Wikipedia:Avoid repeated arguments

Welcome to our website. It is generaly simplier version of wikipedia. You will find there selected articles. Enjoy!

This essay contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors on Wikipedia:Deletion policy. Essays may represent widespread norms or minority viewpoints. Consider these views with discretion. Essays are not Wikipedia policies.

Shortcuts: WP:REPEAT WP:WABBITSEASON WP:DUCKSEASON

This page in a nutshell: Avoid repeating statements previously made in AfD discussions.

Repeated arguments

No one wins a stalemate

As stated in Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions, the AfD process is designed to solicit discussion. Arguing back and forth on positions without providing reasons for the position can become weary to all involved in the discussion. Repeating exactly the same argument over and over can become even more weary and less helpful. Additionally, emotions of editors can begin to heighten during such argumentative states and can sever cooperation among editors. In extreme cases, emotions can lead editors into name-calling, retaliation edits, and other undesirable actions.

While this method can be amusing in cartoons, that amusement does not come to the surface in AfD discussions.

Examples

Delete Not Notable. Daffy 04:01, 4 April 2004 (UTC)
Keep Notable. Bugs 04:02, 4 April 2004 (UTC)
Delete Not Notable. Daffy 04:05, 4 April 2004 (UTC)
Keep Notable. Bugs 04:05, 4 April 2004 (UTC)
Delete Not Notable. Daffy 04:11, 4 April 2004 (UTC)
Delete Not Notable. Bugs 04:12, 4 April 2004 (UTC)
Keep Notable! Fire! Daffy 04:13, 4 April 2004 (UTC)
Bang! Huh-huh-huh! Elmer 04:14, 4 April 2004 (UTC)

Keep - As CEO of a major corp. Hunter666 05:44, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Delete Not Notable. Xr45c 09:01, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
- No, the company has over 500 employees, he must be notable. Hunter666 09:01, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Delete. Fails GNG. Bohbearish 11:15, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
- No, as the CEO he is notable. Hunter666 11:52, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
  - Why? Sources? Bohbearish 11:58, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
    - He must be considered to have significant impact. Hunter666 12:05, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Delete - No sources to demonstrate impact on the historic record. Salarimam 14:53, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
- You are obviously wrong. He is the CEO, see the company annual report linked. Hunter666 16:50, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

v t e Essays on building Wikipedia

Philosophy	Articles must be written Be a reliable source Cohesion Concede lost arguments 8 simple rules for editing our encyclopedia Explanationism Here to build an encyclopedia Paradoxes Product, process, policy Purpose The role of policies in collaborative anarchy Ten Simple Rules for Editing Wikipedia Trifecta Wikipedia in brief Wikipedia is an encyclopedia Avoid vague introductions

Inclusion	Alternative outlets Articles with a single source Avoid template creep Bare notability Bombardment But it's true! Citation overkill Clones Coatrack Discriminate vs indiscriminate information Every snowflake is unique Existence ≠ Notability Explanationism Google searches and numbers High Schools Inaccuracy Inclusion is not an indicator of notability Independent sources Inherent notability Insignificant Masking the lack of notability Make stubs No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability No big loss No one cares about your garage band No one really cares Notability/Historical/Arguments Notability is not a matter of opinion Notability means impact Obscurity ≠ Lack of notability Offline sources Notability sub-pages One sentence does not an article make Other stuff exists Perennial websites Pokémon test Run-of-the-mill Solutions are mixtures and nothing else Subjective importance Third-party sources Trivial mentions cannot verify notability Video links What notability is not Wikipedia is not here to tell the world about your noble cause

Construction	100K featured articles A navbox on every page Alternatives to the "Expand" template Amnesia test An unfinished house is a real problem Avoid mission statements Bare URLs Be neutral in form Beef up that first revision Concept cloud Don't demolish the house while it's still being built Don't hope the house will build itself Don't leave giant breaks between sections Don't panic Editing on iPhones, iPads, etc. Editors are not mindreaders Featured articles may have problems Give an article a chance How to run an edit-a-thon Inaccuracies in Wikipedia namespace Link rot Not everything needs a navbox Not everything needs a WikiProject Nothing is in stone Over explained Permastub Potential, not just current state Put a little effort into it Pruning article revisions Restoring part of a reverted edit Robotic editing Temporary versions of articles The world will not end tomorrow There is a deadline There is no deadline Wikipedia is a volunteer service Wikipedia is a work in progress Wikipedia is not being written in an organized fashion Write the article first Writing better articles

Deletion	Adjectives in your recommendations AfD is not a war zone Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions Arguments to avoid in deletion reviews Arguments to avoid in image deletion discussions Arguments to make in deletion discussions Avoid repeated arguments Before commenting in a deletion discussion But there must be sources! Content removal Delete the junk Does deletion help Don't overuse shortcuts to policy and guidelines to win your argument Follow the leader How to save an article proposed for deletion I just don't like it Immunity Liar Liar Pants on Fire Nothing Overzealous deletion Relisting can be abusive Wikipedia is not Whack-A-Mole Why was my page deleted? What to do if your article gets tagged for speedy deletion

About essays	Value of essays Difference between policies, guidelines and essays Essays are not policy Don't cite essays as if they were policy Finding an essay Quote your own essay

Essays

Wifedogging