Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Church of Wikipedia


 * Church of Wikipedia. Move to meta BJAODN or delete. Maybe do the same for King of Wikipedia as well. Angela. 00:22, May 4, 2004 (UTC)
 * They're not meant seriously, so I don't think they belong on Meta either. Move to BJAODN and delete. --Michael Snow 04:55, 4 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Although there appears to be a bit of clamping down/tidying up on what is on meta, humour has traditionally been allowed. I would be happy with it there, with the new "page type" tags if necessary. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 10:56, 4 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I concur with Michael - BJAODN and delete. &rarr;Raul654 05:00, May 4, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete both, not even remotely encyclopedic. I wouldn't even move either to Meta or BJAODN, but neither would I object if others want them there. Andrewa 13:20, 4 May 2004 (UTC)
 * This is just a parody of the 'micronations' pages, right? Delete. Average Earthman 13:37, 4 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I thought them worth a laugh (forgive me), though of course they don't belong here. BJAODN makes the most sense to me if enough people find them funny, but if deleted, I wouldn't object. Jwrosenzweig 15:38, 4 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete both. Not funny. Wile E. Heresiarch 16:04, 4 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep --it's usefull in other material and the data shoudl be allowed to refactor. I too thought it was "literary"Quickwik
 * Delete or move to meta or to WP:-). Just don't keep in place. :) - Fennec 22:51, May 4, 2004 (UTC)
 * How inane. Delete both. Rdsmith4 22:28, 4 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Cribcage 03:31, 8 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Well, they don't belong in Wikispace. And since they're not funny, BJAODN is not really an appropriate place. However, they are just the right length to DELETE! Denni 04:56, 2004 May 8 (UTC)
 * BJAODN --Jiang 04:31, 9 May 2004 (UTC)