Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Military 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   keep. —  Aitias  // discussion 18:54, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Military humor

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

Regretfully, it is 100% original research. All references cited are joke examples, rather scholarly/encyclopedic study of military humor. We had similar articles deleted on exact same ground: Lawyer jokes, Aviation jokes,Drummer jokes, and many more others. Much that I am interested in humor research, this article fails wikipedia criteria. Laudak (talk) 23:53, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Procedural Comment the AfD alert isn't at the top of the page (anymore?). Could someone fix that? SMSpivey (talk) 00:33, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, I'm going to go through and rewrite this to bring it up to standards, but the subject of the article itself appears to be quite notable if you go check out a quick search of google books and google itself. It should probably mention things more along the lines of Beetle Bailey and the USO as humor that grows naturally out of the exceptionally different culture of the military than what it talks about right now. SMSpivey (talk) 00:37, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment - I think we should be very careful when comparing an article to other previously deleted articles in a deletion discussion. I think it's usually better to leave other articles and AfDs out of it, and discuss this based on its own merits, notability etc.  See WP:OTHERSTUFF.  LinguistAtLarge &bull; Msg  04:12, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep—I can attest that there is some notability, as well as controversy, behind some of the jokes left by the U.S. Military alone; we're not even mentioning the military jokes by other countries toward us. MuZemike 08:36, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Article is well written, maybe easily upgradable, seems to have a future. --Mr Accountable (talk) 09:15, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable topic, Possibility for expansion, many books on the subject available, not to mention probably thousnds of tother sources.DGG (talk) 13:28, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article I read surely looks passable: it looks like it may have been improved.  And it reminds me that we need to start a general article on military folklore, of which this is a subtopic. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:33, 6 February 2009 (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.