When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.
It is not, has never been, nor will ever be, a Wikipedia policy or guideline. Rather, it illustrates standards or conduct that are generally not accepted by the Wikipedia community. Some discussions are born lame; some achieve lameness; some have lameness thrust upon them. Upon coming across a discussion that is borderline lame, some Wikipedians may be tempted to go do something useful.
This is a big mistake. Left to its own devices, the discussion might inadvertently become useful. What's the fun in that?
It is essential that as many editors as possible chime in, not adding to the discussion at hand, but merely commenting how lame it is and what a big waste of time it is. See Self-fulfilling prophecyPositive feedbackand Exponential growth.
Merely stating the discussion is lame is frequently not sufficient; every opposing statement must be denied with increasingly vehement assertions of the lameness. While at first blush, wasting time whining about what a waste of time something is may seem illogical, the inherent irony just magnifies the lameness.
An additional step to increase lameness is to include repeated links to this essay, which is WP: The best way to set about a lame edit war is to change a large number of articles based on your interpretation of minutiae in the manual of style.
If this does not work, try changing the MOS itself; that always works.
Guidelines on how to add an entry to this guide If you want to add a "lame edit war" to this page, keep the following in mind: It must have been an actual edit war. Discussions on talk pages, even over trivially lame details, are not "edit wars" and should NEVER be added: Note that pithy quotes on talk pages may be suitable for Wikipedia: It should truly be amongst the lamest edit wars.
Not just garden-variety lame. Unless a participant is banned for their part in the edit war, do not give the names of participants or link to their userpages.
People have lapses in judgment, and some end up edit warring; they shouldn't, however, be stuck with that for the rest of their on-wiki careers for no reason. This is absolutely not the place for harping over someone's past editing.
Be careful to avoid even the semblance of taking sides in the war. If one version was more or less accepted afterwards, it's OK to note that, but the fact that an edit war occurred means that neither side was "in the right all along".This page contains material that is kept because it is considered humorous.
Please do not take it too seriously.
At ProofreadingPal, we use a two-proofreader model so that every document is proofread and edited by two of our professional proofreaders. We proofread for .
Lifting the Veil An Investigative History of the United States Pathocracy. Researched and Written by Timothy M. Silver “I know the capacity that is there to make tyranny total in America. PaperTrue offers great pricing with no hidden fees, they always deliver on time and I love the fact that they provide a clean version and a corrected version showing the recommend changes.
I highly . FLORIDA SAR Governing Documents. The following text below is the Table of Contents for each of the 2 volumes comprising the Florida Society's Governing Documents. The Online Writing Lab (OWL) at Purdue University houses writing resources and instructional material, and we provide these as a free service of the Writing Lab at Purdue.