Snozzwanger

If you wondered...* edit

i pick articles on which to focus more or less at random; usually they are the result of clicking links that catch my interest, much like a demented magpie dive-bombing pieces of tinsel blowing forlornly around an empty Christmas Tree sales lot December 26.

<scroll><scrollllll> <CLICK> <scroll><scroll> <CLICK> ¡¡¡ [TAG] !!!

Following flares of interest brings one (inevitably it seems) to a "Help Me" tag of one sort or another; almost guaranteed my attention (if not actual assistance) are those which seem directly destined for deletion. My aide could go either way though, whether working to warrant retention^† or sadly sometimes seeking deletion^‡. At heart i suppose i am an "inclusionist", but reluctantly and only when i genuinely believe in an article's importance and i see credible, evidential referents (as i've recently been called deletionist, we'll have more on that later).

^†Caveat #1: The article may convince me of its import* but lack citations to support it. Or conversely, it may be a remarkably (and frighteningly) well-sourced ode to my next door neighbor's second-ever babysitter, notable not even to nosy neighbors. Whichever, the presence of either (import or support) may lead to my attempting to acquire for the article the other. And now i've confused myself. Lovely.

* Import, unlike "notability", can't be bought. Oxygen? Important. Paris Hilton? "Notable"? If that.

^‡Caveat #2: While i may well start out attempting to disprove an article which seems frivolous or asinine with the goal of its speedy deletion... only to find so many credible referents for the subject i have no choice but to believe its unlikely existence, believe with all my heart (i DO believe in Santy-Clause, i do, i DO!) and therefore have no choice but to about-face and attempt to revise and cite and solicit input and whatever else to save the bugger.
(See: "Anti-tank dog")

*...and may god help you if you did.

Peevus pettus maximus edit

People who engage in talk page ~~debates~~ discussions about articles (or worse, start them) without having actually read the article.
Argh. Just argh.

Commas. Love 'em. edit

The comma is God's own punctuation mark, filling a thousand needs for a million people! How could anyone not love that cute little spot o'ink with its own tiny tail? And so many uses it's just, well, mindblowing!

Separation alone would exhaust any other punctuation mark! Check this- comma separates:

list items (although his cousin serial comma fills in before the last item when disambiguating),
a dependent clause from a following independent clause,
independent clauses joined by a coordinating conjunction or having a complementary relationship (but he doesn't have to!),
coordinate adjectives,
days from years when the date is written,
geographical references like city and state,
even the digits in big, big, numbers (but only every thousand or so- hundreds are dead common)!

And still he has other duties:

providing emphasis and clarity
indicating a word was left out by the lazy writer (i.e. elision)
setting off quotes (when the grammatical object of an active verb of speaking or writing)
indicating a relative clause is non-restrictive

...and my all time personal number one favorite, filling in for those lazy-ass parentheses who all the time gotta run off together,

Parenthetical phrases!!! Including: summative, resumptive, absolute, aside, interjection, address, introductory, and (wait for it.... wait for it....)

the all time best, appositive!!! Can you believe that bull? All exclamation mark does, and i do mean ALL, is stand around waiting for people to get excited and shout!

LOVE me some commas!!!