Kraftlos' Top Twelve Wikipedia Pet Peeves
- Editors who continue arguing in a policy-related discussion without reading the links to relevant policy that are brought up by other editors. Yes, you actually have to read all that stuff.
- Biting the newcomer.
- When confronted with a policy that goes against an editor's particular agenda, making some statement that the policy or guideline should be changed to allow them to do what they think should be done (or that their's is a case of Ignore All Rules).
- FANCRUFT
- In a deletion discussion or split/merge discussion, attempting to justify keeping the page as it is by virtue of other crap existing. We follow policy, not the lowest common denominator.
- Vandalism
- Editors with a chip on their shoulder who game the system to support their particular bias.
- Not assuming good faith.
- Suggesting that someone — anyone — use a search engine. Even a complete idiot knows this, any editor that suggests this is just making some petty attempt to make themselves appear intelligent, educated, etc. Example: "Well if you just did a google search..."
- Editors who refuse to admit when they're wrong; that never concede anything. It's impossible for someone never to be wrong! It's just arrogance to pretend otherwise.
- Trolls who stir up debates on controversial subjects before reading any of the previous conversations on the same subject; forcing everyone to repeat the same arguments again, and again.
- Editors who intentionally ignore part or all of a statement or question directly addressed to them in order to focus on what they want to say. Make your point, then discuss and debate; don't go repeating the same line over and over unless you've actually been ignored.