Some of the excellent work that I contributed to Wikipedia (before coming to my senses and realizing how many punks think they own the place) is found here:
Probably the most challenging of those articles was the one on National Fuel Gas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Fuel_Gas ). The one that wins the "elegance" award would have to be the Asparagus graphics discussion (http://www.mywikibiz.com/Image:Asparagus_production_2007.png ). The article on Job sharing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Job_sharing ) is pretty decent, too.
Now, I save my better efforts for sites other than Wikipedia, where I can maintain some level of control over my content. For example, which of these articles is the better one?
Brandywine Springs (on Wikipedia):
Brandywine Springs (elsewhere):
And, in closing, I'd have to say that the work I did on one particular coal mining company's article was decent, though certainly not my best. It's rather comical to have been indefinitely blocked for having written that article -- all for free, not in exchange for any payment. Perfect example, though, of how Wikipedia is full of self-righteous blowhards who think they own the place. Clearly, they don't understand what "open source" really means.
Going forward, I've learned that the best content I can ever contribute to Wikipedia is the content I don't contribute to Wikipedia!
· 10 years ago