Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Vancouver

It is not a brilliant article and could do with some improvement, but it's a 4-2 to keep. I would not argue strongly with someone who called it No consensus.-- Poetlister 15:57, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Vancouver
No notable quotes. Several of these don't even mention Vancouver, and the ones that do are either banal or not really about Vancouver (for example, the Sarah Chalke quote is about her, not Vancouver). — Ubiquity 04:09, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Vote closes: 05:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
 * No consensus - extend to 05:00, 27 January 2008 (UTC)-- Poetlister 17:31, 20 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment As per British Columbia.--Cato 11:21, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment deleting articles that require improvement leaves no way for addition. Nothing worth while was ever made great at its first attempt. I would not call this group of articles as a 'waste of space' but one that needs someone to help it along. 207.6.57.122 17:11, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm looking for more quotes.--Poetlister 20:33, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Reluctant keep Just about enough quotes about Vancouver, but "Vancouver is lovely" is too trite to keep, and there are quotes not about Vancouver. Again, delete "This article is for quotes about Vancouver and displayed on the Portal:Vancouver".--Yehudi 12:44, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, as with the British Columbia page, there's not much of value here. ~ UDScott 18:12, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep and improve - somewhere there are notable quotes about this expansive region. BD2412 T 20:13, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep We have pages on other Cities --Lookatthis 23:16, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep the one sourced quote and delete all the others, leaving the article as a stub. Delete also the reference for Brainy Quote; their quotations are unsourced and unreliable.  - InvisibleSun 04:45, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Why delete the unsourced quotes? Perhaps we can just find the sources for some. BD2412 T 18:50, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It isn't the lack of sourcing but the lack of quality. - InvisibleSun 21:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC)