Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Cockpuppet

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

The result of the discussion was keep and move to user space. While there is no sufficient consensus to keep this in the project space, there is a fairly clear one to keep the page and move it to user space. — Aitias // discussion 00:44, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Cockpuppet

Incorrectly sent to AfD here by Bwilkins with rationale "Primarily violates WP:NEO as an unknown/fake neologism. Could be userfied as an essay, if properly expanded".

Procedural nomination; I have no opinion on deletion. Olaf Davis (talk) 11:37, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nom I was in the process of moving this here myself (nom at 6AM, didn't notice it was in WP space, and not article space). Thanks to Olaf Davis for the move. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:10, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I lol'd. ReverendWayne (talk) 14:23, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ Move - Funny, but not appropriate as a separate entity. The user should just keep the idea on his user page. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 16:06, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Move into their userspace so the user can develop it there. GrooveDog (talk) (Review) 16:42, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy Does not appear to be an attack page as such, and WP certainly has room for this in userspace. Collect (talk) 20:03, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I feel this should be deleted because it doesn't seem to serve any useful purpose. It seems to be a neologism that has no usage around the project. fr33k man ^-simpleWP- 21:58, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, I'm pretty sure the term itself is derived from this amusing typo. I think the page is pretty funny, and I'm not opposed to its being in WP space. That said, if we must must, moving to userspace is acceptable. ÷seresin 22:33, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, if that was a "typo", it is interesting that there are not typos of sockpuppet for qockpuppet, wockpuppet, eockpuppet, aockpuppet, dockpuppet, zockpuppet, xockpuppet, or ockpuppet (all of which are more plausable given the keyboard configurations). My cat's breath smells like catfood (talk) 23:08, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Maybe no one has searched those typos on the page. Please remember that that word is "funny" and a lot better than zockpuppet. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 00:09, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - And once they're caught, they become blockpuppets. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 02:33, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Although this seems weird, it is applicable due to the immaturity of people out there on this site. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 00:09, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy or mark as humor per nom. The Junk Police (reports|works) 02:41, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Puppetry of the Penis. --99.140.183.41 (talk) 07:21, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmm... you re do not know WP:Cross namespace redirects? The Junk Police (reports|works) 01:58, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hadn't thought of that. I added the dab link. My cat's breath smells like catfood (talk) 01:42, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, userfy, mark as humorous material. Also I lol'd. And Bugs' comment is great. Someone who socks on WWF and bad movie articles? theRockpuppet. Goatse vandals? Shockpuppets. Inserting bunkum into medical articles? docpuppet. (Legal articles get dockpuppets, of course). Near-mythical vandals? rocpuppets. I could do this all day... → ROUX ₪ 23:26, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- - And for bad pawns -- hockpuppets? Collect (talk) 01:25, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy as per any single authored disputed essay. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:22, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy: It's pretty firmly established that the Wikipedia namespace is only for super srs business. Lawl. --MZMcBride (talk) 04:08, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Your comment is in violation of WP:SERIOUS, I kindly request you strike your vote. BJ^Talk 04:16, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. We have WP:DICK and this seems equally as reasonable and surely more funny. The dab link is classic. Hahaha. Lara 04:54, 18 July 2009 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.