Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Parodies/Wickerpedia

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany 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 debate was Keep. Xoloz 17:39, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Parodies/Wickerpedia

Wickerpedia was nominated for deletion on 2005-07-19. The result of the discussion was "delete" and the article was deleted on 2005-08-02. For the prior discussion, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wickerpedia.

This site does not appear notable (WP:WEB) outside of a rather limited sub-community. Additionally this article falls well foul of WP:V and is likely in conflict with WP:NOR. As well, it is very likely that this article meets the requirements for vanity deletion (see the specific vanity reason on WP's deletion policy) as there are very likely editors who edit on Encyclopedia of Stupid who concurrently edit the Wikipedia article that corresponds to it (in conflict of interest). Hardvice 11:08, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

• Comment Four wikis with no sources are up at the same time in order for wikipedia to gain a prescedence about this. Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Encyclopædia_Dramatica_(3rd_nomination) Wikipedia:Parodies/Wickerpedia (MFD discussion) Kamelopedia (AfD discussion) Encyclopedia Of Stupid (AfD discussion). Also please note Uncyclopedia has no sources, as well. Hardvice 11:16, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. There's a reason this isn't in the main namespace- it's meant to amuse Wikipedia editors. Captainktainer * Talk 11:47, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Belongs in the Wiki name space. The ones in main space should be moved to the wiki name space. Dgies 17:52, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep This is in the Wikipedia namespace, where WP:V and such don't apply. The project namespace is the appropriate place to keep unencylopedic material of interest to Wikipedians. -GTBacchus^(talk) 09:24, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per GTBacchus. (→Netscott) 10:33, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, humor. Ashibaka tock 12:00, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
• abstain [User:Rootology|rootology]] 15:30, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete per G4. -^demon^{[yell at me]} 13:48, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Hi I'm curious about notability requirements that differentiate between main article and sub namespace. I did not vote on these AFDs I made and I'm not going to. I want to here your reasoning your speedy as there seems to be some rule that 2nd source verification doesn't matter when something is off main namespace in a subsection of an article. This question can be answered by all. Hardvice 14:18, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep in the Wikipedia namespace as humour. --Zoz (t) 15:44, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, as not in main space, but perhaps add a 'joke' or 'humour' tag? EVOCATIVEINTRIGUE TALKTOME | EMAILME | IMPROVEME 14:21, 24 July 2006 (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.