Wikiquote:Votes for deletion

From Wikiquote
Jump to: navigation, search

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.
  • Please do not mark the edit as minor.
  • Use the edit summary to indicate the nomination; this can be as simple as "VFD".
  • You can check the "Watch this page" box to follow the page in your watchlist. This allows you to notice if the VfD tag is removed by a vandal.
  • Save the page.
II: Create the article's deletion discussion page.
Click the link saying "this article's entry" to open the deletion-debate page.
  • Copy the following: {{subst:vfd-new2| pg=PAGENAME| text=REASONING — ~~~~}}. Replace PAGENAME with the name of the page you're nominating, and REASONING with an explanation of why you think the page should be deleted. Note that the signature/timestamp characters (~~~~) are placed inside the braces {{ }}, not outside as with standard posts.
  • Explanations are important when nominating a page for deletion. While it may be obvious to you why a page should be deleted, not everyone will understand and you should provide a clear but concise explanation. Please remember to sign your comment by putting ~~~~ at the end.
  • Consider checking "Watch this page" to follow the progress of the debate.
  • Save the 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:
{{subst:vfd-new3 | pg=PAGENAME}}

replacing PAGENAME appropriately.

  • Please include the name of the nominated page in the edit summary.
  • Save the page. Your insertion will be automatically expanded to the same form as the preceding lines in the file: {{Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/PAGENAME}}.
  • Consider also adding {{subst:VFDNote|PAGENAME}} ~~~~ to the talk page of the article's principal contributor(s).

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 "vote closed" header with the result of the vote, and sign it.
  • 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 (though if you find that daunting, EVula is more than happy to do so).

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


Template:Quotability

This is not a useful maintenance template and maintenance category. Inappropriate content such as material lacking Wikiquote:Quotability should simply be removed. If none would remain on the page then the appropriate templates to use are {{prod}} or {{vfd-new}} — Ningauble (talk) 18:45, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Vote closes: 19:00, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep for the following reasons:
  1. If the problem with a given page is that the quotes aren't quotable enough, then the solution shouldn't be to delete the page, but to improve the page by finding quotes that are even more quotable.  Adding a {{Quotability}} notice in a given page will help direct editors to help improve it.
  2. As an inclusionist (as well as an eventualist), I find it dismaying to see pages deleted instead of being improved.  If and when more-quotable quotes exist than what appears in a given Wikiquote page, the solution should always be to find these more-quotable quotes and add them to the page, not to delete topics altogether.  This template helps to facilitate such improvements.  (Contrariwise, if one wishes to argue that a given page can't get any better, then that's not a reason for deleting the page, but rather for keeping it.)
allixpeeke (talk) 19:46, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment: Allixpeeke, I'm not sure I understand the rationale espoused in your second point above - If, as you have described it, a page can't get any better and yet also does not contain anything quotable, why would we want to keep it? The point of this site is to collect quotes that are quotable, not try to have a page for every topic under the sun. And if it does not appear that there will ever be anything quotable to list on a page, why not delete it? ~ UDScott (talk) 20:22, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Response:  My philosophy has been that each page should contain the most quotable quotes that exist about its topic.  Naturally, some topics will have quotes pertaining to them that are more quotable than the most quotable quotes that may pertain to another topic.  For example, Jerry Maguire has "Show me the money!", "You complete me", and "You had me at hello"—all extremely memorable quotes.  If we compare the quotes in Jerry Maguire to the quotes in Freaky Friday (2003), obviously virtually everyone would agree that Jerry Maguire has the more quotable quotes—and yet that would be no justification to delete Freaky Friday.  And Freaky Friday's probably has quotes that are more quotable than some other movie here, but that's no justification to delete said other movie, either.  This is why my approach has always been to try to find the most quotable quotes about whatever the topic at hand is, rather than comparing quotes between topics.  If someone thinks the quotes in the Freaky Friday page aren't the most quotable Freaky Friday quotes out there, then the reasonable thing to do is to edit Freaky Friday in order to incorporate said more-quotable quotes (or, if she/he does not have the time, add the {{Quotability}} notice to Freaky Friday).  But if someone argues that Freaky Friday should be deleted on the grounds that none of its quotes are as quotable as Jerry Maguire's quotes, that's where I will object.  allixpeeke (talk) 02:00, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Aside:  Tom Cruise's rendition of "show me the money" was quite memorable, and greatly popularized the phrase at the end of the 20th century, but it is not exactly original. Usage in exactly the same sense may be found at least as early as the beginning of the 20th century,[4] and it was familiar in business circles for many years before exploding into pop culture. ~ Ningauble (talk) 15:38, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete - I don't see the value in having this. As I wrote above, if a page does not have quotable quotes, whatever quotes are on the page should be removed and/or the page deleted. ~ UDScott (talk) 19:49, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment Surely the function of this template is not to suggest that the page be deleted, but to encourage a clean-up by removing dud quotes and enhance by adding better ones.--Abramsky (talk) 20:10, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
    Actually, I think the real function of this template is to hang onto a placeholder page that contains no quotable quotes. Removing dud quotes is the first thing. Afterward, if nothing remains then we should not keep pages with no quotations on the theory that something better might eventually turn up. ~ Ningauble (talk) 12:04, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

John Belushi

This article was {{prod}} because "No sourced quotes". The tag was removed without curing the defect, which brings it here. — Ningauble (talk) 15:35, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

  • Vote closes: 16:00, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete as nom, without prejudice to creation of an article on this notable person with actual, sourced quotes. ~ Ningauble (talk) 15:35, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
    • Vote withdrawn pending something actually quoteworthy being found. ~ Ningauble (talk) 17:34, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete, per nom. ~ UDScott (talk) 17:28, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
    • Keep now that sourced quotes have been provided. ~ UDScott (talk) 19:05, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • KeepUser:Mdd has provided some sources.  allixpeeke (talk) 06:44, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Jim Belushi

Contested PROD for having no sourced quotes. The tag was removed, but the problem remains. — UDScott (talk) 17:43, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

  • Vote closes: 18:00, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete, unless sourced quotes are provided. ~ UDScott (talk) 17:43, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
    • Keep, now that sourced quotes have been provided. ~ UDScott (talk) 11:59, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete without prejudice to creation of an article on this notable person with actual, sourced quotes. ~ Ningauble (talk) 17:47, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
    • Keep now that sources have been provided, since some parts are almost quoteworthy. ~ Ningauble (talk) 17:46, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • KeepUser:Mdd has provided some sources.  allixpeeke (talk) 06:45, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Basil Gentleman

Contested {{prod}} because "This self-published author does not appear to be sufficiently notable for an article at Wikiquote, and does not have an article at Wikipedia." — Ningauble (talk) 17:25, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

  • Vote closes: 18:00, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete as nom. ~ Ningauble (talk) 17:25, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. No indication that this person is more quoteworthy than I am, and I don't get a page. BD2412 T 18:35, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete, per nom. ~ UDScott (talk) 18:57, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete While I do not agree that lack of a Wikipedia article is grounds for deletion, I agree that he is not notable.--Abramsky (talk) 21:26, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
    Who are you disagreeing with? I for one did not mean to assert that lack of a Wikipedia article is itself grounds for deletion. ~ Ningauble (talk) 19:39, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep—Lack of a Wikipedia article should not be ipso facto grounds for deletion.  The presence of a Wikipedia article is only a general indication of the notability of a given topic; thus, the lack of a Wikipedia page for this writer is only an indication that this particular author might not be notable, not proof that this author is not notable.  Nor is the fact that this person is only self-published ipso facto grounds for deletion.  For what it's worth, this person has multiple published works, and even if that is not notable enough for Wikipedia, I do think that's notable enough for Wikiquote.  For example, if there were an indie band that had released a couple independent albums, I would argue that that band is notable enough for Wikiquote even if said band did not yet have a Wikipedia page.  (Besides, the quotes on this page seem to have a certain flair to them, which is more than I can say for the page I previously uploaded on Chick Island.  (That page was deleted with my approval after I had been convinced by Ningauble that the quotes on that page just weren't interesting enough.)  The Chick Island quotes had no flair, nothing interesting or memorable about them, unlike these quotes, which are interesting and memorable.)  allixpeeke (talk) 01:48, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
    Yes, having a Wikipedia article is an indication of notability. Having a publisher that exercises editorial judgement is an indication of notability. Having many Google hits that are not self-authored or social networking would also be an indication of notability. Lacking these, what actual indication have you found that this person is notable in any sense, i.e. that he has been "noticed" in any significant way? ~ Ningauble (talk) 19:28, 4 September 2015 (UTC)