Appendix talk:English/my hovercraft is full of eels
Latest comment: 2 years ago by This, that and the other in topic rfdef
The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for deletion (permalink).
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
Don't think how this phrase is useful.--Zcreator alt (talk) 16:27, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
- Delete. It's a joke. Equinox ◑ 19:24, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
- (Wow, is this one still open?) People don't have the same sense of humour and I bet a LOL PIRATE ZOMBIE NINJAS!!! page wouldn't survive long. This one is better because older users like it more? No it's still dumb, useless and annoying. I have a sense of humour and it's not based on pop-culture references. Equinox ◑ 03:54, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
- Delete. Per utramque cavernam (talk) 22:33, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
- Keep, it is OK to have some lighthearted appendices, as long as they don't become overly common. - TheDaveRoss 12:59, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
- I don't see why we should have it at all. What purpose does it serve? Per utramque cavernam 12:03, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
- Delete it is not OK, Dave. Not OK at all --XY3999 (talk) 00:10, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
- Keep. I wish to plead incompetence. – Jberkel 01:29, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
- Keep. Yes, it's silly and a joke, but I see it as more of an easter egg to put a smile on the face of who runs across it. It's also clearly separated from everything else, and if conlangs are any indication, the Appendix namespace is where we put things we don't want but don't want to delete. —Rua (mew) 17:39, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
- Keep. Doesn't hurt. We can't let Omniglot have a monopoly on translations of silly phrases. — Eru·tuon 18:26, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
- Delete. This phrase has no meaning except as a reference to Monty Python. Old Man Consequences (talk) 14:04, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
- No consensus to delete (5 in favour of deletion, if we include the OP, and 4 in favour of keeping). —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 06:26, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
rfdef
[edit]If the {{rfdef}} was part of the joke, I apologise. Feel free to put it back. I was mainly trying to get it out of the category. This, that and the other (talk) 14:27, 31 March 2022 (UTC)