Wikipedia talk:No-no

Essays Low‑impact

	This page is within the scope of WikiProject Wikipedia essays, a collaborative effort to organise and monitor the impact of Wikipedia essays. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion. For a listing of essays see the essay directory.EssaysWikipedia:WikiProject EssaysTemplate:WikiProject EssaysWikiProject Wikipedia essays pages
Low	This page has been rated as Low-impact on the project's impact scale.
	The above rating was automatically assessed using data on pageviews, watchers, and incoming links.

My edits[edit]

I defined words that were commonly not used, wikified portions of the text, and in an attempt to help the flow of the article, moved some of the less persuasive arguments by making them references, this includes the style sheets/bot example, which is not very widely known to most wikipedians. A better example is needed. travb (talk) 03:50, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Contradiction[edit]

It occurs to me that this essay has something of an inherent contradiction. The essay basically states that essays are not binding, and that one should speak for oneself. Thus, in any discussion, linking to this essay is a violation of the essay's own principles. And this essay should not be linked-to, what's the point of having it? (I can actually see some reasons for the essay to exist: Irony. Independent reading (i.e., I got here from a "See also" link, not a discussion). But still, the self-defeating nature of this essay seemed worth remarking upon. (Keep in mind that I'm not saying the essay is bogus/should be deleted/etc. This has some value; it's just tricky.) Cheers! —DragonHawk (talk|hist) 03:58, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but I think you can cite it with your reasoning: You could say Be careful in citing an essay as if it were Wikipedia policy. The No-no essay explains this idea further. I think calling it an essay is a key point.Ccrrccrr (talk) 03:05, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]