Wikipedia:Non esistono scadenze: differenze tra le versioni

Whether the addition/removal to the article can be justified or not, it is sometimes better to handle the dispute at the time it occurs. Generally referenced additions can be viewed and evaluated by other users more easily, since it is much easier than tracking the additions/removals from article history, and generally "let it go" cases are forgotten after a while, unless an editor bothers to check every single entry in article history. Also discussing cases after a while may consume much more time than early solved conflicts since non-solved conflicts generally turn out as personal conflicts between editors. Moreover since editors try to edit nel loro tempo libero where they can do anything else, they may not find such time in the future to edit or discuss these matters to improve Wikipedia. È frequente che alcuni utenti agiscano in modo [[WP:POV]] or [[WP:BIAS]]ed (and [[WP:Systemic bias]] in the worst cases) a causa delle loro idee politiche o religiose or they may not have any expertise in the article they edit. From time to time they may have [[WP:COI]], or act like they [[WP:OWN]] the article, they may take things personal and may not be [[WP:POLITE]] (verbally or worse with their editing style) so, whether or not you assume [[WP:GOODFAITHbuona fede|buona fede]], you may not come to an agreement. At those times, you may seek 3rd party review help from uninvolved editors to come to an agreement between both parties.