Talk:April 2011

I'm not sure if the prank calls by PCAssassins should go here. They revealed some information, sure, but historically these sorts of things haven't ended up in these articles. Freecell (t/c) 07:01, 9 April 2011 (PDT)

Well we don't have much else to go with. These past few months have been quiet as fuck. Nullity 08:05, 9 April 2011 (PDT)

True, but I'm not sure if there's a policy on this or not. Either this is "It gave valuable information, so it goes into the article" or it's "It was a prank call, so it goes into the article". Which one the admins want will have an effect on several articles. Freecell (t/c) 07:45, 9 April 2011 (PDT)

Can't it go in both? I added the call to the Prank Calls page, anyway. Admins can make a Sophie's Choice now. Nullity 07:59, 9 April 2011 (PDT)

• I think adding prank call stuff to the CWChronology would be a bad precedent and comes off as being too desperate. If Chris does nothing this month, so be it, but we don't need to add filler.--Champthom 13:31, 9 April 2011 (PDT)

Should I then take out the prank call entry for March 2011?

• It's there? If it is, yeah. In any case, good thinking about putting it in the prank call page. I totally forgot about that page and I was ready to make a page for the call, so people would stop bitching about there being a "conspiracy" but putting it on the prank calls page is definitely the best solution. --Champthom 15:59, 9 April 2011 (PDT)