Leiðbeiningar um notkun pöntunarkerfis.
Some walls of text are intentionally disruptive, such as when an editor attempts to overwhelm a discussion with a mass of irrelevant kilobytes. Other walls are due to lack of awareness of good practices, such as when an editor tries to cram every one of their cogent points into a single comprehensive response that is roughly the length of a short novel. Not all long posts are walls of text; some can be nuanced and thoughtful. Just remember: the longer it is, the less of it people will read.
The chunk-o'text defense (COTD) is an alleged wikilawyering strategy whereby an editor accused of wrongdoing defends their actions with a giant chunk of text that contains so many diffs, assertions, examples, and allegations as to be virtually unanswerable. However, an equal-but-opposite questionable strategy is dismissal of legitimate evidence and valid rationales with a claim of "text-walling" or "TL;DR". Not every matter can be addressed with a one-liner, and validity does not correspond to length, especially the more complex the matter is. The COTD is characterized by noise and hand-waving, not simply verbosity.