Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joke Theory

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 03:24, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Joke Theory[edit]

Hoax/neologism/nonsense/non-notable/original research? I'm neutral for now, I'm listing to generate discussion. Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 21:11, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Jokes are certainly studied within academia (by psychologists and sociologists mainly), and it even appears that the term "joke theory" is in usage [1]. Nonetheless, this article is more along the lines of something made up one day, and the term jokestitution is clearly not in anything resembling common usage. Given that joke theory does exist, though, a redirect to joke seems in order for now, and at some point this article might be written. Cool3 (talk) 21:51, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The page is a vehicle for author's pathetic attempt at humor. Let me guess, you bet your friend $20 that you could get ten people to read a joke that you had written. Mandsford (talk) 13:21, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and probably should have been speedied for how pathetic it is. If speedy deletes don't cover nonsense like this they should. DreamGuy (talk) 13:47, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to take this moment to step in and defend this article. Your reaction towards the article "joke theory" is exactly as I had hypothesized. You see, I am a very renowned Psychologist, Dr. Jenkins, and my colleagues at the City University of New York and I have began to hypothesize on the effects of Jokes on the minds of people. Your response models the concept of "joke suppresions: When one group or groups of people fail to see humor in a Joke, then they will do all in their power to Suppress and/or eliminate the Joke. My Colleagues and I are planning on publishing a Thesis concerning the effects of Jokes on human minds, and we will soon release it, entitled Joke Theory: Human's Perspective with Regard to Humor. So, with regard to my research, I would very much appreciate it if you were to keep this article, as it will allow for our studies to go beyond just those in the Lab. Thank you kindly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by IoIwut101 (talk • contribs) 22:06, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_J._Jenkins —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.78.78.19 (talk) 22:09, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a research platform. Study it if you want, but do not impede its natural course. First it would make very poor research, and second "future work" is not notable. Also beware of conflicts of interests. Wikipedia is not a place to do science by press conference. Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 22:29, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Geez, where's an administrator when you need one? Mandsford (talk) 02:36, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.