This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hi, I close a lot of AFDs and I have noticed that you have recently started to contribute to these. I thought I should point you in the direction of our guide to arguments to avoid in deletion discussions because it seems to me that many of your votes are assertions (statements of fact without evidence) and/or just opinions without a policy reason. I'd suggest also that you looked closely at WP:RS & WP:GNG because it seems to me that you may not understand the policy we judge sources against. It's great to get new voices in AFD, we really need them, but to give your voice more weight when the AFDs are closed it would be really helpful for you to.explain why you think sourcing is good enough and base your arguments on policy. Wikipedia works on the basis of a roughconsensus and is not a vote so strength of argument counts. Happy to field any questions or concerns you have after reading this. SpartazHumbug! 07:53, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi Spartaz. I appreciate the note. To some extent, I am going to plead the 5th here, as I particularly want to avoid getting into what could be endless arguments on the nature of my comments and my understanding of the policies with other contributors who may read this - and I don't mean you or the admin community by that last comment. I will make every effort to support my arguments with a bit more evidence going forward, however.--Concertmusic (talk) 13:30, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
Not sticking you in front of any judges, just trying to point you towards some resources to help ensure that your volunteer time is effectively used. :-) There is a graphic on my talk page that describes the different levels or argument. Anything that is above assertion will add value to a discussion. I'm happy to field any questions if you have any. Best SpartazHumbug! 18:06, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
