`  == Apollo hoax in popular culture == Hi, I don't appreciate you reverting my edit to the Hoax page. I know your view is that all the links should remain because you think that even passing popular culture references are notable. However, consensus was clear to me that in this case they are not. And I've provided evidence as to how I know that consensus exists. In reverting my edits not only did you revert changes that weren't related to the removal of content but you also re-added points in which html tags within the article code say not to include, showing you didn't even bother to read what you were editing. That, in my eyes, is poor form. Not my attempt at actually producing a version of the article that might actually be saved. Read the comments at both AfDs thoroughly and then honestly tell me that no pruning of the article is required.    :And I certain the many editors who added the content to begin with don't appreciate you trying to remove it.  You don't save an article by destroying most of it.  People that hate popular culture articles will NEVER be happy with any content in them, and those who like them want as much content as possible.  Wikipedia articles exist for those who enjoy reading the content, not people that will never do more than a brief skim through if they bother finding it at all.  I've done enough AFDs for popular culture articles to know how these things work.  It will be saved, without any prunning being necessary.   ::Really there are some quite notable references in that article that could and should be saved. But your insistence that everything in that article is noteworthy is not the consensus of the discussions. I respect your right to have that opinion but you can't pretend that your view is the consensus when it is not. You are probably right, the article will be saved, probably with no consensus, but hopefully with a recommendation for significant pruning. At least the last AfD had such a recommendation but as ever it wasn't acted upon.   `