Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Logic

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. Unproductive and not funny. Please use userspace rather than actual encyclopedia processes for attempts at humor. See WP:AN#April Fools nominations getting out of hand. Sandstein 18:10, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Logic

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

Does logic exist? $p\to {\bar {p}}\cong T$ . There--we have used logic to prove that logic doesn't exist. Therefore all references to said misbegotten child of mankind must be purged. ManishEarth^{Talk • Stalk} 03:47, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep if Logic doesn't exist, then the proof is nullified.
- Wait, then that means Logic exists and we should Delete it per nom.
  - Wait-- Keep since we have nullified the proof
    - AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA. More appropriately, AWWDMBJAWGCAWAIFDSPBATDMTAD
      - Wash. Rinse. Repeat
      - We already have an article on that: AaaaaAAaaaAAAaaAAAAaAAAAA!!! – A Reckless Disregard for Gravity. --MuZemike 15:19, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's only logical. The Utahraptor ^Talk/_Contribs 04:01, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, logically. CycloneGU (talk) 04:06, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Pi. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 07:19, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 April 1. Snotbot t • c » 09:21, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DELLLLLLLEEEEEEEEEEETTTTTTTTTTTTTTTEEEEEEEEEEEEEE LOGIC IS INTOLERABLE. --SupernovaExplosion ^Talk 11:40, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Change its text to "This article is false", and then it will self-destruct in a burst of logic. (It worked for Captain Kirk against more than one superintelligent machine.) *Dan T.* (talk) 14:50, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Trim substantially and merge to Spock, as it's only interesting to readers as a subtopic there. postdlf (talk) 16:09, 1 April 2012 (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.