Welcome to a random and rather silly place.

I am here. If you're not interested in me or in the page below, you can always wander into the safe.
Alternately, you can find out what's here, or here. Or a bit of silliness here.

This user would like to remind you...

...that England, Great Britain, the British Isles and the United Kingdom are not the same thing. At all. I'm assuming most of you already know that, but here's a reminder à toutes fins utiles. In any Wikipedia article, it's important to use the correct term in relation to the historic, political and geographical context.

To sum up:

The British Isles. The large island on the right is Great Britain. In pink, the United Kingdom. In red, England.

This user would like to encourage you...

...to contribute to "small" Wikipedias. Even if you do not speak Tok Pisin, Bislama or Scots, these are creole or pidgin languages derived in great part from English, and it is often possible to understand them to some extent in writing. On that basis, it's possible for you to pick up a few basics through imitation, and to create useful stubs in the Wikipedias in those languages. Therefore I encourage you to contribute to the Tok Pisin Wikipedia, the Bislama Wikipedia and the Scots Wikipedia.

French regional languages

There are many indigenous languages in France. French is merely the dominant, official and most widespread language within the territory of the French Republic. There are a number of Wikipedias in France’s minority indigenous languages, including:
Wikipedia in Alsatian, in Basque, in Breton, in Catalan, in Corsican, in West Flemish, in Franco-provençal, in Norman, in Occitan, in Tahitian, in Walloon.

This user loves Wikipedia

I sincerely believe that Wikipedia is a fantastic idea. The impulse behind it, the drive to create a universal compendium of all human knowledge, is admirable, and -a few notable kinks notwithstanding- the project has been a remarkable success. Wikipedia should still be used with due caution, but I believe it has already proved itself as a revolutionary encyclopedia of the modern ages. May it live long and prosper!

On that note, this user finds this very interesting, and thinks it's a jolly good idea.

Who is this user anyway, and why does he believe he can contribute to Wikipedia?

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, which means it should hold itself to certain standards. I would not claim to be an "expert" in my field of research (the history, politics and cultures of Pacific Commonwealth nations), but I do know a fair bit about that area. I am, moreover, a Normalien agrégé, I have a doctorate in British and Commonwealth studies, and I'm a senior lecturer at university. That doesn't mean I'm "better" than any other enthusiastic contributor to Wikipedia, but it does mean I have qualifications. Also, I speak fluent French, which enables me to translate material from the English Wikipedia to the French one, or vice-versa. I try to do my best and live up to Wikipedia's encyclopedic standards. I'm only human, and I may make mistakes, but I hope to be a useful part of Wikipedia's greater whole, in some small way.

Definitions

According to Keith Windschuttle, in his The Killing of History (my bolding),

"When it was founded early in the twentieth century, American cultural anthropology focused on the language, art, rituals and religious practices of native peoples, especially those of North America itself and of the Pacific Islands. In Britain, by contrast, the discipline's main concerns were about social organisation, and so it came to be known as social anthropology. The descriptive activities of cultural anthropology, as distinct from its theory, have long been known as ‘ethnography’. When ethnographers turn their attention to the past to write the history of non-literate peoples they usually describe their work as either historical anthropology or ethnohistory."

I myself work in civilisation, a field of study unique (it would seem) to French universities, but on the basis of Windschuttle's definition, I'm probably something of a historical social anthropologist. I study the history and present of national and (to a lesser degree) ethnic identity concepts, a study which encompasses literate societies and their literate and pre-literate past. Maybe it's simpler to say that I apply a historian's approach to social anthropology. I hasten to add, by the way, that social anthropology, being essentially the study of human societies, is not (contrary to popular misconception) restricted to a study of non-Western societies. An anthropological study of specific Western societies (namely Australia and New Zealand) is part of my field of research.

This user's favourite quotes

and of course:

Recommended books

History

Main article: History of Australia

Social anthropology

Literature

Recommended Wikipedia articles

These are a few articles that I find interesting and that I did not write myself.

Other favourites

This user recommends the film Good Bye Lenin! by Wolfgang Becker.

Further random and pointless user boxes


























Mind your grammar

than
then
This user understands the difference between using "than" and "then."
its
it's
It's really not that hard to use each word in its proper manner.
less & fewerThis user understands the difference between less & fewer.
your
you're
This user thinks that if your grammar is incorrect, then you're in need of help.
to
too
two
This user thinks that too many people have no idea how to use words that they should have learned in grade two.
their
there
they're
This user thinks that there are too many people who don’t know that they're worse than their own children at spelling!







Oceania press

If you're interested...

Countries I've been to

Self-explanatory, no? Leaving out France (where I live).

Everything you never wanted to know about this user

I strive to be accurate and objective in the articles I write and edit, but it's occurred to me that I should, perhaps, briefly outline my beliefs, so that any potential "bias" of mine may be out in the open. Therefore, this user...

And finally...

Ridentem dicere verum quid vetat?