Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Techie Gospel


 * 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 of the debate was delete. Kirill Lokshin 06:13, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Techie Gospel
While this makes sense as a sort of joke, Wikipedia ain't for jokes. Perhaps a move to BJAODN would be appropriate, but more likely, this page just needs to be deleted or userfyed to one of the people who ostensibly created it. FreelanceWizard 09:24, 29 October 2005 (UTC) Let's let this one go... Com'on guys — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.189.194.157 (talk • contribs) 01:24, 4 November 2005  (UTC)
 * BJAODN, or failing that, Delete. Dr Gangrene 11:17, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
 * It's a prose parody of a religious text, and not even a semblance of an encyclopaedia article. Delete. Uncle G 12:58, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Wonderful joke. Makes good reading. But, wikipedia is not for jokes Prashanthns 15:38, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Joke, belongs to BJAODN (unless it is a copyvio). Delete. - Mike Rosoft 17:37, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete or maybe BJAODN (is there a wikibooks jokebook, for the good jokes?) It may theoretically be a copyvio, but it's one of those gags that's been passed around for so long in so many slightly different forms that I doubt anyone would claim ownership of it.  AJR | Talk 00:12, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, it's not original and therefore doesn't belong in BJAODN. -- stillnotelf   has a talk page  05:32, 4 November 2005 (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.