Wikiquote:Votes for deletion
Community portal Welcome | Reference desk Request an article | Village pump Archives | Administrators' noticeboard Report vandalism • Votes for deletion |
Votes for deletion is the process where the community discusses whether a page should be deleted or not, depending on the consensus of the discussion.
Please read and understand the Wikiquote deletion policy before editing this page.
- Explain your reasoning for every page you list here, even if you think it is obvious.
- Always be sure to sign your entry or vote, or it will not be counted.
The process
Requesting deletions
To list a single article for deletion for the first time, follow this three-step process:
I: Put the deletion tag on the article. |
Insert the {{vfd-new}} tag at the top of the page.
|
II: Create the article's deletion discussion page. |
Click the link saying "this article's entry" to open the deletion-debate page.
|
III: Notify users who monitor VfD discussion. |
Copy the tag below, and then click THIS LINK to open the deletion log page. At the bottom of the log page, insert:
replacing PAGENAME appropriately.
|
Note: Suggestions for requesting deletion of multiple pages, non-article pages, and repeat nominations may be found at VFD tips.
Voting on deletions
Once listed, the entire Wikiquote community is invited to vote on whether to keep or delete each page, or take some other action on it. Many candidate articles will have specific dates by which to vote; if none is given, you can assume at least seven days after the article is listed before the votes are tallied.
To vote, jump or scroll down to the entry you wish to vote on, click its "edit" link, and add your vote to the end of the list, like one of these:
- Keep. ~~~~
- Delete. ~~~~
- (other actions; explain) ~~~~
- Comment (not including action) ~~~~
Possible other actions include Merge, Rename, Redirect, Move to (sister project). Please be clear and concise when describing your action.
The four tildes (~~~~) will automatically add your user ID and a timestamp to your vote. This is necessary to ensure each Wikiquotian gets only a single vote. You can add some comments to your vote (before the tildes) to explain your reasons, but it is not required. However, it may help others to decide which way to vote.
Please do not add a vote after the closing date and time; any late vote may be struck out and ignored by the closing admin.
NOTE: Although we use the term "vote", VfD is not specifically a democratic process, as we have no way of verifying "one person, one vote". It is designed to "take the temperature" of the community on a subject. Sysops have the responsibility of judging the results based on a variety of factors, including (besides the votes) policies, practices, precedents, arguments, compromises between conflicting positions, and seriousness of the participants.
Closing votes and deleting articles
Sysops have the responsibility to review the list and determine what articles have achieved a consensus, whether it is for deletion, preservation, or some other action. All candidate articles should be listed here at least seven days before the votes are tallied. Many VfD entries will have "Vote closes" notices to indicate when the votes will be tallied.
- The sysop tallying the vote should add a Template:Vfd top ("vote closed" header with the result of the vote) to the top of the article's VfD discussion page, as well as a Template:Vfd bottom at the end of the page.
- If consensus is for deletion, the sysop should follow the deletion process to delete the article.
- If it is to keep, or if there is no consensus for action, the sysop should remove the {{vfd-new}} tag from the article and post a notice on the article's talk page about the completed VfD, including a link to the VfD discussion on that article. The {{vfd-kept-new}} template can be used for a standard notice.
- There may also be a vote to move (rename) or otherwise change the article. The sysop's actions will depend on the specific situation in these cases. In those cases, a notice should also be posted on the talk page documenting the decision.
To avoid conflict of interest, a sysop should never close a VfD that he or she started. However, a sysop may close a VfD in which he or she has voted.
After a reasonable time, a sysop will then move the entire entry into the appropriate month page of the VfD log. (Some old discussions are available only in the old Wikiquote:Votes for deletion archive.)
Note: In the interest of cross-wiki cooperation, please check Wikipedia to make sure their articles don't link back to an article that has just been deleted. Also de-link any other language edition articles.
Reviewing closed votes
All closed votes will be archived indefinitely in per-month pages at Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Log. (A few are still found only in the old Wikiquote:Votes for deletion archive.) See that page for details.
Deletion candidates
Lack of quotability. This is just a bland, generic statement of a politician, insufficient for Wikiquote. — Markjoseph125 (talk) 23:45, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, as nominator. Markjoseph125 (talk) 23:49, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
Vote closes: 00:00, 16 May 2024 (UTC). Markjoseph125 (talk) 23:45, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
I nominate this page for deletion due to multiple reasons. They all stem out of the fact that the page was created by a notable crosswiki vandal, who is among other things known for inventing sources as well as inserting misinformation in the articles he creates. After reading the page we see that most of the quotes are actually unrelated to Bellagio specifically and might be better to move them to more appropriate pages. In case someone would actually split the content, there are no more quotes regarding Bellagio specifically, thus making it unquotable and a good candidate for deletion. — A09 (talk) 17:27, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Vote closes: 18:00, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, per nom - fully agree. ~ UDScott (talk) 18:11, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, per nom and first comment. Markjoseph125 (talk) 00:19, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
I nominate this page for deletion due to multiple reasons, the main being quotability. Another notable argument supporting deletion is the fact that the page was created by w:en:WP:LTA/Alec Smithson, who is known for inserting misinformation and false/nonexistent sources. In this case, it is no different: first quote is actually unrelated to Colico while the other two sources, L’isola. L’enigmatica storia del Santo Graal sul Lario and La leggenda del Santo Graal e del lago di Como: quando fu portato sull'Isola Comacina are actually completely made up and should be removed. Thus after appropriately assessing all three quotes we see that the Colico is deemed unquotable at the moment. — A09 (talk) 17:34, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Vote closes: 18:00, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, per nom - fully agree. ~ UDScott (talk) 18:11, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, per nom and first comment. Markjoseph125 (talk) 00:19, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
I am nominating this page for deletion due to multiple reasons, the main being unquotability. Even though it seems like Mt Grigna has a lot of quotes, we should consider checking the cited sources. The historicality of Codex Atlanticus is undisputed, but the second source Mi sento in un destino could not be found via any possible means. Furthermore, when checking attribution of quotes for Codex Atlanticus in the digitalised version we see that most of the quotes are made up. I could not locate a single appearance of Grigna in the digitalised text. Thus after appropriately assesing all acessible quotes, we see that no quotes are left, thus making the subject unquotable. Another argument supporting deletion besides obviously fake quotes is the fact that this page was created by w:en:WP:LTA/Alec Smithson, a known crosswiki vandal. — A09 (talk) 11:52, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Vote closes: 12:00, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, per nom. ~ UDScott (talk) 12:35, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, per nom and first comment. Markjoseph125 (talk) 00:20, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
I nominate this page for deletion due to multiple reasons, the main being quotability. After carefully assessing sources we have an abudance of references to a Codex Atlanticus, which is a primary source. However, after looking through the digitalised version of the codex I could not find any mentions of Fiumelatte. Another cited source, La caduta dei Longobardi is also completely made up and could not be found in any modern library catalogue. I believe the original creator and a longterm abuser Alec Smithson deliberately inserted misinformation in this article. I could not asses the last quote as I couldn't locate the exact source, however the only positive side is that the magazine actually exists. On the other hand I believe one quote is not notable enough for an entry in the Wikiquote and thus should be deleted. — A09 (talk) 13:48, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Vote closes: 14:00, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, per nom. ~ UDScott (talk) 12:38, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, per nom and first comment. Markjoseph125 (talk) 00:20, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
Contested PROD for lack of notability. The problem remains - this person is not notable enough for inclusion in the project. — UDScott (talk) 11:56, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
Vote closes: 12:00, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. ~ UDScott (talk) 11:56, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, per nom. Markjoseph125 (talk) 02:00, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
Contested PROD for lack of notability - the problem remains. — UDScott (talk) 12:03, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
Vote closes: 13:00, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. ~ UDScott (talk) 12:03, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, per nom. Markjoseph125 (talk) 02:01, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
The subject does not meet Wikiquote's notability criteria, lacking significant independent coverage or verifiable public influence. The page does not provide evidence of enduring public interest or wide recognition necessary for inclusion. — Saroj (talk) 15:59, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, Because the explanation on the subject and why this page should be deleted, does not make sense, be more clear and specific, as this page is necessary and the statistics say so, and that although is not a “public figure” as you say, that’s what I understood, that does not mean it has an impact on society, this page is important like many others, and I do not understand why administrators do this kind of thing, understand that doing this is not right, verify it first, as they are too important quotes where you can verify, thank you. 68.192.41.175 17:03, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Because this character have done an important impact in the last 3 years and not being public or not constantly showing himself to society does not mean he is not important, as he is, and deserves to be in Wikiquote, Wikidata, and other encyclopedias in the future, as the impact he has had on the community and the generation he belongs to is important, once again not being in the public eye always, does not mean you are not important, as he is and very much so, thank you. 68.192.41.175 17:10, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, per nom. This person does not appear to be notable enough. ~ UDScott (talk) 17:17, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - My opinion is to let this page work as it has been working, the statistics say if it is important or not, but the page has had 248 views in the last 30 days, that is called “not looking remarkable enough” as this administrator says, which is not true, but I has worked to keep this page clear and clean as in other exiclopedias, but it seems that it is more personal, not to give the opportunity to the new generations, and if he represents a great impact in his generation, his successes have to be marked, and not obstruct the way of the new artists, actors, models, singers etc, this is my opinion, but beyond that it is up to the administrators how they will work on this, thank you. Imjuswannahelp (talk) 23:32, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
Vote closes: 16:00, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
Contested PROD for lack of notability. The problem remains. — UDScott (talk) 15:16, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
Vote closes: 16:00, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, unless evidence of notability can be provided. ~ UDScott (talk) 15:16, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
Not sufficiently notable; the subject in question doesn't have a proper Wikipedia article ("Me & Mickey" currently redirects to another article). Extreme lack of quotability. — 03isrflo62410 (talk) 23:55, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
- Please don’t delete it! 170.199.151.33 16:05, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
- Don't delete 170.199.151.33 17:32, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
Vote closes: 00:00, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, nom. 03isrflo62410 (talk) 23:55, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, per nom. ~ UDScott (talk) 12:24, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
- Don’t delete it! I have worked really hard on it. 170.199.151.33 16:07, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
- Please don’t delete it! I have worked really hard on it! 170.199.151.33 16:07, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. Tanbiruzzaman (talk) 16:18, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
- Don’t delete! I have worked very hard on it! 170.199.151.33 17:32, 29 October 2024 (UTC)