like the idea of a clear distinction of a "living" encyclopedia article (meant to be revised and improved) versus an historical document that should be frozen. (I think the idea of wholesale import of Shakespeare, US Constitution, or you name it into Wikipedia is a bad idea because they will eventually get changed, whether by chance or intent.) Linking to such documents, whether at CCEL or elsewhere, is a great idea. These Schaff-Herzog entries are going to need a good deal of wikification, and many of the bilbliographic references are unexplained in the articles. For example, the article may quote a source such as NPNF, but it is only if you look at the Schaff-Herzog volume preface that you'll find its explanation. I'm not sure what to do with all of those. --Alan Millar
- Almost all the patristic sources are available online. Should we link directly from the references in the articles? I think that's obtrusive, and that links inside articles should be to wikipedia resources only. Links at the end, thus, seem better to me. --MichaelTinkler
I definitely agree; they are too intrusive in the text body --Alan Millar