Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/April Fools Day 2006


 * 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 all.  Jerry  delusional ¤ kangaroo 00:36, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

April Fools Day 2006

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Article is an unencyclopedic list of assorted jokes made by the media on April Fools' Day in 2006. Wikipedia is WP:NOT an indiscriminate list of what Homestar runner and various news networks did for April 1. Reywas92 Talk 00:58, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related pages:
 * Reywas92 Talk 02:19, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Reywas92 Talk 02:19, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Reywas92 Talk 02:19, 24 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete an indiscriminate list of non-notable jokes made by notable people. --  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 01:30, 24 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment A unified approach to April Fools' lists / group nomination might be in order:

MickMacNee (talk) 01:55, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * April 1, 1999, redirects to April 1999. One single real event listed for April 1
 * April 1, 2000 a short year page only listing hoaxes.
 * April 1, 2001 ???
 * April 1, 2002 a longer year page only listing hoaxes.
 * April 1, 2003, redirected to April 2003. Events listed for April 1 are a mix of actual news and hoaxes
 * April 1, 2004, redirected to April 2004, only actual news are listed with a mention that it was April Fools day. 2004 hoaxes are currently hidden in a previous version
 * April 1, 2005 a year page with actual news and hoaxes
 * April 1, 2006, redirects to this list (you have to look at April 2006 for actual events)
 * April 1, 2007, redirects to April Fools Day 2007, which is actually a shorter list of hoaxes than this one
 * April 1, 2008, redirects to April Fools Day 2008 is massive, and actually spawned a child article even.


 * Delete. Wikipedia is not a guide to every April Fools Day. Whats next, "Christmas 2008"?. — Mythdon ( talk  •  contribs ) 02:04, 24 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: I've raised the issue on Talk:April Fools' Day anyway, see this talk page section (permalink) MickMacNee (talk) 02:05, 24 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep all. Those voting delete obviously have no sense of humor.  Articles like this help set Wikipedia apart from other encyclopedias.  And I despise mass nominations in general.SPNic (talk) 03:05, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Having a dislike of bundled AFD nominations is not a valid reason to keep. Oh, and also, I have a great sense of humor. Wanna hear a joke? Knock! Knock!  MuZemike  ( talk ) 07:54, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * And WP:IDONTLIKEIT, which most of the delete votes, reek of, is not a valid reason to delete. The articles are sourced.  I hope MickMacNee can do something (I wish I had some ideas, but thoughtlessly deleting this stuff is not the answer.SPNic (talk) 13:46, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Who said we don't like April Fools? I personally think it's a laugh riot with the hoax newspaper articles and the Rickrolling and what-not. Maybe you should assume good faith and not try to paint everything with such a broad brush. MuZemike  ( talk ) 15:36, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It's hard to assume good faith when somebody's reason for deleete is because it's "a depressing precedent".SPNic (talk) 17:02, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Just to clarify, the reason for my deletion vote, as stated, is that I believe the article is not notable. The precedent that it sets, of creating indiscriminate lists of information that will most likely never be searched for, was an afterthought... but probably should not have been posted. I'm sorry if I gave you the impression that this was an attack. I certainly didn't intend it that way. -- Oliver  Twisted (Talk) (Stuff)  23:58, 24 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Apology accepted. Transwikiiing isn't a bad idea.SPNic (talk) 00:24, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, and I'm sorry if I got out of line.75.105.224.214 (talk) 02:49, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, sorry, but you got to try to. We're all trying to improve the quality of the encyclopedia in one way or another. MuZemike  ( talk ) 18:33, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Maybe I'm humorless as well, but I don't find long lists of corny jokes funny, and I certainly don't find long lists of trivia funny. Wikipedia is different for lots of reasons, and one of the reasons we don't always get a lot of respect is 'fun stuff' like this. Drmies (talk) 04:09, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete the whole lot. Not notable, and quite frankly a depressing precedent . --  O liver  T wisted (Talk) (Stuff) 05:22, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, if I remember right, I was the one that moved the article from April 1, 2006 to April Fools day. All it does is list a bunch of jokes, deletable under WP:IINFO. Tavix (talk) 05:39, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: WP:IINFO StonerDude420 (talk) 07:09, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete all — after looking at a couple, this is nothing but indiscriminate information. MuZemike  ( talk ) 07:54, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to wikinews. The majority of the entries here are newsitems (or faked newsitems) so it would be suitable for WikiNews to keep them on record. - Mgm|(talk) 13:15, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. Another thing I should note is that Wikipedia itself does April Fool's Day jokes.SPNic (talk) 15:21, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Change to transwiki all as MacGyverMagic recommended. This does fit better in Wikinews. I probably should've thought of that before. Oh, well. MuZemike  ( talk ) 18:33, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment My initial thought was that these should all be kept, although edited down to include only the sourced entries. There is some significance in a reputable organization departing from its usual practice in order to play a prank.  After reading the article April Fools' Day, however, it appears to have more than adequate coverage of the most noteworthy of these events.  I don't consider myself humorless (I am humourless, but that's because of Anglophobia).  However, these lists are so sprawling that they are like an unbearably long joke, too detailed to be informative or entertaining.  Ultimately, it is of no significance whether a prank was conducted in 2006, 2007 or 2008.  Mandsford (talk) 14:56, 26 December 2008 (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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.