Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not Whac-A-Mole
|This essay contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. Essays may represent widespread norms or minority viewpoints. Consider these views with discretion. Essays are not Wikipedia policies or guidelines.|
|This page in a nutshell: Don't rush in to a discussion pointing at lots of policies without expanding on why you're doing so.|
One of the biggest stumbling blocks newcomers can face on Wikipedia is having to deal with an article that is sitting in Articles for Deletion and staring at the onslaught of "Delete per WP:RS Delete per WP:OR Delete per WP:GNG", often quickly following the article's nomination. In particular, they may feel that you're trying to pull rank by deleting their work.
Stop and think for a second. Does the article really have no reliable sources, or couldn't you just be bothered to find any? While online citations are the easiest references to uncover, citations can also take the shape of books, journals and newspapers. Because they may take more time and effort to find, it can be easy to assume that nobody's honestly going to look for them, you've done your due diligence, so delete already! Wham! That's another one out of the way. That'll keep that pesky lot at the Article Rescue Squad at bay for a bit!
If you're confident an article will not satisfy the general notability guidelines, take time out to explain why not. Maybe the newcomer will understand. Maybe somebody else will suggest sources you haven't tried and reverse the consensus.