Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Peer review/SpaceX Starship/archive2
- 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: WP:SNOW keep. (non-admin closure) Elli (talk | contribs) 12:29, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Peer review/SpaceX Starship/archive2
Frivolous peer review. Bad jokes are not the purpose of peer reviews. Whiteguru (talk) 21:00, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Keep, but recommend Userfying. Bad / stupid / joke article reviews should NOT be deleted, as it is too close to being censorship of reviews that you don’t like. These article review processes need a better process for joke reviews. It’s complicated because a joke review can contain pertinent review content. I suggest considering userfying. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:44, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
Delete Wp:censor is not an excuse to act like a doofus in a serious project space.Speedy Keep No longer any reason to delete. Dronebogus (talk) 23:58, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Changed, sorry for acting like that earlier. I changed the peer review. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 01:26, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Speedy keep, they put in a joke but the review itself was serious according to them. Nigos (talk | contribs) 07:28, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Speedy keep: It's clearly a real peer review request, even with the joke. ––FormalDude
talk 09:55, 21 December 2021 (UTC) - PLEASE keep: I've just written a very lengthy peer review there. 😬😬😬 Leijurv (talk) 08:58, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- 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.