Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Atlas Shrugged/Section181

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was BJAODN and delete. – ABCD 21:28, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Atlas Shrugged/Section181

All detailed Atlas Shrugged material was transwikied to Wikibooks, but I'm not even sure this is genuine - it bears little resemblance to the transwikied synopsis. Actually, it looks like complete bollocks. Delete either way. sjorford →•← 11:16, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• The contents of this "article" are a figment of the contributor's imagination. Delete. Raven42 12:15, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• I laughed. I cried. I contemplated voting Keep as a little way to brighten the life of anyone who's ever been forced to slog their way through the original, vastly inferior, text. But ultimately I decided that A is still A and that this should be deleted, albeit preserved on a special section of BJAODN for anti-Objectivists. :) Slac speak up! 12:20, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• BJAODN. I'm sure Karl would approve. -- 8^D ^gab 12:44, 2005 Mar 31 (UTC)
  • Furthermore, in addition to Delete and BJAODN, I propose calling Page 23 of BJAODN BJAODN Shrugged: Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense. --Kitch 12:45, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
    • What about Jimbo Shrugged? Slac speak up! 02:48, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Looks like generated by a random story generator :) Agree with the above, bjaodn. Radiant_* 14:21, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)
• Priceless! Delete and BJAODN and name the next page after it as suggested. Too pretty a face to mess up! - Lucky 6.9 21:41, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, complete nonsense. I don't this is even worthy of BJAODN and that's saying something. Megan1967 00:06, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Ooh, definitely BJAODN material. Clap, clap. Is there a Good jokes and other deleted material?  :) RickK 00:15, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete to BJAODN. Gazpacho 00:33, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Almost patent nonsense. Prank/hoax if the reader is intended to believe that this actually describes part of Ayn Rand's novel, personal essay/original creative burlesque if not. It didn't make me laugh. The language of the first line, "Dagny Taggart is getting really pissed off at Rearden," is anachronistic for the time the book was published, and doesn't sound like Ayn Rand's style. And that's just the first sentence. I don't think it's worthy of BJAODN. Dpbsmith (talk) 21:07, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, send to BJAODN. Yes, it's anachronistic, but that's part of the humor. JamesMLane 01:12, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• I clearly remember this scene, it's followed by Frodo... oh wait that was someting else, never mind. Delete Dsmdgold 22:43, Apr 2, 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.