Groupthink

This is a Wikipedia user 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 Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia.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:Groupthink.

Essays Groupthink has written

Lists considered harmful

What Groupthink is

Showing impending signs of Wikiholism.
An exclusionist.
Prone to stream-of-consciousness writing.
A promoter of using categories to index Wikipedia content.
A graduate of the Master's program in Software Engineering at Texas State University.
Unlike a certain Essjay, is not lying about his credentials.
Also unlike same, is willing to verify or demonstrate his credentials.
A polymath.
Of the extremely controversial opinion that Wikipedia administrators should only be allowed to make administrative-type edits and should be disallowed from making any other type of edit.
Of the opinion that Wikipedia could use a peer credibility ratings system.
Of the opinion that credentialed experts ought to be deferred to.
Someone who hates to use prepositions to end sentences with.
Someone who really needs to get his ass on Jeopardy!, be the next Ken Jennings and win a brazilian dollars.
An online privacy advocate.
A believer in the widespread use of encryption.
An open-source sympathizer.
Of the tendency to use the term "cite" in place of "citation".
Probably far more prone to (metaphorically speaking) kicking over hornet's nests than is good for him.
A Scientist and an advocate of the Scientific method.
A Skeptic.
A Night Owl.
Prone to calling an exclamation point a "bang", an apostrophe a "tick", a period a "dot", a slash a "whack", and a backslash a "backwhack".
Anal about the difference between a hyphen and a dash.
Curious if the British call a backslash a "backstroke".
A smart-ass.

What Groupthink is not

Willing to reveal his real name or other personal details of his identity to prove his credentials or for any other reason.
A believer in the persuasiveness of "...but I get X number of Google hits for Y!" based arguments.
An inclusionist.
Yet persuaded that the brain/mind is nothing but a Universal Turing Machine... emphasis on the word yet.
An open-source fanatic.
A promoter of using lists to index Wikipedia content.
A believer in the notion that a point-of-view can ever be truly neutral.
A believer in the notion that all arguments are of equal merit prima facie and thus deserve equal time.
Good at false sentiment, being diplomatic for diplomacy's sake, or averse to conflict if it results in a positive outcome.
Partial to net nannies, consensus-mongerers, or those who think it's more important to get along and play nice than it is to get things right.
A believer in consensus for consensus' sake.
An early riser.
A consistent and regular sleeper.
A condoner of ad hominem attacks.
Willing to show any mercy to those who have the gall to launch an ad hominem attack against this user based on the contents of this page.
A holder of two doctorates in theology and canon law.
Disciplined and stingy in choosing keywords to highlight with internal links.
Decided on which he likes better: The American English grammatical convention of pairing a singular verb with a collective noun (e.g., "The department has decided to purchase more widgets.") or the British English convention of pairing a plural verb with a collective noun (e.g., "The department have decided to purchase more widgets.")
Good at remembering to stick four tildes at the end of his talk page comments.
Prone to calling a slash a "stroke", a Z a "zed", or a period a "full stop", but is amused by those who are.
A dumb-ass.

What Groupthink needs to do

Write some essays on what he perceives to be some serious flaws in Wikipedia as currently incarnated.
Write some essays on Wikipedia policy changes he would make.
Make this page pretty and readable.
A truckload of rewriting on a number of algorithm related pages.
Massive cleanup of the Christian terrorism page.
Write an umbrella article on political controversies in the circles of academia (maybe just in the US, but maybe globally as well), perhaps including material on Norman Finkelstein, Joel Hayward, pro/anti PC views, the conservative movement to protect right-wing students from left-wing teachers, tenure disputes, historical revisionism, non-mainstream views held by faculty (like Michael Behe for instance), student revolts, et cetera...
Eat better and exercise more.
Yoga and meditation more frequently.
Strongly resist the temptation to add [[Category:Shows that have jumped the shark]] to Lost (TV series), Heroes (TV series), Boston Legal and Battlestar Galactica (2004 TV series).

Pages Groupthink has created or substantially edited

Article drafts

None currently.

Change my mind!

The song Ironic does not contain any irony at all except in the meta sense that it is called "Ironic" but contains no irony.