RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Disagreeing by deleting

Disagreeing by deleting | Result: it's a joke, kids. also: moved

 * – ( View AfD View log )

THIS WAS A JOKE. BLAME PACWALKER

Delete

 * 1) No sane person could believe that this article is correct; as such, we should rid ourselves of it. PacWalker 03:22, 3 April 2015 (UTC) Sucker count: now up to five seven over 9000.
 * fffffffssssssssssssss. ʇυzzγɔɒтqoтɒтo (talk/stalk) 16:40, 3 April 2015 (UTC) sneaky bastard
 * Definitely not expressing my disagreement with disagreeing by deleting by trying to delete it or anything... ;) PacWalker 16:46, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
 * To clarify: this was an (apparently overly) elaborate joke. PacWalker 03:17, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) While guilty of said crime myself, I do not see any missionality to this article. Cast it into the void. --Madman (talk) 19:02, 3 April 2015 (UTC)The Madman
 * You get bonus points for falling for it hook, line, sinker, and fisherman. PacWalker 03:22, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Keep

 * 1) I think it has a place, as it can be seen as a sort of logical fallacy. 04:19, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
 * 2) It's a form of censorship, so of course it should stay, but perhaps with a different title. Bicycle  wheel silverbrain.png 10:37, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
 * 3) Either rename it to Internet censorship or just merge into Censorship. FrizzyCatPotato (talk/stalk) 15:04, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
 * 4) Keep or merge. Censorship on Internet forums, maybe? - Smerdis of Tlön, LOAD "*", 8, 1. 18:43, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
 * merging into Censorship looks like a good idea. Bicycle  wheel silverbrain.png 19:36, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

The article isn't *incorrect*, it's definitely a thing that happens and keeping everyone alert to it is good. If you must merge, Burning the Evidence would be a better destination. MatsFan (talk) 12:48, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Goat

 * This is very much a thing - but this is not the title for this. -- Mie kal  04:53, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree that the tile is... not intuitive. "Censorship" may not be the right word though.--ZooGuard (talk) 16:24, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
 * What instead? Sir ℱ℧ℤℤϒℂᗩℑᑭƠℑᗩℑƠ (talk/stalk) 16:25, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
 * "Argument By/through/other Censorship?" The point is it's "I'm correct because nobody else disagrees (because i removed all dissent)".-- Mie kal  18:58, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I like Argument by censorship. Moved and archived! ʇυzzγɔɒтqoтɒтo (talk/stalk) 03:46, 5 April 2015 (UTC)