Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Apocrypha Discordia (4th nomination)
with Principia Discordia as a logical adjunct to that work. However, for the record I have to state my discomfort at articles being disqualified for existence on the grounds that a guideline (not a policy; guidelines can be ignored) came into being ''after'' an article was created.  In this case I happen to believe this item should be merged with the main book. However I urge my fellow editors to never use the fact that WP:BK did not exist when an article was created as a rationale for nominating anything. I do not acknowledge onsensus can change on this issue because I feel it is more closely related to |Notability does not expire
— User:23skidoo, 15:58, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Stance: merge
Cited policy: WP:C||WP:NTEMP (Wikipedia:Copyrights)