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.
Speedy Keep - Keep the stupidity out of article space. It'd be nice if people's jokes were at least funny or novel. --Onorem♠Dil18:05, 1 April 2011 (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.
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.
Two words? Hardly significant coverage (and of questionable reliability, IMHO, now they let any being edit it). Could someone check Encyclopedia Galactica? My local library has cut its subscription, and my request for a WP:CREDO account is still being processed. Qwfp (talk) 15:42, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No independent, third party sources. Hosting this article, the product of people fixated on their local environment, threatens the objective nature of the entire project. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:44, 1 April 2011 (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.
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.
Look at this: [1]. Third link, and already an editorial hosted by the NYT and published back in the 1800's (the friggin 1800's!) agrees that we should remove the letter Q. Let none say that Wikipedia is just an encyclopedia. We are trend-setters! Delete, and remove all instances of it from the internet (perhaps 4-chan could help us with that?). Nolelover It's almost football season!12:37, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Q no coverage in reliable sources to establish notability. Yeah, I know you'll say, "come on, pick up a children's alphabet book" or something, but let's be serious: who has ever written a book entirely about Q? It's always bundled with some other letter, usually U. Merge X to 10 (number). You read my mind with this AfD, I had a similar idea planned for some months, but decied to hold back when I saw three other spoof AfD's already —Soap—12:51, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - My deletionist friend Mr. Hammer will no doubt be distressed to learn that the Spanish Wikipedia has taken the axe to the letter K instead. Admittedly, their decision implies no precedent here, but it is something to consider. Carrite (talk) 14:58, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep While not notable in the field of languages, it is a very important key for PC gamers, and is commonly used for key bindings. Deleting would also require rewriting many of the plot devices in the Star Trek TNG and Voyager series. Dennis Brown (talk) 16:38, 1 April 2011 (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.
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 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.
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 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.
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.
This page contains material that is kept because it is considered humorous. Such material is not meant to be taken seriously.
Despite the numerous references included in the article, I am positively convinced that it is impossible to actually prove the existence of the universe. Therefore, I believe this article should be deleted immediately for not only being unsourced but also being really quite unnotable as the so-called "universe" is just a construct of our imaginations. See Plato's cave. FastLizard4 (talk•contribs) 07:27, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Split - While individual components are notable, no reliable sources are available to talk about the universe as a whole. Even leading scientists have argued to split the content so it can be discussed rationally. "Space" is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mindbogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space[3]Hasteur (talk) 14:06, 1 April 2011 (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.
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.
This page contains material that is kept because it is considered humorous. Such material is not meant to be taken seriously.
Previous holder of office called it "not worth a pitcher of warm spit". Delete per commonly used WP notability guideline WP:WARMSPIT, which in brief, says any article that's not worth a pitcher of warm spit should be deleted within 127 hours Purplebackpack8905:02, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The voice prezident uft zee ununited statelets is a veep important position in the tri-caramel debate society. But you need a deputy prezident to be added to the set to sit in the bottom apartment. 65.93.12.101 (talk) 09:04, 1 April 2011 (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.
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.
If a majority of the participants in this AfD vote for "delete," then more than half of the voters will be in favor of deletion. King of♥♦♣ ♠ 04:43, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not really laughing, maybe because it's not April Fool's Day in California. Please make it clear whether or not you really want the article deleted. --Trovatore (talk) 05:59, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep so it can be deleted. Delete means it would be kept. (Contradictions are tautologies -- Tautologies are contradictions; round and round we go :) 65.93.12.101 (talk) 11:39, 1 April 2011 (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.
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.
This article is about a digital aencyclopedia, but this aencyclopedia is not notable enough, it has been attacked by hax0rs from outspace several times with their DDoS Death Star system, it is also written like an advertisement and is a copyright violation from ebaumsworld where the contents have been ripped off without changing any word. Eduemoni↑talk↓04:08, 1 April 2011 (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.
This page contains material that is kept because it is considered humorous. Such material is not meant to be taken seriously.
The following discussion is an archived April Fool's Day Joke. Please search for moar. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). next year. No further edits should be made to this page - at least this year.
I tried searching at Google for it, some funny guy decided that it would redirect me back to the search engine's site. Obviously some April Fool's prank that is not notable. DELETE! (by the way if we're de-leting something what's "leteing"? 1337ing?) 212.68.15.66 (talk) 06:01, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Heavy cleanup at minimum per WP:OR. Entity appears to exist when searched for on Yahoo!. Article appears to be composed from biased information provided by the subject. Someone needs to take a fine-tooth comb to it and delete all information that cannot be verified by a source other than Google. Bob the WikipediaN(talk • contribs) 14:48, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The prior discussion is an archived April Fool's Day Joke. Please search for moar. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). next year. No further edits should be made to this page - at least this year.
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.
Strong Oppose - Per My76Strat My gut tells me yes, this is my nature. My brain tells me no, which I will follow based on observations. --TitanOne (talk) 02:35, 1 April 2011 (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.
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 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.
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.
If we'll base it from the lifecount within that planet, 6 billion humans are a minority compared to approximately 800 Septillion Ants and 50 Sextillion Cockroaches. --TitanOne (talk) 04:02, 1 April 2011 (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.
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.
Wikipedia isn't communism, nor is it a place to promote terribly bad countries. Do us a favor and delete it or I am moving back to Bel-Air. Takeo™01:47, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Soviet Union no longer exists, and it makes no sense to have an article on something that doesn't exist. Next we'll be having articles on dead people and so forth. Herostratus (talk) 13:14, 1 April 2011 (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.
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.
ArticleEs for deletion is not notable enough to determine other articles' notability. Unless someone can find a CNN article about this subject then it should die in a fire immediately. — Coffee // have a cup // essay // 01:23, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete Not notable ... has anyone ever written a book about AfD, ever?? It seems this page is mostly just a collection of links. Also this is my third spoof AfD of the day and if there are any more people might start to wonder if they can take me seriously when I try to vote in a real AfD. So let's just solve the problem by getting rid of AfD altogether. —Soap—02:25, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete CSD and PROD are sufficient. It will definitely cut down the amount of drama if there is no AfD. In addition AfD is by no means notable, so lets delete all other AfD debates as well as they are equally non-notable, then salt. If we really need a AfD page, why not use this page. Alpha Quadranttalk02:28, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Speedy Suppa Duppa Delete - This article is clearly a BLATANT infringement to every single rule in Wikipedia! And this place is filthy! Let's clean it up. This post brought to you by Dial SoapEduemoni↑talk↓03:48, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want to collect them all, why do I gotta? 05:07, 1 April 2011 (UTC)~~ 05:07, 1 April 2011 (UTC)~~ 05:07, 1 April 2011 (UTC)65.93.12.101 (talk) 05:07, 1 April 2011 (UTC) 05:07, 1 April 2011 (UTC)05:07, 1 April 2011 (UTC) 05:07, 1 April 2011 (UTC)05:07, 1 April 2011 (UTC)~ 05:07, 1 April 2011 (UTC)05:07, 1 April 2011 (UTC)~~[reply]
Speedy delete as an attack page. Constantly filled with unsourced original research attacking subjects as "not notable", including numerous living people. All current and former ArbCom members should be indef blocked for not dealing with this previously. --RL0919 (talk) 06:10, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Complete purge from databases. Should be followed with reformatting of database server hard drives for good measure, just to ensure that AfD is wiped from existence once and for all. --FastLizard4 (talk•contribs) 07:36, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The page is clearly bloated with excess fat that can't be healthy for the server. Besides, subjecting a bad article to 7 days of bashing is considered cruel and unusual punishment. --SoCalSuperEagle(talk)16:55, 1 April 2011 (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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article belowApril Fool's Day Joke. Please eat the nominator. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). next year. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was
Feed to the dogs. Clear Consensus here. If you think I closed this AFD incorrectly, or feel I violated any policies, get over it. Tofutwitch11(TALK)21:02, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - By preventing the year 2013, Wikimania 2012 will be the last, and therefore the greatest, Wikimania ever! harej00:36, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Snowball Delete and Speedy Close per WP:CSD#G11 as unambiguous advertising and promotion of various events of 2013. Article is obviously created and edited by promoters of said events, including some guy who thinks their birthday is a "Major Religious Holiday". Oh, the huge vanity! 212.68.15.66 (talk) 05:57, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep as although ficitious, it's an important part of nearly global mythology outside of the ancient Mayan religion. However, 2014 should be deleted; there's nothing special about that fictitious year. Bob the WikipediaN(talk • contribs) 14:43, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The prior discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article belowApril Fool's Day Joke. Please eat the nominator. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). next year. No further edits should be made to this page.
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 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.
This page contains material that is kept because it is considered humorous. Such material is not meant to be taken seriously.
early april fools joke* Now this is UDDERLY ridiculous, I read this article DAIRY and I can't find why it should exist, I mean, don't have a COW, man! I mean, most people want to get the MOOST out of life and this article is pointless! I'm going to the MOOvies.
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 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 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 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.
Speedy delete... oh wait, we can't... keep so we can use it to speedy delete itself, then speedy delete. Or introduce a Speedy Create process to compensate, then use that to speedy recreate this page. Alzarian16 (talk) 10:44, 1 April 2011 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
This page contains material that is kept because it is considered humorous. Such material is not meant to be taken seriously.
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 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.
This page contains material that is kept because it is considered humorous. Such material is not meant to be taken seriously.
It's a waste of time. Says so right there in the title. :-P —Signature in preceding messsage removed by DoNotSignBot.
Agree. However, participation here is not enough to call a quorum for such a decision. Please advertise more widely as per Wikipedia:Publicising discussions. An RFC should be held, lasting no less than thirty days, where the first fifteen include a watchlist notice for all users. Transclude the discussion onto all XfD pages and all noticeboards, and Jimbo's talk page, as the result, whether one way or another, has implications to them all. —Signature in preceding messsage removed by DoNotSignBot.
This is Jimbo's policy, so only he can decide not to go ahead with implementation of the policy. As I understand it, the implementation has been delayed by the carbon credit hacking incident. —Signature in preceding messsage removed by DoNotSignBot.
Procrastinate—Signature in preceding messsage removed by DoNotSignBot.
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.
