Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Uncyclopedia (5th nomination)


 * 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 speedy keep. Bad faith nom, no valid reason given for deletion. --- RockMFR 04:41, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Uncyclopedia
You deleted ED, which is much more notable, so why not delete this? Jame Taylor 01:09, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, article is now more keepable then ever, now that the unverifiable crap has been weeded out. It merits inclusion regardless of the idiocy involved in deleting the ED article.  Milto LOL pia 02:31, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Wth? Bad faith nom, etc etc etc. Also, coming from someone from ED, and has a sysop account on ED, don't drag ED into random AfDs. It is frustrating and will likely land you in trouble on here- K @  ng  i  e meep! 03:47, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep - Bad faith nom. And Uncyclopedia is more notable, having 1,790,000 google hits, and ED having only 236,000 google hits. -- AAA!  ( AAAA ) 04:19, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * It isn't ED's worthiness of a Wikipedia article we're discussing- K @  ng  i  e meep! 04:22, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I know. But he says ED is more notable, which actually isn't. I was just making my point. -- AAA!  ( AAAA ) 06:55, 26 March 2007 (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.