Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/The Last Five Years


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was:  .KEEP FloNight&#9829;&#9829;&#9829; 20:04, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

The Last Five Years
This appears to be the entire text of the play. I've replaced the content with a copyright violation tag. — UDScott 18:41, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Vote closes: 19:00, 12 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete, as is, unless severely trimmed. ~ UDScott 18:41, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Contributors have an awfully broad idea about what is "quotable". BD2412 T 19:35, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Vote withdrawn based on trimming done to the article. Cheers! BD2412 T 16:42, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and also per BD2412's understatement. Don't get me started, but I will reiterate that, IMHO, the Quotability guideline makes a significant error in giving a pass to anything attributed to a creative work, rather than to a person. ~ Ningauble 14:29, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think WQ:Q gives creative works a pass, it just says that it is about persons, and other criteria apply to the works. BD2412 T 20:37, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * So it says, but the other criteria for quality are unstated (except some remarks about films under "Length of the quote," which are inconsistent with the lead of the main section saying it is not about films). Some contributors' "broad idea about what is 'quotable'" encompasses everything from the "vast wasteland" of television, throwaway films from the "direct-to-video" bin, etc., etc. ~ Ningauble 22:08, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep — and simply roll this sucker back to where it was before the improper contributions of IP 173.26.9.73 — this play has had a page for the last five years and was perhaps not anything close to a copyright violation prior to this IP's edit. ~ Kalki (talk &middot; contributions) 23:32, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I rolled this back to it's state prior to the mentioned IP's edits, and though it probably could be trimmed more, I certainly do not believe it needs to be deleted. ~ 23:40, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Better, thanks, but this still looks like a substantial fraction of the libretto for a one-act musical. ~ Ningauble 14:48, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree, although a sufficiently tightened version could be kept, this is still too much material from the work to pass copyright muster. BD2412 T 14:46, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I have whacked a bunch more from the article, and if it doesn't grow back too much then I would not object to keeping it. (However, I do not expect to find any of this in a future edition of Bartlett's Familiar Quotations.) ~ Ningauble 15:35, 26 April 2011 (UTC)