RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Age of consent

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Age of consent | Result: ?[edit]

Age of consent (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Delete[edit]

  1. "Off mission" -- reason given by User:PBustion87 on page, but posted here by User:FuzzyCatPotato to make the AFD work oʇɐʇoԀʇɐϽʎzznℲ (talk/stalk) 15:51, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

  1. Seems pretty on-mission to me. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 16:03, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
  2. I'm not particularly in love with this article but there's no reason to delete it. Doxys Midnight Runner (talk) 16:21, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
  3. Make it three. Herr FuzzyKatzenPotato (talk/stalk) 21:19, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Goat[edit]

  1. Meh. Hipocrite (talk) 15:40, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
  2. A great opener for New Order's best album. BicyclewheelModerator 20:23, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Doing this to make the AFD happen, not actually supporting delete. Cømrade FυzzчCαтPøтαтø (talk/stalk) 15:38, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Then why not just let someone else who wants the article gone make the deletion so we at least know the proposed reason. ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 15:39, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
... Reasons. I totally have them. oʇɐʇoԀʇɐϽʎzznℲ (talk/stalk) 15:51, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
Don't do that, FCP. We don't need to "make AFD happen" if there's nothing for it to do. --Castaigne (talk) 15:52, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
The guy in delete added the AFD template, but probably didn't understand how to add the AFD here. Just fixing that. oʇɐʇoԀʇɐϽʎzznℲ (talk/stalk) 21:22, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
Stop wasting everybody's time, Fuzzy. WẽãšẽĩõĩďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 21:41, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
Everyone's acting like fixing someone's unfinished AFD is some terrible thing. It's not. Get over it. FᴜᴢᴢʏCᴀᴛPᴏᴛᴀᴛᴏ﹐ Esϙᴜɪʀᴇ (talk/stalk) 22:00, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
If you're not a moron you'll have noticed that PBustion87's deletion nomination on this article was just a retaliation for his/her own puberty article being deleted. Do you really think picking up other people's frivolous AFD cases that they can't be bothered to follow through themselves is a worthwhile exercise? ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 22:11, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
Weaseloid has the very correct point on this one. Let's just go ahead and archive this nonsense. --Castaigne (talk) 22:13, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
It's archived.
Sorry, Weaseloid, I didn't notice, because I wasn't following PBustion87's every action. Maybe you could say this next time, minus the insults? FuzzyCatTomato (talk/stalk) 23:42, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
Or you could go back through the Recent Changes and do some investigative history. ;) --Castaigne (talk) 14:37, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Generally my thought process doesn't go, "Huh, this person failed to do something perfectly, I better look into their probably insidious motives." oʇɐʇoԀʇɐϽʎzznℲ (talk/stalk) 15:19, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Mine do, especially a newbie editor on RW or WP - or at least I check for possible malice, just in case. if there is none, fine, and they get a nice welcome template. BicyclewheelModerator 18:43, 12 March 2015 (UTC)