Wikipedia talk:Beef up that first revision

Criticism of NPP?

Is this essay (or its authors) dismissive of WP:NPP? The essay states that the first version should not be a mess (per WP:REALPROBLEM) but it doesn't have to be complete (per WP:NODEADLINE). Mentions of AfD in this essay seem to indicate the social friction encountered. This illustrates how (as the examples show) future FAs can be born of really insufficient first versions. If NPP is sorting articles on how they are right now, does this essay then contend that NPP shouldn't result in AfD or CSD or PROD quite so often? This essay has an eventualist mindset that seem to intone such. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:28, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

This is one of the greatest essays on Wikipedia

Very good, actionable advice here. If you don't have time to get an article in presentable shape before saving that first revision, it's best to save it in your Gmail or something (not in the Draft: or User: namespaces, because then people might think you're spamming, and list your article at MfD).

Gotta stay on a war footing at all times, because deletionist attack can and will tend to eventually (or even quickly) happen whenever you let your guard down. Wishful thinking didn't work for the French, with the Maginot Line, and it won't work for us. CSD are interpreted more liberally (i.e. more in the deletionists' favor) now than ever before, and admins tend to shoot first and ask questions later. Don't go a bridge too far if you don't have to. Keep your boundaries defensible, and advance only when a more forward position will have adequate cover. This is the Army, not the Marines; the goal is not just to invade but to occupy long-term. St. claires fire (talk) 15:16, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Missing example

The example given of ANAK Society, has since been deleted. (See: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ANAK Society).

Is there a comparable replacement example? Thanks. --Mbrickn (talk) 10:42, 8 February 2022 (UTC)