Talk:2016 in the State of Palestine
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Contested deletion[edit]
This article is part of a yearly series, and is certain to fill up as the year progresses. Pointless to delete it, only to have to re-create it later. This nomination is a waste of everybody's time. --NSH001 (talk) 14:53, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
Incidentally, the nominator also failed to place a notice on my talk page. --NSH001 (talk) 14:56, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- There's no obligation to notify you and we don't create pages in expectation of plausible future relevance (WP:CRYSTAL). Curro2 (talk) 15:04, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, but it's still good manners to do so. Not a good idea to sneakily do something behind somebody's back that they should know about, without telling them. Very bad form, indeed. Any why waste everybody's time in pointless work, when the page is certain to fill up? Please also note that WP:CRYSTAL doesn't apply here, since the article is part of a routine series, and is certain to fill up in the near future; there is no speculation or uncertainty involved. --NSH001 (talk) 16:18, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- If I find you've posted other empty articles I'll have them speedied and I'm not going to spend time notifying you. You didn't put work into this - that's the whole point. Curro2 (talk) 21:52, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- No. Firstly the article isn't empty, and secondly, I put work into creating this (when I didn't need to) in order to neatly complete a task I was working on. And as an additional benefit of my work, it saves someone else time when it comes time to add to this article. I have actually saved other editors' time. You, by contrast, are just wasting everyone's time. That's the whole point. And thanks for confirming you're going to continue to be discourteous in future. --NSH001 (talk) 22:08, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- You've contributed nothing. If you don't understand how Wikipedia works, you're welcome to take a look at 1999 in the Palestinian territories. You are more than welcome to add actual content to the 2016 page, which would justify its existence. Thus far you've elected not to add content, which speaks volumes about the worthiness of this page at this point in time. Curro2 (talk) 09:27, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
- No, if you look at my contribution record, you'll see that I contribute a great deal. You wasted a huge amount of my time by posting an incorrect speedy deletion tag on the article (now correctly removed by an experienced editor). No events have been added in a few days, so what? There's no hurry. You might have a point if no events had been added by the year-end, but that is not going to happen, given what is happening in Palestine at the moment. It so happens that I'm busy researching other articles, i.e., actual productive work, in contrast to the time-wasting you're engaging in. I would rather wait until I've finished my other work, when I will then have time to do the job properly. Most likely, some other editors will come along and add content anyway.
- You've contributed nothing. If you don't understand how Wikipedia works, you're welcome to take a look at 1999 in the Palestinian territories. You are more than welcome to add actual content to the 2016 page, which would justify its existence. Thus far you've elected not to add content, which speaks volumes about the worthiness of this page at this point in time. Curro2 (talk) 09:27, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
- No. Firstly the article isn't empty, and secondly, I put work into creating this (when I didn't need to) in order to neatly complete a task I was working on. And as an additional benefit of my work, it saves someone else time when it comes time to add to this article. I have actually saved other editors' time. You, by contrast, are just wasting everyone's time. That's the whole point. And thanks for confirming you're going to continue to be discourteous in future. --NSH001 (talk) 22:08, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- If I find you've posted other empty articles I'll have them speedied and I'm not going to spend time notifying you. You didn't put work into this - that's the whole point. Curro2 (talk) 21:52, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, but it's still good manners to do so. Not a good idea to sneakily do something behind somebody's back that they should know about, without telling them. Very bad form, indeed. Any why waste everybody's time in pointless work, when the page is certain to fill up? Please also note that WP:CRYSTAL doesn't apply here, since the article is part of a routine series, and is certain to fill up in the near future; there is no speculation or uncertainty involved. --NSH001 (talk) 16:18, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
-
- It is also quite wrong to create an unnecessary self-redirect in the target list page, as you continue to do in your edit-warring. Please self-revert in order to fix that error. I'll leave others to judge which of us has the better understanding of Wikipedia. --NSH001 (talk) 09:59, 14 January 2016 (UTC)