User:Lynxano

i ride the bus everywhere cuz i have to ^w^ so im pretty pro bus all things considered ~

i have conflicts of interest with various municipal politicans in ontario, most especially hazel mccallion.

i am a member of Better Transit Ottawa and a developer for its website, and so have a conflict of interest with it and similar organisations in the city.

there are probably other ones but i cang remember and tbh i dont think id try editing a page for any of them anyways?

i like wikipedia and think supporting it is important healthy and also

we have two massive problems with it, one with policy, and one with culture.

wikipedia as a site feels almost systemically set up to exclude the work and perspectives of anyone other than the average wikipedian (white, male, mid twenties, english speaking). this is absurdly frustrating when edits are reverted under the idea they are not relevant but when in reality they just aren't relevant to this demographic. this is the cultural issue.

the political issue is the no self published sources rule. I completely understand why it is in place, but it massively biases coverage on the site to mainstream media, which has becoming progressively less and less journalist, and more and more sensational.

in canada, we are very very lucky to have the CBC, which acts as the by far most neutral and balanced mainstream publisher. but even with the CBC, it only covers the most popular topics, which leaves a huge gap of information on more niche things.

so, the current wikipedia policies mandate that secondary sources be either biased or completely insufficient for information.

a case study: we primarily edit public transport wikipedia. so much crucial information just isn't published in a reliable source because not enough people take public transport in english speaking countries to make it worthwhile to publish. but, as someone who takes the bus several times every single day, these things are so basic and matter of fact it is absolutely absurd that wikipedia cannot document them.

and when information is published, it nearly always is presented from a motorist and conservative perspective. which means that bus articles end up filling up with information about how excessive subsidies are and nothing else, when subsidies should not remotely matter for one of the most essential public services out there.

when on the other hand, finding information on the experience of riding public transport is essentially impossible. the day to day stuff like operations and passenger comfort and the real world effectiveness, the stuff that actually matters, Impossible to find, or heavily stigmatised. and this is for something relatively inconsequential.

it's extremely horrible for things like mental illnesses, queerness, neurodiversity, and all that. we are Autistic, with a capital A, and the article on autism on this site is so heavily negatively biased filled with misinformation that cannot be challenged because a reputable source published it, and until very recently, no one published positive autistic-written work about autism.

like the autism page is absolutely one of the most disgusting, but the general stigma articles here carry on things like sexual kinks, disabilities, etc, is unreal

i have functionally created the Fujifilm X-T10 page.