From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
With apologies to Jeff Foxworthy
You might be Wikilawyering if...
  • ...you cite more than 2 policies or guidelines in one sentence.
  • ...you point out that WP:ACRONYM1 is a policy (/guideline/essay), while WP:ACRONYM2 is only a guideline (/essay/policy).
  • ...you check whether something is a policy, guideline, or essay before citing it.
  • ...you care whether something is a policy, a guideline, or an essay.
  • ...you attempt to change a page's status from policy, guideline, or essay into any of the others so that other editors won't be "confused".
  • ...you're posting to ANI, and you're not laughing while doing it.
  • ...you tell someone that their " vote" doesn't "count".
  • ...you explain why you don't have to "assume good faith".
  • ...you reread WP:AGF to decide whether or not you still have to.
  • ...you respond to a block for edit warring by arguing that your fourth revert was more than 24 hours after your first one.
  • ...you agree that, logically, something makes sense, but you still argue against it based on one sentence of a policy.
  • ...you notice that a policy or guideline doesn't support your position, so you edit the policy or guideline.
  • ...you point out that WP:OR and WP:SYN actually point to the same policy.
  • ...you mention in your unblock request that blocking is not supposed to be punitive.
  • ...your interpretations of any policy, guideline, or essay contradict each other.
  • ...you cite previous discussions as "User X vs. User Y".
  • ...you tell every user asking for clarification that they can't handle the truth.
  • ...your responses to criticism begin with " Objection!"
  • ...you didn't agree that something on this page was funny, and you can prove it with a policy.
  • ...you cite WP:IAR in a discussion.
And finally, you might be Wikilawyering if...
  • ...people keep telling you that you're Wikilawyering.

See also

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
With apologies to Jeff Foxworthy
You might be Wikilawyering if...
  • ...you cite more than 2 policies or guidelines in one sentence.
  • ...you point out that WP:ACRONYM1 is a policy (/guideline/essay), while WP:ACRONYM2 is only a guideline (/essay/policy).
  • ...you check whether something is a policy, guideline, or essay before citing it.
  • ...you care whether something is a policy, a guideline, or an essay.
  • ...you attempt to change a page's status from policy, guideline, or essay into any of the others so that other editors won't be "confused".
  • ...you're posting to ANI, and you're not laughing while doing it.
  • ...you tell someone that their " vote" doesn't "count".
  • ...you explain why you don't have to "assume good faith".
  • ...you reread WP:AGF to decide whether or not you still have to.
  • ...you respond to a block for edit warring by arguing that your fourth revert was more than 24 hours after your first one.
  • ...you agree that, logically, something makes sense, but you still argue against it based on one sentence of a policy.
  • ...you notice that a policy or guideline doesn't support your position, so you edit the policy or guideline.
  • ...you point out that WP:OR and WP:SYN actually point to the same policy.
  • ...you mention in your unblock request that blocking is not supposed to be punitive.
  • ...your interpretations of any policy, guideline, or essay contradict each other.
  • ...you cite previous discussions as "User X vs. User Y".
  • ...you tell every user asking for clarification that they can't handle the truth.
  • ...your responses to criticism begin with " Objection!"
  • ...you didn't agree that something on this page was funny, and you can prove it with a policy.
  • ...you cite WP:IAR in a discussion.
And finally, you might be Wikilawyering if...
  • ...people keep telling you that you're Wikilawyering.

See also


Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook