When.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Wikipedia : When to use or avoid "other stuff exists" arguments

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:When_to_use_or...

    The claim of "other stuff exists" most often arises in article deletion debate, where it is often used in the following manner. Examples: Keep There's an article on x, and this is just as famous as that. –LetsKeepIt! 04:04, 4 April 2004 (UTC) Delete We do not have an article on y, so we should not have an article on this. –GetRidOfIt! 04:04 ...

  3. Wikipedia : Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arguments_to...

    This page details arguments that are commonly seen in deletion discussions that have been identified as generally unsound and unconvincing. These are arguments that should generally be avoided – or at the least supplemented with a better-grounded rationale for the position taken, whether that be "keep", "delete" or some other objective.

  4. Wikipedia talk:When to use or avoid "other stuff exists ...

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:When_to_use...

    The new title is "When to use or avoid 'other stuff exists' arguments". If the answer to "when to use" was "never", that would be a strange title to use to make things clearer - surely something like "Avoid 'other stuff exists' arguments" would have been far better. That conversation only closed on May 6 - less than two weeks ago.

  5. Wikipedia:List of really, really, really stupid article ideas ...

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_really...

    A favourite line from a movie or catchy lyric, a potent phrase used in argument, juicy facts of interest to fans, a punch-line or zinger; these are all very interesting, but usually all that can be informatively written about topic "X" is: "X is a _____ found in _____." Just about everything listed on Wikipedia:Millionth topic pool.

  6. Why is there anything at all? - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_is_there_anything_at_all?

    Philosopher Brian Leftow has argued that the question cannot have a causal explanation (as any cause must itself have a cause) or a contingent explanation (as the factors giving the contingency must pre-exist), and that if there is an answer, it must be something that exists necessarily (i.e., something that just exists, rather than is caused ...

  7. List of fallacies - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

    The person making the argument expects that the listener will accept the provided definition, making the argument difficult to refute. [19] Divine fallacy (argument from incredulity) – arguing that, because something is so phenomenal or amazing, it must be the result of superior, divine, alien or paranormal agency. [20]

  8. Wikipedia : Existence does not prove notability

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Existence_does...

    Your bouncing bundle of joy on the way does not qualify to have an article simply because they will exist. Leprechauns and fairies do not qualify to have an article simply because people think they exist – but their place in the world's culture makes them notable. If any of those have articles, then there are other reasons why they are notable.

  9. Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1060 - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/.../Questions/Archive_1060

    Paul - other stuff exists is not a valid argument (it often leads to the examples raised being deleted!). Each article has to stand on its own merits. Older articles especially were created under at-that-time lower standards. David notMD 11:31, 11 May 2020 (UTC) I have cleaned up MysteryVibe.