Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mississippi Mud Pie

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 speedy keep DES ^(talk) 22:18, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mississippi Mud Pie

Slang term (having a different meaning at urbandictionary) for a sexual act "unknown if still in practice today, however rumored...". Delete as unverifiable slang. Kusma (討論) 05:03, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Wikipedia is not Wankapedia. Daniel Case 05:23, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
• Strong delete oh Christ... I just lost my appetite... this is Complete bollocks, Quote: man defecating into his partner's mouth and then placing his penis inside the mouth performing oral sex until orgasm ?!?!?!?!Well I looked up encyclopedia-of-sex.com as well and they don't list it either. —This user has left wikipedia 09:45 2006-02-02

*Delete as fast as possible. Horrible! Grandmasterka 11:14, 2 February 2006 (UTC) Keep rewrite, move per Youngamerican. Grandmasterka 20:35, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete without prejudice to recreation if it is about the notable eponymous dessert and not this sex act. Youngamerican 13:44, 2 February 2006 (UTC) Change vote to keep, as I re-wrote the article to be about the popular dessert pie that originated in Mississippi. Article should be renamed Mississippi mud pie if kept. Youngamerican 13:55, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep the rewrite, of course. (The early history could still be deleted). Kusma (討論) 14:18, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep the rewrite, and purge the other versions from the history if possible. -Colin Kimbrell 17:45, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep re-write and delete older history if possible. Thanks Youngamerican for fixing it! TMS63112 19:01, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: Copy the rewritten article to Mississippi mud pie and delete this artice, burn it's ashes and scatter them somewhere along w/ its history. —This user has left wikipedia 20:31 2006-02-02
  • Comment In keeping complient with the GFDL, We cannot simply copy and paste the article. We have to do a move, then an admin can delete the scatalogical edits before my total rewrite. I almost did the move a second ago, but I am pretty sure that it isn't appropriate to do a move while an AfD is ongoing (although I could be wrong). Youngamerican 20:37, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
    • As you are the only author of the new article, I don't see anything that stops you from putting your article at Mississippi mud pie via cut and paste. You are essentially resubmitting your own material again, not really copying. Kusma (討論) 21:13, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
      • Even though I have made 3 edits? Im going to rummage around some precedents here, hold on. Youngamerican 21:18, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
• Comment I copied this from the policy guide on moving pages: The "move page" function keeps the entire edit history of the page, before and after the move, in one place, as if the page were always named that way. So, you should never just move a page by cutting all the text out of one page, and pasting it into a new one; old revisions, notes, and attributions are much harder to keep track of if you do that.

This seems to indicate that the article should not be copied and pasted, even by me. I am putting up a RfC on this one. Youngamerican 21:25, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

• No need for a move, I simply deleted the articel and restored only the newer revisions. Thus the history is intact for your three revisions, but the older ones are gone. DES ^(talk) 22:18, 2 February 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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.