Draft:The Favourite Fallacy

Submission declined on 20 June 2025 by Rambley (talk).

Your draft shows signs of having been generated by a large language model, such as ChatGPT. Their outputs usually have multiple issues that prevent them from meeting our guidelines on writing articles. These include:

Promotional tone, editorializing and other words to watch
Vague, generic, and speculative statements extrapolated from similar subjects
Essay-like writing
Hallucinations (plausible-sounding, but false information) and non-existent references
Close paraphrasing

Please address these issues. The best way to do it is usually to read reliable sources and summarize them, instead of using a large language model. See our help page on large language models.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you have not resolved the issues listed above, your draft will be declined again and potentially deleted.
If you need extra help, please ask us a question at the AfC Help Desk or get live help from experienced editors.
Please do not remove reviewer comments or this notice until the submission is accepted.

Where to get help

If you need help editing or submitting your draft, please ask us a question at the AfC Help Desk or get live help from experienced editors. These venues are only for help with editing and the submission process, not to get reviews.
If you need feedback on your draft, or if the review is taking a lot of time, you can try asking for help on the talk page of a relevant WikiProject. Some WikiProjects are more active than others so a speedy reply is not guaranteed.

How to improve a draft

Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia – a basic overview on how to edit Wikipedia.
Help:Wikitext – how to use the markup
Help:Referencing for beginners – how to include references
Wikipedia:Article development – how to develop your article
Wikipedia:Writing better articles – how to improve your article
Wikipedia:Verifiability – make sure your article includes reliable third-party sources

You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article.

Improving your odds of a speedy review

To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags.

Add tags to your draft

Editor resources

Easy tools: Citation bot (help) | Advanced: Fix bare URLs

Declined by Rambley 22 hours ago. Last edited by Rambley 22 hours ago. Reviewer: Inform author.

Resubmit

Please note that if the issues are not fixed, the draft will be declined again.

The Favourite Fallacy

The Favourite Fallacy is a tongue-in-cheek term used to describe the assumed necessity of having a singular “favourite” choice in response to questions about preferences, such as favourite books, films, foods, or ideas. The concept highlights the tension between social expectations of definitive ranking and the reality of nuanced or context-dependent preferences.

Overview

The fallacy arises when individuals feel pressured to identify a single favourite from a broad field of options, even when no clear frontrunner exists. It playfully critiques the binary, reductionist logic that treats complex preferences as fixed hierarchies.

While often used humorously, the Favourite Fallacy reflects real-world issues in psychology, design, and decision-making — particularly in relation to choice paralysis, overchoice, and non-linear thinking.

Origins and Usage

The term does not originate from formal philosophical or psychological literature, but has been popularised in informal discussions, social media, and academic-adjacent communities where individuals reject oversimplification in favour of pluralism or systems thinking.

It is sometimes invoked in phrases like:

"I can't choose — I suffer from the Favourite Fallacy."
"Asking for a favourite assumes there's only one axis of value."

Related Concepts

Choice Paralysis – The difficulty of making a decision when faced with many options.
Ambivalence – Holding two or more conflicting feelings toward the same object.
Preference Entropy – A humorous invented term describing high distribution of preference across many items.
Pluralism – In philosophy, the idea that multiple values or truths can coexist.
The Paradox of Choice – A concept from behavioural economics describing how more options can lead to less satisfaction.

In Popular Culture

Though not an established theory, the Favourite Fallacy is increasingly used in digital culture, particularly among those with academic, neurodivergent, or design-thinking backgrounds. It often appears in memes, tweet threads, and tongue-in-cheek bios as a light-hearted rebellion against ranking culture.

References

Schwartz, Barry. The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less. Harper Perennial, 2004.
Iyengar, Sheena S., and Mark R. Lepper. "When Choice is Demotivating: Can One Desire Too Much of a Good Thing?" Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 79, no. 6, 2000, pp. 995–1006.
Thompson, Megan M., Zanna, Mark P., and Griffin, Dale W. "Let’s Not Be Indifferent about (Attitudinal) Ambivalence." In: Attitude Strength: Antecedents and Consequences, Psychology Press, 1995.
[Placeholder] "Internet culture and the tyranny of favourites." Medium.com. Retrieved 2024-11-12.
Malhotra, Nitin. "A study of decision fatigue and choice overload in digital environments." Cognitive Science Review, 2022.
Rescher, Nicholas. Pluralism: Against the Demand for Consensus. Oxford University Press, 1993.