Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Bernoulli-Doppler-Leidenfrost-Peltzman-Sabir-Whorf-Dunning-Kruger-Stroop_effect References

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 deleted per CSD G12 by Anthony Bradbury as a copyright violation of an xkcd comic ~ mazca ^talk 00:22, 19 April 2020 (UTC) reply

Bernoulli-Doppler-Leidenfrost-Peltzman-Sabir-Whorf-Dunning-Kruger-Stroop effect

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

I think this is a joke. The only sources I can find are a website titled xkcd.com that I may or may not be reliable, and reddit. Fails WP:GNG. Hog Farm ( talk) 19:20, 18 April 2020 (UTC) reply

Delete - Clearly a hoax/joke page.-- Jorm ( talk) 19:29, 18 April 2020 (UTC) reply
Jorm, WHY DO YOU KEEP SHOWING UP IN MY LIFE?!?! Alex Devens ( talk) 19:43, 18 April 2020 (UTC) reply
Your talk page is on my watch list because you are a disruptive editor who left insulting messages on my talk page because I reverted some of your trolling or gave you a warning or something. It's very simple.-- Jorm ( talk) 23:06, 18 April 2020 (UTC) reply
Um no. You closed off my discussion on a talk page with a condescending, dismissive message. I wasn't "trolling"; you just didn't like what I had to say, so you silenced my attempt at starting a rational discussion - which you had no right to do whatsoever. After this, I called you out on it on your talk page, to which you responded with more smug, condescending snark. I then provided a helpful link to show you exactly what you had done, and why I was on your talk page, and STILL - rather than address the issue - you replied with even MORE passive-aggressive sarcasm. So I gather from that, and your above message, that after those interactions, you put my talk page on your watch list so you could jump in whenever you felt it was appropriate to insert yourself, and now your justification is that I am "a disruptive editor," despite the fact that the VAST majority of my contributions to this website have been constructive, not destructive. So to recap, you, Jorm, have:

- silenced me when I attempted to start a rational discussion, and given a smug, condescending message as your reason for doing so;
- given me more dismissive sarcasm when I confronted you about the issue on your talk page, refusing to address the issue;
- added my talk page to your watch list specifically so you could intervene whenever I became embroiled in something; and
- labeled me "a disruptive editor," as if that's at all your place to say, even though almost ALL my contributions are not disruptive.

From the limited interactions I have had with you, it seems to me that you, Jorm, are a genuinely awful human being. Now please, kindly burn in hell and never talk to me again. Alex Devens ( talk) 23:48, 18 April 2020 (UTC) reply

Cool story, bro.-- Jorm ( talk) 23:49, 18 April 2020 (UTC) reply
Comment I tagged it for G12, it copies the comic caption verbatim from XKCD. Schazjmd (talk) 19:42, 18 April 2020 (UTC) reply
Delete. xkcd is an excellent site which I recommend to everyone, but he would be the first to agree that he's not WP:RS. Narky Blert ( talk) 20:56, 18 April 2020 (UTC) reply
Could someone close this nomination? The article has been deleted. Schazjmd (talk) 00:06, 19 April 2020 (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.