Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Log/2011 November

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: delete. BD2412 T 20:08, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is one of the reviewers for Team TGWTG at Channel Awesome who is not notable enough for his own Wikipedia article. — Ningauble 14:11, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Vote closes: 15:00, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

• Delete as nom. "Everybody's a critic." ~ Ningauble 14:11, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Note to anyone who wishes to have access to the content of this article in the future: copy and save it elsewhere now. Cheers! BD2412 T 21:05, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: delete. BD2412 T 17:30, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(Contested {{prod}}.) No sourced quotes. — Ningauble 15:19, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Vote closes: 16:00, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

• Delete as nom. ~ Ningauble 15:19, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, per nom. ~ UDScott 15:56, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. BD2412 T 21:06, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, and please change to Cleanup, as I am in the midst of collecting more quotes by her. Thank you. (Avriliza) 06:13, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your collecting seems to be taking quite a while. Two weeks with nothing to show for it? Deleting. BD2412 T 17:29, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: delete. BD2412 T 20:10, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

STALEDRAFT of a deleted article. The article was repeatedly recreated by a single-purpose account.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9] — Ningauble 15:37, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Vote closes: 16:00, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

• Delete as nom. ~ Ningauble 15:37, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. BD2412 T 20:39, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: Moot, already deleted. ~ Ningauble 14:22, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

None of the provided quotes are sourced and the person does not appear to be notable enough to merit having a page. This is a contested PROD. — UDScott 20:18, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Vote closes: 21:00, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

• Delete. ~ UDScott 20:18, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Update: This article has already been deleted, out of process. ~ Ningauble 13:50, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: delete. BD2412 T 22:13, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This article was {{prod}} because "No sourced quotes." The tag was removed and the text was rewritten. It is not sourced or attributed to anyone, and appears to be the contributor's original composition. — Ningauble 14:11, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Vote closes: 15:00, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

• Delete as nom. ~ Ningauble 14:11, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom, although we may in the future want to have a theme article on helplessness. BD2412 T 17:37, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, per nom. ~ UDScott 01:03, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: delete. 02:30, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

De-prodded non-notable self promoter. No Wikipedia article on this subject, no sourced quotes. Ningauble noted that this material was previously deleted as "Victor Ramirez" for the same reason.[10], and was deleted at the Spanish Wikiquote for self-promotion.[11]. — BD2412 T 22:25, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Vote closes: 23:00, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

• Keep. 166.147.78.87 04:57, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• KeepVictorrrmz 22:23, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and consider salting this re-created title until such time as an entry for this person may appear in a future edition of Bartlett's Familiar Quotations. ~ Ningauble 22:29, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as nominator; no opposition to Userfication if the author so requests. BD2412 T 16:29, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  I am not as sanguine about people who do not actually participate in the project using our project's user-space like Myspace or Facebook. In this case, the user seems to be interested in self expression rather than quoting others; and I am skeptical that he has really got the spirit of quoting others, with credit where credit is due, when he claims a famous 16th century woodcut as his own copyrighted work of authorship at Commons. The situation would be somewhat different if the user were an actual quoter. ~ Ningauble 16:37, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  I left a note on the user's talk page offering userfication "if you're interested in doing additional work on this project". The question of what can appear on the user page of a potentially productive user is very different from the question of what we can host in our mainspace. If he agrees to userfication, we can revisit the content at a later time to see if he has engaged in content work that justifies him having whatever he chooses to have on a user page. BD2412 T 19:56, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  It is indeed a different question, and can be addressed separately if that eventuates. Offering encouragement to newcomers who display an interest in quotations is a Good Thing™, but when someone shows up with an entirely different agenda, egging them on is less likely to be beneficial. ~ Ningauble 18:44, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm not trying to egg him on; based on his late addition of userboxes, I think he genuinely intends this to be a user page, and might be persuaded to contribute positively to this project. BD2412 T 18:48, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  One can always hope. I am afraid I have beed feeling a bit cranky lately, but it will pass. ~ Ningauble 18:57, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - non-notable. --A Divine 05:47, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, per nom. ~ UDScott 18:49, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: delete. 02:29, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Inappropriate use of user-space for hosting substantial content unrelated to Wikiquote. Wikiquote is not a personal website. — Ningauble 16:33, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Vote closes: 17:00, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

• Delete as nom. ~ Ningauble 16:33, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - unrelated to wikiquote. ~ A divine, 19;44, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
• Delete, per nom. ~ UDScott 17:22, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, per nom. BD2412 T 20:06, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: delete. 02:31, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

This article was {{prod}} because "No sourced quotes." The tag was removed without curing the defect, which brings it here. — Ningauble 16:52, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Vote closes: 17:00, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

• Delete as nom. ~ Ningauble 16:52, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, per nom. ~ UDScott 17:22, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, per nom. BD2412 T 20:07, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no sourced quotes, and no English language quotes. --A Divine 21:07, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: Userfied per user request. BD2412 T 16:36, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed PROD - for this person not being notable enough for a page and the poor quality of the quotes. Also note that the quotes are cited from an unreleased album. — UDScott 15:12, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Vote closes: 16:00, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

• Delete. ~ UDScott 15:12, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - fourteen year old rapper of little repute. --A Divine 16:18, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep-May be noteable in future —This unsigned comment is by Deezy.D. (talk • contribs) 17:04, 28 November 2011.
  • Anyone may become notable in the future. If this person becomes notable in the future, then they will be able to have a page created at that time. BD2412 T 16:57, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep- Notable. Not known by northerners or people who pay little attention to the rap genre —This unsigned comment is by YoungIdolsEnt (talk • contribs) 17:07, 28 November 2011.
  • Note: This is the above editor's first edit to the project. BD2412 T 02:32, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Good luck growing up and becoming notable in the future. ~ Ningauble 18:41, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. BD2412 T 18:45, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Seen his videos on youtube. over 100,000 veiws if thats not notable i don't what is.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.64.190.254 (talk) 01:06, 29 November 2011
• Keep He has a wikipedia page. look it up—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.64.190.254 (talk) 01:07, 30 November 2011

  Not anymore. It was promptly deleted for lack of any indication of the importance or significance of the subject. ~ Ningauble 19:48, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• keep Seen his videos on youtube. Good artist. 100,000 veiws ~ ~ ~ ~ —This unsigned comment is by Researchman11 (talk • contribs) 17:04, 1 December 2011‎.

  Note: This is the above editor's first edit to this project. BD2412 T 18:50, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  I have semi-protected this discussion to cut off the deluge of sockpuppetry at its roots. As a practical matter, anons and brand new accounts will rarely be able to contribute constructively to discussions that require some knowledge of our policies and guidelines. BD2412 T 05:41, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• keep they're right he has hit video's on youtube.com Mr3in1gr 14:01, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: Editor has been here approximately two weeks, and has made fewer than 20 edits; may be unfamiliar with our standards for inclusion. Cheers! BD2412 T 16:35, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: delete. BD2412 T 17:09, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This person does not appear to be notable enough for a page and (as written on the page) has not yet released any albums. — UDScott 15:15, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Vote closes: 16:00, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

• Delete. ~ UDScott 15:15, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no notability. --A Divine 16:11, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. ~ Ningauble 18:42, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. BD2412 T 18:44, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Mr3in1gr 17:18, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: keep. BD2412 T 17:10, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can simply type "@" - no obvious use for this template. — A Divine 19:12, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Vote closes: 20:00, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
• Comment: It inserts an image instead of a character. The purpose of the template (as described at Wikipedia) is to display an email address like "somebodysomewhere.net" without making it easy for spammers to copy it into their databases. The template is not widely used at Wikiquote. ~ Ningauble 20:29, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that's ingenious - we might want to leave editors the option of using it. If so, we must add some documentation. --A Divine 22:25, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. This is useful enough, even though it is seldom used. ~ Ningauble 14:35, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Harmless, potentially useful. BD2412 T 05:42, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.