Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Prom Night 2 and Prom Night 3

--Jusjih 00:01, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Prom Night 2 and Prom Night 3
User:Cato tagged this pages for speedy deletion, citing their years-off release dates as the reason. However, that's not one of our speedy-deletion criteria, and I can't make these pages fit any of the others. (The closest is "no content", but the pages provide an introduction, making them technically ineligible for SD that way.) I was nevetheless tempted to speedy-delete them anyway, stretching the "no content" clause, but instead decided to VFD nominate these pages. —LrdChaos (talk) 14:30, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Vote closes: 15:00, 12 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - I have to confess I'm not good at rules! From a number of VfDs I felt we had established that quotes prior to an event were unacceptable.  I'd have probably speedied these -- Herby  talk thyme 15:18, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. I think en:Wikiquote is about halfway between the practices-based exigency of small Wikimedia projects and the considerable formality of en:Wikipedia. It's common for us to wonder (often in writing in these VfDs) which is called for and whether we need to modify or add some rules (which seems to take forever). Frankly, I've seen few complaints from the community at large which way these borderline articles are handled. (Most of the time, even the article creators don't complain. I wish I knew if this was because they realized the problems and changed their approach, they went away unhappy, or they never returned even to notice the loss.) If we go through with the WQ:PROD proposal, I suspect it will be useful for these kinds of articles. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 19:50, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per reason stated by nom. I think speedy delete would be fine for this type of entry. If the current criteria do not make this clear then perhaps we can change it. In general, WQ:PROD would be the best choice for this type of discussion; where it likely will be uncontested but not clearly within policy/guidelines. FloNight 20:05, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. LrdChaos's thoughtfulness and caution must be praised for bringing them here and submitting these to discussion, since it's better to err on the side of caution when an entry falls into greay areas. Phaed r i e l  - 23:57, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I'd like to denote the fact that, apparently, these entries have most likely been created by the same editor responsible of the Bulletproof series of hoaxes (see above) Phaed r i e l  - 12:12, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I was off to do it but Jeff has placed a message on the IP talk page - thanks for spotting it though -- Herby talk thyme 12:19, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. - InvisibleSun 06:46, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. - All the way. Someone must read the guidelines methinks, and who makes a page for a movie that is to be released two years from now now? Strange people. --Karras 12:18, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete while not released yet.--Jusjih 13:34, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Must come close to a speedy delete as a hoax. Admins can see Navjyotsingh siddhu, which was just deleted; that had a sort of sensible quote in it, but I agree with its deletion.--Poetlister 17:00, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Given that I asked for a speedy!--Cato 21:21, 6 August 2007 (UTC)