963:
X-rays, which was originally declared a hoax. Resistance to change is also visible when science continues to cling to unsupported paradigms, such as the
Rorschach inkblot test.... But ... there is one major difference between science and religion.... Science is a collective enterprise with rules of engagement that allow the whole to make progress even if its parts drag their feet.... What science does best is to incite competition among ideas.... As an example, let's say that I believe that life is passed on through little homunculi inside sperm. You, in contrast, believe it's done by mixing the traits of both parents. Along comes an obscure Moravian monk fond of peas. By cross-pollinating pea plants, he shows that traits pass from both parents to their offspring yet remain fully separate.... The homunculus idea was nice and simple, but couldn't explain why offspring often look like their mother. The blending of traits sounded great, too, but would inevitably kill off variation, because the entire population would converge on some average. At first, the monk's work was criticized, then ignored and forgotten. Science was simply not ready for it. Fortunately, it was rediscovered decades later. The scientific community ... began to favor the monk's explanation. Since his experiments were successfully replicated, Gregor Mendel is now celebrated as the founder of genetics."
996:
a single bubble. In order for this to work, the change from symmetry to broken symmetry must have taken place very slowly inside the bubble, but this is quite possible according to grand unified theories. Linde's idea of a slow breaking of symmetry was very good, but I later realized that his bubbles would have to have been bigger than the size of the universe at the time! .... As a friend of Linde's, I was rather embarrassed ... when I was later sent his paper by a scientific journal and asked whether it was suitable for publication. I replied that there was this flaw about the bubbles being bigger than the universe, but that the basic idea of a slow breaking of symmetry was very good. I recommended that the paper be published as it was because it would take Linde several months to correct it, since anything he sent to the West would have to be passed by Soviet censorship, which was neither very skillful nor very quick with scientific papers. Instead, I wrote a short paper with Ian Moss in the same journal in which we pointed out this problem with the bubble and showed how it could be resolved." Hawking, Stephen W.,
348:, even correctly, may not save your reputation. If no specialist responds, maybe it's because no one with any relevant qualifications ever reads the publication or heard about your work, which is not a good sign. You may need to publish again, in a different outlet, but you can't say just the same thing (often because of competition and copyright), so you may have to find a new angle, new developments, new commentary, or something else substantially new. You'll be building up a body of work, which takes time and effort but the result tends to look good for you and your research. Follow up and see if anyone cites your work anywhere and look for letters to your publishers and other audience response. A political writer and leader said he answered 90% of his mail from the public. Respond to criticisms. When they're right, say so. When they're not, explain why.
360:. Go to the most relevant article's talk page, start a new topic, and explain that you're the author of the source and how you'd like to use it. If you published under one name and edit Knowledge (XXG) under a different username, you don't have to explain why you have a conflict of interest, just say that you have one, although the declaration itself will be a pretty strong clue to your identity, so, if anonymity matters to you, you may have to forego citing your outside publication in Knowledge (XXG). If you have posted to the talk page, give editors time to answer your proposal. If no one responds in a week or so, go ahead and add it approximately as you said you would (don't surprise people). If there was a response, try to accommodate the response/s when you edit the article.
181:. It's not that you were born in a foreign solar system and honored in a comic book, it's just that you're a keen amateur astronomer with good eyes. You saw a streak of yellow up there and you figured out it must be made of gold bars. You found a new way for someone to get rich. Right now, you may be the only person who knows about that pile ready for the taking, and you've never told anyone. That means no one has published it anywhere. It's high time Knowledge (XXG) reported this astonishing discovery. You wouldn't mind getting the credit but your main mission is the public service of keeping everyone up to date on new discoveries, in this case about gold on another planet. You need a strategy.
316:
statements leading up to it also have to be right, and often a hypothesis fails because just one of those statements is wrong. The researcher (you) is responsible for proving every necessary element of the case. No one else is responsible for disproving any of your points until you have made a good case first. One mathematician spent 7 years proving a theorem; then someone found an error and the mathematician spent another year fixing that. Since the theorem had been an open question for over 300 years, a few more were an acceptable price for work done right. Many people spend lifetimes without finishing their work. If that will be you, with luck you'll be vindicated posthumously.
951:"Having spent all my life among academics, I can tell you that hearing how wrong they are is about as high on their priority list as finding a cockroach in their coffee. The typical scientist has made an interesting discovery early on in his or her career, followed by a lifetime of making sure that everyone else admires his or her contribution and that no one questions it.... Academics ... cling to their views long after they have become obsolete ... and are upset every time something new comes along that they failed to anticipate. Original ideas invite ridicule, or are rejected as ill informed. As the neuroscience pioneer Michael Gazzaniga complained in a recent interview,
403:(if it's not, check your Preferences, specifically where it says Watchlist, or, when you edit a page, put a checkmark where it says "Watch this page"). If an article or talk page is watchlisted, so is the other. Once you post something controversial, log in daily for a couple of weeks, then twice weekly a while, and so on, until you're down to once every 3 weeks (that's about the minimum because watchlists don't show changes older than about a month, although every article has a View History link at the top for that article's editing history since it began). You'll likely want to stay on top of developments, such as deletion attempts and rewrites that miss the point.
218:
approach has its points pro and con and its adherents and detractors, but often one or the other is conventional within a particular field of study. Whatever may be the standards for the field of knowledge you've entered, do your best to understand them and apply them even if the results are inconvenient. Facts will survive any defect in the standards, but you have to know what your colleagues expect so you can communicate with as much common ground as possible. Try not to resist standards as doing so will almost certainly get you ignored. Often, you can express your knowledge within those standards, although you may have to expend extra effort to do it.
547:, but your fact is frankly controversial and that tends to bring opposition out of the woodwork, sometimes in swarms. (Swarms usually mean you'll lose. Answer carefully.) Treat the responses as separate and uncoordinated and as coming from multiple real people until proven otherwise. If challenged to repeat an answer, either try to combine them into one answer for several posters (editors who posted) or clarify more with each answer, because maybe a later objector didn't understand your first answer. Generally assume one editor complaining about something virtually represents some larger number who almost complained about the same thing. It's better to
308:
start with what is generally agreed to among scholars (even if they're all wrong) and you determine what new discoveries would advance the state of scholarship and bring it closer to your first discovery. Then make those intermediate discoveries yourself or persuade other scholars to do the missing scholarship. Get the middle steps published. Repeat with each round of discoveries needed until your main discovery becomes believable among scholars. Then get your main discovery published in high-quality third-party media, since they will now have a scholarly basis for recognizing your contribution to knowledge.
332:
clearly are morons, and they're slowing the progress of humanity and biology. You're burning to get this information out. One option for you is to consider other fields of scholarship that overlap the area you were studying. For example, political science and sociology overlap. So do law and history and so do art and optics. That opens up more journals to consider. You'll probably need to re-research and rewrite your work a few more times. However, you likely will be dealing with different people, which makes you someone with no reputation, and that's usually better than having a bad reputation.
189:, compendia of papers from scholarly conferences, influential Masters' theses, and published Ph.D. dissertations from good universities to find out what scholars today generally agree is true or false regarding the field of your discovery. All of these publications should be limited to those recognized by major scholars in the field as legitimate. Writings by scholars for lay audiences are often not as precise, but they can get you started. Websites and online periodical databases have to be judged for editorial quality in comparison to print materials; some are good and some are trash. The
552:
misunderstand something in your article, in which case maybe you should clarify that in your article and not just in replying to a critic; perhaps you should even re-research a necessary point in your work (challenges can be valuable that way). Intent is not always obvious or negative even when the critic is abrupt and harsh. Ignore other people's lack of etiquette and focus on the substance of their statements. Should you need to raise a dispute to a higher level, your record will be clean and you'll have more credibility.
894:
that predicted a light deflection by gravity half as big as the true value. An expedition had been planned to search for the bending of starlight by the sun during a 1914 solar eclipse, but it was preempted by the outbreak of World War I. Einstein was lucky that the observation never happened. If it had, the first prediction of
Einstein's emerging theory of gravity would have disagreed with the data. How that would have affected his life, and the subsequent history of science, is anyone's guess."
293:
is done by their staff) and examine recent sample issues. While scholarly peer-reviewed journals publish work by authors who are almost always professors, recognized scholars, or advanced students in their field, exceptions have happened; if an editor there thinks you have something, congratulations on getting at least that far. Media directed at children are probably less reliable, or not reliable at all.
1082:
106:
136:
152:. If you are ahead of all other scholars, create a stepladder of proof from what scholars agree on with you, based on their published articles and books, until your ultimate point is proven. Anticipate criticisms; take them as legitimate and answer them on their merits. If you're ready to add sourcing to Knowledge (XXG) but you're the author of the sourcing, you have a
24:
87:
1057:
You, personally, might be disbelieved. This was told to
Einstein. "Einstein brazenly sought to rewrite the centuries-old rules of Newtonian gravity, a daunting task that even his ardent supporters considered quixotic, Max Planck, the dean of German science, intoned, 'As an older friend, I must advise
995:
October 1981, I went to Moscow for a conference .... In the audience was a young
Russian, Andrei Linde, from the Lebedev Institute in Moscow. He said that the difficulty with the bubbles not joining up could be avoided if the bubbles were so big that our region of the universe is all contained inside
576:
Speedy deletions may take a day or less to resolve. Copyright violations go that way, and that includes apparent copyright violations, meaning someone might think it's a violation when it's not and delete it speedily. Answer fast and helpfully. Don't say that "information wants to be free". Knowledge
426:
If criticism is predictable but unsourced, omitting critique may cause your article to seem skewed. Anything challengeable can be questioned or removed, but in this case that would mean challenging uncontroversial criticisms, so it's less likely anyone will. Therefore, state an obvious criticism even
414:
Include criticisms about your fact. Lean over backwards to identify reliably-sourced criticisms against the controversial point. It's controversial for a reason, and don't say it's because slobs misunderstand it or hate you (or because they don't understand the topic). Maybe the criticisms are wrong,
331:
Yet, you send your prose to great science magazines but they don't publish it and you suspect they think your manuscript is landfill. Maybe publishers see your name on your submissions and refuse to open your envelopes. They don't even want to laugh at you. They obviously don't recognize talent, they
303:
Apply a publisher's guidelines completely, if at all possible. It's usually a bad idea to submit your manuscript on orange paper with tiny lights on the edges, because a lowly aide will likely have been told that anything noncompliant with guidelines can't be any good and should be returned unread or
292:
Audiences may be either lay or scholarly. They tend to consume different media, although in both sets of media many are reliable. The two sets of media require very different ways of preparing your work. Read authors' guidelines from the publishers (if no guidelines are available, perhaps all writing
893:
Errors in a hypothesis can have lifelong effects on the future work by the person who made the hypothesis. " Einstein had done ... light-bending calculation ... in 1912.... e had made a near-disastrous mathematical error: he had performed his calculation using an early version of general relativity
962:
This is more like the scientists I know. Authority outweighs evidence, at least for as long as the authority lives. There is no lack of historical examples, such as resistance to the wave theory of light, to
Pasteur's discovery of fermentation, to continental drift, and to Röntgen's announcement of
585:
Watch your article for a few months, at least. It can take that long, even longer, for stability and acceptance. Check in every day, if you can, then after a month of inactivity check in a couple of times a week for a few months or more. Things can always change but changes tend to be sooner rather
551:
on the part of your critics, as perhaps they only misunderstood and only after that got mad, and then to answer their criticisms carefully and informatively. Even the severest critics deserve your assumptions of good faith for their intentions, even if they say you're a crackpot, because maybe they
284:
A third-party publisher who'll take your word is nice. But it turns out that the local junior high school's yearbook of adventure stories isn't good enough. Persuade a reliable medium to publish your discovery. Maybe they will if you write it. Many require that you submit your intended full article
147:
In short: Gather your facts. Be careful with your intellectual content. Adhere closely to
Knowledge (XXG)'s policies and guidelines. You can self-publish outside of Knowledge (XXG) pretty easily, but self-publications are not trusted for inclusion in Knowledge (XXG). Third-party publishers are much
498:
Allow at least a week for editors to see the draft. Check in often, maybe daily or every few hours, to keep up with any discussion that appears. Refine the draft while the discussion is in progress. Don't wait and just promise to get to it later. Keep improving it as soon as there's any suggestion
422:
If a criticism is likely but you don't see a source for it, state a larger criticism that encompasses the obvious one you're missing. For instance, if you have discovered that gravity repels every
Wednesday at noon for a quarter-second but all the physicists are still too busy chuckling to write a
390:
Before you post any content or edit anything, you should register a username account if you haven't yet, because that will give you more credibility among editors than if you edit pseudo-anonymously from an IP address and you'll have an easier time monitoring changes to articles you want to watch.
376:
If sources you wrote are not welcome here, one way to show up nay-sayers is to pull strings and get someone else to make essentially the same discovery. When someone else says it, then both of you are more believable among scholars and the public. It may not settle all arguments, but it will help.
367:
If you want to protect the copyright on your non-Knowledge (XXG) work or if you licensed your copyright to someone else (many journals require that, so that they have the copyright license on your article), don't copy much of it into
Knowledge (XXG). Instead, rewrite into new words (your own), and
222:
Knowledge (XXG) policies or guidelines, because you will have been careful about applying them throughout your work. Sometimes, people look for any excuse to get rid of someone, and sometimes they apply double standards: loose for them and strict for you. Don't give them an excuse to kick you off.
156:
you need to declare before you edit. When you're ready to edit, draft carefully for
Knowledge (XXG). Monitor the article and its talk page frequently, even several times a day in the first days. If objections come from multiple editors, don't assume the editors are coordinating against you or just
208:
Once you know the intellectual context, you can test your own knowledge for contradictions and inclarity, rework what needs changing, and see what everyone else needs to change in their thinking. Then you can position your knowledge so you can present it intelligently to other people who know the
307:
You may well be ahead of all the scholars. That can happen. If you suspect that's why scholarly publications refuse your submissions, what you can do is complete the intermediate research that is needed for scholars to believe your main discovery. In effect, build an intellectual stepladder. You
363:
If you propose to write a whole new article and base it exclusively on your own publication, that has almost no chance of surviving. It would suffer from conflict of interest and, without your work, a lack of sources and therefore a lack of notability. It's easier to propose editing an existing
262:
Dump the vanity books; maybe you'll get a penny for the load if a close friend takes pity on you. You may have to pay someone to haul them to the trash. Blog posts, tweets, personal websites, and other self-publications generally don't count, either. Anything that has almost no oversight by an
221:
Adhere to
Knowledge (XXG)'s policies and guidelines even more strictly than usual. You will be accused. Hopefully, you'll only be accused once for each charge because your thoughtful and informative response will settle each matter, or you will be accused of something that does not violate any
217:
Apply strict intellectual standards. Sloppy work looks even worse when it's a shaky foundation for a far-out belief. Those standards can vary by discipline; for example, some demand that you develop a hypothesis before you investigate and others that you not, so you can keep an open mind. Each
315:
himself, and said so (although lately some disagree that it was a blunder in all contexts). However, when a nonscholar thinks a scholar is wrong within the scholar's own field, the scholar is probably right and the nonscholar is probably wrong. Often, for a hypothesis to be right a number of
275:
more credible. Whether you're the author there or someone else is, their editors will look more critically at submissions, and what survives editing will likely be more believed by readers. Find reliable sources to publish what you say. Reliable media tend to have fairly consistent editorial
555:
Discussions about your editing may turn up elsewhere, but almost always it will be at the article's talk page or maybe at your user talk page, unless it's nominated for deletion or brought to a dispute resolution forum, in which case that's where it'll be talked about. Go immediately to any
335:
If you do get your work published this way, congratulations, because even minor media can be difficult to get into. Nonetheless, a recognized scholar may dispute the third-party publication (and you) because surely no one can justify the conclusions you reached. Using two-dollar terms like
196:
Minority views count, but only those minority views that appear in those same kinds of media and are from established scholars should be considered. All other minority views may be interesting but they're often lacking something essential or wrong on a critical point and may be treated as
205:, agreed to by most scientists or leading scientists in a particular discipline (leading scientists can form a consensus because, if they are leading, other scientists in the same discipline tend to be influenced by them and follow). Much the same is true for other fields of scholarship.
494:
Invite editors to look at your draft. If there's already an article you want to edit, post at that article's talk page with a link to your draft. If there's no article and you want to start a new article, post at a WikiProject relevant to the proposed article's subject, and link to your
3465:
398:
Log in often and click the Watchlist link at the top of any Knowledge (XXG) page. The watchlist tells you if any page you're interested in has changed. You can add and subtract pages from the watchlist (don't exclude minor edits from watchlisting) and, generally, any page you edit is
458:
For many writers, care means writing a first draft, putting it aside for a few days or longer, and then proofreading it for errors, unclear writing and missing references. As well, try to read it from other readers' perspectives (including those unfamiliar with the topic and its
285:
and not simply a query. Writers are a dime a dozen; actually less, since many media have so many writers at their doorsteps, they pay none of those they print (and it's legal). Even without pay, you'll have stiff competition. If you get in, you'll get the credit and the blame.
487:
Verifiability is easier when free online sources are used, even though that's not required by Knowledge (XXG), which allows use of nonfree offline sourcing, such as paid databases and books. If verifiability is easier, however, your credibility among potential doubters may go
1505:
258:
Typically, at least in the U.S., the most trusted media pay their writers and media that pay nothing may still be trusted, but media that are paid mainly by their writers are of interest to almost no readers, viewers, listeners, bookstores, libraries, schools, or archivists.
250:
and have them print your book; you pay them and they print any wisdom (or nonsense) you impart to them. But since they'll print almost any garbage anyone pays them to print and most people can't figure out why your book would be any better, Knowledge (XXG) says they're not
169:
A biological species has just been discovered, and found so recently it hasn't even been submitted to a peer-reviewed journal or other reliable source yet, and it'll take months to come out. You want to put it into Knowledge (XXG) without missing another moment. You need a
535:
with whomever participates in the discussion. Correct errors. Concede unimportant points. If you need time to do research before further edits, quickly edit downward to what is agreed to, do the additional research, and then edit to add the results of your newer research.
143:
You want to add a controversial fact or allegation into Knowledge (XXG) or create a new article about a controversial issue, but it will probably be deleted. You want it to survive, so the world will finally know. Here are some things to consider in your efforts.
2666:
463:) to be sure it will be understood by others as you intend; and then redraft. While it's a draft, it's better that the draft be somewhere other than in Knowledge (XXG) article space, such as offline in your word processor, on paper, or on a Knowledge (XXG) user
418:
They should be ample, not half the article but still substantial, if the sources are ample with criticism. Let readers make their own decisions about who's right. Then your article has a better chance of surviving and readers are likelier to agree with you.
238:. So, a source is needed. You'll have to find someone to publish your discovery. Or you'll have to publish it yourself, even though your odds of getting your self-publication to stay in Knowledge (XXG) are between slim and none and Slim just left town.
2070:
276:
standards overseen by editors other than the author, limit themselves to nonfiction or identify fiction as separate and thus ignorable by consumers of nonfiction, and tend to be believed by many important consumers of media in the field.
1535:
3352:
327:
means not referring to a critic's lack of ability to know what they're talking about. Instead, answer the critique as if smart people made it after thorough thought. Maybe they didn't grasp exactly what you meant. Help them to get it.
2801:
427:
if you can't attribute it to any source. If someone wants to delete it on the ground of lack of sourcing, beware of one trap: Deleting criticisms may result in the article appearing to have a point of view when it's supposed to be
3232:
2404:
2761:
2570:
2165:
514:
Once you post your interesting fact into a Knowledge (XXG) article, expect to discuss it on the talk page. Your fact being controversial, some ignoramus may delete it and you probably will want to restore it. You don't
450:
Slowly is better. Few writers write better by rushing. Go ahead and write a passage fast, but don't post yet. Take your time with the whole article, from planning through final proofreading. A handful of geniuses like
3605:
1872:
3545:
3292:
542:
If a bunch of editors all seem to say the same thing against your work, it's tempting to think they're coordinating their responses or even that they're multiple usernames for one editor. That may be true and some
434:
On the article's Talk page, invite sourcing for the critique you'd like to post or keep. Do this only after your own search has failed. Google and library databases of articles are often helpful and many are free.
2913:
1550:
3615:
581:
and you can show or submit the permission (license) or that it's originally from the public domain, and some images can be used under the fair use doctrine, but your best answer depends on the facts of the case.
3357:
1217:
3881:
3876:
3167:
562:, Knowledge (XXG) has a variety of remedies. Key to most of them is speed (reply the same day if possible), openness (your history is visible and acting badly leaves a trail), working within Knowledge (XXG)'s
431:, and having a point of view may lead to an effort to delete your entire work. It may be better to contest the deletion of the main uncontroversial criticisms in order to maintain balance and thus neutrality.
3670:
884:
enough to have their own articles in Knowledge (XXG). If you're not sure, try writing a biographical article on a scholar of your choice, at least a stub, and see if it survives a nomination for deletion.
594:
Things can change anytime. However, if you've had a few months of inactivity in the article and its talk page, your article probably has achieved stability and acceptance among Knowledge (XXG)'s editors.
1970:
647:
3655:
3405:
1945:
2000:
1697:
165:
Isolate and articulate the new fact. We'll consider both the cases of knowledge that's almost ready for prime time as well as those that hardly anyone thinks is anywhere near to being reasonable.
3675:
3082:
2268:
1722:
1645:
1227:
1847:
1277:
1267:
484:
Cite sources right down to page numbers or with equivalent specificity. For audio or video sources, that may be by specifying minutes and seconds from the beginning to the particular fragment.
3122:
3102:
2065:
2035:
1347:
2359:
2085:
1362:
1302:
641:
1435:
3820:
1767:
3127:
3207:
3162:
3072:
3022:
2288:
2015:
1990:
531:
is discussion on the article's talk page. If your work gets howled at, point the howlers to the previous discussion on the talk page but don't get very defensive. Try to arrive at a
491:
Clean out every error, big and small. Clear up every ambiguity, too. Don't expect other editors to do it for you. They may just oppose your work and delete whole chunks or all of it.
3929:
3715:
2005:
1640:
1625:
423:
criticism of your proof, at least find a source that says gravity attracts all the time, because that at least appears to contradict your proof, apart from your proof being newer.
1337:
255:
and generally rejects vanity press books. Editors at vanity presses do very little editing but try to get you to spend more money paying them, so they're not independent of you.
3042:
1605:
1058:
you against it.... You will not succeed, and even if you succeed, no one will believe you.' Never one to yield to authority, Einstein pressed on. And on. For nearly a decade."
502:
Compromise where doing so maintains the integrity of what you write about your discovery; some compromises promote clarity. Keep your compromise within policies and guidelines.
3973:
3197:
3112:
2228:
2080:
1985:
1600:
1560:
1415:
3825:
2918:
2831:
2429:
2170:
1995:
1920:
1655:
1630:
1555:
1167:
1126:
455:
could apparently write out beautiful music right off the top of his head; however, most regular people profit from taking time on their work. Rushing may make a rash result.
2806:
2751:
2736:
3252:
3202:
3057:
2349:
1687:
1570:
1450:
2489:
1867:
296:
Print is more verifiable than broadcast or speech. Most broadcasts never get transcribed for the public or in reliable media and old recordings may be impossible to get.
3785:
2414:
2160:
1897:
1822:
1392:
2469:
3680:
3332:
3177:
3097:
2766:
2515:
2444:
2298:
1595:
3725:
3282:
1980:
1857:
1747:
1650:
1635:
556:
discussion about anything important to you and prepare to answer often but not redundantly. It's usually better to centralize a one-topic discussion in one place.
1862:
1237:
320:
was. You'll be in good but rarified company. If you prefer winning arguments while you're alive, remember your burden is the bigger one. Prove every single step.
3267:
3237:
3047:
2796:
2791:
2328:
1777:
1732:
1662:
3805:
2484:
3978:
3580:
2025:
1400:
1114:
3665:
1382:
3535:
3410:
1430:
3297:
3012:
2409:
2095:
1877:
1707:
1620:
1222:
573:(AfD), it might take less than a week to resolve and you don't want to miss that or show up only four days in. If you are late, respond fast and carefully.
2155:
1372:
3886:
3187:
3147:
2861:
2474:
2394:
1910:
1812:
1742:
578:
3775:
3347:
2530:
3027:
2464:
2210:
1702:
1242:
1087:
It is not recommended that this essay be promoted to become a guideline or a policy. This opposition to promotion is by the first editor of this essay.
2826:
2771:
2741:
1212:
629:
438:
Meanwhile, keep looking for a source. If you find one later, edit the criticism to conform to the new source and add the citation as soon as you can.
3495:
3415:
2278:
681:, a historical theory created in the 17th century comparing the spreading of light to waves in water and assuming light needed ether for transmission
635:
252:
3810:
3780:
3570:
3550:
3107:
2776:
2731:
2726:
2535:
2419:
2323:
2060:
1772:
1717:
1672:
1610:
1580:
1485:
1475:
1247:
528:
3590:
3092:
1692:
1377:
312:
3745:
3620:
3470:
3192:
2888:
2696:
2575:
2424:
2020:
1842:
1792:
1332:
3760:
3700:
3625:
3117:
3087:
3007:
2836:
1807:
1797:
1762:
1575:
1480:
1202:
3800:
1006:
975:
3770:
3635:
3610:
3490:
3262:
2721:
2630:
2590:
2494:
2150:
2135:
2010:
1615:
1465:
1420:
1352:
1312:
1162:
611:
39:
It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Knowledge (XXG) contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of
3912:
3740:
3720:
3645:
3640:
3212:
2701:
2344:
2253:
2115:
2050:
1960:
1950:
1925:
1887:
1882:
1817:
1585:
1545:
1490:
563:
40:
2198:
470:
Citing up to 3 sources for an important controversial point is better than just one, although if you have only one, that will have to do.
2816:
2479:
2308:
124:
that may help someone else, knowing other information, to infer the full statement or identification that may not be in Knowledge (XXG).
3968:
3934:
3337:
2625:
2610:
2525:
2100:
1445:
1192:
1187:
881:
617:
304:
discarded. What may be a good idea when promoting toys to souvenir stores may be counterproductive for serious scholarly submissions.
3730:
3540:
3510:
3475:
3302:
2781:
2691:
2605:
2248:
2218:
2090:
1272:
570:
516:
428:
1367:
566:
including explaining them, and, generally, assuming good faith in other people's intentions, even when they do the opposite to you.
3896:
3765:
3595:
3322:
3222:
3032:
2908:
2821:
2786:
2711:
2681:
2545:
2379:
2369:
2318:
2145:
2130:
2055:
1827:
1677:
1520:
1307:
1252:
1177:
1107:
478:
474:
357:
2811:
2706:
2671:
1500:
3871:
3685:
3600:
3362:
3307:
3227:
3182:
3137:
3132:
3017:
2851:
2646:
2354:
2175:
1955:
1930:
1837:
1832:
1712:
1342:
1257:
1172:
3866:
3062:
2746:
3922:
3695:
3575:
3455:
3430:
3257:
2893:
2856:
2846:
2449:
2389:
2243:
1540:
1515:
1470:
1322:
1297:
1287:
1262:
559:
527:
everyone who mangles your work. Once one editor edits the Knowledge (XXG) article and another editor reverts that change, the
473:
When you paraphrase a source, paraphrase very closely to what the source says or quote it, to make it harder to challenge as
3815:
3630:
3515:
3440:
3327:
3247:
3217:
3067:
2686:
2656:
2620:
2510:
2374:
2293:
2075:
1940:
1905:
1752:
1510:
1460:
1455:
1182:
548:
2238:
1425:
3917:
3505:
3500:
3460:
3445:
3435:
3312:
3157:
2565:
2555:
2454:
2263:
2125:
1410:
1282:
539:
Baseless charges are part of the territory. Answer patiently even against hostility, and for third parties to read, too.
3963:
3891:
3848:
3660:
3525:
3425:
3385:
3342:
3287:
3277:
3272:
3242:
3077:
3052:
3037:
2992:
2878:
2600:
2540:
2273:
2110:
2045:
2040:
2030:
1782:
1405:
1157:
1139:
1100:
577:(XXG) has already decided about that and upholds U.S. copyright law. Often, a good answer is that the copyright holder
368:
then only what you write in Knowledge (XXG) will be submitted under the liberal license terms Knowledge (XXG) applies.
198:
139:
Controversial content can survive a severe dispute if you adhere closely to Knowledge (XXG)'s policies and guidelines.
3565:
3520:
2883:
2756:
2716:
2520:
2258:
1787:
1232:
230:
You're the most honest person on Earth but Knowledge (XXG) still doesn't give a whit for your word. Knowledge (XXG)
201:
views, which Knowledge (XXG) usually does not publish. Scientific findings need to be within scientific consensus,
3795:
3735:
3710:
3650:
3560:
3555:
3142:
2959:
2661:
2651:
2439:
2434:
1852:
1525:
1495:
1327:
544:
235:
231:
356:
Don't add the article's information to Knowledge (XXG) just yet. Being the author of the source means you have a
3755:
3705:
3485:
3480:
3450:
2939:
2903:
2898:
2595:
2399:
2233:
1757:
1590:
1565:
1440:
520:
391:
You don't have to, but it's helpful. If you don't want to register but still want to monitor pages for changes,
849:
3750:
3317:
3172:
2585:
2580:
2364:
2283:
2140:
1802:
871:
This didn't exist at the time of writing, as far as I know; Google had no results for it on February 24, 2013.
392:
1207:
1039:
998:
3690:
3152:
2949:
2873:
1737:
1682:
1667:
1197:
3790:
3400:
2969:
2944:
2923:
2303:
1935:
1727:
1292:
623:
532:
524:
519:
an article, even if you're its first and most frequent contributor, and neither does anyone else; and an
193:
probably won't qualify. Television shows and movies are generally worse; only a few are reliable enough.
44:
2964:
2954:
2868:
2841:
2105:
1357:
464:
288:
In choosing media to carry your work, consider the audience you want to reach, and the space allotted.
54:
3420:
2384:
2223:
2120:
1317:
904:
2560:
2550:
2459:
1123:
32:
895:
2313:
714:
364:
article instead and spinning off a new article later when enough independent sourcing turns up.
299:
Longer is better than very brief, provided you use the length well or you'll lose your audience.
1003:
1002:(N.Y.: Bantam Books Trade Pbks. (Bantam Book), Bantam trade pbk. ed. September, 1998, © 1996 (
972:
702:
666:
3585:
3530:
2676:
2615:
1915:
669:, neuroscience researcher and psychology professor at University of California, Santa Barbara
415:
but dig for sourcing, and at least state and source the critiques neutrally and in quantity.
786:
186:
149:
153:
988:
956:.... The old line that human knowledge advances one funeral at a time seems to be so true!
317:
1044:
935:
750:
690:
263:
independent editor generally is a self-publication and will come to the same dead end.
3957:
3466:
Assume that everyone's assuming good faith, assuming that you are assuming good faith
964:
837:
47:. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.
1059:
247:
95:
Your new articles or facts can survive a severe dispute, if you have valid sources.
626:(essay on when to use "Criticism" or "Controversy" sections, and related matters)
939:
762:
1009:)), pp. 135-136 (page break between "several months to" & "correct it").
400:
2667:
Don't accuse someone of a personal attack for accusing of a personal attack
789:, an organism's phenotypic character variants, such as specific eye colors
174:
505:
Review your work one last time before introducing it into article space.
119:
a person or organization who cannot be written about in Knowledge (XXG).
1092:
798:
178:
135:
638:(list of articles prone to edit-warring because they're controversial)
185:
Gather context. Dig into textbooks at college to postgraduate levels,
2071:
Don't overuse shortcuts to policy and guidelines to win your argument
460:
452:
3353:
Knowledge (XXG) is not here to tell the world about your noble cause
969:
The Bonobo and the Atheist: In Search of Humanism Among the Primates
411:
Controversial facts or claims come with criticisms. Deal with them.
774:
726:
678:
134:
1536:
Criticisms of society may be consistent with NPOV and reliability
810:
738:
311:
Even top scholars get things wrong, many times. Einstein made a
3846:
3383:
2990:
2196:
1137:
1096:
1076:
822:
100:
81:
18:
650:(essay on how Knowledge (XXG) really deals with fringe ideas)
467:
that you create for the draft, linked to from your talk page.
3233:
Not every single thing Donald Trump does deserves an article
2405:
Most people who disagree with you on content are not vandals
1873:
Knowledge (XXG) is not being written in an organized fashion
918:
801:, of a region located within what is now the Czech Republic
2762:
Don't demand that editors solve the problems they identify
2571:
Drop the stick and back slowly away from the horse carcass
2166:
What to do if your article gets tagged for speedy deletion
1506:
Children's lit, adult new readers, & large-print books
1218:
Editing Knowledge (XXG) is like visiting a foreign country
705:, a hypothesis that preceded the theory of plate tectonics
644:(essay on how to avoid and resolve trouble in this regard)
922:
173:
Or, as a most unlikely case, with your bare eyes you saw
114:
a fact or view that may not be stated in Knowledge (XXG).
3606:
How many Wikipedians does it take to change a lightbulb?
729:, electromagnetism in the range of 0.01 to 10 nanometers
632:(essay: the phrase doesn't mean what you think it means)
598:
To see how often people visit your article, you can get
3616:
How to put up a straight pole by pushing it at an angle
1038:
The first editor of this essay believes the leader was
599:
157:
puppets of one; treat them as separate and legitimate.
69:
62:
3168:
No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability
2802:
Don't make a smarmy valediction part of your signature
648:
Why Knowledge (XXG) cannot claim the Earth is not flat
446:
Draft your contribution to Knowledge (XXG) carefully.
323:
Anticipate criticisms and address them on the merits.
2914:
There's no need to guess someone's preferred pronouns
1551:
Don't demolish the house while it's still being built
232:
does not publish statements just because they're true
3358:
Knowledge (XXG) is not the place to post your résumé
3905:
3859:
2932:
2639:
2503:
2337:
2209:
1969:
1896:
1391:
1150:
925:
offers searching inside them but it seems doubtful.
148:more trustworthy. The most reliable publishers are
3877:Difference between policies, guidelines and essays
3656:Newcomers are delicious, so go ahead and bite them
1278:Not editing because of Knowledge (XXG) restriction
1848:Understanding Knowledge (XXG)'s content standards
1140:Essays on building, editing, and deleting content
122:Do not give a partial statement or identification
2001:Arguments to avoid in image deletion discussions
1946:We shouldn't be able to figure out your opinions
1698:Not every story/event/disaster needs a biography
840:, the first developer of the science of genetics
741:, a deliberate falsehood made to appear as truth
352:Before drafting for Knowledge (XXG) on your word
267:Third-party publication of work by you or others
3676:No climbing the Reichstag dressed as Spider-Man
3406:Ain't no rules says a dog can't play basketball
3083:Drafts are not checked for notability or sanity
1723:Organizing disambiguation pages by subject area
1228:Eight simple rules for editing our encyclopedia
942:. This may have been featured as a cover story.
753:, a psychological test of responses to inkblots
693:, the finding that oxygen inhibits fermentation
3974:Knowledge (XXG) essays about original research
3103:Extracting the meaning of significant coverage
2269:High-functioning autism and Asperger's editors
2036:Counting and sorting are not original research
3930:How to contribute to Knowledge (XXG) guidance
3546:Don't abbreviate "Knowledge (XXG)" as "Wiki"!
2066:Don't confuse stub status with non-notability
1348:The role of policies in collaborative anarchy
1108:
987:Something like this did happen. According to
579:has licensed it under Knowledge (XXG)'s terms
8:
3596:Seven Ages of Editor, by Will E. Spear-Shake
2360:An uncivil environment is a poor environment
2086:How to save an article proposed for deletion
1363:We are absolutely here to right great wrongs
1338:Ten Simple Rules for Editing Knowledge (XXG)
1303:POV and OR from editors, sources, and fields
642:POV and OR from editors, sources, and fields
3128:Inclusion is not an indicator of notability
1070:, vol. 313, no. 3 (September, 2015), p. 36.
908:, vol. 313, no. 3 (September, 2015), p. 52.
3856:
3843:
3821:You don't have to be mad to work here, but
3393:
3380:
3208:Notability is not relevance or reliability
3163:News coverage does not decrease notability
3073:Discriminate vs indiscriminate information
3023:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions
3000:
2987:
2206:
2193:
2016:Before commenting in a deletion discussion
1991:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions
1147:
1134:
1115:
1101:
1093:
271:Publishers who are independent of you are
3716:Please be a giant dick, so we can ban you
2006:Arguments to make in deletion discussions
1626:Identifying and using independent sources
3882:Don't cite essays as if they were policy
3043:Big events make key participants notable
2490:Knowledge (XXG) should not be a monopoly
1868:Knowledge (XXG) is not a reliable source
1606:Formatting bilateral relations templates
971:(New York: W. W. Norton, 1st ed. 2013 (
620:(essay on writing to reduce controversy)
41:Knowledge (XXG)'s policies or guidelines
3979:Knowledge (XXG) essays about neutrality
3293:Solutions are mixtures and nothing else
3198:Notability is not a level playing field
3113:How the presumption of notability works
2229:Contributing to complicated discussions
2081:How the presumption of notability works
1601:Formatting bilateral relations articles
1416:Adding images improves the encyclopedia
864:
659:
3826:You should not write meaningless lists
3123:Historical/Policy/Notability/Arguments
2430:Staying cool when the editing gets hot
2171:When in doubt, hide it in the woodwork
1996:Arguments to avoid in deletion reviews
1561:Don't hope the house will build itself
1168:All Five Pillars are equally important
717:, a physicist who found X-rays in 1895
191:7th Street Poker Players Biology Blast
3253:One sentence does not an article make
3203:Notability is not a matter of opinion
2919:You can't squeeze blood from a turnip
2832:Don't throw your toys out of the pram
2350:A weak personal attack is still wrong
2289:Obsessive–compulsive disorder editors
1921:Don't throw more litter onto the pile
1863:Knowledge (XXG) is a work in progress
1688:Minors and persons judged incompetent
1451:An unfinished house is a real problem
1436:Alternatives to the "Expand" template
1238:External criticism of Knowledge (XXG)
813:, a person who is a religious ascetic
7:
3806:What Knowledge (XXG) is not/Outtakes
3786:Things that should not be surprising
3481:Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense
2807:Don't remind others of past misdeeds
2752:Don't come down like a ton of bricks
2737:Don't call people by their real name
2485:Knowledge (XXG) is not about winning
2415:Profanity, civility, and discussions
1823:There are no shortcuts to neutrality
3681:No one cares about your garage band
3666:List of jokes about Knowledge (XXG)
3333:What is and is not routine coverage
3178:No one cares about your garage band
3098:Existence does not prove notability
2516:Assume the assumption of good faith
2445:There is no Divine Right of Editors
2299:Relationships with academic editors
2161:Why was the page I created deleted?
2156:Knowledge (XXG) is not Whack-A-Mole
1596:Featured articles may have problems
1383:Knowledge (XXG) is not RationalWiki
921:offers snippets of vanity books or
691:Pasteur's discovery of fermentation
3726:Please do not murder the newcomers
3283:Reducing consensus to an algorithm
2767:Don't drink the consensus Kool-Aid
1981:Adjectives in your recommendations
1858:What an article should not include
1748:The problem with elegant variation
1556:Don't get hung up on minor details
1373:Knowledge (XXG) is an encyclopedia
917:Perhaps someone can check whether
510:After appearing in Knowledge (XXG)
45:thoroughly vetted by the community
14:
3776:The first rule of Knowledge (XXG)
3348:Knowledge (XXG) is not Crunchbase
3048:Businesses with a single location
2329:You have a right to remain silent
1778:Restoring part of a reverted edit
1733:Potential, not just current state
1663:Ignore STRONGNAT for date formats
765:, representations of small humans
571:article is nominated for deletion
2797:Don't knit beside the guillotine
2792:Don't ignore community consensus
2026:Confusing arguments mean nothing
1080:
104:
85:
22:
16:Essay on editing Knowledge (XXG)
3298:Sources must be out-of-universe
3013:All high schools can be notable
2410:Old-fashioned Wikipedian values
2096:Identifying blatant advertising
1878:The world will not end tomorrow
1708:Not everything needs a template
1621:How to write a featured article
1223:Editors will sometimes be wrong
852:, the scientific study of genes
612:Knowledge (XXG) is not censored
242:Your word that you self-publish
3887:Avoid writing redundant essays
3536:Don't stuff beans up your nose
3411:Akin's Laws of Article Writing
3238:Obscurity ≠Lack of notability
3188:Notability cannot be purchased
3148:Masking the lack of notability
1911:Copyediting reception sections
1813:Temporary versions of articles
1743:Principle of Some Astonishment
1531:Creating controversial content
1431:Akin's Laws of Article Writing
1378:Knowledge (XXG) is a community
1:
3969:Knowledge (XXG) how-to essays
3913:About policies and guidelines
3028:Articles with a single source
2652:Knowledge (XXG):Because I can
2475:Two wrongs don't make a right
2465:The rules of polite discourse
2395:It's not the end of the world
1703:Not everything needs a navbox
1571:Don't "teach the controversy"
1243:Here to build an encyclopedia
3801:Knowledge (XXG) is an MMORPG
3496:BOLD, revert, revert, revert
3416:Alternatives to edit warring
2279:Maintaining a friendly space
825:, seeds or seed-pods of the
636:List of controversial issues
381:Drafting for Knowledge (XXG)
3781:The Five Pillars of Untruth
3571:Editing under the influence
3108:Google searches and numbers
2827:Don't template the regulars
2742:Don't call the kettle black
2536:Be excellent to one another
2420:Revert notification opt-out
2324:We are all Wikipedians here
1773:Put a little effort into it
1718:Obtain peer review comments
1673:Introduction to structurism
1611:Fruit of the poisonous tree
1581:Editors are not mindreaders
1486:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle
1476:Beef up that first revision
1248:Leave it to the experienced
1213:Don't search for objections
880:The best are those who are
630:Don't teach the controversy
3995:
3811:Why not create an account?
3746:Requirements for adminship
3621:How to vandalize correctly
3591:Five Fs of Knowledge (XXG)
3551:Don't delete the main page
3471:Avoid using preview button
3193:Notability comparison test
2777:Don't fight fire with fire
2772:Don't eat the troll's food
2732:Don't call a spade a spade
2727:Don't bludgeon the process
2576:Encourage full discussions
2425:Shadowless Fists of Death!
2061:Don't attack the nominator
2021:But there must be sources!
1843:Try not to leave it a stub
1793:Source your plot summaries
545:puppetry is against policy
523:is a no-no, so don't just
52:
3855:
3842:
3761:Sarcasm is really helpful
3701:Notability is not eternal
3626:How to win a citation war
3396:
3392:
3379:
3088:Every snowflake is unique
3008:Advanced source searching
3003:
2999:
2986:
2889:No, you can't have a pony
2837:Do not insult the vandals
2697:Don't be high-maintenance
2254:Encouraging the newcomers
2205:
2192:
1798:Specialized-style fallacy
1763:Pruning article revisions
1591:Endorsements (commercial)
1576:Editing on mobile devices
1481:Blind men and an elephant
1456:Articles have a half-life
1203:Dissent is not disloyalty
1173:Avoid vague introductions
1146:
1133:
777:, male reproductive cells
3771:The Night Before Wikimas
3636:Ignore every single rule
3611:How to get away with UPE
3491:Before they were notable
3263:Overreliance upon Google
3058:Common sourcing mistakes
2631:Settle the process first
2591:Imagine others complexly
2495:Writing for the opponent
2470:There is no common sense
2151:Unopposed AFD discussion
2136:Relisting can be abusive
2011:Avoid repeated arguments
1616:Give an article a chance
1466:Avoid mission statements
1426:Advanced text formatting
1421:Advanced article editing
1368:Knowledge (XXG) in brief
1353:The rules are principles
1313:Product, process, policy
1163:Articles must be written
938:published a study by an
93:This page in a nutshell:
3906:Policies and guidelines
3741:Requests for medication
3721:Please bite the newbies
3646:Mess with the templates
3213:Notability means impact
2747:Don't call things cruft
2722:Don't be the Fun Police
2531:Avoid the word "vandal"
2480:Knowledge (XXG) clichés
2345:A thank you never hurts
2116:Liar liar pants on fire
2051:Deletion is not cleanup
1961:Writing better articles
1951:Write the article first
1926:Gender-neutral language
1898:Writing article content
1888:Writing better articles
1883:Write the article first
1818:Tertiary-source fallacy
1586:Encourage the newcomers
1546:Dictionaries as sources
1491:Build content to endure
1040:William F. Buckley, Jr.
1023:What Einstein Got Wrong
1021:, Krauss, Lawrence M.,
999:A Brief History of Time
936:leading medical journal
900:What Einstein Got Wrong
564:policies and guidelines
479:impermissible synthesis
407:Criticism is inevitable
401:added to your watchlist
3964:Knowledge (XXG) essays
3935:Policy writing is hard
3641:Is that even an essay?
3338:What notability is not
3093:Existence ≠Notability
2702:Don't be inconsiderate
2626:Read before commenting
2611:Mind your own business
2526:Avoid personal remarks
2101:Identifying test edits
1446:A navbox on every page
1401:100K featured articles
1198:Concede lost arguments
1193:Competence is required
1124:Knowledge (XXG) essays
751:Rorschach inkblot test
618:Controversial articles
187:peer-reviewed journals
140:
3731:Pledge of Tranquility
3476:Avoid using wikilinks
3303:Subjective importance
2817:Don't spite your face
2606:Keep it down to earth
2370:Beware of the tigers!
2309:Too long; didn't read
2249:Edit at your own pace
2219:Accepting other users
1986:AfD is not a war zone
1333:There is no seniority
1273:Neutrality of sources
234:, but may if they're
138:
70:WP:CONTROVERSIALFACTS
43:, as it has not been
3897:Quote your own essay
3766:Sausages for tasting
3541:Don't-give-a-fuckism
3511:CaPiTaLiZaTiOn MuCh?
3323:Vanispamcruftisement
3223:Notability sub-pages
3033:Avoid template creep
2993:Essays on notability
2909:There are no oracles
2692:Don't be a WikiBigot
2546:Call a spade a spade
2319:Unblock perspectives
2146:The Heymann Standard
2131:Overzealous deletion
2091:I just don't like it
1828:There is no deadline
1693:"Murder of" articles
1521:Common-style fallacy
1393:Article construction
1308:Process is important
1253:Levels of competence
1178:Be a reliable source
679:Wave theory of light
358:conflict of interest
154:conflict of interest
127:No original research
63:WP:CONTROVERSIALFACT
3686:No one really cares
3601:Go ahead, vandalize
3363:Two prongs of merit
3308:Third-party sources
3228:Notabilitymandering
3183:No one really cares
3138:Inherent notability
3133:Independent sources
3018:Alternative outlets
2852:Nationalist editing
2822:Don't take the bait
2787:Don't help too much
2712:Don't be prejudiced
2682:Don't be an ostrich
2647:ALPHABETTISPAGHETTI
2380:Deletion as revenge
2355:Advice for hotheads
2176:No Encyclopedic Use
2056:Does deletion help?
1956:Writing about women
1838:The deadline is now
1833:There is a deadline
1713:Nothing is in stone
1343:Tendentious editing
1258:Levels of consensus
1068:Scientific American
905:Scientific American
896:Krauss, Lawrence M.
600:counts of page hits
3696:No sorcery threats
3576:Embrace Stop Signs
3456:Assume good wraith
3431:Anti-Wikipedianism
3268:Perennial websites
3258:Other stuff exists
2894:Passive aggression
2857:No angry mastodons
2847:Hate is disruptive
2707:Don't be obnoxious
2672:Don't be a fanatic
2450:Most ideas are bad
2390:Forgive and forget
2199:Essays on civility
1808:Run an edit-a-thon
1541:Deprecated sources
1516:Citation underkill
1501:Chesterton's fence
1471:Be neutral in form
1323:Reasonability rule
1288:Oversimplification
1263:Most ideas are bad
499:you can live with.
342:wave-form analysis
246:You could go to a
150:university presses
141:
3951:
3950:
3947:
3946:
3943:
3942:
3838:
3837:
3834:
3833:
3816:Yes legal threats
3631:Ignore all essays
3516:Complete bollocks
3441:Asshole John rule
3375:
3374:
3371:
3370:
3328:What BLP1E is not
3248:One hundred words
3218:Notability points
2982:
2981:
2978:
2977:
2782:Don't give a fuck
2657:Civil POV pushing
2621:Mutual withdrawal
2511:Assume good faith
2375:Civility warnings
2294:Please say please
2244:Editors' pronouns
2188:
2187:
2184:
2183:
2076:Follow the leader
1941:Use our own words
1906:Avoid thread mode
1753:Pro and con lists
1511:Citation overkill
1461:Autosizing images
1183:Civil POV pushing
1091:
1090:
1042:, as profiled in
1007:978-0-553-38016-3
976:978-0-393-07377-5
940:11-year-old child
703:Continental drift
667:Michael Gazzaniga
590:Relative finality
560:If disputes arise
549:assume good faith
475:original research
442:Writing the whole
393:RSS or Atom feeds
338:noise attenuation
161:Facts and context
133:
132:
99:
98:
80:
79:
3986:
3892:Finding an essay
3857:
3844:
3506:Butterfly effect
3501:Boston Tea Party
3461:Assume stupidity
3446:Assume bad faith
3436:Articlecountitis
3394:
3381:
3313:Trivial mentions
3158:Minimum coverage
3001:
2988:
2687:Don't be ashamed
2566:Discussing cruft
2556:Deny recognition
2455:Nothing is clear
2264:Expect no thanks
2207:
2194:
2126:Nothing is clear
1973:deleting content
1656:Tertiary sources
1411:Acronym overkill
1283:The one question
1148:
1135:
1128:
1117:
1110:
1103:
1094:
1084:
1083:
1077:
1071:
1055:
1049:
1036:
1030:
1016:
1010:
994:
985:
979:
961:
954:
949:
943:
932:
926:
915:
909:
891:
885:
878:
872:
869:
853:
847:
841:
835:
829:
820:
814:
808:
802:
796:
790:
784:
778:
772:
766:
760:
754:
748:
742:
736:
730:
724:
718:
712:
706:
700:
694:
688:
682:
676:
670:
664:
253:reliable sources
213:Uphold standards
108:
107:
101:
89:
88:
82:
72:
65:
26:
25:
19:
3994:
3993:
3989:
3988:
3987:
3985:
3984:
3983:
3954:
3953:
3952:
3939:
3901:
3872:Value of essays
3851:
3830:
3661:Legal vandalism
3526:Counting juntas
3426:Anti-Wikipedian
3388:
3386:Humorous essays
3367:
3343:What to include
3288:Run-of-the-mill
3278:Read the source
3243:Offline sources
3038:Bare notability
2995:
2974:
2928:
2879:No Confederates
2677:Don't be a jerk
2635:
2601:Keep it concise
2541:Beyond civility
2499:
2333:
2274:How to be civil
2239:Don't retaliate
2201:
2180:
2111:Keep it concise
2046:Delete the junk
2041:Delete or merge
2031:Content removal
1965:
1931:Myth vs fiction
1892:
1783:Robotic editing
1646:Science sources
1641:Primary sources
1631:History sources
1406:Abandoned stubs
1387:
1158:Article content
1142:
1129:
1121:
1081:
1075:
1074:
1056:
1052:
1037:
1033:
1017:
1013:
992:
989:Stephen Hawking
986:
982:
978:)), pp. 98–100.
959:
952:
950:
946:
933:
929:
916:
912:
892:
888:
879:
875:
870:
866:
861:
856:
848:
844:
836:
832:
821:
817:
809:
805:
797:
793:
785:
781:
773:
769:
761:
757:
749:
745:
737:
733:
725:
721:
713:
709:
701:
697:
689:
685:
677:
673:
665:
661:
657:
608:
592:
512:
444:
409:
395:may also work.
388:
383:
374:
372:By someone else
354:
282:
269:
244:
228:
215:
163:
117:Do not identify
105:
86:
76:
75:
68:
61:
57:
49:
48:
23:
17:
12:
11:
5:
3992:
3990:
3982:
3981:
3976:
3971:
3966:
3956:
3955:
3949:
3948:
3945:
3944:
3941:
3940:
3938:
3937:
3932:
3927:
3926:
3925:
3920:
3909:
3907:
3903:
3902:
3900:
3899:
3894:
3889:
3884:
3879:
3874:
3869:
3863:
3861:
3853:
3852:
3847:
3840:
3839:
3836:
3835:
3832:
3831:
3829:
3828:
3823:
3818:
3813:
3808:
3803:
3798:
3793:
3788:
3783:
3778:
3773:
3768:
3763:
3758:
3753:
3748:
3743:
3738:
3733:
3728:
3723:
3718:
3713:
3708:
3703:
3698:
3693:
3688:
3683:
3678:
3673:
3668:
3663:
3658:
3653:
3648:
3643:
3638:
3633:
3628:
3623:
3618:
3613:
3608:
3603:
3598:
3593:
3588:
3583:
3578:
3573:
3568:
3566:Editsummarisis
3563:
3558:
3553:
3548:
3543:
3538:
3533:
3528:
3523:
3521:Counting forks
3518:
3513:
3508:
3503:
3498:
3493:
3488:
3483:
3478:
3473:
3468:
3463:
3458:
3453:
3448:
3443:
3438:
3433:
3428:
3423:
3418:
3413:
3408:
3403:
3397:
3390:
3389:
3384:
3377:
3376:
3373:
3372:
3369:
3368:
3366:
3365:
3360:
3355:
3350:
3345:
3340:
3335:
3330:
3325:
3320:
3315:
3310:
3305:
3300:
3295:
3290:
3285:
3280:
3275:
3270:
3265:
3260:
3255:
3250:
3245:
3240:
3235:
3230:
3225:
3220:
3215:
3210:
3205:
3200:
3195:
3190:
3185:
3180:
3175:
3170:
3165:
3160:
3155:
3150:
3145:
3140:
3135:
3130:
3125:
3120:
3115:
3110:
3105:
3100:
3095:
3090:
3085:
3080:
3078:Don't cite GNG
3075:
3070:
3065:
3060:
3055:
3053:But it's true!
3050:
3045:
3040:
3035:
3030:
3025:
3020:
3015:
3010:
3004:
2997:
2996:
2991:
2984:
2983:
2980:
2979:
2976:
2975:
2973:
2972:
2967:
2962:
2957:
2952:
2950:WikiHarassment
2947:
2942:
2936:
2934:
2930:
2929:
2927:
2926:
2921:
2916:
2911:
2906:
2901:
2896:
2891:
2886:
2884:No queerphobia
2881:
2876:
2871:
2866:
2865:
2864:
2854:
2849:
2844:
2839:
2834:
2829:
2824:
2819:
2814:
2809:
2804:
2799:
2794:
2789:
2784:
2779:
2774:
2769:
2764:
2759:
2754:
2749:
2744:
2739:
2734:
2729:
2724:
2719:
2714:
2709:
2704:
2699:
2694:
2689:
2684:
2679:
2674:
2669:
2664:
2659:
2654:
2649:
2643:
2641:
2637:
2636:
2634:
2633:
2628:
2623:
2618:
2613:
2608:
2603:
2598:
2593:
2588:
2583:
2578:
2573:
2568:
2563:
2558:
2553:
2548:
2543:
2538:
2533:
2528:
2523:
2521:Assume no clue
2518:
2513:
2507:
2505:
2501:
2500:
2498:
2497:
2492:
2487:
2482:
2477:
2472:
2467:
2462:
2457:
2452:
2447:
2442:
2437:
2432:
2427:
2422:
2417:
2412:
2407:
2402:
2397:
2392:
2387:
2382:
2377:
2372:
2367:
2362:
2357:
2352:
2347:
2341:
2339:
2335:
2334:
2332:
2331:
2326:
2321:
2316:
2311:
2306:
2301:
2296:
2291:
2286:
2281:
2276:
2271:
2266:
2261:
2259:Enjoy yourself
2256:
2251:
2246:
2241:
2236:
2231:
2226:
2221:
2215:
2213:
2203:
2202:
2197:
2190:
2189:
2186:
2185:
2182:
2181:
2179:
2178:
2173:
2168:
2163:
2158:
2153:
2148:
2143:
2138:
2133:
2128:
2123:
2118:
2113:
2108:
2103:
2098:
2093:
2088:
2083:
2078:
2073:
2068:
2063:
2058:
2053:
2048:
2043:
2038:
2033:
2028:
2023:
2018:
2013:
2008:
2003:
1998:
1993:
1988:
1983:
1977:
1975:
1972:
1967:
1966:
1964:
1963:
1958:
1953:
1948:
1943:
1938:
1933:
1928:
1923:
1918:
1913:
1908:
1902:
1900:
1894:
1893:
1891:
1890:
1885:
1880:
1875:
1870:
1865:
1860:
1855:
1850:
1845:
1840:
1835:
1830:
1825:
1820:
1815:
1810:
1805:
1800:
1795:
1790:
1788:Sham consensus
1785:
1780:
1775:
1770:
1765:
1760:
1755:
1750:
1745:
1740:
1735:
1730:
1725:
1720:
1715:
1710:
1705:
1700:
1695:
1690:
1685:
1680:
1675:
1670:
1665:
1660:
1659:
1658:
1653:
1648:
1643:
1638:
1633:
1623:
1618:
1613:
1608:
1603:
1598:
1593:
1588:
1583:
1578:
1573:
1568:
1563:
1558:
1553:
1548:
1543:
1538:
1533:
1528:
1523:
1518:
1513:
1508:
1503:
1498:
1493:
1488:
1483:
1478:
1473:
1468:
1463:
1458:
1453:
1448:
1443:
1438:
1433:
1428:
1423:
1418:
1413:
1408:
1403:
1397:
1395:
1389:
1388:
1386:
1385:
1380:
1375:
1370:
1365:
1360:
1355:
1350:
1345:
1340:
1335:
1330:
1325:
1320:
1315:
1310:
1305:
1300:
1295:
1290:
1285:
1280:
1275:
1270:
1265:
1260:
1255:
1250:
1245:
1240:
1235:
1233:Explanationism
1230:
1225:
1220:
1215:
1210:
1205:
1200:
1195:
1190:
1185:
1180:
1175:
1170:
1165:
1160:
1154:
1152:
1144:
1143:
1138:
1131:
1130:
1122:
1120:
1119:
1112:
1105:
1097:
1089:
1088:
1085:
1073:
1072:
1064:Why He Matters
1050:
1045:The New Yorker
1031:
1011:
980:
965:de Waal, Frans
944:
927:
910:
886:
873:
863:
862:
860:
857:
855:
854:
842:
830:
815:
803:
791:
779:
767:
755:
743:
731:
719:
707:
695:
683:
671:
658:
656:
653:
652:
651:
645:
639:
633:
627:
621:
615:
607:
604:
591:
588:
511:
508:
507:
506:
503:
500:
496:
492:
489:
485:
482:
471:
468:
456:
443:
440:
408:
405:
387:
386:Before posting
384:
382:
379:
373:
370:
353:
350:
301:
300:
297:
294:
281:
278:
268:
265:
243:
240:
227:
224:
214:
211:
183:
182:
177:on the planet
171:
162:
159:
131:
130:
125:
120:
115:
109:
97:
96:
90:
78:
77:
74:
73:
66:
58:
53:
50:
38:
37:
29:
27:
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
3991:
3980:
3977:
3975:
3972:
3970:
3967:
3965:
3962:
3961:
3959:
3936:
3933:
3931:
3928:
3924:
3921:
3919:
3916:
3915:
3914:
3911:
3910:
3908:
3904:
3898:
3895:
3893:
3890:
3888:
3885:
3883:
3880:
3878:
3875:
3873:
3870:
3868:
3865:
3864:
3862:
3858:
3854:
3850:
3845:
3841:
3827:
3824:
3822:
3819:
3817:
3814:
3812:
3809:
3807:
3804:
3802:
3799:
3797:
3796:Watchlistitis
3794:
3792:
3791:The WikiBible
3789:
3787:
3784:
3782:
3779:
3777:
3774:
3772:
3769:
3767:
3764:
3762:
3759:
3757:
3754:
3752:
3749:
3747:
3744:
3742:
3739:
3737:
3736:R-e-s-p-e-c-t
3734:
3732:
3729:
3727:
3724:
3722:
3719:
3717:
3714:
3712:
3711:Play the game
3709:
3707:
3704:
3702:
3699:
3697:
3694:
3692:
3689:
3687:
3684:
3682:
3679:
3677:
3674:
3672:
3669:
3667:
3664:
3662:
3659:
3657:
3654:
3652:
3651:My local pond
3649:
3647:
3644:
3642:
3639:
3637:
3634:
3632:
3629:
3627:
3624:
3622:
3619:
3617:
3614:
3612:
3609:
3607:
3604:
3602:
3599:
3597:
3594:
3592:
3589:
3587:
3584:
3582:
3579:
3577:
3574:
3572:
3569:
3567:
3564:
3562:
3561:Edits Per Day
3559:
3557:
3556:Editcountitis
3554:
3552:
3549:
3547:
3544:
3542:
3539:
3537:
3534:
3532:
3529:
3527:
3524:
3522:
3519:
3517:
3514:
3512:
3509:
3507:
3504:
3502:
3499:
3497:
3494:
3492:
3489:
3487:
3484:
3482:
3479:
3477:
3474:
3472:
3469:
3467:
3464:
3462:
3459:
3457:
3454:
3452:
3449:
3447:
3444:
3442:
3439:
3437:
3434:
3432:
3429:
3427:
3424:
3422:
3419:
3417:
3414:
3412:
3409:
3407:
3404:
3402:
3399:
3398:
3395:
3391:
3387:
3382:
3378:
3364:
3361:
3359:
3356:
3354:
3351:
3349:
3346:
3344:
3341:
3339:
3336:
3334:
3331:
3329:
3326:
3324:
3321:
3319:
3316:
3314:
3311:
3309:
3306:
3304:
3301:
3299:
3296:
3294:
3291:
3289:
3286:
3284:
3281:
3279:
3276:
3274:
3271:
3269:
3266:
3264:
3261:
3259:
3256:
3254:
3251:
3249:
3246:
3244:
3241:
3239:
3236:
3234:
3231:
3229:
3226:
3224:
3221:
3219:
3216:
3214:
3211:
3209:
3206:
3204:
3201:
3199:
3196:
3194:
3191:
3189:
3186:
3184:
3181:
3179:
3176:
3174:
3171:
3169:
3166:
3164:
3161:
3159:
3156:
3154:
3151:
3149:
3146:
3144:
3143:Insignificant
3141:
3139:
3136:
3134:
3131:
3129:
3126:
3124:
3121:
3119:
3116:
3114:
3111:
3109:
3106:
3104:
3101:
3099:
3096:
3094:
3091:
3089:
3086:
3084:
3081:
3079:
3076:
3074:
3071:
3069:
3066:
3064:
3061:
3059:
3056:
3054:
3051:
3049:
3046:
3044:
3041:
3039:
3036:
3034:
3031:
3029:
3026:
3024:
3021:
3019:
3016:
3014:
3011:
3009:
3006:
3005:
3002:
2998:
2994:
2989:
2985:
2971:
2968:
2966:
2963:
2961:
2960:WikiLawyering
2958:
2956:
2953:
2951:
2948:
2946:
2943:
2941:
2938:
2937:
2935:
2933:WikiRelations
2931:
2925:
2922:
2920:
2917:
2915:
2912:
2910:
2907:
2905:
2902:
2900:
2897:
2895:
2892:
2890:
2887:
2885:
2882:
2880:
2877:
2875:
2872:
2870:
2867:
2863:
2860:
2859:
2858:
2855:
2853:
2850:
2848:
2845:
2843:
2840:
2838:
2835:
2833:
2830:
2828:
2825:
2823:
2820:
2818:
2815:
2813:
2810:
2808:
2805:
2803:
2800:
2798:
2795:
2793:
2790:
2788:
2785:
2783:
2780:
2778:
2775:
2773:
2770:
2768:
2765:
2763:
2760:
2758:
2757:Don't cry COI
2755:
2753:
2750:
2748:
2745:
2743:
2740:
2738:
2735:
2733:
2730:
2728:
2725:
2723:
2720:
2718:
2717:Don't be rude
2715:
2713:
2710:
2708:
2705:
2703:
2700:
2698:
2695:
2693:
2690:
2688:
2685:
2683:
2680:
2678:
2675:
2673:
2670:
2668:
2665:
2663:
2662:Cyberbullying
2660:
2658:
2655:
2653:
2650:
2648:
2645:
2644:
2642:
2638:
2632:
2629:
2627:
2624:
2622:
2619:
2617:
2614:
2612:
2609:
2607:
2604:
2602:
2599:
2597:
2594:
2592:
2589:
2587:
2584:
2582:
2579:
2577:
2574:
2572:
2569:
2567:
2564:
2562:
2559:
2557:
2554:
2552:
2549:
2547:
2544:
2542:
2539:
2537:
2534:
2532:
2529:
2527:
2524:
2522:
2519:
2517:
2514:
2512:
2509:
2508:
2506:
2502:
2496:
2493:
2491:
2488:
2486:
2483:
2481:
2478:
2476:
2473:
2471:
2468:
2466:
2463:
2461:
2458:
2456:
2453:
2451:
2448:
2446:
2443:
2441:
2440:The last word
2438:
2436:
2435:The grey zone
2433:
2431:
2428:
2426:
2423:
2421:
2418:
2416:
2413:
2411:
2408:
2406:
2403:
2401:
2398:
2396:
2393:
2391:
2388:
2386:
2383:
2381:
2378:
2376:
2373:
2371:
2368:
2366:
2363:
2361:
2358:
2356:
2353:
2351:
2348:
2346:
2343:
2342:
2340:
2336:
2330:
2327:
2325:
2322:
2320:
2317:
2315:
2312:
2310:
2307:
2305:
2302:
2300:
2297:
2295:
2292:
2290:
2287:
2285:
2282:
2280:
2277:
2275:
2272:
2270:
2267:
2265:
2262:
2260:
2257:
2255:
2252:
2250:
2247:
2245:
2242:
2240:
2237:
2235:
2232:
2230:
2227:
2225:
2222:
2220:
2217:
2216:
2214:
2212:
2208:
2204:
2200:
2195:
2191:
2177:
2174:
2172:
2169:
2167:
2164:
2162:
2159:
2157:
2154:
2152:
2149:
2147:
2144:
2142:
2139:
2137:
2134:
2132:
2129:
2127:
2124:
2122:
2119:
2117:
2114:
2112:
2109:
2107:
2104:
2102:
2099:
2097:
2094:
2092:
2089:
2087:
2084:
2082:
2079:
2077:
2074:
2072:
2069:
2067:
2064:
2062:
2059:
2057:
2054:
2052:
2049:
2047:
2044:
2042:
2039:
2037:
2034:
2032:
2029:
2027:
2024:
2022:
2019:
2017:
2014:
2012:
2009:
2007:
2004:
2002:
1999:
1997:
1994:
1992:
1989:
1987:
1984:
1982:
1979:
1978:
1976:
1974:
1968:
1962:
1959:
1957:
1954:
1952:
1949:
1947:
1944:
1942:
1939:
1937:
1934:
1932:
1929:
1927:
1924:
1922:
1919:
1917:
1914:
1912:
1909:
1907:
1904:
1903:
1901:
1899:
1895:
1889:
1886:
1884:
1881:
1879:
1876:
1874:
1871:
1869:
1866:
1864:
1861:
1859:
1856:
1854:
1853:Walled garden
1851:
1849:
1846:
1844:
1841:
1839:
1836:
1834:
1831:
1829:
1826:
1824:
1821:
1819:
1816:
1814:
1811:
1809:
1806:
1804:
1801:
1799:
1796:
1794:
1791:
1789:
1786:
1784:
1781:
1779:
1776:
1774:
1771:
1769:
1766:
1764:
1761:
1759:
1756:
1754:
1751:
1749:
1746:
1744:
1741:
1739:
1736:
1734:
1731:
1729:
1726:
1724:
1721:
1719:
1716:
1714:
1711:
1709:
1706:
1704:
1701:
1699:
1696:
1694:
1691:
1689:
1686:
1684:
1681:
1679:
1678:Mine a source
1676:
1674:
1671:
1669:
1666:
1664:
1661:
1657:
1654:
1652:
1649:
1647:
1644:
1642:
1639:
1637:
1634:
1632:
1629:
1628:
1627:
1624:
1622:
1619:
1617:
1614:
1612:
1609:
1607:
1604:
1602:
1599:
1597:
1594:
1592:
1589:
1587:
1584:
1582:
1579:
1577:
1574:
1572:
1569:
1567:
1564:
1562:
1559:
1557:
1554:
1552:
1549:
1547:
1544:
1542:
1539:
1537:
1534:
1532:
1529:
1527:
1526:Concept cloud
1524:
1522:
1519:
1517:
1514:
1512:
1509:
1507:
1504:
1502:
1499:
1497:
1496:Cherrypicking
1494:
1492:
1489:
1487:
1484:
1482:
1479:
1477:
1474:
1472:
1469:
1467:
1464:
1462:
1459:
1457:
1454:
1452:
1449:
1447:
1444:
1442:
1439:
1437:
1434:
1432:
1429:
1427:
1424:
1422:
1419:
1417:
1414:
1412:
1409:
1407:
1404:
1402:
1399:
1398:
1396:
1394:
1390:
1384:
1381:
1379:
1376:
1374:
1371:
1369:
1366:
1364:
1361:
1359:
1356:
1354:
1351:
1349:
1346:
1344:
1341:
1339:
1336:
1334:
1331:
1329:
1328:Systemic bias
1326:
1324:
1321:
1319:
1316:
1314:
1311:
1309:
1306:
1304:
1301:
1299:
1296:
1294:
1291:
1289:
1286:
1284:
1281:
1279:
1276:
1274:
1271:
1269:
1266:
1264:
1261:
1259:
1256:
1254:
1251:
1249:
1246:
1244:
1241:
1239:
1236:
1234:
1231:
1229:
1226:
1224:
1221:
1219:
1216:
1214:
1211:
1209:
1206:
1204:
1201:
1199:
1196:
1194:
1191:
1189:
1186:
1184:
1181:
1179:
1176:
1174:
1171:
1169:
1166:
1164:
1161:
1159:
1156:
1155:
1153:
1149:
1145:
1141:
1136:
1132:
1125:
1118:
1113:
1111:
1106:
1104:
1099:
1098:
1095:
1086:
1079:
1078:
1069:
1065:
1061:
1060:Greene, Brian
1054:
1051:
1047:
1046:
1041:
1035:
1032:
1028:
1024:
1020:
1015:
1012:
1008:
1005:
1001:
1000:
990:
984:
981:
977:
974:
970:
966:
957:
948:
945:
941:
937:
931:
928:
924:
920:
914:
911:
907:
906:
901:
897:
890:
887:
883:
877:
874:
868:
865:
858:
851:
846:
843:
839:
838:Gregor Mendel
834:
831:
828:
827:Pisum sativum
824:
819:
816:
812:
807:
804:
800:
795:
792:
788:
783:
780:
776:
771:
768:
764:
759:
756:
752:
747:
744:
740:
735:
732:
728:
723:
720:
716:
711:
708:
704:
699:
696:
692:
687:
684:
680:
675:
672:
668:
663:
660:
654:
649:
646:
643:
640:
637:
634:
631:
628:
625:
622:
619:
616:
613:
610:
609:
605:
603:
601:
596:
589:
587:
583:
580:
574:
572:
567:
565:
561:
557:
553:
550:
546:
540:
537:
534:
530:
526:
522:
518:
509:
504:
501:
497:
493:
490:
486:
483:
480:
476:
472:
469:
466:
462:
457:
454:
449:
448:
447:
441:
439:
436:
432:
430:
424:
420:
416:
412:
406:
404:
402:
396:
394:
385:
380:
378:
371:
369:
365:
361:
359:
351:
349:
347:
346:triangulation
343:
339:
333:
329:
326:
325:On the merits
321:
319:
314:
309:
305:
298:
295:
291:
290:
289:
286:
279:
277:
274:
266:
264:
260:
256:
254:
249:
241:
239:
237:
233:
225:
223:
219:
212:
210:
206:
204:
200:
194:
192:
188:
180:
176:
172:
168:
167:
166:
160:
158:
155:
151:
145:
137:
129:is permitted.
128:
123:
118:
113:
110:
103:
102:
94:
91:
84:
83:
71:
67:
64:
60:
59:
56:
51:
46:
42:
36:
34:
28:
21:
20:
3860:About essays
3849:About essays
3756:Rouge editor
3706:Oops Defense
3486:Barnstaritis
3451:Assume faith
3273:Pokémon test
3118:High Schools
2940:WikiBullying
2904:Superhatting
2899:POV railroad
2596:Just drop it
2400:Nobody cares
2234:Divisiveness
1758:Printability
1651:Style guides
1530:
1441:Amnesia test
1298:Paraphrasing
1067:
1063:
1053:
1048:decades ago.
1043:
1034:
1029:, pp. 53–55.
1026:
1022:
1018:
1014:
997:
983:
968:
955:
947:
930:
919:Google Books
913:
903:
899:
889:
876:
867:
845:
833:
826:
818:
806:
794:
782:
770:
758:
746:
734:
722:
710:
698:
686:
674:
662:
597:
593:
586:than later.
584:
575:
568:
558:
554:
541:
538:
513:
465:talk subpage
445:
437:
433:
425:
421:
417:
413:
410:
397:
389:
375:
366:
362:
355:
345:
341:
337:
334:
330:
324:
322:
310:
306:
302:
287:
283:
272:
270:
261:
257:
248:vanity press
245:
229:
220:
216:
207:
202:
195:
190:
184:
164:
146:
142:
126:
121:
116:
112:Do not state
111:
92:
30:
3867:Essay guide
3751:Rouge admin
3318:Video links
3173:No big loss
2862:just madmen
2812:Don't shout
2586:How to lose
2581:Get over it
2365:Be the glue
2284:Negotiation
2141:Relist bias
1971:Removing or
1803:Stub Makers
1636:Law sources
1566:Don't panic
31:This is an
3958:Categories
3923:Guidelines
3691:No, really
3671:LTTAUTMAOK
3153:Make stubs
2874:No racists
2616:Say "MOBY"
2338:Philosophy
2211:The basics
1768:Publicists
1738:Presentism
1683:Merge Test
1668:Inaccuracy
1151:Philosophy
859:References
273:ipso facto
236:verifiable
226:Publishing
3401:Adminitis
2970:WikiPeace
2945:WikiCrime
2924:UPPERCASE
2304:Thank you
1936:Proseline
1728:Permastub
1293:Paradoxes
1208:Don't lie
763:Homunculi
624:Criticism
533:consensus
529:next step
313:"blunder"
175:gold bars
55:Shortcuts
3918:Policies
3068:Coatrack
2965:WikiLove
2955:WikiHate
2869:No Nazis
2842:Griefing
2106:Immunity
1358:Trifecta
1188:Cohesion
1027:op. cit.
850:Genetics
799:Moravian
614:(policy)
606:See also
569:If your
521:edit war
3581:Emerson
3421:ANI flu
2385:Failure
2224:Apology
2121:Nothing
1318:Purpose
882:notable
715:Röntgen
429:neutral
318:Galileo
209:field.
179:Jupiter
3063:Clones
2640:Don'ts
2561:Desist
2551:Candor
2460:Reader
923:Amazon
787:Traits
727:X-rays
525:revert
495:draft.
461:jargon
453:Mozart
344:, and
280:By you
199:fringe
2314:Truce
1066:, in
902:, in
775:Sperm
655:Notes
170:plan.
33:essay
3586:Fart
3531:Crap
1916:Coup
1268:Need
1019:E.g.
1004:ISBN
973:ISBN
958:....
934:One
823:Peas
811:Monk
739:Hoax
203:i.e.
2504:Dos
1127:(?)
517:own
488:up.
477:or
3960::
1062:,
1025:,
993:"n
991:,
967:,
898:,
602:.
340:,
1116:e
1109:t
1102:v
960:'
953:'
481:.
35:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
