Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Blood Lines of Darkness/Funny Stuff




 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was  Delete something lame from CBW 12:43, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

User:Blood Lines of Darkness/Funny Stuff
Relisted at 15:44, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Nonsense that is not related to Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kayau (talk • contribs)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 15:44, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete I'm all for humor, but this looks to be copied from an article and therefore in violation of GFDL. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 03:29, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: Clearly not useful in Wikipedia. ~ [ Scott M. Howard  ]:[  Talk  ] 12:05, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Can not find an article it is copied from - and it appears to be a very old joke. So copyvio is not here.  "Not useful" is not required in userspace.  Hence Keep, even a vulgar joke. Collect (talk) 14:13, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep What article is it copied from TenPoundHammer? It's a subpage, not a article, ScottMHoward.  Thank you, Collect, it's an old joke, I got it from MySpace, my neighbor copied it down and put it on that page, so you can't delete a page, because it seems "useless" or "looks copied". --  Demon Hunter Rules   ]] ( talk ) 23:27, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete A little much for fair use in userspace, especially when it's not relevant to the encyclopedia. Even an old joke isn't technically public domain unless it was pre 1923.  This one seems like maybe 40s vintage judging by the mention of shaving cream, which weren't as common until after WWII. Gigs (talk) 15:11, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep I don't see the problem. Probably a hoax, so what? Would it help if a humor template were added?-- SPhilbrick  T  22:07, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - Yeah, it's a stupid joke, but humour pages should be related to Wikipedia and not just a whole bunch of bosh.  Kayau  Voting  IS   evil 12:02, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Weak delete - not very funny and copyright status undetermined. Would be weak keep if contributor was active. –xenotalk 15:49, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak. User is a little active.  Don't delete due to unsubstantiated copyright fears.  Is just random humour unrelated to wikipedia, not to be confused with many "humour" pages that actually have project-related educational value.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:25, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
 * ...delete. Too far unrelated to the project.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:00, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete This surely does not aid anyone in building an encyclopedia, and Wikipedia is not a webhost. I heard this joke when I was a kid, and I doubt anyone will assert copyright for it; however, that doesn't mean we should keep this. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 03:59, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as random humor unrelated to Wikipedia. While Wikipedia-related humor can be acceptable (hence, Category:Wikipedia humor), Wikipedia is not a repository for general jokes that are easily accessible through hundreds of other websites. -- Black Falcon (talk) 04:55, 9 March 2010 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.