It's a start...

[trixtah]

Eee, the entry I (mainly) wrote about George Gipps on Wikipedia is the number one search hit on Google!

And thanks to everyone who contributed to my wee poll on reading habits, it's been really interesting.

• No one who responded "hates" reading, or doesn't read at all (or is admitting to those things).
  
• It's confirmed my view that the amount of reading one does is a function of available time (mostly) and priorities, but nothing so mechanical as reading speed.
• The Internet hasn't had that much of a negative impact on people's reading habits, and for many, it's broadened the amount of reading material they either have access to or find out about (so they obtain it offline).

With that last, I wish I'd formulated that question a bit better to capture more responses to do with sourcing reading material online, but I'm glad that people highlighted it anyway. Clever bunch that you lot are and all.

Comments

[saluqi.livejournal.com]

Congratulations. That's much more impressive than my only wikipedia foray to date, a minor edit on their faux pas listing. Hee!

[trixtah.livejournal.com]

Thanks! Heh, the only other full entry I've done is on the Black Ferns (women's rugby). And you know how much I looove rugby. But it irked me there were 6 trillion pages on the ABs and other rugby teams, and sweet FA for the women. Oooh, looky google (http://www.google.com.au/search?q=black+ferns), bwahahaha!

As for getting the faux pas thing right, well, that's important. How embarrassing for them if it was wrong!

[damned-colonial.livejournal.com]

*snort*

One of my most *obvious* contribs, if you look at the list WP provides, was the evening I sat down and disambiguated links to the Dutch vs English East India Companies for about 100 different entries. Makes a great big splat over my contribs page, that does, and makes me look weirdly knowledgeable about Asian history, which I'm really not.

[buddleia.livejournal.com]

That was an interesting poll. I'd love to know if I'm the only one who re-reads a lot, though. I tend to grab handfuls out of my bookshelf in the same way I would pick up an apple to eat while cooking. I know people who read books and then throw them away.

Needless to say, they're not friends.

[surelars.livejournal.com]

I, too, re-read a lot. You know, reading a new book is like getting a new friend, re-reading a book is like meeting up for quality time with an old friend. There are books I've read so many times that I grab them off she shelf, flip up on a random page, and read as many pages as i takes dinner to cook or whatnot, without skipping a beat.

I used to have a bf who would buy books on vacations, and rather than keep a bookmark tear out pages as he went along. Obviously the relationship didn't last.

[trixtah.livejournal.com]

Oh, no, not at all. If I didn't re-read, I'd spend a fortune on books, since I managed to go through the interesting bits of the Canberra library in less than 6 months.

I'd say about 80% of my reading is re-reading. I go through my bookshelves at home on a yearly rotation. And more frequently for the really good ones. :-)

[surelars.livejournal.com]

Yay on contributing good stuff to WP. Good job!

I'm probably in the minority, but I do feel that improving (mechanical) reading speed would enable me to read more. Part of that, I think, is that I read a lot of stuff to keep current on a number of topics. Much of it I don't read in depth, but rather read quickly and then go back and re-read single chapters, sometimes months or even years later.

Language issues is probably also a factor. Despite the many years I've been reading English, I still read (and write) faster in my own language.

[trixtah.livejournal.com]

That kind of reading is one of the few instances where I feel that learning a speed-reading technique might be useful. If it's complex/technical material, my usual 100 pages an hour drops down to about 50, but I don't read that kind of stuff too often. Perhaps a skim with then a more thorough read of the apposite bits would make that kind of thing more digestable.

I wouldn't be surprised if the second-language thing is a slight impediment. My French is admittedly dire, but even when I know (most of) the words, I'm lucky to crack 10 pages an hour. Despite your fluency in English, there is undoubtedly some part of your brain still going "This is unnatural!!1!"

[seeker66.livejournal.com]

Oddly, a woman I'm seeing, who's literate, well-spoken, and a singer-songwriter, can't stand reading. She's too restless.

[trixtah.livejournal.com]

Goodness. That's interesting. I don't know how I'd be in a relationship myself with someone like that, I haven't encountered something like that yet. Mind you, I tend to go out with women who have massive Type A tendencies, so it's probably not that different.

Neither of my g/fs reads quantities, despite enjoying reading, but that's because they're way too busy to read. Hm, with one of them, though, that may well be displaced restlessness. *lightbulb*