Hello...

I thought I can add Wikipedia articles every once in a while. Sometimes, I come across information in articles that is simply wrong, sometimes I think I can add something to the article. Do you sometimes write for Wikipedia? Do you think it's easy to stick with the rules? What is relevant and what isn't? How do you handle image rights, you can't use any image on the web, right? Is it hard to write for Wikipedia? There are some things you always know very well, right, so everyone can add something...

Edit: Right, I wanted to ask something. Sometimes, I think you should add a section like "meaning" of a personality, for instance. Sometimes, Wikipedia reiterates clearly what happened to a person, or during an event, but lacks information that might direct a discussion. For instance: Sartre is regarded as something like the Jesus Christ of modern philosophy, having had a different impact than many other philosophers, he improved understanding in society and participated in many public debates etc.
What do you think? Can I add such thoughts to wikipedia articles? I can't give any reference here... Maybe, it's a misunderstanding with Wikipedia, though, where there are so many references.

Greetings,
PeterParker

[mindwaves]

I have been thinking about this a lot. I have some ideas to contribute to some topics, but haven't gotten around to it. I think if I start then I cannot stop.

[subego]

I've heard rumors of petty squabble culture, so I've stayed away.

In terms of putting opinions, I think the basic idea is "[some person] considers Sartre to be the 'Jesus of philosophy'[citation]"

The "some person" should preferably not be a random idiot.