Essays Low‑impact | ||||||||||
|
This page was nominated for deletion on 4 October 2011. The result of the discussion was keep. |
I just added "Solution in search of a problem" which appears frequently on policy discussions. The text I added is largely based on User:Gigs great comment at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Revisiting past proposal – Viewdelete user right. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 15:36, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Should an argument like “too much work”/“too tedious” be included here? If it already is (or if it’s somewhere else), I can’t find it. Rationale would be similar to WP:NOEFFORT: the project is collaborative, and no one person is required to do all the work necessary to implement a given proposal. — 174.141.182.82 ( talk) 17:22, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Please feel free to help me improve this page. I'd been thinking of working on it for a long time, and no one else has, so I've started. I'm picking kind of random entries, and normalizing them to actual policy, as well as to the intent and depth of their counterparts at
WP:AADD when they exist, as well as giving them their own shortcuts, and the {{
ATA shortcut notice|type=Wikipedia}}
template under the shortcuts, and cross-referencing between the AADD and AADP entries.
I think the main reason no one bothers to improve this page or cite it is that it's very difficult to refer to anything in it due to lack of shortcuts (who wants to type out Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid on discussion pages#Nobody's working on it (or impatience with improvement) instead of WP:NOWORK?), ergo no one sees it, so no one works on it. It's amazing how much solid advice is already in there, and how much WP:LAME WP:DRAMA could be avoided by citing to it frequently. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 08:17, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
PS: One clear problem is that a lot of this was copied over verbatim from [an old version of] AADD, and still retains many references to WP:Notability and examples that pertain to notability and article deletion, when the present essay is about content disputes generally. This material needs to be replaced with more generalized content and policy/guideline citations that deal with addition/removal of material from pages (and other editorial disputes/discussions, without being redundant with any of the related essays listed at WP:Arguments to avoid. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 09:14, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Can we add the argument " this page shouldn't be moved to X because X already redirects here"? This is illogical because it defies the reason why we even have an article moving process in the first place as many proposed new titles are already redirects towards the current title..-- Prisencolin ( talk) 17:37, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm not going to add this since it came up in a pending discussion where I'm involved. But it seems like a possible new thing to add under "#Individual merit".
HORSE TRADING
* Support Support x, provided I get to do y at article
Foo. -BribeTaker
* Opposed Oppose x, unless I get to do y at article
Foo. -HostageTaker
NewsAndEventsGuy (
talk) 22:18, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
Essays Low‑impact | ||||||||||
|
This page was nominated for deletion on 4 October 2011. The result of the discussion was keep. |
I just added "Solution in search of a problem" which appears frequently on policy discussions. The text I added is largely based on User:Gigs great comment at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Revisiting past proposal – Viewdelete user right. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 15:36, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Should an argument like “too much work”/“too tedious” be included here? If it already is (or if it’s somewhere else), I can’t find it. Rationale would be similar to WP:NOEFFORT: the project is collaborative, and no one person is required to do all the work necessary to implement a given proposal. — 174.141.182.82 ( talk) 17:22, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Please feel free to help me improve this page. I'd been thinking of working on it for a long time, and no one else has, so I've started. I'm picking kind of random entries, and normalizing them to actual policy, as well as to the intent and depth of their counterparts at
WP:AADD when they exist, as well as giving them their own shortcuts, and the {{
ATA shortcut notice|type=Wikipedia}}
template under the shortcuts, and cross-referencing between the AADD and AADP entries.
I think the main reason no one bothers to improve this page or cite it is that it's very difficult to refer to anything in it due to lack of shortcuts (who wants to type out Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid on discussion pages#Nobody's working on it (or impatience with improvement) instead of WP:NOWORK?), ergo no one sees it, so no one works on it. It's amazing how much solid advice is already in there, and how much WP:LAME WP:DRAMA could be avoided by citing to it frequently. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 08:17, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
PS: One clear problem is that a lot of this was copied over verbatim from [an old version of] AADD, and still retains many references to WP:Notability and examples that pertain to notability and article deletion, when the present essay is about content disputes generally. This material needs to be replaced with more generalized content and policy/guideline citations that deal with addition/removal of material from pages (and other editorial disputes/discussions, without being redundant with any of the related essays listed at WP:Arguments to avoid. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 09:14, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Can we add the argument " this page shouldn't be moved to X because X already redirects here"? This is illogical because it defies the reason why we even have an article moving process in the first place as many proposed new titles are already redirects towards the current title..-- Prisencolin ( talk) 17:37, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm not going to add this since it came up in a pending discussion where I'm involved. But it seems like a possible new thing to add under "#Individual merit".
HORSE TRADING
* Support Support x, provided I get to do y at article
Foo. -BribeTaker
* Opposed Oppose x, unless I get to do y at article
Foo. -HostageTaker
NewsAndEventsGuy (
talk) 22:18, 18 October 2019 (UTC)