Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedians for Jimbo's beard

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete with a copy to BJAODN.

In evaluating this discussion, I merged the three related discussions. Given the topic, it seems to me that an inconsistent result would be the worst possible choice.

Wikipedia:Non-main namespace pages for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedians who frankly don't care about Jimbo's beard
Wikipedia:Non-main namespace pages for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedians for Jimbo's beard
Wikipedia:Non-main namespace pages for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedians against Jimbo's beard

By strict vote-counting, I get the following:

	Delete	BJAODN	Keep	Merge	could not call
"against..."	8	11	7	2	1
"for..."	9	8	13	2	1
"don't care..."	13	6	8	1	0
summed	15 2/3	12 5/6	12 1/2	2	2

The last line represents the opinions if you took all three discussions and merged them, then eliminated duplication. The fractions come from 2 people who voted differently in the different discussions.

I should also note that 5 of the "keep" voters did so with comments that make it very difficult to tell if they were being serious. Their stated reasons appear to have no connection to the discussion. My hypothesis is that the discussion is about a joke and they consider surreal comments to be humorous and therefore appropriate. Not every culture shares that view, however. I was within a hair's-breadth of putting those comments in the "could not call" column.

Noting that a synopsis is already in the BJAODN archive, I am going to take the last step to delete the pages and the related redirects. Rossami (talk) 02:52, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedians for Jimbo's beard

Bad joke. BJAODN. Andrew pmk | Talk 01:01, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

First, merge all "Beard" VFD's together. Second, keep (and BJAODN) all of them. I'd like to see where this ends up if it's allowed to go on. --Titoxd 01:13, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Temporarily, that is... --Tito xd 01:16, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. non-encyclopedic. Elfguy 01:18, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete
Keep. ‣ᓛᖁᑐ 01:39, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep. We went over this before and it was speedy keep. They should all be merged however. Please note that these were made at a time when Wikipedia desperately needed a laugh, and they served their purpose (See FreplySpang's comment on its talk page). But now let us merge them and put it in Category:Wikipedia humor. Redwolf24 (talk) 01:48, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete amusing while they lasted, but they needn't last. -Splash 02:17, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. *drew 02:47, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
BJAODN works for me. FreplySpang (talk) 03:55, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
BJAODN shouldn't be a wikiproject but definately deserves a place at BJAODN. Jtkiefer ^{T | @ | C} ----- 04:04, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
Delete, useless project, not funny enough for BJAODN. — JIP | Talk 07:31, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Joke project, has outlived the joke. --Tony Sidaway ^Talk 07:59, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
BJAODN, nice parody of the censorship/countercensorship Wikiproject debacle. R adiant _>|< 08:55, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
Keep but Merge all the Beard projects into one and put into category:Wikipedia:Humour. Thryduulf 10:20, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all Jimbobeardcruft.--Scimitar ^parley 16:13, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. -- user:zanimum
Speedy keep, Leviticus 19:27 Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 20:08, 2005 August 29 (UTC)
BJAODN - Mike "Mig" 23:59, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
GJAODN --Ryan Delaney ^talk 08:28, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, MOVE to Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedians against Wikipedians against Jimbo's beard --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 16:03, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain A comment, I think the problem with Jimbo's beard is the length. It's too short and it makes it a little stubly. He needs to grow it longer and the longer the better. Hopefully so long he needs servants to carry it. DyslexicEditor 19:49, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - since when is humor not permitted? — Dan | Talk 23:30, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I'm violent supportive of Jimbo's beard. I'd support a move to commons though. --fvw * 00:17, September 1, 2005 (UTC)
Comment: ElfGuy said non-encyclopedic... is that a criteria for non namespace VfD's? </rhetorical> R e dwolf24 (talk) 23:16, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — Matt Crypto 08:15, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all joke wikiprojects including specifically this one per my reasoning in the related discussion below.Rossami (talk) 18:54, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Lulu. ~ Syrae Faileas - «Talk» 21:14, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Lulu Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 07:17, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all beard projects. They show Wikipedia isn't as boring as you'd think. :) - ulayiti (talk) (my RfA) 13:31, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - it has run its course. -- DS1953 03:39, September 5, 2005 (UTC)
Speedy keep. First of all it has already been through this and has been kept. Secondly, without such things, WP is like a nerds' club.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 04:37, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep. Yay! Notable! :D --WikiFanatic,^{formerly known as WikiFan04}^{Talk 00:03, 5 Sep 2005 (CDT)}
In Soviet Russia, beard grows you! Keep or Move to Mother Russia Wikipedia Project2501a 14:27, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: opposition to funny Wikipedia pages, if done, should be done as a policy, not piecemeal. ~~Article has already been vfd and kept~~ can't confirm. ~~Possible move to meta.~~nevermind about thatDDerby (talk) 15:56, 8 September 2005 (UTC) edited 17:31, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.