Well, I decided to take some initiative and do the Wikiquote thing. . . .
I was not prepared for what would transpire.

I posted a bunch of quotes and saved. A couple hours later, I checked back to make sure everything had gone through ok, and that I hadn't just imagined the whole experience. When I checked the page, I found that not only had it been marked for deletion, but that three people had already voted to delete it. I felt helpless, like I was watching the cataclysm and could do nothing to stop it.

After recovering from my panic attack, I realized that knowledge is power, so I decided to power-up. Apparently the page had been flagged as a 'Vanity Page'. I looked what this was, and determined that the page had been mislabelled. I even went so far as to learn what a wikiquote page is -not-, but I was still in the right.

It was then that I discovered that the deletion process to subject to public vote, so I made use of my right as John Q. Public and decided to vote against deletion. The only problem was, once I created an account, I couldn't figure out how.

It turns out that I was just an idiot, and couldn't figure out which edit button went with which article, but never fear, everything should be alright now. Rejoice!

Or not. . . .

It seems that these ego-inflated administrators require some sort of 'notability', to keep a WQ page on the server. I've tried to fight for the cause, but they're demanding things like publishments and news coverage.

Is it unethical to say that Syd is officially "The Man who put Wakefield back on the map"?

Point, Set, Match.

Do you think it would help the cause to put that last one on the WQ page?