Wikiquote:Votes for deletion archive/Dr. Frank Crane


 * 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: Kept. — Jeffq 30 June 2005 00:45 (UTC)

Dr. Frank Crane
Google points to just various quotes collection (first entry is wikiquote!), article is a mess, no obvious notability... MosheZadka 04:48, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Vote extended; it closes: 0:00 30 June 2005 (UTC) to make clear the consensus; cleanup or delete. --Aphaia 03:15, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * VOTE CLOSED after extension. Result: Kept (3 Deletes; 1 official Keep, 1 Keep just past deadline that was solicited by deadline extender; article substantially improved, but still needs work based on several voters' comments; 2 of Delete votes consider cleanup an acceptable alternative). Since I did a good bit of the cleanup (and grabbed copies of the page images specifically to verify the quotes, just in case), I'll finish my suggested work. (I find it amusing to contribute to the preservation of an article whose author savaged me.) &mdash; Jeff Q (talk) 30 June 2005 00:45 (UTC)
 * Delete MosheZadka 04:48, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Better these quotes than the plagarized ones that JohnQ calls his "Personal Quotes"!!!  Photolinks on Frank Crane site have been removed, article edited.  RocknRollEdder 21:24 8 June 2005 MST (UTC)
 * The human heart is a great green tree, and many strange birds come and sing in its branches; a few build nests, but most are from far lands north and south and never come again. (Frank Crane)
 * The human heart is the throne of God, the council-chamber of the devil.... (Frank Crane)
 * The quality of the author's writing is self-explanatory, the author widely quoted but lacking in volume EXACTLY because his words have not previously published ON-LINE!
 * KEEP Let's get rid of plagiarized quotes and leave bona fide pre-1923 (OPEN-SOURCE!) works for public enjoyment!  (UTC)
 * Comment: Vote from anon. "(UTC)" was written by its voter. --Aphaia 17:09, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Struck out illegal (forged or double) vote (see details below). &mdash; Jeff Q (talk) 13:28, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete or Transwiki to Wikisource; an editor uploaded a photo of its source; if it is not an extract, it would be suitable for Wikisource (unless they consider it unnotable). And I confess I was not impressed by this author. --Aphaia 03:00, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: As for user's "self-quotes", it is rude to refer it as the above way in my opinion, we encourage Wikiquote editor to create their own quotes collection as long as they make it on their user page; and it might underestimate the author in question to compare with the quotes which is thought clearly infringement of project policies.
 * Revevant discussion:
 * See also: Frank Crane (As of 04:14, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC) empty page) Aph.
 * PLAGARISM You obviously have no ethics against plagarism,  Or you would recognize that when someone says, "These are my own original quotes." as JohnQ JohnQ  does, he IS taking credit for concepts that would be best cited as "SOURCE UNKNOWN".   If someone sues your website, or big government censors your crap, your disregard deserves it.
 * Above comment was added by 24.117.255.9. &mdash; Jeff Q (talk) 13:28, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I will find another more profitable venue for the publicity of these classic essays, and you will be left with your pathetic cyberworld virtual past time because you will never be a real-world editor.
 * Above comment was added by 24.117.255.9. I removed the bolding, as it interferes with bold-for-vote formatting. &mdash; Jeff Q (talk) 13:28, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Comments: My, my. How to untangle this mess? It's not in my nature to be concise &#9786;, but let me try.
 * The rambling text added in fits and starts by RocknRollEdder and 24.117.255.9 (possibly the same person) demonstrates only a minimal grasp of clear thinking, wiki editing, and basic concepts like "public domain" (which they incorrectly referred to as "open source"). We must try to look beyond this "blundering ignorance" (in the good Dr. Crane's words) to consider the value of the article itself. Let's not blame the article for the rudeness of its defender(s).
 * The book probably is public-domain now, as it was published in 1919. I have reworked the article to remove all the POV editorializing, breathless emphasizing, and duplication. (Edder seems to consider a Wikiquote article as an essay opportunity.) I've left in a cleaner version of the introduction, as it is within Wikiquote practice to have a brief introduction.
 * The article still needs some serious copyediting, as I made no attempt to compare the quotes to the photographs we have (which I've added links to so that others may do just this.) The "Clean Business" transcriptions are in the form of individual sentences on separate lines, giving no indication of where an excerpt starts and stops. If these passages are indeed entire tracts, they probably should be edited down to their essentials. There also appears to be many unnecessary hyphens in the text, which should only be there if the original spelled the words that way, not just because there was a line break. (That's elementary typography.)
 * I have not evaluated the content of the quotes or the notability of the author. There is no Frank Crane (or "Dr. Frank Crane") page on Wikipedia at this point, so I can't tell whether it was there and deleted, or never there.
 * If, after all this, the article survives VfD, it should be moved either to Frank Crane or Four Minute Essays. Neither the current title nor its redirect follow any Wikiquote practice.
 * RocknRollEdder's "keep" vote, however libelous, is valid, but the second "keep" was added to his later text by 24.117.255.9. That second vote is therefore either an attempt at forgery or a double vote. Either way, it doesn't count. Again, I think this is not malevolent intent; I think it's just ignorance of wiki practices (bordering on disrespect).
 * And when I say "libelous", I'm being literal. His accusation of plagiarism is not only raving and misattributed (my name is Jeff, not John), but unjustified. Not only do I have records to prove when I first thought of my quotes, I also protect myself (and Wikiquote, although it hardly needs it) by prefacing my personal quotes with the statement: "If anyone knows of earlier sources of any of these quotes that are essentially the same phrasing, please tell me so I can stop calling it mine." I've had no takers thus far. I feel fairly certain that our blustering Frank Crane fan not only will not, but cannot provide such evidence.
 * Last and least, I want to thank 24.117.255.9 for his unintended compliment of considering my personal quotes good enough to be attributed to "source unknown", which implies pithy but untraceable. My quotes, however, can be traced.
 * Because of the wiki markup complexity of my commentary above, I ask that subsequent comments, if any, be added after this whole block, not interspersed between. Thank you. &mdash; Jeff Q (talk) 13:28, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: I, as a temporal admin on English Wikipedia, abused my power a bit --- check if there is a trace of deletion of article on this topic there. I think every admin knows how to find deleted revisions from archive. And there is nothing on English Wikipedia. On the other hand w:WP:VFU says "Pages deleted prior to the database crash on 8 June 2004 are not present in the current archive". So the article in question was ether deleted before 8 June 2004 or never created. --Aphaia 14:05, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete or further heavy cleanup and trimming. Rmhermen 17:06, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Rather Delete, however don't oppose to keep but cleanup. I propose pending deletion for one week for waiting for editor(s) who will clean it up willingly. If not, it should be deleted. --Aphaia 00:04, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep but moved to Frank Crane: Though I don't find a great deal of intrinsic value in many of the quotes, and suspect the poster might be a descendent or relative of Dr. Crane, they may arguably have some historical value. The page does need further work and clean-up though, and I feel the photos of the pages should be deleted as unneeded by Wikiquote, and probably by any of the other Wikimedia projects. ~ Kalki 30 June 2005 00:22 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.