Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Phil McGraw

Phil McGraw
Almost all of the quotes are unsourced. The one exception (the Letterman "shot gun" remark) doesn't mean much out of context, whatever that might be. - InvisibleSun 20:01, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Vote closes: 21:00, 17 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. - InvisibleSun 20:01, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep after improvements made by JavierMC. - InvisibleSun 22:08, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, unless properly sourced and pithy quotes are added in place of what is currently there. ~ UDScott 00:42, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, after the improvements. ~ UDScott 00:06, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. While some quotable things have been said and written by and about the notable Dr. McGraw, the present article is unacceptable. ~ Ningauble 12:45, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Phil is ok now, as long as he sees his therapist regularly to keep the unsourced stuff out. ~ Ningauble 00:25, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, unless research is done and sourced notable quotes are found and added to the entry. The entry is about a living person so the unsourced content needs to be sourced promptly or removed by blanking or deletion, I think. Since this entry is about a famous and public person, and none of the material is especially contentious, it's alright to wait for the deletion discussion to end before removing the content. FloNight&#9829;&#9829;&#9829; 21:27, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Now Keep, since sourced quotes are added by JavierMC (thanks). FloNight&#9829;&#9829;&#9829; 13:27, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. I've sourced ten quotes and moved the ones lacking sources to the talk page pending sourcing.  Phil McGraw is too notable to offhandedly delete it's entry when sourced quotes are easily found.-- Javier MC  23:29, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Thank you for cleaning up the article, JavierMC. Keeping unsourced quotes on site is not okay, even if the person is famous, and is known to make remarkable quotes. This is especially true if they are quotes by living people. Until they are cleaned up by an interested user, the entry needs to be deleted. The VFD process is a way to give notice that this is going to happen so that users, like yourself, can clean up the article if they are interested in the subject. In my experience, very few entries of famous people with easily obtained remarkable quotes are deleted because an user will see the VFD notice and fix them. So, I do not think that you need to fear that massive numbers of entries like McGraw's are being purged. FloNight&#9829;&#9829;&#9829; 13:27, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks FloNight for the explanation. Sorry if my Strong Keep sounded in any way like shouting.  I'm a wikipedian crossover and it is just a habit that if an article has potentinal it is not deleted and usually the editors on WP will save the article if sourcing is available by sourcing it themselves. NOTE TO SELF: This is not wikipedia.  I'm an inclusionist at heart. Cheers.-- Javier MC  00:25, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I am afraid you think it light this project is no Wikipedia and that you don't understand our newly proposed inclusion policy. There is no room on this project for unsource quotes from living people. Period. It would be okay for Wikipedia to have unsourced quotes, so I understand what you said, but due to the project mission which collects only quotes and only, requirement should be much stricter than the Wikipedia where the quotes are used to a part of argument or description. Unsourced quotes, specially from living people, are should not storage even in talk page in my understanding. Please make it sure to remove them if you cannot cite them in an appropriate timeframe. Thanks. --Aphaia 17:23, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I doubt this is the right place to discuss this, but you are 100% incorrect. I'm a STRONG advocate for sourcing and agree that anything without a source should be removed.  Also, Wikipedia is ALL about sourcing and anything unable to be sourced is removed. A huge portion of the articles I've seen on WQ would not last 10 minutes on Wikipedia because of lack of sources.  I'm here to help source as I can and hope to improve where I can.  I'm kind of offended by your remarks, and think my option is just to retire from WQ.  Making such a comment without reviewing my edit history on WQ and being made by an admin on this project AND bureaucrat and checkuser, strikes me wrong.-- Javier MC  19:50, 17 October 2008 (UTC)