User:ZabMilenko/wikipedia

If these have been coined elsewhere then let me know and I will credit them. For whatever reason I keep thinking of these as I edit wikipedia:

WikiPedia content is primarily provided by new editors and, if they are lucky, improved by others rather than challenged and deleted under a bunch of WikiLawyering. That said there is still way too much stuff slipping through the cracks.
Calling a person non-notable is really rude. If it must be done (usually at AfD) then the nominator should at least do some freaking research as to why. Being unable to find notability is different...
Waiting for administrators to get around to stuff is like waiting for paint to dry: sure it happens sooner or later but you can't enjoy the results until it's done. This makes hedonistic edits less likely, so perhaps there are too many fully protected pages and/or templates.
WP:UNDO should very rarely be used for good faith edits and never if any part of the edits are kept.
By calling a vote "!vote" you are acknowledging that it is indeed just a qualified vote.
If an editor appears to be applying at RfA out of frustration (perhaps intending to make a WP:POINT somehow) they are probably misunderstanding the position and should reapply in a couple months. WP:DGAF is my number one qualification.
Deletionism hurts WikiPedia. Inclusionism hurts WikiPedia. If you see a delete vote, actually try to find a reason to keep, or vice versa. Don't just read the other group of votes and run with the pack.
WP:AFD is sadly being used for cleanup and I don't think enough people care.
- Related WP:ATA is too exhaustive, which is probably why many of us ignore it. Heck, I've cited it directly before in a vote.
Future RrC: WP:CSD#A7 is redundant and could be scrapped in favor of a general notability guideline.
Future RfC: If an AfD nomination consists only of unqualified arguments to avoid it should be closed as speedy keep immediately.

In the interest of WP:DGAF

If you are carrying one of these:

Then you should avoid these at all costs:

Other userboxes

This user applies tit for tat strategy.

Info
Box

This user believes that all articles should have an infobox.

This user thinks that Wikipedia has become too bureaucratic.

This user is a Sagittarius.

This user likes foggy days.

May 1
=
1 May

This user believes we
don't need no autoformattin'.

This user is nocturnal.

This user loves rainy days.

This user's favorite color is orange.

Don't worry, Pluto, I'm not a planet either.

This user is interested in nanotechnology.

This user prefers cake-like brownies.

This user uses XChat
for chatting on IRC.

This user feels that most of "life after death" bears an intriguing resemblance to compost.

This user says let's just change our clocks by 1/2 hour and forget daylight saving time for good.

This user owns an 80 GB PlayStation 3 and wishes it had better backwards compatibility.

This user was born in the Year of the Monkey.

猴

This user believes that anyone who thinks Wikipedia is an unreliable source should continue their quest to find a better website.

This user values the quality of Wikipedia articles over the quantity and thus supports the merging of related content and deletion of articles that violate policies and guidelines.

Awards

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Great work on Roxy Ann Peak and Upper and Lower Table Rock! (I was already planning on giving you one before you gave me one... :) ) Little Mountain 5 14:48, 2 September 2009 (UTC)