Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kamino
How much coverage by independent secondary sources must be shown before the nom and his buddy give in and stop saying "nuh-uh!" to everyone who disagrees with them? While I'm no fan of simply pointing to policies, I think that everyone here could use a look at , , and the discussion articles linked from them such as proof by assertion, which seems to have been used quite often by Judgesurreal and several others in recent deletion discussions. While I'm glad that it's at least remaining civil, this really needs to stop. How many AfDs have I looked at today that degenerated into Hobit and Citrouilles posting source after source while Judgesurreal and EEMIV or Doctorfluffy call every single one non-notable? How many massive discussion trees do you have to fill with long-winded versions of the playground arguement strategy "Nuh-uh!", "uh-huh!" before you guys recognize that there is a ''problem'' and it needs to be solved? I'm new here, but Wikipedia is community-driven enough that I'm sure there IS a way to solve this, whether it be arbitration or something else
— User:Gelmax, 19:29, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:UNENCYCLOPEDIC||WP:ITSNOTABLE (Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions)