Votes for deletion is the process whereby 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 page'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 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

Videogamedunkey

Notability, quotability, puerility. — Markjoseph125 (talk) 01:56, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vote closes: 02:00, 2 August 2025 (UTC). Markjoseph125 (talk) 01:56, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nominator. Markjoseph125 (talk) 01:56, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not clear where the notability argument is coming from. There are WP articles in three languages. GMG ^talk 14:49, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe. That doesn't address the issue of quotability. Or, for that matter, of puerility. Markjoseph125 (talk) 19:01, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: subject has a wikipedia article, demonstrating notability, and there is no rule that “puerility” is grounds for deletion. Wikiquote has articles on South Park, PewDiePie, etc. “quotability” is merely nominator's own opinion. Howardcorn33 (talk) 12:59, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, there is a whole page devoted to exactly what quotability is: Wikiquote:Quotability. The entire page is interesting; the line I refer to the most is: "Is the quote particularly witty, pithy, wise, eloquent, or poignant?" If the one "quote" on this page, "JonTron is a fucking scumbag! Hey, guys. Videogamedunkey here. You may remember me from my dipshit videos where I make fun of retarded people. Now, I’ve held off on making this video for years because personally I’m a huge fan of JonTron, I think his videos are incredible but this man is a fucking hypocrite, piece of shit, rat bastard!" is not puerile, then the word needs to be removed from the dictionary. Why have standards, if we are never going to apply them in even the most egregious cases? Markjoseph125 (talk) 02:12, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: as nominated. Notability, quotability and puerility are all valid reasons and applicable in my opinion. ~ Peter1c (talk) 16:49, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I feel like you could have some good quotes from Dunkey. Not all of his stuff is mindless swears. I recall some interesting quotes. But that isn't what's here, so... PARAKANYAA (talk) 05:15, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: as nominated. WQ:CRITICISM is pretty good, and I agree that this youtuber has some pretty quotable sayings. But this isn't one of them. If this is all we have, we shouldn't have it. —FPTI (talk) 21:34, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Yan'an Rectification Movement

Not a Wikiquote page. NO quotes. A couple of random sentences, which have nothing to do with the page title, which itself is not Wikiquote material. — Markjoseph125 (talk) 23:07, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vote closes: 00:00, 10 November 2025 (UTC). Markjoseph125 (talk) 23:07, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete as nominator. Markjoseph125 (talk) 23:08, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:11, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are we nominating a talk page for deletion because it doesn't have any quotes? I'm genuinely confused what's going on here. GMG ^talk 22:53, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Moniro Ravanipour

The quotes on this page appear to be sourced to primary sources (here and here), notability questionable. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SophiaJustice59 (talk • contribs) 16:41, 8 November 2025 (UTC)

Vote closes: 17:00, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

Keep. As long as this person is Wikipedia notable, they are notable for our purposes; we obviously don't put secondary sources here because that violates what Wikiquote is not, but this person is widely quoted and discussed in secondary sources, e.g. [1]. Some of these quotes are fairly interesting and there are a wide array of published materials from which to expand. Quotes are supposed to be sourced to primary sources, or they are less reliable. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:33, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]