My flirtation with Wikipedia

While I have been keeping very busy, and am unlikely to post anything substantial for some time, I thought, I would provide link to my Wikipedia user page (click) that I had developed after lot of effort without any real knowledge of HTML. Of course back then, I had been able to develop it only by analyzing a lot of others' users pages, and tweaking them through trial and error.

Also, almost unknown to many of you, I had been a very avid contributor (click) to Wikipedia articles. But had to tear away myself from that web site, especially editing it, only since it was so very addictive and hampering my studies (not unlike blogging ;) ).

There is an article I had created and brought to its current status almost entirely on my own, including making several diagrams. On searching for 'polyclonal response' on major search engines, that article is the first result one gets. Here (click). It enjoys the status of a 'Good article' on Wikipedia, which means by quality and reliability as judged by a stringent peer review, it is 1 among every 403 articles.

Also, I had singlehandedly created an article on a very important topic called 'lymph', which a year back used to get almost 700 to 1000 hits in a day, or more! Same with articles on 'B cell' and 'lymphatic system', to which I had made significant contributions.

It has been more than a year I have made any significant edits to Wikipedia, and was feeling nostalgic. And not to forget, once a Wikipedian is always a Wikipedian. :) So, I wanted to share these things with a few readers who visit my blog. Somehow though contributing to Wikipedia has not brought me any glory or provided with career boost, I feel very content to have added something to the World's knowledge-base. I have used Wikipedia extensively, and have always felt deeply indebted to those anonymous contributors who have been enriching my life through their knowledge and writings, with no material rewards in return, except for the satisfaction of sharing their knowledge systematically.

If any of you feel you are an expert/well read person in anything under the Sun (and beyond), please do share your knowledge through Wikipedia. :)

Another interesting article

In one of my interactions with a fellow blogger, the issue of purpose of life was raised. Not that I can allow someone else to define that purpose for myself, except for if it's through a form of coercion I can't thwart, but it's always interesting to note others' views on the issue. Someone else's purpose could definitely be more interesting than mine(!), and I'd uninhibitedly and shamelessly borrow that purpose for myself!

I've long concluded there's no external purpose to life--as in influencing some tangible indestructible entity on whom the act of our living would've an impact. But this sterile view begs many questions--like 'why do we then feel such an intense desire to live?', 'why should we live?', 'what should we do while live-ing?'.

To the above questions I do have some crude answers, which I can of course, not claim to be applicable to all. Greatest reason being there's no measurable endpoint to the act of living. Like endpoint of using energy efficient automobiles would be the reduction of green house gases in the atmosphere, which can be measured.

Well so as usual, as a quirky idea, I searched for 'purpose of life' on Wikipedia, and this is what turned up.

I've not yet read the article completely, may not even complete it myself, but thought others might enjoy it. Reading it won't take much time, but understanding it completely, which will require one to understand concepts right from molecular biology, thermodynamics, quantum physics to abstract philosophical and logical assertions, will certainly take much longer--maybe around a week.

One thing that struck me was how the ancient Greek philosophers born more than 2000 years ago had such clear and objective view of life. They were only limited by lack of scientific knowledge. And then, somehow the world's intellect regressed, and it took mankind almost two millenia to reach their level again and progress beyond that!

Maybe philosophy will always stay ahead of science. It requires only two tools--one harbored behind the two eyes and an armchair!

Which reminds me, maybe, I've been philosophizing a lot, the indicator being creaks of my armchair, which are nothing but groans because of the abuse I subject her (it's my armchair--I get to assign the gender ;) ) to. Time to stop philosophizing so much get a new armchair!

That's all!