Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Crackerjack

Fys. &#147;Ta fys aym&#148;. 17:27, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Crackerjack
It's never a good sign when a page's creator puts in both the edit summary and the page that the quotes are all "from memory", and this is something we definitely should not encourage. (If someone can clean this up and turn it into a proper page, I'll reconsider my vote on this one.) —LrdChaos (talk) 12:49, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Vote closed: Result: delete. Close call on this one but I think the consensus to delete is there. There is no prejudice to recreation of a page on the Australian bowling film or the UK children's television series if it is properly sourced and contains proper quotes. Fys. &#147;Ta fys aym&#148;. 17:27, 7 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete, per nom - unless a properly sourced and formatted page is created in its place. ~ UDScott 14:24, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Should be fixable. Notable with Wikipedia article. I added the intro/catch line with source to the article but don't have time to do more now. FloNight&#9829;&#9829;&#9829; 18:13, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Now Delete since the article still does not have an introduction that makes it clear about the subject of the entry and the quotes do not have verifiable reliable sources. Can be re-created later if the introduction and remarkable well sourced quotes are added. FloNight&#9829;&#9829;&#9829; 21:02, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Definitely deserves an article.--Cato 18:28, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I believe the lack of any intro has led us to confuse two different Crackerjacks. The quote "Bowl, Jack" leads me to think that this was intended as a collection of quotations from the Australian bowling film Crackerjack (film).  I certainly don't remember any four-letter words in the children's TV series.   Antiquary 18:35, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Yikes!! I think you're likely right. FloNight&#9829;&#9829;&#9829; 22:20, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: Allow some time to improve it. I neither support nor oppose deletion.--Jusjih 11:07, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete While the subject deserves an article, no improvement has happened until now, including avoidance of confusion pointed by Antiquary. --Aphaia 09:06, 5 September 2007 (UTC)