Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/No (3rd nomination)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy keep. April Fools has ended (non-admin closure) -KAP03(^{Talk • Contributions • Email}) 02:06, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No

This page contains material that is kept because it is considered humorous.
Such material is not meant to be taken seriously.

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No. Just no. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 00:59, 1 April 2017 (UTC) Yes - delete - preferably speedily. ↅ𝜞 _{(Contact me) (See my edits)} 01:02, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Because I like votes.^{[April Fools!]} Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 01:12, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe. can someone propose Past for AfD so we can make more paradoxes? DiamondMiner7^On_WHEELz!^{april fools!}_ProDuct0339 01:21, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
But can you even? If not, delete. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:31, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes because no. ThePlatypusofDoom ^{April Fools!} 12:39, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No keep ... wait no delete ... No I don't no no. –Davey2010^Talk 13:56, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
NO —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 14:31, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Say no! Eye snore 14:38, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nooooooo --Tito Dutta (talk) 15:21, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo because why not? -'KAP03(^{Talk • Contributions • Email}) 16:24, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
How about no? Tompop888^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:43, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Tompop888: What about a redirect to Uranus instead? -KAP03(^{Talk • Contributions • Email})
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!! — Darth Vader (talk) 20:59, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: While many valid arguments for keeping the page have been submitted throughout the course of the discussion, I intend to relist this debate as many times as it takes for a "delete" consensus to emerge, as is customary. Vote early, vote often.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:41, 1 April 2017 (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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.