Hello, I have been a Wikipedia editor since 2006. My interest in Wikipedia is primarily as a learning tool, rather than a hobby or job. When I don't know something, I look it up on Wikipedia, and when Wikipedia seems a bit thin on the subject, I edit. This has led me to make contributions to a very eclectic variety of pages, from biomedical to religious, with everything in between.

I think Wikipedia has serious problems, most notably the ease with which certain articles can be controlled by politically-motivated zealots, whose politics are all too often antisocial and selfish. But on the other hand, I really don't see anything else that can compete. Like it or not we are in the Wikipedia age, Wikipedia is omnipresent as a source of information. And if we want Wikipedia to be a sound source of information, we have to be active about defending a certain standard of fairness. Strong disinterested intervention by "amateurs" in articles that are controlled by "professionals" is necessary for this. Don't be afraid to interfere!

To anyone frustrated (as I have been) with edits or discussion threads which are written in bad English, in a "translationese" style which requires clarification: I initiated a discussion of this at the Village Pump, which produced some suggestions for tagging the article with appropriate templates.