Talk:Leader (spark)

This article was nominated for deletion on 8 May 2019. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Physics Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Plenty - I suspect this Scholar search [1] contains everything necessary on its first two pages. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 16:00, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Since there is an archived deletion discussion stating that there are indeed sources for this article, it seems superfluous to permanently disfigure it with a large virtual sticky note that is only of hypothetical value to hypothetical editors. If it gets nominated for AfD again, then than nomination can be quickly closed. We don't permanently tag every article that survives an AfD with a sticky note, else the encyclopedia would be nothing but headline banners. --Wtshymanski (talk) 22:18, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Heads up, Wtshymanski: the point of maintenance tags is to alert editors to tasks that have to be done to get an article to an acceptable status. If that AfD had not happened, the tag that would be here is {{More citations needed}}. As it is, the current tag records an indisputable problem with the article, and gives instructions how to implement it. You do NOT get to remove this just for shits and giggles. I have little patience with editors who obstruct article improvement by being uninformed ("But I've never seen this tag before!"), believe that our main target is to have badly-sourced but pretty articles ("But it mars the article!"), and assume that edit-warring is how you get your way ("If I revert it often enough it will stick!"). Put another way, if you remove this tag once more without either resolving the issue (i.e., adding sources) or there being a consensus to do so (see WP:BRD), I will report you for disruptive editing and/or edit-warring - take your pick. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 06:06, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Heads up? A threat? I have replace the useless tag with one that states the issue you identified. Isn't it better to give editorial guidance to the substantial issue instead of referring to some internal Wikiwanking that no-one is going to follow up on? --Wtshymanski (talk) 21:57, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ignorance is not a badge of honour, nor is having to be threatened with a report before stopping to edit-war. Glad to see you have at least realized that talk pages exist. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 06:02, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]