- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the discussion was keep. harej 00:12, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not/Outtakes
Relisted. Cunard ( talk) 01:37, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
I don't really want humour pages deleted in general, but this page is a bunch of gibberish. It's not funny and is far too long. occono ( talk) 22:34, 9 November 2010 (UTC) occono ( talk) 22:34, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
- Apologies: this apparently had a vote on it back in August, I read the talk page and glanced over it. Really sorry.-- occono ( talk) 22:37, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
- Delete This falls well withing WP:IINFO because it is an indiscriminate collection of complete nonsense. WP:IINFO applies as much to project space as much as it does to article space. If you remove all of the one-liners and other nonsense from the page from the page, it would virtually empty. It would also fall within WP:NOTWEBHOST and WP:MADEUP. The thing about humor pages is that there is some sort of point behind the humor. But this page, on the other hand, has no point. — Farix ( t | c) 00:33, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
- Speedy keep - like nom said, the last MFD was closed as keep 30 August 2010. jonkerz ♠ 23:43, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
- Keep. Valid reflections related to the project. I do wish that there were better attribution of the content, but this is not a reason to delete. -- SmokeyJoe ( talk) 22:16, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- Move it or lose it - Move to
Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not - Outtakes. In its current location, it should be deleted because, unlike
What Wikipedia is not/Rewrite December 2004,
What Wikipedia is not/galleries, and
What Wikipedia is not/Trivia, it does not qualify to be subpage of
Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. However, per
WP:ESSAYS, its got enough opinion or advice of an editor or group of editors, for which widespread consensus has not been established, to be considered a
Wikipedia essay. Trimming some of the non opinion or advice from the essay might be a good thing. --
Uzma Gamal (
talk) 16:13, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
- Is Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not/Unencyclopedic in the correct location? -- Uzma Gamal ( talk) 17:29, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
-
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cunard ( talk) 01:37, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
- Keep but tag with
{{ humor}}per WP:-D and WP:HASNOSENSEOFHUMOR. -- N Y Kevin @761, i.e. 17:15, 19 November 2010 (UTC) - Keep but I believe that there should be a limit on how many sections the article should have. Secret Saturdays ( talk to me) what's new? 21:58, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
- Keep Tag as humour if you can't tell. As for it being too long - chacun a son gout still applies on WP. Collect ( talk) 08:24, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Keep Unfunny and far too long, but not necessary to delete it. We need to cut it down, though. I really don't see why we needed to drag this discussion out with a relisting either. Swarm X 13:57, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the discussion was keep. harej 00:12, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not/Outtakes
Relisted. Cunard ( talk) 01:37, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
I don't really want humour pages deleted in general, but this page is a bunch of gibberish. It's not funny and is far too long. occono ( talk) 22:34, 9 November 2010 (UTC) occono ( talk) 22:34, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
- Apologies: this apparently had a vote on it back in August, I read the talk page and glanced over it. Really sorry.-- occono ( talk) 22:37, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
- Delete This falls well withing WP:IINFO because it is an indiscriminate collection of complete nonsense. WP:IINFO applies as much to project space as much as it does to article space. If you remove all of the one-liners and other nonsense from the page from the page, it would virtually empty. It would also fall within WP:NOTWEBHOST and WP:MADEUP. The thing about humor pages is that there is some sort of point behind the humor. But this page, on the other hand, has no point. — Farix ( t | c) 00:33, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
- Speedy keep - like nom said, the last MFD was closed as keep 30 August 2010. jonkerz ♠ 23:43, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
- Keep. Valid reflections related to the project. I do wish that there were better attribution of the content, but this is not a reason to delete. -- SmokeyJoe ( talk) 22:16, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- Move it or lose it - Move to
Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not - Outtakes. In its current location, it should be deleted because, unlike
What Wikipedia is not/Rewrite December 2004,
What Wikipedia is not/galleries, and
What Wikipedia is not/Trivia, it does not qualify to be subpage of
Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. However, per
WP:ESSAYS, its got enough opinion or advice of an editor or group of editors, for which widespread consensus has not been established, to be considered a
Wikipedia essay. Trimming some of the non opinion or advice from the essay might be a good thing. --
Uzma Gamal (
talk) 16:13, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
- Is Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not/Unencyclopedic in the correct location? -- Uzma Gamal ( talk) 17:29, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
-
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cunard ( talk) 01:37, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
- Keep but tag with
{{ humor}}per WP:-D and WP:HASNOSENSEOFHUMOR. -- N Y Kevin @761, i.e. 17:15, 19 November 2010 (UTC) - Keep but I believe that there should be a limit on how many sections the article should have. Secret Saturdays ( talk to me) what's new? 21:58, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
- Keep Tag as humour if you can't tell. As for it being too long - chacun a son gout still applies on WP. Collect ( talk) 08:24, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Keep Unfunny and far too long, but not necessary to delete it. We need to cut it down, though. I really don't see why we needed to drag this discussion out with a relisting either. Swarm X 13:57, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.