Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/2022 monkeypox outbreak

2022 monkeypox outbreak
Listed material us unlikely to meet Quotability; the quotes are just ordinary objective reports of the situation with no preference on their specific wording. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 07:32, 1 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep Quotes might be bad, but it's too notable to simply delete. Edit: Delete, there is nothing really good about the article. – Ilovemydoodle (talk | e-mail) 09:14, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Have you tried to look for quotes which are not "bad" concerning this topic? I tried and couldn't find any. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 19:37, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
 * If there really are zero good quotes, than consider my vote to a "Delete". – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 19:55, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
 * @1234qwer1234qwer4, I am glad you have joined the discussion. I hope I can ask you a couple of questions without being accused of of being incivil:
 * Do you recall ever adding quotes to any article on WQ?, if so can you provide a few examples of your work.
 * Do you recall improving any health related articles on WQ?, ditto.
 * I am asking because I don't have a good memory, but do not recall seeing any of your content building work on WQ. I am also wondering about your comment below:
 * there is no merit in attempting that on things that "just simply may not belong here"
 * Is it your opinion that this article simply does not belong on WQ, and if so why do you believe this? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 21:10, 17 June 2022 (UTC) In regards to "I tried and couldn't find any": Why are you so certain that none of the 251 inline references of the enwp article have any quotable quotes? Ottawahitech (talk) 21:22, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) I am not accusing you of being incivil, but I have already said below: VfD is about discussing articles, not editors. I do not see how these questions contribute to the discussion (with the rest of the community, keep in mind, not just the nominator or any other arbitrary user specifically) on whether or not the quotes on this page meet Wikiquote's inclusion standards? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:27, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
 * @1234qwer1234qwer4, Why won't you answer questions such as
 * "Why are you so certain that none of the 251 inline references of the enwp article have any quotable quotes?"
 * or
 * "Is it your opinion that this article simply does not belong on WQ?"
 * This has nothing to do with commenting on editors and everything to do with the rationale you used in nominating this article for deletion. Ottawahitech (talk) 02:29, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, you added the first of these question in the edit I conflicted with and I did not bother to look what it was about at that moment, sorry. The condition of being listed at Wikipedia is somewhat arbitrary, but discussing whether or not there are quotable quotes on the topic at hand is the point of this venue. I have not found any; however, so far nobody of the other participants could provide any such material either. If you can, great, but so far this article does not contain any quotes worthy of inclusion, and deleting it would not keep editors off from recreating it with appropriate quotes.
 * As for the second question, you may or may not know that Votes for deletion "discusses whether a page should be deleted or not", so you can assume that anybody nominating a page for deletion here does indeed opine "that this article simply does not belong on WQ". The reasons for that opinion are generally stated in the nomination, so maybe you could try looking there. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 05:14, 18 June 2022 (UTC)


 * By asking if an editor has ever added a quote on a platform exclusively for quotes is slightly offensive. – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 02:52, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Why? There are many users who have-not added any quotes. Ottawahitech (talk) 02:58, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete in its current form. I agree that the topic is notable, but the listed quotes are not. If better quotes were found, I would change my mind, but as is it is not worthy of keeping. ~ UDScott (talk) 12:51, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment Going to attempt some research for this topic. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 19:25, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I can technically find quotes but they don't meet Quotability. It's just medical advice and news reporting. I would propose to delete unless such quotes can be found. It may be too soon for them to exist. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 22:24, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete a recent news topic that has so far attracted no notable quotable quotes. HouseOfChange (talk) 08:52, 3 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete Not really quotable materials at this point. -- Rauisuchian (talk) 11:41, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I have just added a quote
 * Comment Why are the participants in this discussion not spending more time on building instead of destroying? Ottawahitech (talk) 16:20, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
 * FYI https://pageviews.wmcloud.org/?project=en.wikiquote.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&redirects=0&range=latest-20&pages=Wikiquote:Votes_for_deletion/2022_monkeypox_outbreak|2022_monkeypox_outbreak Ottawahitech (talk) 16:28, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
 * , I would read through Quotability. The comparison between the two page's pageviews doesn't really make sense. The statement that editors who, like you, are "destroying" is uncivil and makes me think of what a new user with no experience would say, not what one who has done genuinely good work, like you, would say. Not everything warrants a Wikiquote page; that doesn't mean there's nowhere the page would be useful, it just simply may not belong here. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 16:45, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
 * @Rubbish computer, I would rather not debate who is more uncivil/incivil. I would rather lay out some simple arithmetic that everyone can agree with:
 * seven non-IP users have contributed to this deletion discussion
 * four non-IP users and three IP users contributed to the actual article that is being nominated for deletion in this discussion
 * on 21 May 2022 the article was created by an IP user, it was tagged as a Proposed deletion within 3 hours
 * Proposed deletions (PRODs) are described in a WQ-Policy namely: Proposed deletion
 * According to this policy: "This process should only be used for articles that are uncontroversial deletion candidates that obviously do not belong in the Wikiquote quote compendium'''
 * On 31 May 2022 I removed the PROD tag, and had my action promptly reverted with a stern please wait for an admin edit summary.
 * I spent additional time on the tagger's user-talkpage to remind them that anyone is free to remove PROD-tags, no need for admin permission. In total this used up 6 more edits that contributed zero improvement to the article, and used up time I would have preferred to use adding content to our compendium of quotes.
 * On June 1 I removed the PROD tag for the second time, just to have the original tagger replace it with a Votes for deletion (VFD) tag
 * Summary: Only two non-IP users, out of a total 11, attempted to improve the article. There were 17+6+12=35 corresponding edits, but only 6 edits were an attempt to improve the article. Ottawahitech (talk) 15:16, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Okay,, but please follow w:WP:CIVIL. – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 15:22, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I can't see how bringing up the edits to the page is relevant in this discussion. VfD is about discussing articles, not editors. I have already apologised for reverting your removal of the PROD tag on my talk page, so I am not sure what point you are trying to make about it now, neither do I see what is objectively wrong with "replac[ing] it with a Votes for deletion (VFD) tag", which means nothing but starting a discussion after your removal made clear that the article would not be an "uncontroversial deletion candidate" as required by PROD. As for "attempt[s] to improve the article", I believe @Rubbish computer's comment you were replying to already explained that there is no merit in attempting that on things that "just simply may not belong here" – and a web search shows that there are no quotes meeting the criteria of this project on this topic at the moment. (Feel free to prove that wrong though, but do remember Quotability.) 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 19:34, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
 * @Rubbish computer, Re: "The comparison between the two page's pageviews doesn't really make sense."
 * It makes perfect sense to me. The comparison between pageviews of the page nominated for deletion and the page where the deletion is being debated clearly shows that a lot of energy is being diverted away from improving the article in question. AND, unfortunately, it appears this trend will accelerate in the next days.
 * I am saying this with a heavy heart, but after reading a seemingly unrelated discussion regarding the use of paywalled sources on WQ, it appears I am not the only person around who feels WQ is in trouble. The person who conveyed this information is, unlike most of the participants on this deletion board, someone who has contributed A LOT of content to WQ, but rarely participates in discussion. I am not the most eloquent person around, and I do not enjoy participating in Dramah boards. The only reason I am here is my gut feeling that deletion does not fix the important issues we face trying to build this "compendium of quotes". All this does is take away attention from the real issues that we must confront.
 * IMIO we should be drawing new participants into more productive pursuits and away from endless discussion. People without experience in building content should not be making decisions for the rest. YMMV. Ottawahitech (talk) 14:09, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not interested in taking this conversation any further. I voted Delete based on Quotability, the article doesn't meet it, that's literally it. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 18:21, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep AntisocialRyan (talk) 14:04, 17 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep  Quotability is a guideline that describes what good quotes are, it does not tell us when articles should be deleted.  Deletion policy is where we should be looking to see if this article should be kept or deleted, and it is clear that the rationale for deletion that has been used in this deletion discussion cannot be used when one follows official policy.
 * The policy states quite clearly that articles which are capable of meeting inclusion criteria should not be deleted. The key word is capable. In other words, articles which currently do not meet inclusion criteria, but are capable of meeting this criteria in future, should be kept. Since WQ has dozens of similar articles (see: Category:Diseases and disorders), I don't see how anyone can convince us that an article about this particular disease is not capable of meeting WQ criteria. Ottawahitech (talk) 01:07, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Comment I happened to see two articles on monkeypox the may contain decent quotes: When will this VFD be closed? Ottawahitech (talk) 14:35, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/3519566-here-are-ways-to-protect-yourself-and-others-from-monkeypox/
 * https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/3529793-first-probable-monkeypox-cases-reported-in-missouri-indiana/

Quotes
 * We have an outbreak that has spread around the world rapidly through new modes of transmission about which we understand too little and which meets the criteria in the international health regulations. I know this has not been an easy or straightforward process and that there are divergent views among the members of the committee.
 * Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus WHO declares expanding monkeypox outbreak a global emergency (Jul 23, 2022) Ottawahitech (talk) 15:12, 23 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep. Circumstances have changed. BD2412  T 07:51, 15 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep as outlined above, better quotes have been found. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 12:38, 15 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Comment more quotable materials available now. However the choice of quotes should be primarily leaders/institutions commenting on the status and society's reactions as of a certain date, rather than attempt to use Wikiquote to assert up to date facts on monkeypox itself. As the scientific research will be evolving fast, which is hard for Wikipedia to keep up with and Wikipedia is many times faster than Wikiquote. There is also the w:WP:MEDICAL disclaimer/policy. Rauisuchian (talk) 15:35, 15 August 2022 (UTC)