User:2422889236x

I believe in an inclusionist philosophy on Wikipedia. It is OK for an article to start from humble beginnings. That is how it will develop. Good articles start with non-ideal sources (student newspapers, blog articles, etc). That content can act as a placeholder. The article will then develop. Then better references are found. Editors create just the basic framework of an article. Then the intention of coming back to fill it in later, or for others to do so is what Wikipedia is here for.

Underdeveloped articles are under construction. Lend a hand, don't tear down! A building, like an article, takes time to build. Imagine if a building were constantly ripped apart? Goals would never be accomplished. The goal is to build rather than tear down.

The zeal of deletionists to AfD new articles and articles that are under construction is stifling. In the first few minutes of creating an article, an AfD is often slapped on the article, while in the process of adding references! WP editors: to avoid having an article deleted, work on the article "offline" in your WP sandbox, and only put it on the real WP page when it is ready, with lots of Reliable Sources as references.

When Wikipedians dispute content, this results in continual edits to an article - this is called Edit Warring^[1][2] A semi-formal dispute resolution process is appropriate in such circumstances. Raise these issues in Wikipedia's community forums. See for example the Biographies of Living Persons Noticeboard or Neutral Point of View Noticeboard. These are there to address content falling under their respective areas. Also seek outside input through third opinion requests or by initiating a more general community discussion known as a request for comment.^[2]