User:Weeklyd3/Essays/Arguments to avoid in contested speedy deletions

On Wikipedia, many pages are created. Some of them get nominated for speedy deletion. When the creator visits the article, they see a message like this:

Clicking the "Contest this speedy deletion" button brings the user to the talk page, where an explanation to why the page should not be speedily deleted can be written.

When done correctly, contested speedy deletions can save a page from deletion. Here are a few examples of contested speedy deletions that won't work:

Contested speedy deletion
This page should not be speedily deleted because (your reason here) --Example (talk) 00:33, 15 June 2022 (UTC) If the reason for speedy deletion makes sense, and there is no reason not to delete it, the page will get deleted.

Contested speedy deletion
This page should not be speedily deleted because deleting it would be censorship and Wikipedia is not censored. --Example (talk) 00:33, 15 June 2022 (UTC) WP:NOTCENSORED means that we do not need to remove content solely because it may offend someone. (For example, the penis article has images of penises, even though it is not suitable for children.) It does not mean that we can't remove unencyclopedic content that falls into WP:NOT or otherwise is inappropriate for the encyclopedia because it might be seen as censorship.

Contested speedy deletion
This page should not be speedily deleted because the person who nominated this article for deletion had conspired with User:Example1 and User:Example2 against me and should be blocked. --Example (talk) 00:33, 15 June 2022 (UTC) Wikipedia prohibits personal attacks. This also does not address the reasons the article was proposed for deletion.

Contested speedy deletion
This page should not be speedily deleted because the subject is (a description with WP:PUFFERY) and won these awards. (more reasons why the subject is awesome) --Example (talk) 00:33, 15 June 2022 (UTC) Contested speedy deletions like this do not address the reasons for deletion either.

"Just the facts"
Usually in response to G11 deletions. Something like this:

Contested speedy deletion
This page should not be speedily deleted because everything in this article is factually correct. --Example (talk) 02:54, 14 August 2022 (UTC) Well, even the facts can be stated in a promotional tone. Consider this: Wikipedia is one of the world's most accessed site, serving as a reference source for many other external sites. Best of all, it is free! Join and start editing today at  en.wikipedia.org ! versus this (CC BY-SA note: This was adapted from the lead of the Wikipedia article): Wikipedia is a free-content online encyclopedia in 328 different languages. It is written by volunteers using the MediaWiki wiki software and is hosted by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation. See the difference? The first one really sounds like a blatant advertisement even though it is stating all facts. The second one sounds like it might have a tiny chance to belong in an article if it had a few references.

Contested speedy deletion
This page should not be speedily deleted because I'm going to sue if it gets deleted. --Example (talk) 00:33, 15 June 2022 (UTC) Legal threats are prohibited and users who make legal threats may get indeffed.

Threatening to cease donations to the Foundation
(Note: I have not seen this on wiki, but on external sites.)

Contested speedy deletion
This page should not be speedily deleted because I'm going to stop donating to the Wikimedia Foundation unless this page isn't deleted. --Example (talk) 02:54, 14 August 2022 (UTC) A common misconception of donations is that the funds raised by donations are given to editors. This is untrue; everyone here (maybe with the exception of people that have "WMF" at the end of their usernames) are unpaid volunteers. Donations go to the Foundation for things like server costs, development, and other things, so threatening to cease donations is useless because the deleting administrator probably wasn't compensated anyways.

Contesting speedy deletions
A contested speedy deletion is more likely to persuade the deleting admin to keep the article if:
 * It addresses the reasons for deletion and why the article shouldn't be deleted despite the reasons for deletion.
 * It points out nicely that the nominator made a mistake and identifies it, or:
 * It points out details that might have been missed that save the page from deletion.