Difference between revisions of "Talk:Five pillars theory"
Nonsensical (talk | contribs) (New page: == Nomination for Deletion == *'''Delete''' - Or at the very least move to the ''failed attempt at Humor'' category ~~~~) |
|||
| (10 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | == Nomination for Deletion == | ||
| + | *'''Delete/Move''' - Or at the very least move to the ''failed attempt at Humor'' category [[User:Nonsensical|Nonsensical]] 13:33, 1 May 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | *'''Keep''' - I think it's an interesting theory, though of course it's entirely unoriginal and Tao is rather pompous in claiming it as his own. Nevertheless, I agree that it's in the wrong category. I propose we move it to new "[[:Category:Opinions|opinions]]", "editorials", or "opinion pieces" category. Personally, I'd appreciate such a category as an outlet for my occasional "[http://www.wikicu.com/index.php?title=Undergraduate_business_program&curid=3229&diff=12455&oldid=12442 editorializing rhetoric]". {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 14:19, 1 May 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | *'''Delete''' [[User:Umlund|Umlund]] 17:59, 1 May 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | *'''Move''' - it can go under [[Tao Tan]], possibly [[User:Pacman|Pacman]] 18:32, 1 May 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | *'''Keep'''' This isn't wikipedia, so pet theories are fair game. [[User:Feinstein|Feinstein]] 17:14, 2 May 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | *'''Keep'''+'''Move''' Can we put it under a category like "student pontifications and masturbations"?[[User:Stephen.wang|wang]] 22:06, 2 May 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | *'''Onanism''': i think we need to make an 'onanism' template, and this can be the first (of many) proud recipients.[[User:Umlund|Umlund]] 13:49, 3 May 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | :*Excellent suggestion! Although a category would be more appropriate than a template. {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 14:04, 3 May 2007 (EDT) | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | '''Since when is Amherst a university?''' | |
Latest revision as of 20:50, 3 May 2007
Nomination for Deletion
- Delete/Move - Or at the very least move to the failed attempt at Humor category Nonsensical 13:33, 1 May 2007 (EDT)
- Keep - I think it's an interesting theory, though of course it's entirely unoriginal and Tao is rather pompous in claiming it as his own. Nevertheless, I agree that it's in the wrong category. I propose we move it to new "opinions", "editorials", or "opinion pieces" category. Personally, I'd appreciate such a category as an outlet for my occasional "editorializing rhetoric". − Reaganaut 14:19, 1 May 2007 (EDT)
- Delete Umlund 17:59, 1 May 2007 (EDT)
- Move - it can go under Tao Tan, possibly Pacman 18:32, 1 May 2007 (EDT)
- Keep' This isn't wikipedia, so pet theories are fair game. Feinstein 17:14, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
- Keep+Move Can we put it under a category like "student pontifications and masturbations"?wang 22:06, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
- Onanism: i think we need to make an 'onanism' template, and this can be the first (of many) proud recipients.Umlund 13:49, 3 May 2007 (EDT)
- Excellent suggestion! Although a category would be more appropriate than a template. − Reaganaut 14:04, 3 May 2007 (EDT)
Since when is Amherst a university?
