Sometimes when somebody says something that overlaps what you have already said, you feel moved to delete it in the spirit of eliminating redundancy. You want everything to be said OnceAndOnlyOnce. (The only time I have ever done this is when somebody else writes on my home page.)

It may also be possible - although I have never done this - that you see an argument you agree with, but you think the author is making a mistake that you can correct, so you go in and correct it...

The other situation, where you see that somebody else said something you wanted to say, so you choose not to say anything, may create a world where SilenceImpliesConsent.
----
If, as has been suggested, editors wait until a page discussion has finished, or a general agreement reached, then delete much of the content, replacing it with a concise, fair and balanced summary.

Would this not also create a ''community'' where everyone is striving to create the most efficient information resource possible?

However, this could only be done once a general agreement had been reached and the page had largely finished being an active discussion area.

Finally, this brings us full circle: An active discussion page follows agree-by-adding (sometimes of the MeToo kind), then, once it has somewhat died, wiki citizens can AgreeByDeleting. Of course, this will probably start up the discussion again. A good thing, perhaps?

-- MatthewTheobalds

''See DocumentMode''