Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anti-humor


 * 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. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 02:21, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Anti-humor

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Entirely original research-- which it has been tagged as being for the last five months; no reliable source has been put forth which actually discusses this apparent neologism as a concept-- as claimed in the article; a magnet for individuals' favorite non-joke/anti-comedian. See also, WP:NOT: "[Wikipedia] is not a vehicle to make personal opinions become part of human knowledge". -- LeflymanTalk 05:39, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete unless referenced. This is a valid term but most of the article seems to be personal observation/preference. --Dhartung | Talk 06:08, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as is. This exists. I can appreciate it. But I'm not sure the article helps me understand it. And it doesn't give the references needed to be sure they understand it. I want enlightenment. ( <-- note the period) Shenme 06:14, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - I can't find this defined anywhere reliable. Definitely qualifies as a neologism. Mark Chovain 03:44, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Just a comment The article refers to anticlimax. According to the theory Isaac Asimov expounded in his Treasury of Humor, anticlimax is the essence of all humor. --hbquikcomjamesl | Talk 10:55, 23 April 2007 (PDT)
 * Cleanup —Quarl (talk) 2007-04-26 07:29Z


 * 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.