Wikipedia as a vocation

This is a stub. I should use it to encourage smart people to do Wikipedia edits. My email to Gigerenzer and emails to friends contain good material.

I have written down strength and weaknesses of mine below, because they are relevant to this. What I will be writing about is that people with skills like mine ought to be writing Wikipedia articles and lecturing for Khan Academy.

I am 61 and must decide what to do with the rest of my life. What are my strengths?

1. Quick and good editing of nonfiction writing style. I can tighten as well as anyone, strunk-and-whiting with ease and enjoyment.

2. Original ideas nobody else thinks of.

3. Explaining technical concepts from math, economics, and probably anything else if I can just understand it first (grasping concepts is NOT one of my strengths, though I am pretty good at it).

4. Legal issue-spotting and legal skill generally— knowing how to read statutes and judicial opinions and apply or make rules and to find relevant precedents and examples.

5. Skimming and other rapid reading.

6. Breadth of knowledge of economics, history, science, philosophy, geography, etc.

7. Dispassion in examination of arguments.

8. Strategic thinking.

9. Willingness to fight injustice, hypocrisy, and falsehood.

10. Willingness to suffer monetary loss.

11. Not feeling a psychological need to compromise for agreement’s sake; ruthlessness in justice.

12. Rapid and fluid expository, instructional, and descriptive writing.

On the other hand, I am weaker in pure IQ, ability to hold arguments in my head (RAM as opposed to disk space), care, patience, foreign languages, pure memory, memory of Bible verses or phone numbers or birthdays or my own past history (as opposed to dates, factoids, and history), persistence, endurance, self-confidence, being poker-faced, self-preservation, focus, sitting still, expressing anger, avoiding ideas that turn out to be bad, and avoidance of procrastination.