Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Toilet paper orientation: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
:({{Find sources|Toilet paper orientation}}) |
:({{Find sources|Toilet paper orientation}}) |
||
This looks like some sort of a joke. As far as I can tell, the masses and masses of citations and references are a complete smokescreen. Most of the article doesn't discuss toilet paper orientation at all but tangentially related topics. [[User:Xjobcon|Xjobcon]] ([[User talk:Xjobcon|talk]]) 19:52, 14 July 2010 (UTC) |
This looks like some sort of a joke. As far as I can tell, the masses and masses of citations and references are a complete smokescreen. Most of the article doesn't discuss toilet paper orientation at all but tangentially related topics. [[User:Xjobcon|Xjobcon]] ([[User talk:Xjobcon|talk]]) 19:52, 14 July 2010 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''' as the topic is notable and your claims that it is a joke and references are faulty seem false. [[User:Nefesf9|Nefesf9]] ([[User talk:Nefesf9|talk]]) 20:02, 14 July 2010 (UTC) |
|||
:'''Keep''' - Oddly, a somewhat random sampling of the voluminous cites seems to verify that people really like to write about this topic. I note that the article was a 'Do You Know' selection July 12. Notable and referenced and, need I say, balanced. [[User:AbbyKelleyite|Abby Kelleyite]] ([[User talk:AbbyKelleyite|talk]]) 20:12, 14 July 2010 (UTC) |
:'''Keep''' - Oddly, a somewhat random sampling of the voluminous cites seems to verify that people really like to write about this topic. I note that the article was a 'Do You Know' selection July 12. Notable and referenced and, need I say, balanced. [[User:AbbyKelleyite|Abby Kelleyite]] ([[User talk:AbbyKelleyite|talk]]) 20:12, 14 July 2010 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 20:17, 14 July 2010
- Toilet paper orientation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This looks like some sort of a joke. As far as I can tell, the masses and masses of citations and references are a complete smokescreen. Most of the article doesn't discuss toilet paper orientation at all but tangentially related topics. Xjobcon (talk) 19:52, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
- Keep as the topic is notable and your claims that it is a joke and references are faulty seem false. Nefesf9 (talk) 20:02, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Oddly, a somewhat random sampling of the voluminous cites seems to verify that people really like to write about this topic. I note that the article was a 'Do You Know' selection July 12. Notable and referenced and, need I say, balanced. Abby Kelleyite (talk) 20:12, 14 July 2010 (UTC)