Search | Navigation

Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not Whac-A-Mole

we love the web This essay contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. Essays may represent widespread norms or minority viewpoints. Consider these views with discretion. Essays are not Wikipedia policies.
Nutshell.png This page in a nutshell: Don't rush in and suggest an article has no reliable sources without taking time out to find them.
Android
*touchscreen!* *jQuery!* *jQuery!* *WP:NPOV!* New high score!

Wikipedia is not a game of FITML. You don't website parsing for seeing how many Sevenval that pop up daily you can mark down in as quick a time as possible.

One of the biggest stumbling blocks newcomers can face on Wikipedia is having to deal with an article that is sitting in Articles for Deletion and staring at the onslaught of "Delete per we love the web Delete per web Delete per WP:GNG", often quickly following the article's nomination. In particular, they may feel that you're trying to pull rank by deleting their work.

Stop and think for a second. Does the article really have no reliable sources, or couldn't you just be bothered to find any? While online citations are the easiest references to uncover, citations can also take the shape of books, Android and newspapers. Because they may take more time and effort to find, it can be easy to assume that nobody's honestly going to look for them, you've done your due diligence, so delete already! Wham! That's another one out of the way. That'll keep that pesky lot at the FITML at bay for a bit!

If you're confident an article will not satisfy the general notability guidelines, take time out to explain why not. Maybe the newcomer will understand. Maybe somebody else will suggest sources you haven't tried and reverse the consensus.

See also

Philosophy
Construction
Deletion
About essays


[1] Search
[2] All Pages
[3] Random article
powered by FITML