Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Category:Fictional last words

Category:Fictional last words
(this was originally posted on the Village Pump; I've adapted my initial post for VfD)

Basically everything in Category:Fictional last words is worthless.

Look at Last words in God of War series games; quoting "Unnamed Woman"? Oh yeah, very beneficial. Or Last words in Tales From the Crypt media; the entire show features lots of people dying, so we get gems like "What? No!", "Where's Alan?", and "Yes, let's." Last words in The X-Files media has similarly inane quotes: "No.", "Wow...", and "No." (yes, that's a repeat, because that's someone's last word multiple times) Last words in Harry Potter media says that Harry Potter has "yielded many memorable last words", which apparently includes "Harry...Potter...", "You weren't.", "Harry!", and "Ow." Aliens is one of my all-time favorite movies, and yet Last words in Aliens media lists such heavy-hitting phrases as "Alright, I'm in! Ramp closed." and "Go!"

If you think I'm picking solely on pop culture articles... well, I kind of am, but I think stuff like Fictional last words in literature is a bit of a failure as well. It's a complete mishmash of stuff, introducing more than a little bit of redundancy, without any real restriction on what should be added. Then you've got stuff thats even worse, like Fictional last words in internet series and Fictional last words in webcomics... Ugh.

That all leads me to my next point. We've got limits on quotations for fictional material, but these completely sidestep that policy. If something actually is notable (such as Dumbledore's line "Severus...please..."), it should be placed on the page for that particular piece of media, ideally with a few lines before and after it so that we've got a bit of context for the line.

Here are all the pages I'm including in this VfD:
 * Fictional last words
 * Last words in 24 media
 * Last words in Aliens media
 * Fictional last words in animated television series
 * Last words in Isaac Asimov's fiction
 * Last words in Assassin's Creed series games
 * Fictional last words in Avatar media
 * Last words in Batman media
 * Last words in Bleach media
 * Last words in Buffy the Vampire Slayer media
 * Last words in Call of Duty series games
 * Last words in Castlevania series games
 * Fictional last words in comic books, graphic novels, and manga
 * Last words in Disney animated films
 * Last words in Doctor Who media
 * Fictional last words in internet series
 * Fictional last words in films
 * Last words in Final Fantasy
 * Last words in God of War series games
 * Last words in The Godfather media
 * Last words in Grand Theft Auto series games
 * Last words in Halo series games
 * Last words in Harry Potter media
 * Last words in Heroes media
 * Last words in James Bond media
 * Last words in Kingdom Hearts series games
 * Fictional last words in literature
 * Fictional last words in live-action television series
 * Last words in the Living Dead films
 * Last words in Lord of the Rings media
 * Last words in Lost media
 * Last words in Matrix media
 * Last words in Metal Gear series games
 * Last words in Mortal Kombat media
 * Last words in Naruto media
 * Last words in Resident Evil
 * Last words in Saw media
 * Last words in Shakespeare
 * Last words in Star Trek media
 * Last words in Star Wars media
 * Last words in Tales From the Crypt media
 * Last words in Terminator media
 * Last words in Transformers media
 * Last words in Twilight Zone media
 * Fictional last words in video games
 * Fictional last words in webcomics
 * Last words in The X-Files media
 * Last words in X-Men media

These aren't real people that we're quoting here; what they say can be legitimately quotable. These are just fictional people, saying things that someone else wrote, and we've got absolutely no scope for these pages so we can (and do) end up with utterly non-notable quotes from characters who entire purpose is to die. — EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 04:35, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Vote closes: 05:00, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, per nom. Much of what is on these pages is not memorable in the least. Those that are memorable can be captured on the pages for the work in which they appear. ~ UDScott (talk) 13:43, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep — I have done little work on such pages and pay little attention to most of them, and agree that most have little that is memorable or significant to me, and perhaps to most people, but I believe that they should be available to people who ARE interested in looking up such quotations and creating and maintaining such pages, and the disinterest of me or others in some particular genre or subject should NOT be the determining factors in what is available to people. This project was established many years ago to provide access to quotations, and I object to the increasingly restrictive tendencies of people to IMPOSE adherence and explicit MANDATING of their own own TASTES on others. I believe ANY matter of taste or levels discernment should ALWAYS be left open to debate, and not peremptorily closed by those most familiar with human apathy and how little most people are inclined to actually get involved in developing policies and procedures and using their freedoms to get involved to the point where their freedoms and capacities are increasingly REDUCED by those most intolerant and irritated by some forms of freedom of others to express interests they do not share. I don't find all these articles all that interesting or important, but I am attempting to defend the rights of those who do against those VERY FEW people skilled at manipulating the systems available to them to further reduce the rights and abilities of others to indicate their tastes and inclinations. ~ ♞☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 14:34, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll buy the "we shouldn't force one person's tastes on another" angle, though I disagree over this particular issue (obviously). But what about the whole "we're stepping around WQ:LOQ" issue? We're already overrun with Fair Use content; these pages are hindering our attempts at cleaning that up, not helping. EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 16:39, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

On top of that, seriously, a lot of these are crap. If we had a lot of choice final words from fictional characters, I might be a lot less gung-ho about the pages' deletion, but we've got a lot of crap, and this is some of it. EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 05:23, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
 * User:Finister2 I vote for keeping. They may not be real people, but is it not in the best intrest of every wiki to record all infomation recarding it's topic.
 * No, it is not. Wikiquote's purpose isn't to record everything on a topic, at least in regards to Fair Use content (such as fictional works): it's supposed to be selective to a certain degree, if only because we have to limit how much of a work we quote. Grabbing every single quote in a work that matches a very narrow definition (a character's final words) doesn't help us document the individual works that the quotes appear in; every once and a while, it does (for example, Dumbledore's final words) and we should document that, but as a memorable quote, not just because it was his final words. EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 16:39, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete We can boil down all that is worthwhile in these articles to at most a handful. We can then put them in a "Last words" category together with genuine ones.--Collingwood (talk) 19:07, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep, generally. If there are examples that should be excluded, or specific lists that are demonstrably lacking in worthwhile material, they can be culled from the whole, but these pages usefully collect matters with a common theme that are spread across many different works within a larger body of work. This can be helpful for users searching for the final words of a particular character, who can find that information without knowing the particular episode or issue or film in which this event occurred. I am not concerned about LOQ concerns, as these quotes tend to come from multiple works. Unless a single work contains a rather astounding number of deaths, this is just not going to be a problem. BD2412 T 00:35, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
 * That raises the question of LOQ's scope, then; are we limited to how much we quote everywhere from a work? As you state (not meaning to sound accusatory, sorry if that's how I'm coming across), we're limited in how much we quote from a work on a single page, but we can then quote even more elsewhere; that's a greater percentage of a work that we're using on the site. It's one thing to quote a fictional character on a theme topic (like Love or Revenge), but to have a collection of just fair use quotes is a bit of a problem in my eyes.
 * I doubt we will run into LOQ problems in part because if the last words are truly novel or memorable, then they will already be included in the primary page for the media - for example, both Palpatine and Vader's closing soliloquys are at Star Wars Episode VI: Return of the Jedi; if on the other hand, someone's last words are "NOOOOOO" or "you bastard", that's really not protectable matter at all. Not the we should necessarily list all of those, but if we do, we're not including anything that trenches on anyone's intellectual property rights. BD2412 T 14:21, 21 September 2012 (UTC)


 * KEEP THEM PLEASE, they are also culture of the humanity


 * How about this as a compremice: we delete the pages, but move all the infomation to the Famous Last Words page at TV Topes and Ideals.--Finister2 (talk) 09:01, 25 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete, with the caveat "move memorable ones to relevant pages". Even for LOQ they should not have their own page, but be quoted within the medium's specific page.83.70.170.48 11:02, 25 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete most per UDScott's rationale, except Last words in Shakespeare. I disagree with BD2412's opinion that "these pages usefully collect matters with a common theme that are spread across many different works within a larger body of work." Rather, this strikes me as arbitrary cross-categorization, about which Wikipedia:NOT says "Cross-categories like these are not considered sufficient basis to create an article, unless the intersection of those categories is in some way a culturally significant phenomenon." A case might be made that the Shakespeare article meets these conditions, so it could be discussed in a separate nomination. The problem with the rest of these cross-categorizations, as with articles on random Fictional characters, is that the nominal article topic becomes a magnet for obsessive fan trivia and excess material that lacks enough Quotability to be included in the main article on the work. ~ Ningauble (talk) 17:30, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I would contend that there are other instances where the instersection of last words is significant. For example, Last words in Doctor Who media is the only page that does, or reasonably could, contain the last words of each of the ten regenerations of the Doctor. I would further contend that with respect to the other pages, we should evaluate them page by page, remove what is clearly non-quotable, and then determine if there are enough quotable last words with enough of an intersection to hold them together to keep each such page. I am certainly not a fan of mass nominations of articles covering a wide range of quality and conformity to our rules. Finally, I would note that I have put some work into these pages in the past, and am willing to put more in to work them down to a more reasonable set and range of content. BD2412 T 20:17, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

In order to avoid an unwritten-rule process wherein the good is thrown out with the bad, I have written some proposed guidelines for last words in fictional media. These are, appropriately enough, at Wikiquote talk:Fictional characters. Cheers! BD2412 T 18:40, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep, culturally relevant, quotes have extreme Quotability, educational and value for readers. -- Cirt (talk) 18:02, 28 October 2012 (UTC)