Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/ESSENCE EIDOS

. Every "keep" vote comes from a brand-new single-purpose account. While they are entitled to their views, I cannot give them as much weight as established editors. The evidence of sockpuppetry also weighs against them.--Yehudi 06:35, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

ESSENCE EIDOS
"Essence Eidos" would appear to be a fairly obscure theme, based on Google search results. The one person quoted also yields few search results. This doesn't seem like a promising beginning for a collection of quotes upon a theme.- InvisibleSun 01:47, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Vote closes: 02:00, 25 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. - InvisibleSun 01:47, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - a theme page for a subject with no Wikipedia article? Not happening. BD2412 T 03:34, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - That it seems to have lost much in translation makes for an inauspicious start. Ningauble 16:20, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, per nom. ~ UDScott 17:14, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - Previously speedy deleted about a half hour before this vfd as not notable and not in English. Current content is likely an original translation by contributer. Ningauble 14:03, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Pretty poor quotes, too.--Cato 18:56, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment an earlier draft at ESSENCE is curently . User contrib history shows confusion, needs help? Ningauble 20:59, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom and Cato.-- Poetlister 07:11, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep.- This is an interesting article.Kornelius 20.August 2008 (UTC) non existent user -- Herby  talk thyme 11:20, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep.- Only this is a really philosophical article Erika 20.August 2008 (UTC) non existent user -- Herby  talk thyme 11:20, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. The above two contributors, Kornelius and Erika, originated from the same IP editor, 201.230.134.243, who has made no other contribution to Wikiquote pages. - InvisibleSun 02:50, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep.- ¡What a relevant article! Luquitas 21.August. 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep.-The author of this article perhaps knows enough of philosophy Jumbo1 21. August. 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. I've struck the non-existent user votes (hope no one minds).  If I were a project CU I might wish to check some of the users voting to "keep" here.  Thanks -- Herby  talk thyme 11:20, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * KeepThis article is excelent karlotita 21. August. 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I have blocked Luquitas, Jumbo1 and karlotita as sockpuppets. The closing admin is recommended to discount their votes.--Cato 22:54, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep explendid;all the articles ought to be so!! Pompadourcita 21. August. 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete this non-quote, confusingly titled article. If this is a theme article, the title should be either "Essence" or "Eidos" (Platonic ideal), not both, and certainly not CAPITALIZED. But it currently has only argumentative statements, not quotes, that have been poorly translated (something that one cannot afford when discussing philosophical abstractions!). It's also fairly clear, even without a CU, that the same person (or group of co-located persons with the same lack of wiki experience and command of English) are sockpuppeting their support for this article as their only WQ contributions. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 01:54, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep All right: the ideas are in excelent distribution and order. Jeffq must study ontology before speaking Jenny5 22. August. 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment This is not an encyclopaedic article, so the quality of the ideas and ordering is not critical.-- Poetlister 06:53, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete the essence here is the need of a new destination......Modernist 15:04, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 * KeepSo must be articles because it's knoledge. These ideas were wroten http://en.wikiquote.org/skins-1.5/common/images/button_link.pngby a philosoph Lenska7 23.August.2008 (UTC)
 * Comment It is not the function of Wikiquote to disseminate knowledge.
 * Delete Falls a mile short of WQ standrds.--Yehudi 07:21, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Eidos seems a notable subject to me (it redirects to Theory of Forms on WP) but, for the reasons outlined above, the treatment of it on this page fails to meet WQ's requirements so thoroughly that it could only be redeemed by rewriting every word, including the title. --Antiquary 11:57, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep These ideas aren't frivolity: these ideas are philosophy Karla2 24. August. 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep The title can't be better, because essence isn't equal to eidos Andrews67 24. August. 2008
 * Keep The ideas are good articulated and extraordinary Ronaldinho 24. August. 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Greek philosophers thought that eidos was more important than essence Robert7 24. August. 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Essence and eidos, both are tieded concepts Jacobus 24. August. 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Arguments are all right, and there are quotes Ericka 24. August. 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep A few articles are so clear and interesting Pablito 24. August. 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep The page's structure is ideal and well distributed Elizabeth9 24. August. 2008 (UTC)