Talk:Trolling With Logic

While this seems like great on-mission fun, why is it written like a fan-site for the various utubers mentioned? ħuman 03:00, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

I was going to ask "So who is in this group and do they have a central channel or something?", but then I saw that Human has deleted the list of members...--ZooGuard (talk) 20:52, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Delete?

"The trolling with logic team want this page deleted." Discuss. Sophie^Wilder 13:51, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

It would be useful to know why they want it deleted. The article doesn't seem very critical of TWL; in fact in reads like a fanboy piece. ωεαşεζøίɗ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 13:57, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

And is it they or just one of them? Sophie^Wilder 14:03, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Identity Confirmed

My email from them has confirmed it is Zulufightrunner of Trolling With Logic. Reckless Noise Symphony (talk) 14:12, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Did it confirm why they're behaving like this? Wẽãšẽĩõĩď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 14:26, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

No, mostly because I requested they do so here to help avoid any confusion lost in the translation from my e-mail. Reckless Noise Symphony (talk) 14:30, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Yay

Hi I'm one of the admins of the site (TWL) , created this account for the wiki discussion.

Was going to give my reasons but after seeing the "Nay" section with one comment "Piss Off" I realize this will very likely not be a fruitfull discussion. Do what you please.

No, please do share with us your concerns. Even if it is not deleted outright, we always work with you to make this article more to your tastes. Reckless Noise Symphony (talk) 14:31, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Please see that vote in the light of how it appeared - an unknown user blanking a page that's been around for just over two years. I'd very much like to hear your reasons. I'm aware some people prefer that this sort of article not exist, and while it's unlikely that I'll change my vote, I'll certainly consider it if your reason is a good one. rpeh •T•C•E• 14:32, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Nay

• Piss off. Sophie^Wilder 13:51, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
• If there's a good reason why the team want it deleted, maybe, but a drive-by blanking from a BoN - > no for now. rpeh •T•C•E• 13:57, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, but we do now know it is somebody legitimately from TWL. Honestly, I'd like to hear their concerns. Reckless Noise Symphony (talk) 14:30, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Looks like we just posted past each other. I'll consider my vote if there's a good reason, but I can't see what such a reason might be. rpeh •T•C•E• 14:33, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

• If they want the article deleted, they should say why. Hipocrite (talk) 14:58, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
• What Hip said. Nobody^{don't bother} 14:59, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

After further discussion with the team, they have decided to withdraw the request. Sorry for any inconvenience. Zulufightrunner (talk) 15:17, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Alright. Nobody^{don't bother} 15:17, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Goat

Tempest, teacups... ^pathetic 16:39, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Deadlinks

Two of the four links lead to dead youtube pages. Anyone have some fresh ones?--Zipperback (talk) 19:41, 21 March 2014 (UTC)