I primarily edit articles about my interests such as cricket and tennis. Thanks to the incredible efforts of many other Wikipedians who came before me, there's not much for me to do on higher-profile articles, so I mostly stick to pages which haven't received as much attention, as that's where the bulk of the available work to be done is. After all, Wikipedia is nowhere near being finished!
Many of my edits are just bringing pages such as BLPs that aren't frequently edited up to date by adding recent events soon after they happen. There are a lot of things that happen, and a lot of articles involving said things that need to be updated, so there's plenty of editing to be done there. I also do some copyediting, simply for grammar, conciseness or understandability, and I am a member of the Guild of Copy Editors. I was initially surprised to learn that something as comprehensive as Wikipedia would have such simple errors, but now that I'm more aware of how it's written, it makes a lot more sense.
Ability + Communication
Seeing as I am not yet entirely comfortable with Wikitext and the source editor, I usually stick to the visual editor except when Wikipedia's integration of templates, invisible comments, and design elements isn't compatible with it. Even making my user page and signature was a bit of a struggle. I also still have a lot to learn about finding usable images on Wikipedia and implementing them suitably.
I can write prose fluently in the necessary tone of Wikipedia, or at least I'd like to think so. I would also label myself as being fairly good with spelling, punctuation and grammar, which is why I copyedit. I am quite familiar with Wikipedia's many policies, but seeing as I don't have an abundance of experience, I may still make mistakes, in which case feel free to whack me with a trout or whatever. I welcome any advice, comments or criticism on my talk page, as that's how I'll improve. My pronouns are he/him.
