Meta tags:

Headings (most frequently used words):

edit, adjectives, in, your, recommendations, why, do, arguments, on, navigation, users, this, tools, wikipedia, contents, against, putting, it, doesn, matter, if, you, put, menu, inspiration, so, what, is, being, said, summary, alternative, viewpoint, potential, to, cause, offence, history, impact, personal, namespaces, views, search, contribute, print, export, languages,

Text of the page (most frequently used words):
the (109), not (61), don (53), wikipedia (46), and (41), your (39), for (33), that (31), you (23), notability (23), #recommendations (22), adjectives (20), article (18), deletion (18), users (18), are (17), this (16), edit (15), avoid (15), there (15), their (15), policy (14), essays (14), editing (14), sources (14), editors (14), arguments (13), recommendation (13), what (12), put (12), articles (12), about (11), with (11), will (11), make (11), opinion (11), discussions (11), strong (11), from (10), how (10), why (10), one (10), they (9), can (9), does (9), assume (9), source (9), practice (9), page (8), writing (8), should (8), content (8), weak (8), encyclopedia (7), policies (7), have (7), but (7), other (7), good (7), cause (7), out (7), delete (7), area (7), because (7), action (7), more (6), personal (6), guidelines (6), essay (6), revert (6), faith (6), nothing (6), advanced (6), afd (6), being (6), such (6), comment (6), different (6), may (5), here (5), first (5), them (5), consensus (5), test (5), every (5), matter (5), common (5), template (5), just (5), attack (5), another (5), some (5), putting (5), votes (5), vote (5), placing (5), offence (5), statement (4), using (4), add (4), pages (4), history (4), read (4), difference (4), editor (4), newcomers (4), even (4), many (4), give (4), bold (4), bad (4), place (4), coverage (4), trivial (4), impact (4), high (4), all (4), pov (4), others (4), like (4), call (4), spade (4), process (4), say (4), keep (4), civility (4), rules (4), most (4), when (4), comments (4), needs (4), formatting (4), instance (4), recommended (4), only (4), has (4), adjective (4), doesn (4), text (3), terms (3), links (3), community (3), help (3), contribute (3), navigation (3), search (3), org (3), own (3), between (3), rule (3), before (3), please (3), bite (3), pushing (3), take (3), stop (3), deleted (3), assuming (3), world (3), significant (3), lack (3), single (3), cares (3), citation (3), overkill (3), alternative (3), part (3), fire (3), problems (3), civil (3), better (3), two (3), clear (3), who (3), advice (3), still (3), discussion (3), identifying (3), shortcuts (3), write (3), neutral (3), deadline (3), fallacy (3), style (3), potential (3), everything (3), featured (3), house (3), build (3), sometimes (3), same (3), probably (3), modifier (3), used (3), supports (3), could (3), been (3), course (3), simply (3), than (3), support (3), rfa (3), user (3), choose (3), practices (3), think (3), makes (3), also (3), against (3), point (3), absolutely (3), utterly (3), count (3), saying (3), inspiration (3), mobile (2), view (2), contact (2), privacy (2), under (2), non (2), use (2), was (2), last (2), 2022 (2), print (2), information (2), link (2), special (2), upload (2), file (2), changes (2), tools (2), current (2), events (2), contents (2), talk (2), project (2), create (2), account (2), categories (2), building (2), https (2), adjectives_in_your_recommendations (2), were (2), work (2), legal (2), things (2), five (2), pillars (2), really (2), rouge (2), adminship (2), ahead (2), vandalize (2), wikipedians (2), edits (2), stuff (2), much (2), party (2), wikipedian (2), include (2), else (2), required (2), run (2), google (2), exists (2), words (2), means (2), reliability (2), level (2), cannot (2), historical (2), big (2), independent (2), inclusion (2), schools (2), meaning (2), existence (2), notable (2), bare (2), searching (2), vandals (2), too (2), down (2), cruft (2), someone (2), commenting (2), drop (2), get (2), encourage (2), back (2), word (2), right (2), sense (2), ideas (2), zone (2), gets (2), end (2), environment (2), wrong (2), philosophy (2), thank (2), yourself (2), standard (2), bias (2), liar (2), stub (2), must (2), reviews (2), deleting (2), opinions (2), written (2), reliable (2), now (2), neutrality (2), tertiary (2), into (2), principle (2), navbox (2), ignore (2), bilateral (2), relations (2), discuss (2), images (2), simple (2), need (2), competence (2), carrying (2), phrases (2), generally (2), clearly (2), voter (2), suggested (2), placed (2), excessive (2), likely (2), issue (2), offensive (2), cases (2), strongly (2), position (2), counts (2), carry (2), reason (2), time (2), look (2), lot (2), convention (2), however (2), contains (2), believe (2), viewpoint (2), these (2), evidence (2), summary (2), want (2), goes (2), said (2), feel (2), maybe (2), stupid (2), completely (2), totally (2), devastating (2), dev920 (2), represent (2), jump (2), web (2), sep (2), cookie, statistics, developers, disclaimers, available, additional, apply, site, agree, registered, trademark, profit, organization, wikimedia, foundation, inc, creative, commons, attribution, sharealike, license, edited, february, utc, languages, printable, version, download, pdf, export, permanent, related, recent, portal, learn, donate, random, main, views, english, namespaces, log, contributions, logged, menu, hidden, short, description, retrieved, index, php, title, oldid, 1073073052, hard, guidance, quote, finding, redundant, cite, value, guide, mad, yes, threats, watchlistitis, wikibible, surprising, untruth, night, wikimas, sausages, tasting, sarcasm, helpful, admin, requirements, requests, medication, newbies, giant, dick, ban, oops, defense, eternal, climbing, reichstag, dressed, spider, man, lttautmaok, vandalism, delicious, correctly, straight, pole, angle, change, lightbulb, seven, ages, spear, shake, emerson, embrace, signs, influence, editsummarisis, per, day, editcountitis, fuckism, beans, nose, capitalization, barnstaritis, boston, tea, jokes, nonsense, wikilinks, preview, button, everyone, stupidity, wraith, asshole, john, anti, humorous, post, résumé, tell, noble, crunchbase, routine, blp1e, vanispamcruftisement, video, mentions, third, subjective, importance, solutions, mixtures, mill, reducing, algorithm, pokémon, perennial, websites, overreliance, upon, sentence, hundred, offline, obscurity, thing, donald, trump, deserves, notabilitymandering, sub, points, relevance, playing, field, comparison, purchased, garage, band, loss, amount, overcome, news, decrease, stubs, masking, insignificant, inherent, indicator, searches, numbers, fart, extracting, prove, snowflake, unique, drafts, checked, sanity, discriminate, indiscriminate, coatrack, clones, sourcing, mistakes, true, businesses, location, bombardment, key, participants, creep, outlets, wikipeace, wikilove, wikilawyering, wikihate, wikiharassment, wikicrime, wikibullying, wikirelations, squeeze, blood, turnip, oracles, railroad, passive, aggression, pony, confederates, racists, nazis, madmen, angry, mastodons, nationalist, griefing, insult, throw, toys, pram, regulars, bait, spite, face, shout, remind, past, misdeeds, smarmy, valediction, signature, fuck, fight, eat, troll, food, drink, kool, aid, demand, solve, identify, cry, coi, come, ton, bricks, kettle, black, bludgeon, fun, police, rude, prejudiced, obnoxious, inconsiderate, maintenance, wikibigot, ashamed, ostrich, jerk, fanatic, accuse, accusing, cyberbullying, alphabettispaghetti, settle, mutual, withdrawal, moby, mind, business, earth, imagine, complexly, lose, over, full, stick, slowly, away, horse, carcass, discussing, desist, deny, recognition, candor, beyond, excellent, vandal, remarks, clue, assumption, argue, dos, opponent, monopoly, winning, wrongs, polite, discourse, reader, divine, grey, staying, cool, hot, shadowless, fists, death, notification, opt, profanity, old, fashioned, values, people, disagree, nobody, forgive, forget, failure, revenge, warnings, beware, tigers, glue, uncivil, poor, hotheads, unblock, perspectives, truce, long, didn, relationships, academic, obsessive, compulsive, disorder, negotiation, maintaining, friendly, space, functioning, autism, asperger, expect, thanks, enjoy, encouraging, pace, divisiveness, contributing, complicated, apology, accepting, basics, encyclopedic, doubt, hide, woodwork, tagged, speedy, created, whack, mole, unopposed, heymann, relist, relisting, abusive, overzealous, pants, concise, immunity, blatant, advertising, save, proposed, follow, leader, overuse, win, argument, confuse, status, nominator, junk, counting, sorting, original, research, removal, confusing, mean, repeated, image, war, removing, women, shouldn, able, figure, proseline, gender, language, copyediting, reception, sections, thread, mode, tomorrow, organized, fashion, progress, walled, garden, understanding, standards, temporary, versions, thon, makers, specialized, plot, summaries, sham, robotic, restoring, reverted, little, effort, publicists, pruning, revisions, printability, astonishment, presentism, state, permastub, organizing, disambiguation, subject, obtain, peer, review, stone, wikiproject, story, event, disaster, biography, murder, minors, persons, judged, incompetent, merge, mine, rot, introduction, structurism, inaccuracy, inaccuracies, namespace, strongnat, date, formats, guides, science, primary, law, chance, fruit, poisonous, tree, templates, endorsements, commercial, mindreaders, devices, teach, controversy, due, solely, panic, hope, itself, hung, minor, details, demolish, while, built, dictionaries, deprecated, criticisms, society, consistent, npov, creating, controversial, concept, cloud, underkill, children, lit, adult, new, readers, large, books, chesterton, fence, cherrypicking, endure, cycle, blind, men, elephant, beef, revision, form, urls, mission, statements, autosizing, half, life, unfinished, real, problem, amnesia, alternatives, expand, akin, laws, coding, table, adding, improves, acronym, 100k, construction, brief, trifecta, principles, role, collaborative, anarchy, tendentious, ten, seniority, systemic, reasonability, purpose, product, important, fields, paraphrasing, paradoxes, oversimplification, question, restriction, levels, external, criticism, explanationism, eight, our, visiting, foreign, country, objections, lie, dissent, disloyalty, concede, lost, cohesion, vague, introductions, height, overall, necessarily, believes, huge, anyway, applies, dash, siroxo, usually, feels, fundamental, authors, voters, merely, stands, firmly, behind, somewhat, sure, taken, convinced, otherwise, since, early, days, once, recorded, aim, discouraging, then, best, challenging, solves, undoubtedly, criticised, possible, stating, candidate, admitting, requires, interpret, superior, drawing, negative, conclusions, where, necessary, healthy, productive, intended, treated, inference, multiple, speak, reasons, see, doing, summarise, underlying, feelings, particularly, future, reference, occurs, through, rather, going, detail, includes, those, beginning, appended, start, well, formal, separation, next, rationale, given, certain, exist, harm, essentially, harmless, deviates, avoided, restrictions, bureaucracy, making, attacks, incivil, impression, kind, power, seem, foolish, unaware, exasperate, haven, gotten, effect, whatsoever, annoying, drain, eyes, anything, affect, idea, express, again, actual, appear, phrase, encourages, suggests, done, obvious, gain, less, looks, fucking, worthless, four, whatever, very, extremely, comes, subpage, says, described, disagreement, examples, debate, request, aiyv, aiyr, adj, contributors, nor, widespread, norms, minority, viewpoints, thoroughly, vetted, free, wayback, machine, http, archive, 20221018044043, wiki, timestamps, capture, fail, success, 2023, 2021, nov, oct, mar, 2011, 2026, 283, captures,

Text of the page (random words):
olicy give others the impression that you think you have some kind of special power different from them you don t and that as they say is that arguments on why it doesn t matter if you put adjectives in your recommendations edit wikipedia has policies against users carrying out certain practices such as being incivil or making personal attacks these exist because there is clear evidence of harm from these practices no such evidence exists for users placing adjectives in their recommendations however this is essentially a harmless and trivial practice and even if it deviates from standard practice in discussions wikipedia is not a bureaucracy so excessive restrictions on what users can and can t do should be avoided alternative viewpoint on why users do this edit a lot of the practice that occurs in discussions is through convention rather than policy with the deletion policy for instance not going into detail on how to comment in deletion discussions wikipedia articles for deletion how to discuss an afd is not policy but reviews convention and includes the recommendation that editors put their recommended course of action in bold text e g delete however it does not say to put those at the beginning of a comment as is common practice or that adjectives cannot be appended to such recommendations the advice given at rfa also contains no recommendation for editors to put their recommended cause of action at the start of a comment but it is common practice there as well there is no formal separation between a recommendation area and an opinion area in policy so it makes no difference if users put adjectives next to their recommended course of action e g strong delete or as part of their rationale e g i strongly believe that this article should be deleted because multiple users place adjectives in their recommendations so no one can speak for all of them as there are probably many reasons why users choose to carry out this practice editors may choose to carry out practices at afd simply because they see another user doing it and think it makes sense for them to do it also another reason could be the need of an editor to summarise their underlying feelings on an issue at the time particularly for future reference when they look back at the discussion potential to cause offence edit it has been suggested that placing adjectives in recommendations may be offensive only in some cases is this possible for instance stating that you strongly support a candidate at rfa or admitting your position is weak at afd is clearly not likely to cause offence even in other cases it requires significant inference to interpret an adjective in a recommendation to be a statement that it is superior or counts more than another drawing such negative conclusions on the meaning of other user s comments where it is not necessary is not a healthy practice on wikipedia it is more productive if editors assume that comments placed in discussions are not intended to be offensive and should not be treated as such if the aim of discouraging placing adjectives in recommendations is to avoid offence then the best course of action is probably to simply ignore them excessive challenging of users who place adjectives in their recommendations is likely to cause more problems than it solves as many users will undoubtedly take offence for being criticised on such a trivial issue history edit adjectives have been placed in recommendations since the early days of wikipedia the historical page wikipedia votes for deletion phrases once recorded what they were used for strong weak modifier sometimes used with a vote usually keep or delete generally the strong modifier is used when someone feels that fundamental wikipedia policy clearly supports inclusion or deletion of the article a strong vote is not an attack on the authors or other voters merely a statement that the voter stands firmly behind the vote generally the weak modifier means that the voter is only somewhat sure that their suggested action should be taken or could be convinced otherwise siroxo wikipedia votes for deletion phrases impact edit the overall impact of putting adjectives in your recommendations is trivial but an action is not necessarily a statement that the editor carrying it out believes it will make a huge difference for instance does it make a difference if users put a dash between their recommended cause of action and opinion e g delete probably not but many users do it anyway the same principle applies with putting adjectives in your recommendations and that as they say is that v t e wikipedia essays essays on building editing and deleting content philosophy articles must be written all five pillars are the same height avoid vague introductions be a reliable source civil pov pushing cohesion competence is required concede lost arguments dissent is not disloyalty don t lie don t search for objections editing wikipedia is like visiting a foreign country editors will sometimes be wrong eight simple rules for editing our encyclopedia explanationism external criticism of wikipedia here to build an encyclopedia levels of competence most ideas are bad need neutrality of sources not editing because of wikipedia restriction the one question oversimplification paradoxes paraphrasing pov and or from editors sources and fields process is important product process policy purpose reasonability rule systemic bias there is no seniority ten simple rules for editing wikipedia tendentious editing the role of policies in collaborative anarchy the rules are principles trifecta wikipedia in brief wikipedia is an encyclopedia wikipedia is a community article construction 100k featured articles acronym overkill advanced source searching adding images improves the encyclopedia advanced article editing advanced table formatting advanced template coding advanced text formatting akin s laws of article writing alternatives to the expand template amnesia test a navbox on every page an unfinished house is a real problem articles have a half life autosizing images avoid mission statements bare urls be neutral in form beef up that first revision blind men and an elephant bold revert discuss cycle build content to endure cherrypicking chesterton s fence children s lit adult new readers large print books citation overkill citation underkill common style fallacy concept cloud creating controversial content criticisms of society may be consistent with npov and reliability deprecated sources dictionaries as sources don t demolish the house while it s still being built don t get hung up on minor details don t hope the house will build itself don t panic don t revert due solely to no consensus don t teach the controversy editing on mobile devices editors are not mindreaders encourage the newcomers endorsements commercial featured articles may have problems formatting bilateral relations articles formatting bilateral relations templates fruit of the poisonous tree give an article a chance how to write a featured article identifying and using independent sources history sources law sources primary sources science sources style guides tertiary sources ignore strongnat for date formats inaccuracies in wikipedia namespace inaccuracy introduction to structurism link rot mine a source merge test minors and persons judged incompetent murder of articles not every story event disaster needs a biography not everything needs a navbox not everything needs a template not everything needs a wikiproject nothing is in stone obtain peer review comments organizing disambiguation pages by subject area permastub potential not just current state presentism principle of some astonishment printability pruning article revisions publicists put a little effort into it restoring part of a reverted edit robotic editing sham consensus source your plot summaries specialized style fallacy stub makers run an edit a thon temporary versions of articles tertiary source fallacy there are no shortcuts to neutrality there is no deadline there is a deadline the deadline is now understanding wikipedia s content standards walled garden what an article should not include wikipedia is a work in progress wikipedia is not a reliable source wikipedia is not being written in an organized fashion the world will not end tomorrow write the article first writing better articles writing article content avoid thread mode copyediting reception sections gender neutral language proseline we shouldn t be able to figure out your opinions write the article first writing about women writing better articles removing or deleting content 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 confusing arguments mean nothing content removal counting and sorting are not original research delete the junk does deletion help don t attack the nominator don t confuse stub status with non notability 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 identifying blatant advertising identifying test edits immunity keep it concise liar liar pants on fire nothing nothing is clear overzealous deletion relisting can be abusive relist bias the heymann standard unopposed afd discussion wikipedia is not whack a mole why was the page i created deleted what to do if your article gets tagged for speedy deletion when in doubt hide it in the woodwork no encyclopedic use essays on civility the basics accepting other users apology contributing to complicated discussions divisiveness edit at your own pace encouraging the newcomers enjoy yourself expect no thanks high functioning autism and asperger s editors how to be civil maintaining a friendly space negotiation obsessive compulsive disorder editors relationships with academic editors thank you too long didn t read truce unblock perspectives we are all wikipedians here philosophy a weak personal attack is still wrong advice for hotheads an uncivil environment is a poor environment be the glue beware of the tigers civility warnings deletion as revenge failure forgive and forget it s not the end of the world nobody cares most people who disagree with you on content are not vandals old fashioned wikipedian values profanity civility and discussions revert notification opt out shadowless fists of death staying cool when the editing gets hot the grey zone the last word there is no divine right of editors most ideas are bad nothing is clear reader the rules of polite discourse there is no common sense two wrongs don t make a right wikipedia is not about winning wikipedia should not be a monopoly writing for the opponent dos argue better assume good faith assume the assumption of good faith assume no clue avoid personal remarks avoid the word vandal be excellent to one another beyond civility call a spade a spade candor deny recognition desist discussing cruft drop the stick and back slowly away from the horse carcass encourage full discussions get over it how to lose imagine others complexly just drop it keep it down to earth mind your own business say moby mutual withdrawal read before commenting settle the process first don ts alphabettispaghetti civil pov pushing cyberbullying don t accuse someone of a personal attack for accusing of a personal attack don t be a fanatic don t be a jerk don t be an ostrich don t be ashamed don t be a wikibigot don t be high maintenance don t be inconsiderate don t be obnoxious don t be prejudiced don t be rude don t be the fun police don t bludgeon the process don t call a spade a spade don t call the kettle black don t call things cruft don t come down like a ton of bricks don t cry coi don t demand that editors solve the problems they identify don t drink the consensus kool aid don t eat the troll s food don t fight fire with fire don t give a fuck don t help too much don t make a smarmy valediction part of your signature don t remind others of past misdeeds don t shout don t spite your face don t take the bait don t template the regulars don t throw your toys out of the pram do not insult the vandals griefing nationalist editing no angry mastodons just madmen no nazis no racists no confederates no you can t have a pony passive aggression please don t bite the newcomers pov railroad there are no oracles you can t squeeze blood from a turnip wikirelations wikibullying wikicrime wikiharassment wikihate wikilawyering wikilove wikipeace essays on notability advanced source searching all high schools can be notable alternative outlets arguments to avoid in deletion discussions articles with a single source avoid template creep bare notability big events make key participants notable bombardment businesses with a single location but it s true citation overkill common sourcing mistakes clones coatrack discriminate vs indiscriminate information drafts are not checked for notability or sanity every snowflake is unique existence notability existence does not prove notability extracting the meaning of significant coverage fart google searches and numbers high schools inclusion is not an indicator of notability independent sources inherent notability insignificant masking the lack of notability make stubs news coverage does not decrease notability 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 cannot be purchased notability comparison test notability is not a level playing field notability is not a matter of opinion notability is not relevance or reliability notability means impact notability points notability sub pages notabilitymandering not every single thing donald trump does deserves an article obscurity lack of notability offline sources one hundred words one sentence does not an article make other stuff exists overreliance upon google perennial websites pokémon test read the source reducing consensus to an algorithm run of the mill significant coverage not required solutions are mixtures and nothing else subjective importance third party sources trivial mentions video links vanispamcruftisement what blp1e is not what is and is not routine coverage what notability is not what to include wikipedia is not crunchbase wikipedia is not here to tell the world about your noble cause wikipedia is not the place to post your résumé humorous essays anti wikipedian asshole john rule assume bad faith assume faith assume good wraith assume stupidity assume that everyone s assuming good faith assuming that you are assuming good faith avoid using preview button avoid using wikilinks bad jokes and other deleted nonsense bold revert revert revert boston tea party barnstar...