I'm Premeditated Chaos, also known as PMC. On Discord and (rarely) IRC, I go by PMC_x. The accounts PMC, PMC_x, and Premedicated Chaos are my doppelgangers. I use this name exclusively on Wikipedia, so in the unlikely event that you come across another Premeditated Chaos elsewhere, it isn't me. I have been a Wikipedian since 2003, and an admin since 2004. I was active on-and-off for a number of years thereafter until returning in January 2017. In December 2017 I was elected to the Arbitration Committee for a two-year term, which ended in December 2019. I had the checkuser and oversight permissions as a result of being elected to ArbCom, but have since handed them back in.
Unlike many editors, I don't have a favorite topic that serves as a focus for my edits. A process of leapfrogging hyperfixations has led to an interest in the goddesses of Georgian mythology, Inuit clothing, and obscure fashion articles, however. I am often found de-orphaning articles, particularly from the February 2009 category. I've recently developed an interest in trimming excessive plot summaries, which I find weirdly satisfying. I'm quite fond of list articles, probably as a result of my de-orphaning efforts. I have created several new lists, and actively maintain several others. Despite what my article creation habits might indicate, I don't particularly care for or know much about beetles, plants, or algae, but they are frequently found as orphans and also happen to be very easy to de-orphan.
I consider myself a mergist with a bent towards deletionism, particularly when it comes to stubs imported from old public domain sources likeChambers' Cyclopædia,Encyclopedia Britannica, and theCatholic Encyclopedia. That's not to say that these sources aren't useful, but many of the remaining articles we have which were imported from those sources would do better merged elsewhere.
When responding to requests for undeletion, I typically prefer not to restore deleted material to mainspace unless there are reliable sources available to indicate that we shouldn't have deleted the item in the first place. I am usually willing to restore good-faith content that lacks notability to draft or userspace, or to email a copy. I will almost never restore promotional or UPE content for any reason.
I believe SNGs should be used narrowly, to exclude non-notable content rather than to force the inclusion of content on a broad scope. I support the expansion of the NCORP criteria, and would support most other efforts to expand SNGs to be more exclusive. We should be focused on making our existing content better rather than just making more of it, especially when "more" so often constitutes two-line stubs.
Last but not least, allow me to get a little sentimental and quoteWired: "Wikipedia is built on the personal interests and idiosyncrasies of its contributors. You could even say it is built on love."
.jpg)
