Wikiquote - User contributions [en]

Wikiquote:Administrators' noticeboard

2014-01-08T20:42:27Z

EVula: /* User:Kalki is making personal attacks, AGAIN... */ blocked the IP

[[de:Wikiquote:Administratoren/Notizen]]
[[fa:ویکی‌گفتاورد:تابلوی اعلانات مدیران]]
[[nl:Wikiquote:Verzoekpagina aan conciërges]]
{{Wikiquote:Administrators' noticeboard/Header}}
[[Category:Wikiquote|{{PAGENAME}}]]
= Discussions =

== Request for closure ==

* [[Wikiquote:Village pump#Kedar Joshi quote farming]]
* [[Wikiquote:Deletion review#Kedar Joshi]]
These two discussions have had ample time and participation to reach consensus, if any. I would be grateful if someone a little less heavily involved than myself would assess the results and close them. Thanks. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:10, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
: A month has passed with no further comments on these discussions.... ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 21:53, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
:: {{done}} Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 03:49, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
::: 1. If [[User:RogDel/Quotes added to WQ|these quotes]] can be included (and I see no reason why they should not be included), I see no reason why quotes by Kedar Joshi should be excluded. 2. ''“Among more experienced editors, the vast majority support removal” – [[User:BD2412|BD2412]]''
::::Since WQ is not a democracy, this seems to be an invalid argument for removal. There does not seem to have been any stronger argument countering all the [[User:RogDel/Notability as a source of quotes|simple and logical arguments]] I have made in support of inclusion of such quotations. ~ [[User:RogDel|RogDel]] ([[User talk:RogDel|talk]]) 10:50, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
::RogDel, with all due respect, I seriously doubt that we should create such explicit regulations about such exceptional situations. As to Kedar Joshi, after years of discussion we should draw a line, and not keep bringing it up. As to the regulation even for me it is confusion, trying to make a difference between quotability and notability, let alone outsiders. There are so much ins and out about, and regularly there seem to be a good understanding. Don't try to make regulations for those handful of cases we don't all agree on. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:35, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
::: <edit conflict> Regarding RogDel's first point, [[w:WP:OTHERSTUFF|other stuff]] is not always good precedent, particularly when the addition of that stuff gives the appearance of [[w:WP:POINT|making a point]] about a minority view from these discussions. Now that these discussions have been closed, there may be further action to deal with this stuff that was added while the discussions were ongoing. Regarding the second point, discussions are assessed based on a variety of factors, including (besides the votes) policies, practices, precedents, arguments, & etc. As expressly indicated in the closing remarks, from which you selectively quote, anonymous single-purpose accounts that are not cognizant of or do not address those factors have little or no weight in assessing the arguments. Regarding the essay linked above, it directly contradicts the established guideline at [[Wikiquote:Quotability]], which makes it relatively unpersuasive as an argument in these cases. If you think the guideline is wrong then it might be better to propose changing it rather than try an end-run around it. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 12:42, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
* RogDel, I think maybe only one or two people have read your (rather long and repetitive) essay. Perhaps, for their benefit, one could condense it into one sentence: "If a quote is cited in a 'highly reliable' secondary source (even if just once) then it is notable enough to be on Wikiquote." Would you accept that as a fair summary? ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 13:16, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

== Feuding between DanielTom and Cirt ==

Per the discussion ongoing at [[User talk:UDScott#Query for help]] (and on my talk page), I am setting forth the following interaction ban in response to the incessant and disruptive feuding, baiting, and forum shopping between DanielTom and Cirt.

DanielTom could properly be blocked for incivility at this point (he has said as much). If DanielTom attempts to bait or otherwise interact with Cirt, talks to him, talks about him, or reverts or otherwise contests any of his actions, I will block DanielTom for a minimum of thirty days.

If Cirt attempts to interact with DanielTom, talks to him, talks about him, or reverts or otherwise contests any of his actions, I will move to desysop Cirt on this project. Reacting to baiting is not the trait of an administrator.

To the extent that either Cirt or DanielTom thinks the other is making improper edits or otherwise misbehaving, do nothing about and say nothing about it. The other administrators on this project are observant, and we will see and will handle any violations of policy.

I hope that my fellow administrators agree with my determination with respect to this matter. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 01:27, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

----

;Reply by Cirt to BD2412
:''Originally posted on another page: [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:UDScott&diff=1594538&oldid=1594501 diff].''

This is my reply to [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AUDScott&diff=1594501&oldid=1594445 comment by BD2412].

'''Comment:''' @{{user|BD2412}}, understood. I will take your advice to heart. I will do my best to not react to the baiting. I will do my best to only engage in a polite and constructive manner from here on out. I am sorry for troubling you with this. I will do my best to rise above this matter. Thank you for your advice and your input. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 02:44, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

;Statement by Ningauble about the ban
I endorse the interaction ban imposed by BD2412. The misconduct of both parties has been extensive and disruptive. Note that the ban as stated is indefinite in duration. I would not want to entertain an application to lift an indefinite ban in less than six months or a year.
 Regarding stipulated consequences for violating the ban by DanielTom:  I approve of handling this in a progressive manner, as has been done, rather than imposing a 30 day block on the first infraction. I think any further infractions should be met with ''steep'' progression.
 Regarding stipulated consequences for violating the ban by Cirt:  This is not really an administrative sanction. A [[WQ:VOC|vote of confidence]] may be called any time that three users concur. Administrative sanctions may still be imposed for misconduct even if it is not stipulated in this ban. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:15, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

=== Cirt has ''already'' breached the interaction ban ===

BD2412 made the terms of the interaction ban clear:
:[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=1594507&oldid=1591220 ''If Cirt attempts to interact with DanielTom, talks to him, talks about him, or reverts or otherwise contests any of his actions, I will move to desysop Cirt on this project.'']
Yet, Cirt has already completely disrespected the interaction ban: ''just one hour later'', he decided to come to my talk page, uninvited, and posted [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DanielTom&curid=139176&diff=1594537&oldid=1594424 this baiting comment].
I am tempted to reply to his baiting comment, <s>but I won't</s>, as I don't think I would particularly enjoy being unable to edit WQ for 30 days. However, after Cirt's ''direct'' breach of the interaction ban cited above, I would like to see BD keeping his word and actually "[moving] to desysop Cirt on this project". ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 08:52, 26 June 2013 (UTC) last edit: 19:07, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
: Firstly, I have blocked you for 24 hours to be sure that you understand that I am serious about this interaction ban. As I said above, if either of you thinks the other is making improper edits or otherwise misbehaving, do nothing about and say nothing about it. That includes accusing one another of violations of this interaction ban. Please do not imagine for a moment that other administrators on this site are unaware of any action that either of you is taking.
: Secondly, I hope that you agree that fair warning of a penalty to be imposed is necessary before imposition of that penalty. I saw the post Cirt made on your talk page last night, shortly after I set forth this interaction ban. Based on Cirt's edits, there is no reason to believe that he was aware of this interaction ban at the time that he made the talk page post of which you complain. You, on the other hand, were clearly aware of it before you posted this complaint.
: In case I need to make this any clearer, both of you are to carry on as if the other does not exist.
: Finally, I hope that the community approves of my determination with respect to this problem, but if any uninvolved administrator feels that I have overstepped the bounds of my authority in my actions with respect to this matter, please feel free to unblock DanielTom. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 12:05, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
::I, for one, fully endorse both the ban and your action here. Thanks. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 19:11, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
::@BD2412: thanks for blocking me, I appreciate it. Alas, I have a hard time learning from punitive blocks, so I shall make another comment here, and be blocked for it again. I must point out that your contrived naïveté ("there is no reason to believe that [Cirt] was aware of this interaction ban at the time that he made the talk page post of which you complain") is quite breathtaking. Cirt edited several different pages after you set forth this interaction ban, including yours, UDSCott's, and Ningauble's talk pages (not just mine), so he must have seen the Recent Changes page, or at least his Watchlist. To say that he somehow missed the section you had opened an hour earlier in the Administrator's Noticeboard, with his name in it, is simply absurd. In any case, as you can see, I have mentioned Cirt in this very comment, so you should block me once again, this time for "at least 30 days." Won't that be fun for you? I ''will'' miss editing articles, but I understand that I need to be blocked, as I pose such a great danger to Wikiquote. Knock yourself out. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 12:47, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
::: Since you have now specifically requested to be blocked for 30 days, I will accommodate your request. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 12:56, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
:::: I suppose if I asked you to [insert any fantasy] me, you would also "accommodate" my request? I did not request to be blocked. Sorry that you don't understand irony. (It's not a new concept, it's been around for at least a couple of years now.) In any case, you decided to abuse your tools and block me for 30 days, as a '''smokescreen''', so that you wouldn't have to properly reply to the clarification/explanation in my comment, above, but even a child can see through that. (Nice try, though.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:17, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

=== Request for reconsideration ===
DanielTom has sent me an email stating that he has learned his lesson, and will abide by the interaction ban, and therefore seeks reconsideration of the period of the block. He seems to have gotten the message, and I am inclined to unblock, if there is general support from my fellow administrators for so doing. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 02:50, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
: I have no objection.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 11:34, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:If we can have another productive editor ''and'' not have anymore back-and-forth between them, I'd say that's the best possible scenario. Thumbs up. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 14:15, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:No objections from me, assuming the dispute is not continued. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 15:22, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
::Thanks, the three of you. And thanks to Ningauble and BD as well, even though I ''am'' disappointed by their recent actions. (Anyway, time to move on.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:35, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
: Although I received a snarky email when I extended the scope of the block,[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DanielTom&diff=1595942] I do not object to giving the benefit of the doubt if others are persuaded that he is now earnest about reform. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:41, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
::: My email to you was not "snarky", and as no person reading this here has access to it, other than the two of us, it is very ungentlemanly of you to say it was. However, I should say, the message ''you'' left at my talk page after revoking my talk page access for 30 days ''was'' "snarky", as I've just briefly explained there. Finally, I cannot believe that it was in Wikiquote's best interest to have me blocked an unable to edit articles (but, then again, maybe that's me being too egocentric.) Sincerely, [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:30, 10 July 2013 (UTC) P.S. Ningauble, if you think you can revoke my talk page access ''for 30 days'' and then not hear any criticism from me, think again. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:39, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:: As the community is in agreement, the block of [[User:DanielTom]] is lifted. The interaction ban remains is place indefinitely. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 17:02, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:DanielTom had (before asking to be unblocked) sent both BD and Ningauble more than a couple emails with diffs and links to articles that could have been easily fixed in less than 10 seconds, but he was simply ignored. Given this, I (speaking in the first person now) did request to be unblocked early so that I could edit said articles again myself [as well as others, and I quote from the email: ''I just want to go back to edit[ing] articles. (Plans include adding a few quotes to the [[Bertrand Russell]] article, [[Virgil]], and then fixing the [[Death Note]] page as promised [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Death_Note&diff=1566835&oldid=1566828])'']. I should say that the original block itself was ridiculous (in my opinion, at any rate; admittedly, it is always amusing for me to be treated like a vandal — though, oddly enough, even deliberate vandals, whose only contributions have been wrecking articles, are usually only blocked for 2 days, while I found myself blocked for 30 days, but I digress), and as I had already been blocked for about two weeks, that was indeed long enough time for me to admit "lesson learnt" [where the lesson is: 1) some people apparently do not ''really'' care about article quality, and 2) punitive blocks are considered acceptable here]). I will indeed "abide by the interaction ban" from now on. Time to focus on articles again. Thanks guys for getting me unblocked, and see you 'round. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 17:41, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:: The original block was for 24 hours, this was your ''second'' block. Persistent disruption is indeed treated differently than drive-by vandalism, and blocking to "deter the continuation of present, disruptive behavior" is [[w:WP:BLOCK#PREVENTATIVE|preventative, not punitive]]. I do recognize the distinction may not be easy to appreciate when one is on the receiving end of it, but it really is not the same thing. Regarding article fixes not done: you would not believe the length of my list of things needing to be fixed. One of the coping mechanisms I employ for problems arising faster than I can address them is to [[Procrastination|defer action]] when it appears that someone else will probably handle it. Still, the list grows daily, even without distractions like this, and the priorities I choose are mostly inexplicable even to myself. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 20:53, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
::: Maybe someday someone will explain to me ''exactly'' how blocking me for 30 days for [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=1595314&oldid=1594947 this edit] was "preventive", and not punitive. Anyway, I agree with you, this really is a "distraction", and a waste of time.~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 21:21, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

===New block of DanielTom===
In response to [https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ABD2412&diff=1624219&oldid=1624194 this edit to my talk page], in violation of the interaction ban, I have blocked [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] for three months. This editor has previously made requests for actions like this in ways that do not implicate the interaction ban, so clearly he knows how to do so, and has chosen not to. I interpret this as the editor intentionally trying to make trouble, to see what he can get away with, which is not conduct consistent with a good faith desire to build a useful compendium of quotes. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 13:26, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

== Block request for SantiagoG ==

Hi there,

{{user|SantiagoG}} is a spambot using a non-sul account, so unfortunately it can't be locked. Please consider blocking it instead. :)

Thanks, [[User:Mathonius|Mathonius]] ([[User talk:Mathonius|talk]]) 04:43, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} Spam bots like this are pretty routine, you can usually just tag the userpage and they get deleted and blocked pretty quickly. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 06:39, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
:: Alas, this particular pattern of userpage spam has become ''very'' routine lately. They will eventually realize they are wasting their time, but it can take a while because they are remarkably stupid. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:02, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
:::Back when I still had the CheckUser bit, I'd run the occasional check to see if I could catch a bunch of accounts at one time, but alas, there was never any connection between them. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 05:15, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
::::Let us just nominate and choose a second CheckUser here, and then you get your bit backs. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 18:20, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
::::: Here, here! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 03:54, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::BD2412, if you are interested you got my vote. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 10:08, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::: I appreciate the support, but since my last bid for CU status I have come around to the view that it is probably better for the project for power to be diffused rather than concentrated. As I am already a 'crat, I would feel uncomfortable also serving as a CU at this point. However, I do think we need more CUs. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 00:44, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
::::Ningauble, in the light the diffusion of power, would you be interested in the CheckUser bit? If so you got my vote. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:45, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
::::: For my own peace of mind, I prefer not to delve into the activities of bad actors more deeply than I already do with my administrative work. I don't want to be involved in researching personally identifying information about them. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:40, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::: I'd say the chances of us having a new CheckUser on Wikiquote are about 0%. Where would the candidates get the (minimum) 25 supporting votes to be "promoted", when we don't even have 10 active contributors on this wiki? ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 14:54, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::: Not necessarily. You would be surprised by who shows up for CU elections. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:13, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::: No Wikiquote CheckUser has ever been ''legitimately'' elected here, as anyone looking at the archives can now confirm. It's not just that people with almost no local contributions show up; we've also had more than one sockpuppet voting in such elections. (And, no, I wouldn't be surprised because I've seen them.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 15:34, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::::: Well, [[m:Wikimedia Forum/On disbanding Wikiquote|it has been argued]] that sock voting makes the ''entire project'' illegitimate, but I don't think we need to go there. I am satisfied by the level of participation in past CU elections that the outcomes were not influenced by the quantity of puppet votes. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:30, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::: (Where? The discussion you linked only refers to possible copyright infringements, not to "sock voting".) The outcomes were certainly influenced by puppet votes (who helped the support votes reach the minimum of 25). While I too am "satisfied", I still feel that the current minimum (a relic blindly and rigidly imposed by meta policy) is too high, and unrealistic, for Wikiquote. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 16:58, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::No legitimate CheckUser election? [[Wikiquote:Requests for checkuser/EVula|O rly]]? [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 17:33, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::Yep. Some users there had (and still do) literally ''zero'' edits on Wikiquote, other than showing up at your election to vote support (namely, and strikingly, [[Special:Contributions/Nifky%3F|User:Nifky?]], [[Special:Contributions/Razorflame|User:Razorflame]], and [[Special:Contributions/Jake Wartenberg|User:Jake Wartenberg]]). (Incidentally, there were also other users, namely [[Special:Contributions/Juliancolton|User:Juliancolton]] and [[Special:Contributions/Counterpower|User:Counterpower]], who also had zero or just a couple of edits to articles before voting there.) None of that was your fault; nay, it was pretty much ''a must'', given that we simply don't have, ''and never had'', 25 active contributors on Wikiquote. (See the larger picture?) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:03, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::: We have more active contributors (usually defined as at least 5 article edits per month) than that. See [http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikiquote/EN/TablesWikipediaEN.htm#editor_activity_levels editor activity levels] at Wikistats. Getting them to participate in community affairs is another matter. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:27, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::: @DanielTom: (Within that lengthy discussion there were strong words alleging incompetent governance in dealing with the Poetlister socks, claiming that was sufficient grounds to disband the project.) The elections were typically called as soon as they reach 25, and results would not likely have been different had they run a little longer. This is really moot unless you want to challenge [http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests/Permissions&diff=5458382 EVula's standing] for reinstatement in the event a second CU is elected. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:43, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::: No, I don't want to challenge EVula's standing. (We need more CUs, not less. But, ain't gonna happen.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:08, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::@Ningauble, thanks. Still that particular pattern of userpage spam also worries me, and I think we should search for more structural solutions. Getting the CheckUser bit back, and (let EVula) keep running occasional checks, seems the least we could/should do. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 14:56, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::: The global Stewards are well aware of this pattern, which occurs across all wikis. Unfortunately, the IP addresses used by these spambots are highly variable by design, so blocking them, even ranges of them, is ineffective. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:10, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::Yeah, any time that I would run a check on the spam IPs, I'd get nothing. It's really annoying. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 15:41, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::: Someone might investigate whether Wikipedia has developed an Abuse filter for this pattern. However, the text changes so much that keeping up with the filter might be a game of [[w:Whac-A-Mole|Whac-A-Mole]]. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 12:56, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

== Edit filter maybe ==

I don't hang out at Wikiquote, so I'm not sure how much of a problem this is. But I just ran across [//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=ANTman&oldid=1600515 an edit] that may have been able to be stopped by an [[Special:AbuseFilter|edit filter]] similar to [[w:en:Special:AbuseFilter/135]]. Perhaps somebody could copy that filter over to here. [[Special:Contributions/64.40.54.47|64.40.54.47]] 04:13, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

== Talk page spam ==

Yesterday and today I noticed a (for me) new type of spam on the talk page: an unrelated text (size about 4k) from a rotating ip address (see for example [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Great_Mouse_Detective&diff=prev&oldid=1606173 here]). Now I noticed that 7 of 9 originated ip addresses originated from one ownerid in Venezuela. If this continues, can we than block his range of IP addresses all at once? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 10:21, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
: Thus far I count 25 IP addresses used by this spambot, ranging from 60.24.11.41 to 221.10.40.232. This is too wide a range to block without blacking out entire continents. If the problem persists then someone could try using the [[Special:AbuseFilter|Abuse filter]] to mitigate it. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 12:41, 24 July 2013 (UTC)–Updated 13:43, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

== Unblock request [[User:Diogotome]] ==

::''The following unblock request is copy/paste here (partly trimmed) from [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ABD2412&diff=1609829&oldid=1608714 here] by [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 09:16, 7 August 2013 (UTC)''
*{{checkuser|Diogotome}}
As you know, my brother was blocked some time ago in many wikis where he has zero edits... He was recently unblocked at Commons, where admin asked him to write on his user page that he is my brother. (He did so [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Diogotome]...) He was also unblocked at Wikisource [http://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3ADiogotome] on the grounds that he had no edits there. (He also has no edits here.)
:Other than the strong evidence presented by email that he is my brother (including citizen card, ID), there are other things which you included can check. 1) he created his account in 2009 (I myself didn't even know about accounts till late 2012); 2) the email with which he registered his account is diofact@hotmail.com (confirm that); 3) he still uses that email, even on his Facebook account, where you can find him (Diogo Tomé). I think it is obvious that the account is his.
Also worth noting, he, just like me, registered with his real name, which is not what socks do (...). Although I know he doesn't want to edit Wikiquote, I still don't think he should be blocked here on sock grounds.
... ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 21:47, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
:: I have lifted the block. It is my understanding that [[User:Diogotome]] has no interest in editing here. I am sure you are aware that it would raise some eyebrows (on all of the above mentioned projects) if this editor suddenly began making edits that seemed as if they are made as a proxy for you, so please take care. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 12:20, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:::Thanks (your understanding is correct). ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 12:42, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:: I don't have any problem with this unblocking, but I would like to rectify some incorrect assumptions. (1) The email with which he registered his account cannot be confirmed by any technical means available to administrators here. It is confidential information that only the account holder is at liberty to disclose. (2) Registering with a real name most definitely ''is'' something that socks do. Some of the most notorious abusers are known to impersonate real people. Finally, BD's eyebrow raising admonition cuts both ways: both accounts should avoid involvement in each other's affairs. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:39, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:::"The email with which he registered his account cannot be confirmed by any technical means available to administrators here." Where can it be confirmed? ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 17:44, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:::: I assume that it could be extracted by a developer. However, it is easy enough to change the e-mail associated with an account; we have no way of knowing whether it is the original address.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 18:06, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
::::: "It is confidential information that only the account holder is at liberty to disclose." The [[foundation:Privacy policy|Privacy policy]] identifies one way he can confirm the email address currently linked to his account (using "email this user"), and indicates conditions under which the Foundation would disclose it without his consent (e.g. subpoena). ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:09, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::: I suppose even the original email ("e-mail address confirmation") could be changed if forwarded. As to the real names question, of course socks use real names, but not ''their'' real names (any name you can choose is someone else's real name). My point is that no sock has its name so close to the sockmaster's (in this case, Diogo being a Portuguese name, and our family names being the same). Maybe if I get blocked indefinitely on Wikiquote, and unable to edit, my brother may come along to return my favor here, and ask that I be unblocked, although that is exceedingly unlikely (not the block part, but the returning of the favor part from him). ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:25, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

== Semi-protection request for Mean Girls ==

Could an administrator semi-protect [[Mean Girls]]? Too much IP vandalism going on as of lately (especially {{User|65.175.216.98}}). Thanks in advance. [[User:SnapSnap|SnapSnap]] ([[User talk:SnapSnap|talk]]) 18:26, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} - but I also trimmed this very bloated page first. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 19:02, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

== QOTD for 10 & 12 August 2013 ==

The QOTD layout at [[Wikiquote talk:Quote of the day/August 10, 2013]] will have to be placed into [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/August 10, 2013]] by an admin. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 21:36, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 23:16, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

I am once again a bit late with a selection and the QOTD layout at [[Wikiquote talk:Quote of the day/August 12, 2013]] will have to be placed into [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/August 12, 2013]] by an admin. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 14:53, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 15:04, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

== [[Talk: Main Page]] ==
Can someone semi-protect this again? It's getting vandalized a lot. [[User:King jakob c 2|'''Kjc2''']] [[User talk:King jakob c 2|jabber]] 15:47, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
: I am reluctant to protect the talk page or our main public-facing portal, where newcomers and visitors should be welcome to make pertinent inquiries and comments, unless the situation becomes unmanageable. I think the current frequency of unconstructive edits on this widely watched page is being handled well enough by folks who notice and revert in a fairly timely manner. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:07, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
::It seems in the past year only one comment was made by an anom visitors, while the page is vandalized 50+ times. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:36, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
::: You are not counting registered accounts without enough local edits to be autoconfirmed, but it is true that unconstructive edits significantly outnumber constructive ones. I just don't think a handful of reverts per month is too great a price to pay for keeping the front door open. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:22, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

== Blocking question ==

Just wanted to gauge the opinions of the admins: I noticed that {{user|Mdd}} recently blocked a user indefinitely for a single instance of what I would characterize as moderate and fairly harmless spamming (linking to a site for their poetry on their user page). If it were me, I would have likely let them off with a <nowiki>{{spam}}</nowiki> warning - which is what I did earlier in the day for someone who posted a link to their blog on their user page. I'm not saying my inclination is correct or that {{user|Mdd}} is wrong, but in the spirit of consistency, what is the feeling out there? I'm just curious. Thanks. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 18:35, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
:Assuming you're talking about {{User|MelissaHg}}, I'd say it was a reasonable assumption; the page itself matches the same pattern for all the spam that we've been getting for months (right down to the double tags before the link). Plus, I'm not sure why someone from Switzerland would have a Spanish poetry site... [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 18:55, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

::In the past 4 months I have blocked about 200 new users, which where I presume all made by spam bots. The links which are presented by those spam bots differ greatly from hardporn to... indeed poetry. Does UDScott suggest, that we make go make a difference in what type of site the spambot is referring to? If indeed there are just spam-bots, it seems to me adding warnings on the talk page is a waist of time. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 19:08, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
:::In the end, I'm not really asking whether or not a block was warranted (in most cases I agree it is) - I'm just asking if it is the first step in all cases. I just want to be consistent in our treatment of spam. If it is the case that we automatically block anyone who posts spam, fine - but our [[Wikiquote:Blocking policy|blocking policy]] does not reflect this and should be updated. The only current mention of spam is that if a block is given for spamming, it should not be less than a month. And if we are going this way, then what is the purpose of the two spam warnings we have? Again, I'm not trying to criticize what anyone else has done - I'm just asking the question on how we would like to generally treat these circumstances. Thanks. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 19:12, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
::::I'd say that we need to update our blocking policy, then. I don't think warning spam accounts will do anything; it's just drive-by vandalism, but if we just delete the spam and leave the account, there's a much better chance that they'll swing right back around and spam again, increasing the amount of administrative work (not by a substantial margin, of course; but it ''is'' one more time that we have to delete their spam). [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 19:21, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
::::: Before we became inundated, as Mdd notes, with a consistent pattern userpage spam, I routinely responded as UDScott describes. Since then I have been blocking them on sight, when they appear to be using the same pattern, without investigating whether the link itself is commercial or otherwise execrable. I would not be quite so hasty with things that do not appear to match the pattern. I do not regard this as drive-by spamming: the consistency of the pattern leads me to believe we are dealing with an SEO spammer who is hired by people who want to promote their web pages. If the nature of the linked content makes no difference to the spammer, I am not sure it should make any difference to us. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 19:39, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
::::@UDScott: our regular visitors, the spambots, follow an easily-distinguishable pattern, and I think those can just be blocked with no prior warning (they aren't here to contribute to articles anyway). But when it comes to ''human'' editors who, say, post unwarranted links in "External links" article sections, then the <nowiki>{{spam}}</nowiki> templates can and should be used, as they offer useful information to the user, and serve as warnings. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:47, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::OK, understood - this pretty much matches to my understanding. I guess it's my fault that I've been spending more time on other parts of the project and I don't know that I would automatically recognize someone as a spambot, which spawned my question (I fight them when I see them, but I usually see more traditional vandals than spammers in my time here). Thanks all. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 15:58, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::: In recent months this pattern of spam has been a large proportion, even a majority, of newly created user pages. Therefore, I have been screening [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ANewPages&namespace=2 all new user pages] daily. Since becoming an administrator, Mdd has been catching most of them while my time zone is sleeping. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:29, 15 August 2013 (UTC)/16:47, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::: Question: if a spambot starts posting here, and we block them for just a month, do we have any reason to think that they will start spamming again once the month is up? I honestly don't know. It seems to me that spambots, once blocked for any reasonable length of time, just go away forever even if the block expires. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 20:48, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::::: Yes, the spambot will be back after a month. He has ''already'' been using the same pattern for several months running. This might quite possibly be the ''same'' SEO spammer that started [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive/019#Checkuser_request:_serial_one-shot_spam_accounts two years ago,] though the pattern now uses less verbose boilerplate. Prior to that time userpage spamming was rare and was not systematic; but since then we have only infrequently been without extended campaigns of systematic userpage spam. The named throwaway accounts are seldom re-used, except in an immediate timeframe. The reason I block them is not to prevent re-using the names, but to autoblock the underlying IPs. This does not stop him, but it is my impression that blocking enough of them slows him down a bit, at least until he gets a fresh set of addresses to exploit. Perhaps resistance is futile. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 19:37, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::: Can we file a complaint with his ISP? [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 19:59, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::Back when I had my CU flag, I would run a check on the occasional userpage vandal like these, but I could never find a pattern between them. I'm not sure that there would be a single IP to file a complaint with. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 21:14, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::There should be a way of adding "<nowiki> </nowiki>" to the [[Special:AbuseFilter|abuse filter]], at least as a test (maybe just on user pages). ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 01:09, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::: Hmmm. I use that syntax sometimes, and in drafts in userspace too. Some kind of alert would be nice, though. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 02:04, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
{{Outdent}} Is it technically possible to make the creation of an external link subject to a captcha for new users and only new users? (I think it would be too irksome to have it for everyone.) That would solve the problem.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 07:14, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
: I don't see why it ''wouldn't'' be possible, since Wikipedia is able to prevent new users from creating articles at all. This is an excellent suggestion. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 12:36, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
:: Good idea, but it would appear that the spammer(s) already passed the captchas required to create these throwaway accounts in the first place. Doubling the labor cost by adding a captcha when editing may not be much of a deterrent. If we want to pursue this, it would involve tweaking [[mediawikiwiki:Extension:ConfirmEdit#Configuration|configuration settings]] for the ConfirmEdit extension. I do not know where to view the current settings (or whether I am allowed to). ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:22, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
::: Can we just bar new accounts from adding external links, period? No external links until you've made x number of regular edits over y number of days? [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 18:33, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
:::: This would be a very significant new policy but, yes, we can. It could be enforced by the Abuse Filter if there is no more direct method. (We would need assistance from Wikipedia's filter experts to implement something that does not give false-positives when editing a page that already contains external links.) Note that this would impact many long-term IP editors who choose not to register an account (most of whom probably do not monitor discussion pages where policy consensus is formulated). Although I favor the proposition that ''everyone'' should be required to register before posting, I must note that it is a minority view opposed even by Jimbo, with whom I agree about some other things. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:42, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
::::: BD didn't say anything about barring ''IPs'' from adding external links. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:20, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::: I believe IPs must already pass a Captcha to add any external link. Is that not correct? [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 13:35, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::: @BD: Yes, captcha is required to post an external link when one is not logged in. @Daniel: Unregistered falls below newly registered in the hierarchy of user status. The implementation for what BD describes above would be to require at least "autoconfirmed" status to post an external link. There is no precedent for granting IPs more permissions than registered accounts: doing so would create a logical snarl and would be a disincentive to registration. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:03, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::Ningauble, referring to BD's proposal, you write: "this would impact many long-term IP editors". But it wouldn't. BD suggested "No external links ''until you've made x number of regular edits over y number of days''", so clearly "long-term IP editors" would be exempt from such a limitation. You speak as if you would want to bar IPs from adding external links ''altogether'', but that seems idiotic to me, especially since they already have to pass a captcha to post them. (Well, I see you don't want IPs editing ''at all'', but yeah, that ''is'' an extreme position...) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 15:40, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::: Four points in reply to Daniel:
:::::::::# BD did not ''propose'', he enquired whether it is possible. I replied that it is, and noted that it would need a major policy discussion.
:::::::::# I did not speak for or against allowing IPs to post links. I noted that this group would be impacted, and followed up in a subsequent post explaining why they would be impacted. My remark about whether this group should be posting at all was intended purely as a disclosure.
:::::::::# Note that our long term IP editors frequently have their IPA changed by their ISP, and the same IPA may be allocated to multiple users. There is no such thing as an "IP account": an unregistered user has no account and earns no confirmation status.
:::::::::# If you think I am an idiot, you would be well advised to keep that opinion to yourself and focus instead on the issues under discussion.
::::::::: I begin to wonder whether I am wasting my time in replying to you at all. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:19, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::: I was focusing on the issue. I said "bar[ring] IPs from adding external links ''altogether'' [...] seems idiotic to me, especially since they already have to pass a captcha to post them." I didn't say I think you are an idiot, though I am sorry if the word "idiotic" offended you somehow. (For what it's worth, I think you are smart, and I do admire your ability to take things out of context.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 16:54, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::: There is little ambiguity in ascribing a desire to someone and declaring it to be idiotic. Who else might you have meant by "you" in that sentence? There is no call for insinuating that I dissemble by misrepresenting context. If you wish to accuse me of dishonesty then you may call for a vote of confidence, otherwise your insults are not welcome. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 22:52, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::::: To be clear, in "but ''that'' seems idiotic to me", the "''that''" refers to "bar[ring] IPs from adding external links ''altogether''", not to your desires. I'm not going to change the offending word now that you've made such a big fuss about it. I also have no intention of calling for a "vote of confidence" just because you happen to believe in idiotic things. (Hell, I believe in idiotic things too.) Maybe it does seem to me idiotic to want to prevent IPs from editing. So what? Feel free to block me for "incivility", if you're so overly-sensitive. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 23:33, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::: In order to avoid any misunderstanding that might arise from how my remarks have been characterized above, let me make one thing clear: I have not advocated barring IP editors from posting external links. I brought it up because, recognizing the consensus for allowing unregistered editing, I believe it would be an ''adverse'' consequence. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 00:44, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::: I am not uncomfortable with temporarily placing newly registered editors in a worse position than IP editors with respect to external links, if our persistent spam problems are coming from newly registered editors. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 17:55, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
You get spam from IPs too; I just removed some on [[Talk:Main Page]].--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 03:55, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

=== To do next ===
In the above discussion two types of action are proposed.
# To update the [[Wikiquote:Blocking policy]], adding a note about permanently blocking "spam-only accounts"
# To create an abuse filter, which automatically blocks (''more specific, I mean, disallowing edits'') of new users trying to add external links

Now I would like to propose to pursue both courses of action. Concerning the abuse filter, we can begin with a pilot for a short period of time. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:09, 16 October 2013 (UTC) / ''01:37, 18 October 2013 (UTC)''

== Nietzkov: nuisance or hoax? ==

Can anyone verify citations added by {{user|200.121.207.40}}? Googling the name "Nietzkov" appearing in quotes this user (and others[https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?search=Nietzkov]) has been adding, I find a pattern that smells like promotion of a nobody. Are celebrities really talking about him as claimed, or are we being hoaxed? ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:53, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
: As far as I can see, all these quotes are either unsourced or sourced to non-existent Youtube videos, so they can be removed as unsourced. They all look pretty fishy to me, anyway.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 03:43, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
:: Thanks for checking the YooToob links (it is impractical with my limited bandwidth). Since this much is demonstrably bogus, I will go ahead and revert it all. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:15, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

== User 98.15.141.31 ==

I have deleted a number of bogus titles created by {{IPvandal|98.15.141.31}}. The user's few remaining contributions correspond to genuine titles, but I do not know whether the contributed content is bogus. Can anyone check the accuracy of the remaining contributions? If they are not affirmatively verified then I am inclined to presumptively revert/delete them due to their vandalistic provenance. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:47, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
:His edit to [[Yu-Gi-Oh!]] ("Say hello to the unstoppable family of monsters; The five Kuriboh brothers!") sounds plausible, though I couldn't confirm it. The dialogue in [[Disney's The Kid]] is accurate, but the one in [[Radio Flyer (film)]] seems bogus. (I'd ask him about this last one.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 17:17, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
::FYI, the ''[[Radio Flyer (film)]]'' dialogue was pretty close to correct (I've since fixed the page). ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 18:09, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
: It turns out this is a long term vandal known at Wikipedia as the "[[w:Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Voice Cast Vandal|Voice Cast Vandal]]". I have blocked the IP for a year. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 13:43, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

== Template:Otherwiki ==

Just wondering if someone could edit [[Template:Otherwiki]] and change Wikivoyage-logo.svg to Wikivoyage-Logo-v3-icon.svg Thanks -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 12:04, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 13:12, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

==[[Talk:Main Page]] again==
Vandalism and spam there is picking up even more. Maybe now it can be semi-protected? --[[User:King jakob c 2|Jakob]] ([[User talk:King jakob c 2|Scream about]] [[Special:Contributions/King jakob c 2|the things I've broken]]) 15:02, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
:I really don't like the idea of ''that'' particular page being semi-protected, considering it's the talk page for what is effectively our homepage. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 15:21, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

== Broadway vandal ==
Could some admin semi-protect the articles: [[George Washington]], [[Michelle Obama]], [[Men in Black (film)]] and [[Men in Black II]]? Thanks. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 15:23, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
: This "Broadway vandal" has been around for at least three years, and has no difficulty picking new pages to deface whenever it is convenient. More than a dozen pages have been impacted. Rather than restrict editing of random pages arbitrarily selected by the vandal, it might be better if someone could implement an [[Special:AbuseFilter|abuse filter]] that screens for the pattern of content added. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:09, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
::@Ningauble, could you initiate the development of such an abuse filter? And/or a abuse filter such as mentioned in the [[#Blocking question]] discussion? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:16, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
::: I believe I ''could'', but I am not sure that I will. I have given some thought to a filter for the Broadway Vandal, and it is on my list of things to consider doing; but I have not invested the substantial time it would take to acquire the requisite expertise with the filter tool. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:01, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

== [[Total Recall]] talk page ==

For the past few days, some idiot anon's claiming Douglas Quaid has talked to him. I've been reverting [https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Total_Recall&action=history it] for sometime because I don't think it adds anything to article improvement. Can we block that guy?--[[User:Eaglestorm|Eaglestorm]] ([[User talk:Eaglestorm|talk]]) 10:55, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
:Hi Eaglestorm, the first step is to give him a warning. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 11:58, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
::I don't know if there's a warning template around here.--[[User:Eaglestorm|Eaglestorm]] ([[User talk:Eaglestorm|talk]]) 12:07, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
:::[[Wikiquote:Template messages/User talk]] -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:12, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

== Medical spam. ==

User:[[Special:Contributions/125.27.105.23|125.27.105.23]] has been spamming links on random articles related to medicine; might be worthwhile blocking ? --[[User:Aphorist|Aphorist]] ([[User talk:Aphorist|talk]]) 10:32, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
: It appears to be a single episode that has stopped. A block would be worthwhile if the activity resumes. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:12, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
:: Spamming links to the same site has continued from multiple IP addresses, so I have added the site to the spam blacklist. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 13:04, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
:::Agree with the addition to the spam blacklist, thank you. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 23:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

== Improper mischaracterization by [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] of another user's comment ==

It is alleged on my talk page[//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ningauble&diff=1632035] that I, user {{Userlinks|Ningauble}}, have improperly mischaracterized the words of user {{Userlinks|Cirt}}. Because I regard this as a serious allegation of misconduct, and because I have previously made [//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ningauble&diff=1499213 a commitment to Cirt] that I would submit his concerns about improper conduct on my part to this noticeboard for review, I invite Wikiquote's administrators to evaluate whether what I wrote was a mischaracterization of Cirt's words, and if such be the case, to recommend appropriate action to address any misconduct on my part.
* The original exchange may be found [//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AMdd&diff=1631983&oldid=1631647 here]
* The full discussion in which it occurred is at [[User talk:Mdd#Thanks much for your formatting help]]
'''My understanding of events''' is that when I joined a discussion to express opinions in support of a third contributor's edits, Cirt replied, in part, "Everything in moderation, no need for extremists, either way" and I replied, in full "''<nowiki>'</nowiki>Extremists'?'' I invite you to reconsider your characterization of those with whom you disagree." [emphasis in original] As I understand it, the allegation is that "characterization of those with whom you disagree" misrepresents that to which "no need for extremists" refers.
'''In my defense''' I offer the following points about my understanding of the referent of Cirt's remark:
# In the context of the original discussion, the word "extremists" clearly and unambiguously refers to participants in the discussion, or at least to participants in the Wikiquote project, not to the merits of the question being discussed, which concerns the appropriateness of certain article content.
# Cirt has indicated (in discussions linked above) that this was not intended to refer to any actual individuals then participating in the discussion, but to potential future participants in the discussion. Whether considered as applicable to past, present, or future participants, describing it as a "characterization of those with whom you disagree" is equally applicable to actual or hypothetical participants, and is in no way a mischaracterization.
# Whether considered as an attempt to [[w:argumentum ad hominem|disparage current participants]] in the discussion, or as an attempt to [[w:Poisoning the well|pre-emptively discredit]] future participants, or even as a [[w:Ignoratio elenchi|mere irrelevancy]] absent such intent, Cirt's remark about extremists (i.e. persons who are far outside the mainstream of society) was unmistakably and unambiguously a characterization of some people. The only assumption I made in describing his remark is that he disagrees with such people, which seems quite evident from the context.
'''My ''interpretation'' of these events''' is somewhat subjective, and is offered solely to explain ''why'' I responded to Cirt's remark in the first place, not whether the content of my response was a fair and accurate characterization of that remark. If it is determined that my response was indeed a factual misrepresentation, whether by reason of incomprehension or by deceit, understanding motive may help administrators decide upon appropriate actions to take. I replied to Cirt as I did because:
# Although Cirt's comment was prompted by my expressing an opinion with which he evidently disagrees, I did not assume it was a personal characterization of me ''individually'', and my response did not suggest that this was the case. Rather, I looked upon it as an apparent attempt to discourage or discredit ''anyone'' who might express opinions extremely different from his own, by labeling such people as extremists.
# I consider "extremists" a rather odious characterization of anyone, though there certainly are some people to whom the appellation may be applied with accuracy. Use of such language may be marginally appropriate where user conduct is the subject of discussion, but I consider it wholly inappropriate in the discussion where it was used.
# "Extremists" is also a very inapt and objectively misleading way to characterize people who argue against a practice that is itself extremely rare in Wikiquote articles. ([[User:Mdd|Mdd]]'s investigation found only about 30 instances among Wikiquote's 22,000+ articles.[//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AMdd&diff=1631453&oldid=1631429]) This is not ''extremism'' far outside the mainstream, it is defense of ordinary ''mainstream'' practice.
# I consider it unbecoming of an administrator such as Cirt to engage in ''[[w:argumentum ad hominem|argumentum ad hominem]]'' of any sort, and I consider it a duty of administrators such as myself to encourage participants to refrain from it. For this reason, and the reasons above, I thought it was appropriate to encourage Cirt to reconsider making this sort of comment.
Although I have shared some of my motivations for my remark, please bear in mind that the substance of the complaint I am submitting for your consideration is not whether the article content under discussion is a good idea, nor whether Cirt's comment about extremists was a good idea, nor whether it was a good idea for me to respond, but is whether my response was in fact, as alleged by Cirt, a mischaracterization of his words. Thank you for reviewing this complaint about the conduct of yours truly, [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 22:13, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

:Just my two cents: I agree that there is/was something off about the use of the word "extremists" in that context, which I initially (mis)read and interpreted as "extremism": referring to the editorial action of remove all further reading sections. I also think Cirt could do a better job using non-offensive/neutral talk-item titles. Offensive titles like "Mischaracterizations" tend to escalate things. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 13:05, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
::I read the discussion as it was occurring, and I've re-read it now, and I absolutely do not feel that you mischaracterized what was written. I believe that Ningauble was correct to call him on the use of such an inflammatory term as "extremists." And I also believe that the way in which Cirt was invited to reconsider showed courtesy and actually offered a chance for clarification so that the words would not be mischaracterized. My reading of the statement (both then and now) was that Cirt felt that there were two extremes of action - either completely remove the additional links, or leave them as they are. In the end, I believe that Cirt was trying to espouse a compromise, wherein some links were cut and some remain. But that is not the way the exchange was written. I believe that Ningauble acted properly and that the use of such a term as "extremists" was inappropriate. It has been my experience that Cirt has a tendency to inflame a discussion beyond the bounds of civility quite quickly if someone does not fully agree with him. In this particular case, I believe that the resulting conflict certainly could have been avoided with a better choice of language in the discussion. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 15:51, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
::: Thank you both for your thoughtful deliberation. Since nobody has (yet) endorsed Cirt's allegation, I am going to resume editing Wikiquote (including areas relating to the subject of the discussion from which the allegation arose), under the rebuttable presumption that the allegation of misconduct is without merit. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:23, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
::::'''Comment:''' Thank you all for the above comments. I realize upon further reflection that my comments were inappropriate. I shall take greater care in the future to not comment in such style in subsequent discussions. I wish you all well. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 22:22, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
'''Update:''' As far as the matter related to the ''Further reading'' sections, I realize that community consensus does not support this. Therefore, I have voluntarily gone ahead and taken the actions to remove these myself from the relevant pages. This has since been {{done}}. I made a note of this at [https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Village_pump&diff=1633186&oldid=1633164 Village Pump]. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 23:00, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

== Auto spambot detection with User:Abuse filter ==
'''Proposal :'''
# to investigate the implementation of Auto spambot detection with <s>User:Abuse filter</s> the [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:AbuseFilter Extension:AbuseFilter]
# to implement the Auto spambot detection with <s>User:Abuse filter</s> the [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:AbuseFilter Extension:AbuseFilter]
-- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:19, 17 October 2013 (UTC) (p.s. this proposal is added a day after this discussion started) / 14:04, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
----
*[[m:User:Abuse filter]]
**See also: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/Abuse_filter
**Brief description: [https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Abuse_filter&action=history note: not a bot; like User:MediaWiki default]
**See also: [[User:MediaWiki default]]
**At Italian Wikipedia: [https://it.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Speciale:Registri/Filtro_anti_abusi&offset=&limit=5000&type=&user=Filtro+anti+abusi it's currently their sixth sysop by blocks].
**According to {{user|Billinghurst}}, we need to first get community consensus supporting this and we can then have the feature turned on. After that, the most prominent issue to consider is simply supervising its activity and placing restrictions on it.

I think this could be incredibly helpful, what do you think, community? -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 14:38, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
<hr width="50%" />

*'''Support'''. Just a note that I fully support implementation of this, as nom. Cheers, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 14:38, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
** Cirt. What do you support? Above the concrete proposal is (still) missing, or am I missing something? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 17:23, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
***It was simple enough for {{w|unanimous}} support over at ''Wikinews'', shrug... -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 22:19, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
**** So far, it is completely unclear what this is about. So far I only detected that there is a user with the name "Abuse filter" on meta. The rest of the completely unclear. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 23:55, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
** Ok, let's get some things straight:
**# The tool we might import here is the [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:AbuseFilter Extension:AbuseFilter].
**# The explanation about this tool on Meta can be found [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Abuse_filter here]
**# The user on Meta with the name [[m:User:Abuse filter|Abuse filter]] has made a link on his user page to the above link.
** [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 00:02, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
*** It seems this is not correct either, because the explanation about this tool on Meta states: ''It was enabled on English Wikipedia on March 2009[1] and is now be enabled on all Wikimedia projects...'' Should this mean that it can be enabled on Wikiquote (by filling in an request)? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 00:16, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
****I believe the user you refer to is not an actual person, but part of the automated system to block spammers. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 01:19, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
*****You might be right, anyway. I added an explicit proposal on top of this discussion, so it is more clear what we are talking about. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:30, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
*'''Comments''': The heading of this section refers to ''spambot detection'', but the links provided above appear to relate to the ability of the '''[[Special:AbuseFilter|AbuseFilter]]''' to impose blocks, which is not currently enabled in Wikiquote's implementation of the abuse filter. I will assume, but correct me if I am wrong, that this ''blocking feature'' is the one you are interested in enabling, rather than ''detection'' of spambot posts using the filter. I think the first priority is the detection of spam so it can be filtered out. Blocking the accounts is dependent upon detecting the activity first, and may be of less importance if the posts are effectively filtered out. I also think it could be dangerous to implement the blocking feature at a project that does not have its own local filter experts. It would be very helpful, and would not require enabling anything, to import a filter from another wiki that is already designed for the pattern of spambot activity we have been experiencing. If anyone would care to identify such a filter in use at another English language project, I would be happy to work on importing it. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:00, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
::Okay that sounds good, agree with analysis by {{user|Ningauble}}, above. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 16:32, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' as proposed, due to lack of clarity in the proposal about what exactly is proposed to be done. (The apparent confusion displayed in discussion above reinforces my opinion that it would be unwise to enable dangerous components of a system that is not well understood by those who would use it.) ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 11:51, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
** You are quite right. I think we need to investigate this some further. What are the possibilities and how to implement this? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:27, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

*'''Explicit proposal is now added''': Due to the previous comment by Ningauble and my earlier comments an explicit proposal is now added. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:25, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
** Your restatement of an explicit proposal, inserted above Cirt's original post, suggests that you might understand what is meant better than I do. For purposes of clarification, what do you mean by ''implement with User:Abuse filter''? ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 13:48, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
*** You're quite right, the proposal is rephrased. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 14:04, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
**** Your revised restatement of what is proposed, by striking reference to "User:Abuse filter" which was the focus of Cirt's original post starting this thread, appears to be changing the subject altogether rather than clarifying it. This thread has become a real mess, with confusion about the subject exacerbated by posting comments out of chronological sequence. I suggest everyone take a deep breath, step back, and begin a fresh thread if desired. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:53, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't think we are changing the subject here:
# There is a mediawiki extension named [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:AbuseFilter Extension:AbuseFilter]
# This extension can be turned on in any specific wikiproject, as explained [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Abuse_filter here] on mediawikimedia.org
## This specific mediawikimedia.org gives a table with "Permissions configuration comparison"
## Here it seems the Abuse filter is "turned on" on a lot of Wikiproject, but not on Wikiquote
# Now I guess if a request is made and granted, the Extension:AbuseFilter will create [[User:Abuse filter]] here on Wikiquote
Now I could be mistaken (again)), but let us bear in mind we are all on unfamiliar ground here. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 17:41, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
*I have asked Jasper Deng on Wikimedia for advice (see [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jasper_Deng#Wikiquote here]), since he created the User:Abuse filter page overthere. [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:05, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
** Allow me to clear up some misunderstandings:
**# The Abuse Filter extension is already installed at en.wikiquote, as indicated at [[Special:Version]]. Its main interface may be found at [[Special:AbuseFilter]].
**# The Abuse Filter does not need to be "turned on". It is up and running, and [[Special:AbuseLog]] shows its actions.
**# The table to which you linked ''does'' show that the Abuse Filter is installed here, but information about the configuration is incomplete. Apart from a naming difference, configuration of the extension at en.wikiquote similar to that described at [[w:Wikipedia:Edit filter]], and is essentially the Wikimedia default.
**# In particular, as described at [[w:Wikipedia:Edit filter#Actions which can be assigned in response to filtered edits]], automatic account blocking is not enabled.
**# "User:Abuse filter" is the username under which the Abuse Filter performs blocks, so that the block log, recent changes, & etc. can show ''who'' [sic] did the blocking. It is only needed at projects where automatic account blocking is enabled.
:: I hope that, in light of this information, my original comment (16:00, 16 October 2013 above) may make a little more sense. I appreciate that you would like for the Abuse Filter to combat the spambot activity we have been experiencing. It would be a good thing. Unfortunately, writing filters is not easy: it requires specific technical proficiencies, and can cause massive disruption of the entire site if it is done wrong. Please proceed with the utmost caution. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 23:28, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
:::Ok thanks. We already have a [https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter Abuse filter management] system...! Now the million dollar question: is there not an extra extension/filter we can add here? It looks like we have got 15 filters running, while Wikipedia (see [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter here]) has up to about 600 filters (not all active). -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 01:56, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
::::If you want to borrow some from Meta or MediaWiki (we have some good ones), then I or a steward can help. [[User:PiRSquared17|PiRSquared17]] ([[User talk:PiRSquared17|talk]]) 21:59, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

* Although I am not a regular contributor to Wikiquote, I noticed this discussion after it was mentioned to a fellow [[m:SWMT|SWMT]] member on Meta. I personally disagree with automatically imposed blocks from an edit filter in almost all cases, but I am fine with disallowing edits. Of course, it's up to your community whether or not you want automatic blocks. [[User:PiRSquared17|PiRSquared17]] ([[User talk:PiRSquared17|talk]]) 22:07, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
** I also believe that automatic blocks are not a good idea. This is not allowed at Wikipedia, where there are a large number of filter experts. I think it is scary to even consider the idea at a project like this where there are no experts to manage it. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 23:23, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
*** @PiRSquared17. we are looking for a bot that can disallowing edits, not block user accounts (See also correction [https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard#To_do_next here]): In short, we want to disallow new users to add (any) external links to Wikiquote. Do you know how this can be done? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 01:43, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
**** @Mdd: The original purpose of this thread concerns the blocking feature, by reference to [[m:User:Abuse filter]]. (Cirt was well aware of the extension itself, having edited filters previously.[https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter/history]) Again, " I suggest everyone take a deep breath, step back, and begin a fresh thread if desired." There was not much consensus in previous discussion ([[#Blocking question]]) to disallow ''any'' external links by new users (much less unregistered ones). If we do reach a consensus for such a policy, then it would be easy to implement automatic enforcement. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:20, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
****@Mdd: This project already has AbuseFilters that can disallow edits. To create one, see [[Special:AbuseFilter]] (please test filters before enabling them). I am an admin on Meta, where we have blocking filters. Only two people (including myself) opposed it there. False positives could really discourage new users, so I think blocking filters need to be disabled and fixed after any FP. [[User:PiRSquared17|PiRSquared17]] ([[User talk:PiRSquared17|talk]]) 21:59, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

=== Abuse filter to prevent "''New users adding external links on their user or talk page''" ===
Wikisource (see [https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter here]) has an abuse filter (nr 15) up and running, that prevents "''New users adding external links on their user or talk page''". It seems like a good idea to test this Abuse filter here on Wikiquote. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 20:53, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
:Actually, they're only ''tagging'' such edits, not ''preventing'' them, as it also catches good links. If you want to try it with "disallow" enabled, that is a different story. I can (privately) give you the code that other projects use for this, but only stewards and admins on Wikisource can see what the conditions for that filter are. [[User:PiRSquared17|PiRSquared17]] ([[User talk:PiRSquared17|talk]]) 22:04, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
:: Thanks for the kind offer! I am going to follow up with PiRSquared17 about finding suitable filters that can be adapted from other wikis. They can be difficult to find and import without assistance because most are "private", i.e., the details are hidden from public view (for good reason). We do need our filters to be a little more discriminating, sensitive to recognizable patterns used by spambots, than simply looking for the presence of external links. (E.g., they should not reject things like the original version of [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User:Mdd&oldid=566688 this user's page], or the page of [[User:Sue Gardner|this seemingly well-meaning person]]. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 13:08, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
I've made [[m:Special:AbuseFilter/43]] and /44 public. Not sure what wikisource does exactly, but it should be similar. [[User:PiRSquared17|PiRSquared17]] ([[User talk:PiRSquared17|talk]]) 18:41, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
: Thanks Pi! These filters detect and tag any edit that adds links the new user's page/talk. I am not sure tagging is a great benefit, since we seem to be catching them already at New Pages and Recent Changes; but if others think it would be beneficial to tag them then I will set up these filters or something similar. (They are easy.) What would be more useful, IMO, would be something that detects the specific pattern of spam we have been dealing with and stops them from posting. I have not followed up with Pi about the pattern yet, but will do so later today or tomorrow. Unfortunately, the pattern is so variable that it will take more than a simple "regexp" to catch many of them. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 19:22, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
:: Replied. (Note: change the wikimedia.org part to wikiquote.org) [[User:PiRSquared17|PiRSquared17]] ([[User talk:PiRSquared17|talk]]) 22:55, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
{{outdent|:::}}
PiRSquared17 provided info about [[m:Special:AbuseFilter/65]], which is designed for the spambot pattern we have been experiencing. I have implemented it here, with some changes, as [[Special:AbuseFilter/16]] (on a test basis initially, to go live soon). The filter will catch many features peculiar to this spambot, but some posts will slip through due to variations in wording. Administrators who feel confident editing filters can update it as the spammer [[w:Whac-A-Mole|invents new variations]] to evade the filter. For major or tentative changes, consider forking a new filter to run in test mode. You can also help by monitoring the [[Special:AbuseLog|AbuseLog]] for false positives, because some of the triggers may be so generic that they trap innocent edits. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:48, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
:Ntsamr is changing its usual pattern significantly. No link + No <nowiki> </nowiki>: [[User:NellieStGeorge]] & [[User:ArtALXQlifa]]. I saw something like this yesterday too. No spam link on the userpage but it created a spam page on ns0. --[[User:Glaisher|Glaisher]] ([[User talk:Glaisher|talk]]) 05:45, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
::@[[User:Glaisher|Glaisher]]: do you know any filters that handle this? [[User:PiRSquared17|PiRSquared17]] ([[User talk:PiRSquared17|talk]]) 14:04, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
:::Nope, but I just saw this. [[m:User:Mathonius/Reports/BAABP]] --[[User:Glaisher|Glaisher]] ([[User talk:Glaisher|talk]]) 15:02, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
:::: The two cited examples may not reflect a change in the pattern. They may only be cases of operator error when running the bot, like an even more [https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Undelete&target=User%3AArchieKXMrxpeib&timestamp=20130918153622 egregious goof] last month when the operator not only forgot the link, but also the part "About_Yourself". ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:17, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
::::: I can't see the deleted edit, but I recommend you ask [[m:User:Billinghurst]] to fix the filter if you think it's missing something. [[User:PiRSquared17|PiRSquared17]] ([[User talk:PiRSquared17|talk]]) 23:48, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
:::::: My point was that these goofs do not appear to be a systematic pattern or recurring problem. If nuisance user pages ''without'' external links do become a persistent problem in the future then we can look into filtering them. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:10, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

== New type of spambot? ==

It seems two days ago a new type of spambot appeared (see [https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Special:DeletedContributions/Eliga here]) which just kept on adding new spambot messages (up to 25) until it was blocked.

Now today the new spambot account [https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Special:DeletedContributions/Ritubhaskar Ritubhaskar] came from the same source because it also created a page [https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Special:Undelete/Wctreeservice Wctreeservice].

Should we be worried? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 14:01, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
: I don't think worrying about it will help. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:59, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

== Complaint from a user on OTRS ==

A user has complained on OTRS (Ticket#2013090410005661 ) that as soon as User: is typed in search box, the text prompt "! !Gavin.collins ræpes babies" appears. As it could be offensive and refers to a blocked account, the account could be deleted or renamed at the earliest by taking up with Stewards--[[User:Arjunaraoc|Arjunaraoc]] ([[User talk:Arjunaraoc|talk]]) 05:21, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
:I've renamed the account and deleted the redirects on the User: and User talk: pages; it's still showing up, but that could also be something that clears itself out of the system after a short while. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 07:35, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
::Now you get "User:! Jack Merridew b& from WP", also a blocked account but rather less offensive.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 11:14, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

== Vandalism and spam patrol ==

I have lately been preoccupied by some unanticipated, somewhat urgent events in "real life" that prevent me from conducting my usual vandalism and spam patrol. This situation will probably persist for a few more days. I would be grateful if some of our less active administrators could spend a little extra time keeping an eye on things in the meanwhile. (Particularly, [//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&limit=250&hidebots=0 Recent Changes], [//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Special:NewPages&hideredirs=0&namespace=all New Pages (all)], and activity by users who tripped [//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Special:AbuseLog&wpSearchFilter=16 Filter 16].) Thanks. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 19:25, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
: I am back on the job. Thinking about asking for a 25% raise. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:48, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

== Vandalism at [[Bhagavad Gita]] ==

Heavy vandalism by a user at [[Bhagavad Gita]], and it's not by any '''new''' user of wikipedia, but the same user who vandalized the wikipedia page before too with the same spam links. Which can be seen here[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Criticism_of_Hinduism&diff=572735158&oldid=572735128] and his IP/account was banned for Edit warring. The page should be locked for now. [[User:Justicejayant|Justicejayant]] ([[User talk:Justicejayant|talk]]) 15:34, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

== Blacklisted social networking sites ==

The following websites were added to the '''[[Mediawiki:Spam-blacklist|spam blacklist]]''' a month ago by administrator [[User:Cirt|Cirt]] ([//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist&diff=1643153 dif]). Existing links to these sites are noted in this list:
* ''facebook.com'' ([//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALinkSearch&target=*.facebook.com 74 links])
* ''twitter.com'' ([//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALinkSearch&target=*.twitter.com 118 links])
* ''myspace.com'' ([//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALinkSearch&target=*.myspace.com 104 links])
One user, [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]], has requested that Twitter be removed from the blacklist ([//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ningauble&diff=1654603 dif]). Note also that citation to this type of site has been discussed at [[Wikiquote talk:Quotability#Tweets, blogs, chatrooms, &c.]] without reaching consensus. Should any or all of these sites be blacklisted or un-blacklisted? Is this an administrative call, or is broader community discussion needed? ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:52, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' removing any of the above. They are unreliable, as they are not durably archived. They are used for spamming as well. Best to stick to reliable secondary sources, whenever possible. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 17:09, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Twitter is sometimes the true source of celebrated quotes, such as the ones by [[Richard Dawkins#Twitter|Richard Dawkins]]. Twitter is the most accurate (and reliable) source in such cases, for verified Twitter users, and has been used on Wikiquote for a long time. Could some admin who actually contributes to Wikiquote remove this recent addition of Twitter to the "spam" blacklist? Or will edits [https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Richard_Dawkins&diff=1652405&oldid=1652404 like] [https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Justin_Bieber&diff=1657858&oldid=1655323 these] continue to be disrupted from now on? Come on. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:43, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
: I cannot see any logical reason to block these sites totally and would support removal from the blacklist.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 11:18, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
:: I tend to agree with their prohibition. If a quote from Twitter or Facebook or the like is worth quoting, it will be quoted in secondary sources, which can then be cited as evidence of the quotability of the quote. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 13:24, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
::: I tend to STRONGLY disagree with their prohibition. EVEN if one wishes to primarily encourage quotes that are already widely quoted elsewhere, as some seem to be inclined to do (and I do not), the blacklisting of these sites PREVENTS the linking to the original sources, and seems quite unnecessary, and actually more detrimental than helpful, especially when pages of certain celebrities are of "verified" status within these sites. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 13:33, 26 December 2013 (UTC) + tweaks
::@[[User:BD2412|BD]]: do you have anything against primary sources? If you do, you must be on the wrong website. I want to link Dawkins' quotes to their true source, not to some journalist's opinion on why his tweet was offensive, thank you very much. [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 14:41, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
::: The question is not whether some journalist found a comment to be offensive (or praiseworthy), but whether it was notable at all. If Dawkins (or some similarly famous person) tweets their grocery list, should it be possible for that to be added here as a quote? By what principle, then, should we ''not'' add to Dawkins' page his entire Twitter stream of over 14,000 tweets (including, in the past few days, "Listening to the Carols from King’s College, Cambridge. Very lovely (except for the pretentious rolled Rs), matching the sublime building."; "Catholic Church has a legitimate right & authority to veto scientific conclusions that directly contradict her dogma [link]"; and "I LOVE this video. [link] Anybody know if music copyright problems'd make it hard for me to do something like it myself?" [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 15:54, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
::::You seem to be working under the assumption that unless you block websites like Twitter, total chaos will ensue, and everybody is going to start adding banal quotes to our articles. Well, sorry to break it to you, BD, but despite your much-repeated and beloved example, no one is actually interested in adding grocery lists to Wikiquote. No matter how much you may fear subjectivity, I affirm that any selection of quotes is ''necessarily'' subjective, and I find it strange that you should ask by what criteria are quotes chosen when you yourself follow up by selecting a number of quotes which, presumably, are to appeal to our common sense for what constitutes triviality. How did you do that? By what "principle" did you select those quotes? (By what principles do journalists select ''their'' quotes?) You see, I trust our readers' and editors' intelligence in the selection quotes, as I do that of our reviewers (like yourself), who are free to remove from any article quotes which they deem too trivial for inclusion. I only fear subjectivity in administrative areas, where force is used, for example in selecting the period of time for which a person should be blocked. I resent that we are only having this discussion ''after'' primary sources like Twitter were blocked, and that the "rules" were changed in the middle of the game, with no consultation. I would like to say a few more words about this, but last time I did so, you blocked me for three months, and God knows for how many months you will block me next time. That's exactly the kind of arbitrary judgment that concerns me. Not fear of grocery lists. [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:02, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
::::: It is entirely possible to discuss the best practice without discussing the personalities involved, so let's focus on that. Let's say we forget grocery lists then, and look at the actual Twitter stream. Here are the last eight tweets by Dawkins which are not already mentioned above, and which are not merely retweets or pointing to links:
:::::*Are dreams epiphenomenal or have they Darwinian survival value? I find "tidying the hard disk" (Evans, Crick) to be not a big enough theory.
:::::*Been watching recent David Attenborough DVDs. He just goes on getting better and better. Truly superb, magical.
:::::*Again accused of ignorance of theology. But what is there in "theology" to be ignorant ABOUT? Tell me 1 theological fact & I'll learn it.
:::::*Religious acts between consenting adults should not be illegal. #Turing
:::::*Oral sex is illegal in several US states. Homosexuality is illegal in many countries. What kind of person thinks it's the state's business?
:::::*What kind of moralist makes a "crime" out of a private act, which harms nobody, simply because it's forbidden in some old book? #Turing
:::::*What kind of moralist makes a "crime" out of a private act, simply because they'd prefer not to do that act themselves? #Turing
:::::*"Overturn a conviction" sounds a lot better than "pardon". "Pardon" implies that #Turing did something wrong in the first place.
:::::*It’s not a posthumous Pardon that Alan Turing needs, but a posthumous Apology. Same for the many others convicted of the same “crime”.
::::: Perhaps these are "quotable"; I don't propose to judge that, but to leave it to the objective filter of whether anyone has ''quoted'' them. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 19:29, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
:::::: You are still operating under the fallacy that if Twitter was allowed people would even considering adding such statements to Wikiquote, which is a tiresome straw-man (and very much against all evidence). But let me ask you the opposite, which is actually relevant. Take, for example, the quote from ''[[Mortals and Others]]'' by [[Bertrand Russell]], "While genius is individual, sanity is social." Now Google it, and see how many times it was "quoted". Result? Zero times. Was it too "subjective" of me to add that quote by Bertrand Russell, perhaps? It would seem that according to your pseudo-objective criteria, such a quote has no place on Wikiquote, and should thus be removed (unlike whatever Miley Cyrus will say tomorrow, which I'm sure will be "quoted" in several media outlets, and so pass with flying colors your "objective filter"). [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:51, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
::::::: There are plenty of junk quotes that make it through in TV show articles. I would say that the difference between published books and things posted on the Internet is that at least books have to go through the filter of publication. Stuff on Twitter and Facebook goes through no filter at all. That said, after thinking it over, I'm not sure that blocking links to these websites is the best avenue to serve this purpose. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 01:23, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
:::::::: Not really a straw-man: People have not only ''considered'' adding tweets that are trivial or even rubbish to Wikiquote articles, they have ''done so'': Evidence may be found [//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Merlin_Mann&diff=1364805 here] and among the links to Twitter identified above. The criterion of quoting things that are actually quoted is not "pseudo-objective", it is the objective basis for such compendia as ''Bartlett's Familiar Quotations'', which expresses the concept in its title. It has been suggested from time to time that Wikiquote limit itself to ''only'' quotations that are famous, like ''Bartlett's'', but that is not the consensus and I do not support it. Contributors are encouraged to make subjective choices, subject to consensus, for including lesser-known statements from widely known, notable works. This broader scope encompasses the example from ''Mortals and Others'', so that example is a bit of a red herring. Another difference between published books and things posted on the interestnet is, as noted above, their durability. The contents of a social networking site may be rewritten, redacted, or deleted at any time. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:42, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

:For what it's worth, I'm totally fine with removing Twitter from the blacklist but keeping Facebook and MySpace blacklisted; Twitter seems to have far fewer layers between the person being quoted and the actual comment, versus Facebook with is more advertising-oriented (and MySpace is MySpace, so screw that). [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 19:45, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
:: Though I tend to prefer to avoid "blacklisting" any sites that are not prone to produce merely vandalizing links, I can laughingly agree with your assessment. I generally avoid Facebook and Myspace, despite having accounts on them, and though they probably have some worthwhile comments on them occasionally, I believe Twitter is more likely to produce quoteworthy material. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 21:05, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
::: How does blacklisting those sites achieve anything? All it does is prevent a live link. I can still go to one of those sites and copy a quote, giving the source as an unclickable link. That is a verifiable source, indeed more easily verified than a printed book that not everyone can readily access. We could make it a policy that these sites are not reliable and should not be given as references; that would require a proper debate.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 09:24, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
:::: It doesn't achieve anything, other than make the sources simply say ''Twitter'' + date, with no link to it. There clearly is no consensus to keep this disruptive change. (I guess that means it will be kept anyway?) [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 00:21, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
::::: I think that the point is to not have quotes from Twitter at all unless they are sourced to some other publication (i.e., unless their notability has been demonstrated by the fact that someone ''quoted'' them). [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 15:41, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

== 20 December 2013 QOTD ==

The layout at [[Wikiquote talk:Quote of the day/December 20, 2013]] will have to be placed into [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/December 20, 2013]] by an admin; the auto-protection has already kicked in on that QOTD page. The 21st and 22nd are already done. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 20:26, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 20:47, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

== Application for use of AWB ==

Would someone please grant me the right to use [[Wikiquote:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage|AutoWikiBrowser]]. Also looks as though that page could do with a little maintenance, there are a few addresses that should be culled. Thanks. It would be great if someone pings me or thanks me for the edit so I know whether I am successful or not. ''[[user talk:billinghurst|sDrewth]]'' 13:59, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
:{{done}}. I have granted AWB access to "sDrewth" ([[User:Billinghurst]]) who, as a global Steward, is a highly trusted user. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:50, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
::many thanks, now to do some fixing. ''[[user talk:billinghurst|sDrewth]]'' 15:29, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

== [[User:Kalki]] is making personal attacks, AGAIN... ==

Everybody, look at [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Kalki&diff=1663256&oldid=1663254 ] - this person, who was at a time an administrator, is verbally attacking other people once more, despite all the warnings. [[User:Zarbon|Zarbon]]
{{unsigned|166.205.55.36}}
: This of course is the statement of a poorly informed troll impersonator, who seems to be one of the more intermittent vandals of our site. This troll-vandal in one comment declared that I "lost ur sysop rights due to relentless incivility from ur part" — which is of course nonsense. I actually lost it because of suspicions generated by my use of multiple accounts. I was unwilling to alleviate the ignorant and confused assessments of others as to why I might have created them, because I had much more important matters to attend to than those of answering suspicions or explaining much about my perspectives to those who demanded such answers as could be absolutely accepted or rejected, praised or condemned, entirely in accordance to their very limited conceptions of matters. I generally have a very low esteem of such foolish behavior, and though I might hide that fact, I certainly do not deny it. I was willing to lose sysop privileges some years ago, rather than attempt to extensively disclose, deny or lie about far more important matters, in response to their puzzlements and assumptions. ''So it goes''... ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 19:38, 8 January 2014 (UTC) + tweaks
::While not delving into the history of Kalki's adminship or whether the stripping of said status was correct or incorrect, I can firmly state that the cited exchange was in response to a user who unleashed vandalism across multiple pages. I did not then (and do not now) find any fault in what Kalki wrote. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 20:01, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

:It's times like this that I really miss the CheckUser bit. I've blocked the reporting IP, this "report" is worthless. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 20:42, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikiquote:Administrators' noticeboard

2013-12-27T19:45:33Z

EVula: /* Blacklisted social networking sites */ Twitter is fine with me

[[de:Wikiquote:Administratoren/Notizen]]
[[fa:ویکی‌گفتاورد:تابلوی اعلانات مدیران]]
[[nl:Wikiquote:Verzoekpagina aan conciërges]]
{{Wikiquote:Administrators' noticeboard/Header}}
[[Category:Wikiquote|{{PAGENAME}}]]
= Discussions =

== Request for closure ==

* [[Wikiquote:Village pump#Kedar Joshi quote farming]]
* [[Wikiquote:Deletion review#Kedar Joshi]]
These two discussions have had ample time and participation to reach consensus, if any. I would be grateful if someone a little less heavily involved than myself would assess the results and close them. Thanks. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:10, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
: A month has passed with no further comments on these discussions.... ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 21:53, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
:: {{done}} Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 03:49, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
::: 1. If [[User:RogDel/Quotes added to WQ|these quotes]] can be included (and I see no reason why they should not be included), I see no reason why quotes by Kedar Joshi should be excluded. 2. ''“Among more experienced editors, the vast majority support removal” – [[User:BD2412|BD2412]]''
::::Since WQ is not a democracy, this seems to be an invalid argument for removal. There does not seem to have been any stronger argument countering all the [[User:RogDel/Notability as a source of quotes|simple and logical arguments]] I have made in support of inclusion of such quotations. ~ [[User:RogDel|RogDel]] ([[User talk:RogDel|talk]]) 10:50, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
::RogDel, with all due respect, I seriously doubt that we should create such explicit regulations about such exceptional situations. As to Kedar Joshi, after years of discussion we should draw a line, and not keep bringing it up. As to the regulation even for me it is confusion, trying to make a difference between quotability and notability, let alone outsiders. There are so much ins and out about, and regularly there seem to be a good understanding. Don't try to make regulations for those handful of cases we don't all agree on. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:35, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
::: <edit conflict> Regarding RogDel's first point, [[w:WP:OTHERSTUFF|other stuff]] is not always good precedent, particularly when the addition of that stuff gives the appearance of [[w:WP:POINT|making a point]] about a minority view from these discussions. Now that these discussions have been closed, there may be further action to deal with this stuff that was added while the discussions were ongoing. Regarding the second point, discussions are assessed based on a variety of factors, including (besides the votes) policies, practices, precedents, arguments, & etc. As expressly indicated in the closing remarks, from which you selectively quote, anonymous single-purpose accounts that are not cognizant of or do not address those factors have little or no weight in assessing the arguments. Regarding the essay linked above, it directly contradicts the established guideline at [[Wikiquote:Quotability]], which makes it relatively unpersuasive as an argument in these cases. If you think the guideline is wrong then it might be better to propose changing it rather than try an end-run around it. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 12:42, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
* RogDel, I think maybe only one or two people have read your (rather long and repetitive) essay. Perhaps, for their benefit, one could condense it into one sentence: "If a quote is cited in a 'highly reliable' secondary source (even if just once) then it is notable enough to be on Wikiquote." Would you accept that as a fair summary? ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 13:16, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

== Feuding between DanielTom and Cirt ==

Per the discussion ongoing at [[User talk:UDScott#Query for help]] (and on my talk page), I am setting forth the following interaction ban in response to the incessant and disruptive feuding, baiting, and forum shopping between DanielTom and Cirt.

DanielTom could properly be blocked for incivility at this point (he has said as much). If DanielTom attempts to bait or otherwise interact with Cirt, talks to him, talks about him, or reverts or otherwise contests any of his actions, I will block DanielTom for a minimum of thirty days.

If Cirt attempts to interact with DanielTom, talks to him, talks about him, or reverts or otherwise contests any of his actions, I will move to desysop Cirt on this project. Reacting to baiting is not the trait of an administrator.

To the extent that either Cirt or DanielTom thinks the other is making improper edits or otherwise misbehaving, do nothing about and say nothing about it. The other administrators on this project are observant, and we will see and will handle any violations of policy.

I hope that my fellow administrators agree with my determination with respect to this matter. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 01:27, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

----

;Reply by Cirt to BD2412
:''Originally posted on another page: [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:UDScott&diff=1594538&oldid=1594501 diff].''

This is my reply to [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AUDScott&diff=1594501&oldid=1594445 comment by BD2412].

'''Comment:''' @{{user|BD2412}}, understood. I will take your advice to heart. I will do my best to not react to the baiting. I will do my best to only engage in a polite and constructive manner from here on out. I am sorry for troubling you with this. I will do my best to rise above this matter. Thank you for your advice and your input. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 02:44, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

;Statement by Ningauble about the ban
I endorse the interaction ban imposed by BD2412. The misconduct of both parties has been extensive and disruptive. Note that the ban as stated is indefinite in duration. I would not want to entertain an application to lift an indefinite ban in less than six months or a year.
 Regarding stipulated consequences for violating the ban by DanielTom:  I approve of handling this in a progressive manner, as has been done, rather than imposing a 30 day block on the first infraction. I think any further infractions should be met with ''steep'' progression.
 Regarding stipulated consequences for violating the ban by Cirt:  This is not really an administrative sanction. A [[WQ:VOC|vote of confidence]] may be called any time that three users concur. Administrative sanctions may still be imposed for misconduct even if it is not stipulated in this ban. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:15, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

=== Cirt has ''already'' breached the interaction ban ===

BD2412 made the terms of the interaction ban clear:
:[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=1594507&oldid=1591220 ''If Cirt attempts to interact with DanielTom, talks to him, talks about him, or reverts or otherwise contests any of his actions, I will move to desysop Cirt on this project.'']
Yet, Cirt has already completely disrespected the interaction ban: ''just one hour later'', he decided to come to my talk page, uninvited, and posted [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DanielTom&curid=139176&diff=1594537&oldid=1594424 this baiting comment].
I am tempted to reply to his baiting comment, <s>but I won't</s>, as I don't think I would particularly enjoy being unable to edit WQ for 30 days. However, after Cirt's ''direct'' breach of the interaction ban cited above, I would like to see BD keeping his word and actually "[moving] to desysop Cirt on this project". ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 08:52, 26 June 2013 (UTC) last edit: 19:07, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
: Firstly, I have blocked you for 24 hours to be sure that you understand that I am serious about this interaction ban. As I said above, if either of you thinks the other is making improper edits or otherwise misbehaving, do nothing about and say nothing about it. That includes accusing one another of violations of this interaction ban. Please do not imagine for a moment that other administrators on this site are unaware of any action that either of you is taking.
: Secondly, I hope that you agree that fair warning of a penalty to be imposed is necessary before imposition of that penalty. I saw the post Cirt made on your talk page last night, shortly after I set forth this interaction ban. Based on Cirt's edits, there is no reason to believe that he was aware of this interaction ban at the time that he made the talk page post of which you complain. You, on the other hand, were clearly aware of it before you posted this complaint.
: In case I need to make this any clearer, both of you are to carry on as if the other does not exist.
: Finally, I hope that the community approves of my determination with respect to this problem, but if any uninvolved administrator feels that I have overstepped the bounds of my authority in my actions with respect to this matter, please feel free to unblock DanielTom. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 12:05, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
::I, for one, fully endorse both the ban and your action here. Thanks. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 19:11, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
::@BD2412: thanks for blocking me, I appreciate it. Alas, I have a hard time learning from punitive blocks, so I shall make another comment here, and be blocked for it again. I must point out that your contrived naïveté ("there is no reason to believe that [Cirt] was aware of this interaction ban at the time that he made the talk page post of which you complain") is quite breathtaking. Cirt edited several different pages after you set forth this interaction ban, including yours, UDSCott's, and Ningauble's talk pages (not just mine), so he must have seen the Recent Changes page, or at least his Watchlist. To say that he somehow missed the section you had opened an hour earlier in the Administrator's Noticeboard, with his name in it, is simply absurd. In any case, as you can see, I have mentioned Cirt in this very comment, so you should block me once again, this time for "at least 30 days." Won't that be fun for you? I ''will'' miss editing articles, but I understand that I need to be blocked, as I pose such a great danger to Wikiquote. Knock yourself out. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 12:47, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
::: Since you have now specifically requested to be blocked for 30 days, I will accommodate your request. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 12:56, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
:::: I suppose if I asked you to [insert any fantasy] me, you would also "accommodate" my request? I did not request to be blocked. Sorry that you don't understand irony. (It's not a new concept, it's been around for at least a couple of years now.) In any case, you decided to abuse your tools and block me for 30 days, as a '''smokescreen''', so that you wouldn't have to properly reply to the clarification/explanation in my comment, above, but even a child can see through that. (Nice try, though.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:17, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

=== Request for reconsideration ===
DanielTom has sent me an email stating that he has learned his lesson, and will abide by the interaction ban, and therefore seeks reconsideration of the period of the block. He seems to have gotten the message, and I am inclined to unblock, if there is general support from my fellow administrators for so doing. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 02:50, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
: I have no objection.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 11:34, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:If we can have another productive editor ''and'' not have anymore back-and-forth between them, I'd say that's the best possible scenario. Thumbs up. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 14:15, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:No objections from me, assuming the dispute is not continued. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 15:22, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
::Thanks, the three of you. And thanks to Ningauble and BD as well, even though I ''am'' disappointed by their recent actions. (Anyway, time to move on.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:35, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
: Although I received a snarky email when I extended the scope of the block,[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DanielTom&diff=1595942] I do not object to giving the benefit of the doubt if others are persuaded that he is now earnest about reform. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:41, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
::: My email to you was not "snarky", and as no person reading this here has access to it, other than the two of us, it is very ungentlemanly of you to say it was. However, I should say, the message ''you'' left at my talk page after revoking my talk page access for 30 days ''was'' "snarky", as I've just briefly explained there. Finally, I cannot believe that it was in Wikiquote's best interest to have me blocked an unable to edit articles (but, then again, maybe that's me being too egocentric.) Sincerely, [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:30, 10 July 2013 (UTC) P.S. Ningauble, if you think you can revoke my talk page access ''for 30 days'' and then not hear any criticism from me, think again. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:39, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:: As the community is in agreement, the block of [[User:DanielTom]] is lifted. The interaction ban remains is place indefinitely. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 17:02, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:DanielTom had (before asking to be unblocked) sent both BD and Ningauble more than a couple emails with diffs and links to articles that could have been easily fixed in less than 10 seconds, but he was simply ignored. Given this, I (speaking in the first person now) did request to be unblocked early so that I could edit said articles again myself [as well as others, and I quote from the email: ''I just want to go back to edit[ing] articles. (Plans include adding a few quotes to the [[Bertrand Russell]] article, [[Virgil]], and then fixing the [[Death Note]] page as promised [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Death_Note&diff=1566835&oldid=1566828])'']. I should say that the original block itself was ridiculous (in my opinion, at any rate; admittedly, it is always amusing for me to be treated like a vandal — though, oddly enough, even deliberate vandals, whose only contributions have been wrecking articles, are usually only blocked for 2 days, while I found myself blocked for 30 days, but I digress), and as I had already been blocked for about two weeks, that was indeed long enough time for me to admit "lesson learnt" [where the lesson is: 1) some people apparently do not ''really'' care about article quality, and 2) punitive blocks are considered acceptable here]). I will indeed "abide by the interaction ban" from now on. Time to focus on articles again. Thanks guys for getting me unblocked, and see you 'round. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 17:41, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:: The original block was for 24 hours, this was your ''second'' block. Persistent disruption is indeed treated differently than drive-by vandalism, and blocking to "deter the continuation of present, disruptive behavior" is [[w:WP:BLOCK#PREVENTATIVE|preventative, not punitive]]. I do recognize the distinction may not be easy to appreciate when one is on the receiving end of it, but it really is not the same thing. Regarding article fixes not done: you would not believe the length of my list of things needing to be fixed. One of the coping mechanisms I employ for problems arising faster than I can address them is to [[Procrastination|defer action]] when it appears that someone else will probably handle it. Still, the list grows daily, even without distractions like this, and the priorities I choose are mostly inexplicable even to myself. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 20:53, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
::: Maybe someday someone will explain to me ''exactly'' how blocking me for 30 days for [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=1595314&oldid=1594947 this edit] was "preventive", and not punitive. Anyway, I agree with you, this really is a "distraction", and a waste of time.~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 21:21, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

===New block of DanielTom===
In response to [https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ABD2412&diff=1624219&oldid=1624194 this edit to my talk page], in violation of the interaction ban, I have blocked [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] for three months. This editor has previously made requests for actions like this in ways that do not implicate the interaction ban, so clearly he knows how to do so, and has chosen not to. I interpret this as the editor intentionally trying to make trouble, to see what he can get away with, which is not conduct consistent with a good faith desire to build a useful compendium of quotes. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 13:26, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

== Block request for SantiagoG ==

Hi there,

{{user|SantiagoG}} is a spambot using a non-sul account, so unfortunately it can't be locked. Please consider blocking it instead. :)

Thanks, [[User:Mathonius|Mathonius]] ([[User talk:Mathonius|talk]]) 04:43, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} Spam bots like this are pretty routine, you can usually just tag the userpage and they get deleted and blocked pretty quickly. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 06:39, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
:: Alas, this particular pattern of userpage spam has become ''very'' routine lately. They will eventually realize they are wasting their time, but it can take a while because they are remarkably stupid. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:02, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
:::Back when I still had the CheckUser bit, I'd run the occasional check to see if I could catch a bunch of accounts at one time, but alas, there was never any connection between them. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 05:15, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
::::Let us just nominate and choose a second CheckUser here, and then you get your bit backs. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 18:20, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
::::: Here, here! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 03:54, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::BD2412, if you are interested you got my vote. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 10:08, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::: I appreciate the support, but since my last bid for CU status I have come around to the view that it is probably better for the project for power to be diffused rather than concentrated. As I am already a 'crat, I would feel uncomfortable also serving as a CU at this point. However, I do think we need more CUs. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 00:44, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
::::Ningauble, in the light the diffusion of power, would you be interested in the CheckUser bit? If so you got my vote. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:45, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
::::: For my own peace of mind, I prefer not to delve into the activities of bad actors more deeply than I already do with my administrative work. I don't want to be involved in researching personally identifying information about them. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:40, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::: I'd say the chances of us having a new CheckUser on Wikiquote are about 0%. Where would the candidates get the (minimum) 25 supporting votes to be "promoted", when we don't even have 10 active contributors on this wiki? ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 14:54, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::: Not necessarily. You would be surprised by who shows up for CU elections. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:13, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::: No Wikiquote CheckUser has ever been ''legitimately'' elected here, as anyone looking at the archives can now confirm. It's not just that people with almost no local contributions show up; we've also had more than one sockpuppet voting in such elections. (And, no, I wouldn't be surprised because I've seen them.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 15:34, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::::: Well, [[m:Wikimedia Forum/On disbanding Wikiquote|it has been argued]] that sock voting makes the ''entire project'' illegitimate, but I don't think we need to go there. I am satisfied by the level of participation in past CU elections that the outcomes were not influenced by the quantity of puppet votes. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:30, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::: (Where? The discussion you linked only refers to possible copyright infringements, not to "sock voting".) The outcomes were certainly influenced by puppet votes (who helped the support votes reach the minimum of 25). While I too am "satisfied", I still feel that the current minimum (a relic blindly and rigidly imposed by meta policy) is too high, and unrealistic, for Wikiquote. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 16:58, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::No legitimate CheckUser election? [[Wikiquote:Requests for checkuser/EVula|O rly]]? [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 17:33, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::Yep. Some users there had (and still do) literally ''zero'' edits on Wikiquote, other than showing up at your election to vote support (namely, and strikingly, [[Special:Contributions/Nifky%3F|User:Nifky?]], [[Special:Contributions/Razorflame|User:Razorflame]], and [[Special:Contributions/Jake Wartenberg|User:Jake Wartenberg]]). (Incidentally, there were also other users, namely [[Special:Contributions/Juliancolton|User:Juliancolton]] and [[Special:Contributions/Counterpower|User:Counterpower]], who also had zero or just a couple of edits to articles before voting there.) None of that was your fault; nay, it was pretty much ''a must'', given that we simply don't have, ''and never had'', 25 active contributors on Wikiquote. (See the larger picture?) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:03, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::: We have more active contributors (usually defined as at least 5 article edits per month) than that. See [http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikiquote/EN/TablesWikipediaEN.htm#editor_activity_levels editor activity levels] at Wikistats. Getting them to participate in community affairs is another matter. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:27, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::: @DanielTom: (Within that lengthy discussion there were strong words alleging incompetent governance in dealing with the Poetlister socks, claiming that was sufficient grounds to disband the project.) The elections were typically called as soon as they reach 25, and results would not likely have been different had they run a little longer. This is really moot unless you want to challenge [http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests/Permissions&diff=5458382 EVula's standing] for reinstatement in the event a second CU is elected. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:43, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::: No, I don't want to challenge EVula's standing. (We need more CUs, not less. But, ain't gonna happen.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:08, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::@Ningauble, thanks. Still that particular pattern of userpage spam also worries me, and I think we should search for more structural solutions. Getting the CheckUser bit back, and (let EVula) keep running occasional checks, seems the least we could/should do. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 14:56, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::: The global Stewards are well aware of this pattern, which occurs across all wikis. Unfortunately, the IP addresses used by these spambots are highly variable by design, so blocking them, even ranges of them, is ineffective. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:10, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::Yeah, any time that I would run a check on the spam IPs, I'd get nothing. It's really annoying. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 15:41, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::: Someone might investigate whether Wikipedia has developed an Abuse filter for this pattern. However, the text changes so much that keeping up with the filter might be a game of [[w:Whac-A-Mole|Whac-A-Mole]]. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 12:56, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

== Edit filter maybe ==

I don't hang out at Wikiquote, so I'm not sure how much of a problem this is. But I just ran across [//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=ANTman&oldid=1600515 an edit] that may have been able to be stopped by an [[Special:AbuseFilter|edit filter]] similar to [[w:en:Special:AbuseFilter/135]]. Perhaps somebody could copy that filter over to here. [[Special:Contributions/64.40.54.47|64.40.54.47]] 04:13, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

== Talk page spam ==

Yesterday and today I noticed a (for me) new type of spam on the talk page: an unrelated text (size about 4k) from a rotating ip address (see for example [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Great_Mouse_Detective&diff=prev&oldid=1606173 here]). Now I noticed that 7 of 9 originated ip addresses originated from one ownerid in Venezuela. If this continues, can we than block his range of IP addresses all at once? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 10:21, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
: Thus far I count 25 IP addresses used by this spambot, ranging from 60.24.11.41 to 221.10.40.232. This is too wide a range to block without blacking out entire continents. If the problem persists then someone could try using the [[Special:AbuseFilter|Abuse filter]] to mitigate it. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 12:41, 24 July 2013 (UTC)–Updated 13:43, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

== Unblock request [[User:Diogotome]] ==

::''The following unblock request is copy/paste here (partly trimmed) from [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ABD2412&diff=1609829&oldid=1608714 here] by [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 09:16, 7 August 2013 (UTC)''
*{{checkuser|Diogotome}}
As you know, my brother was blocked some time ago in many wikis where he has zero edits... He was recently unblocked at Commons, where admin asked him to write on his user page that he is my brother. (He did so [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Diogotome]...) He was also unblocked at Wikisource [http://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3ADiogotome] on the grounds that he had no edits there. (He also has no edits here.)
:Other than the strong evidence presented by email that he is my brother (including citizen card, ID), there are other things which you included can check. 1) he created his account in 2009 (I myself didn't even know about accounts till late 2012); 2) the email with which he registered his account is diofact@hotmail.com (confirm that); 3) he still uses that email, even on his Facebook account, where you can find him (Diogo Tomé). I think it is obvious that the account is his.
Also worth noting, he, just like me, registered with his real name, which is not what socks do (...). Although I know he doesn't want to edit Wikiquote, I still don't think he should be blocked here on sock grounds.
... ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 21:47, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
:: I have lifted the block. It is my understanding that [[User:Diogotome]] has no interest in editing here. I am sure you are aware that it would raise some eyebrows (on all of the above mentioned projects) if this editor suddenly began making edits that seemed as if they are made as a proxy for you, so please take care. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 12:20, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:::Thanks (your understanding is correct). ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 12:42, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:: I don't have any problem with this unblocking, but I would like to rectify some incorrect assumptions. (1) The email with which he registered his account cannot be confirmed by any technical means available to administrators here. It is confidential information that only the account holder is at liberty to disclose. (2) Registering with a real name most definitely ''is'' something that socks do. Some of the most notorious abusers are known to impersonate real people. Finally, BD's eyebrow raising admonition cuts both ways: both accounts should avoid involvement in each other's affairs. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:39, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:::"The email with which he registered his account cannot be confirmed by any technical means available to administrators here." Where can it be confirmed? ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 17:44, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:::: I assume that it could be extracted by a developer. However, it is easy enough to change the e-mail associated with an account; we have no way of knowing whether it is the original address.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 18:06, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
::::: "It is confidential information that only the account holder is at liberty to disclose." The [[foundation:Privacy policy|Privacy policy]] identifies one way he can confirm the email address currently linked to his account (using "email this user"), and indicates conditions under which the Foundation would disclose it without his consent (e.g. subpoena). ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:09, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::: I suppose even the original email ("e-mail address confirmation") could be changed if forwarded. As to the real names question, of course socks use real names, but not ''their'' real names (any name you can choose is someone else's real name). My point is that no sock has its name so close to the sockmaster's (in this case, Diogo being a Portuguese name, and our family names being the same). Maybe if I get blocked indefinitely on Wikiquote, and unable to edit, my brother may come along to return my favor here, and ask that I be unblocked, although that is exceedingly unlikely (not the block part, but the returning of the favor part from him). ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:25, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

== Semi-protection request for Mean Girls ==

Could an administrator semi-protect [[Mean Girls]]? Too much IP vandalism going on as of lately (especially {{User|65.175.216.98}}). Thanks in advance. [[User:SnapSnap|SnapSnap]] ([[User talk:SnapSnap|talk]]) 18:26, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} - but I also trimmed this very bloated page first. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 19:02, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

== QOTD for 10 & 12 August 2013 ==

The QOTD layout at [[Wikiquote talk:Quote of the day/August 10, 2013]] will have to be placed into [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/August 10, 2013]] by an admin. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 21:36, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 23:16, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

I am once again a bit late with a selection and the QOTD layout at [[Wikiquote talk:Quote of the day/August 12, 2013]] will have to be placed into [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/August 12, 2013]] by an admin. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 14:53, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 15:04, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

== [[Talk: Main Page]] ==
Can someone semi-protect this again? It's getting vandalized a lot. [[User:King jakob c 2|'''Kjc2''']] [[User talk:King jakob c 2|jabber]] 15:47, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
: I am reluctant to protect the talk page or our main public-facing portal, where newcomers and visitors should be welcome to make pertinent inquiries and comments, unless the situation becomes unmanageable. I think the current frequency of unconstructive edits on this widely watched page is being handled well enough by folks who notice and revert in a fairly timely manner. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:07, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
::It seems in the past year only one comment was made by an anom visitors, while the page is vandalized 50+ times. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:36, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
::: You are not counting registered accounts without enough local edits to be autoconfirmed, but it is true that unconstructive edits significantly outnumber constructive ones. I just don't think a handful of reverts per month is too great a price to pay for keeping the front door open. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:22, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

== Blocking question ==

Just wanted to gauge the opinions of the admins: I noticed that {{user|Mdd}} recently blocked a user indefinitely for a single instance of what I would characterize as moderate and fairly harmless spamming (linking to a site for their poetry on their user page). If it were me, I would have likely let them off with a <nowiki>{{spam}}</nowiki> warning - which is what I did earlier in the day for someone who posted a link to their blog on their user page. I'm not saying my inclination is correct or that {{user|Mdd}} is wrong, but in the spirit of consistency, what is the feeling out there? I'm just curious. Thanks. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 18:35, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
:Assuming you're talking about {{User|MelissaHg}}, I'd say it was a reasonable assumption; the page itself matches the same pattern for all the spam that we've been getting for months (right down to the double tags before the link). Plus, I'm not sure why someone from Switzerland would have a Spanish poetry site... [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 18:55, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

::In the past 4 months I have blocked about 200 new users, which where I presume all made by spam bots. The links which are presented by those spam bots differ greatly from hardporn to... indeed poetry. Does UDScott suggest, that we make go make a difference in what type of site the spambot is referring to? If indeed there are just spam-bots, it seems to me adding warnings on the talk page is a waist of time. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 19:08, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
:::In the end, I'm not really asking whether or not a block was warranted (in most cases I agree it is) - I'm just asking if it is the first step in all cases. I just want to be consistent in our treatment of spam. If it is the case that we automatically block anyone who posts spam, fine - but our [[Wikiquote:Blocking policy|blocking policy]] does not reflect this and should be updated. The only current mention of spam is that if a block is given for spamming, it should not be less than a month. And if we are going this way, then what is the purpose of the two spam warnings we have? Again, I'm not trying to criticize what anyone else has done - I'm just asking the question on how we would like to generally treat these circumstances. Thanks. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 19:12, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
::::I'd say that we need to update our blocking policy, then. I don't think warning spam accounts will do anything; it's just drive-by vandalism, but if we just delete the spam and leave the account, there's a much better chance that they'll swing right back around and spam again, increasing the amount of administrative work (not by a substantial margin, of course; but it ''is'' one more time that we have to delete their spam). [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 19:21, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
::::: Before we became inundated, as Mdd notes, with a consistent pattern userpage spam, I routinely responded as UDScott describes. Since then I have been blocking them on sight, when they appear to be using the same pattern, without investigating whether the link itself is commercial or otherwise execrable. I would not be quite so hasty with things that do not appear to match the pattern. I do not regard this as drive-by spamming: the consistency of the pattern leads me to believe we are dealing with an SEO spammer who is hired by people who want to promote their web pages. If the nature of the linked content makes no difference to the spammer, I am not sure it should make any difference to us. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 19:39, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
::::@UDScott: our regular visitors, the spambots, follow an easily-distinguishable pattern, and I think those can just be blocked with no prior warning (they aren't here to contribute to articles anyway). But when it comes to ''human'' editors who, say, post unwarranted links in "External links" article sections, then the <nowiki>{{spam}}</nowiki> templates can and should be used, as they offer useful information to the user, and serve as warnings. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:47, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::OK, understood - this pretty much matches to my understanding. I guess it's my fault that I've been spending more time on other parts of the project and I don't know that I would automatically recognize someone as a spambot, which spawned my question (I fight them when I see them, but I usually see more traditional vandals than spammers in my time here). Thanks all. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 15:58, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::: In recent months this pattern of spam has been a large proportion, even a majority, of newly created user pages. Therefore, I have been screening [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ANewPages&namespace=2 all new user pages] daily. Since becoming an administrator, Mdd has been catching most of them while my time zone is sleeping. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:29, 15 August 2013 (UTC)/16:47, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::: Question: if a spambot starts posting here, and we block them for just a month, do we have any reason to think that they will start spamming again once the month is up? I honestly don't know. It seems to me that spambots, once blocked for any reasonable length of time, just go away forever even if the block expires. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 20:48, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::::: Yes, the spambot will be back after a month. He has ''already'' been using the same pattern for several months running. This might quite possibly be the ''same'' SEO spammer that started [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive/019#Checkuser_request:_serial_one-shot_spam_accounts two years ago,] though the pattern now uses less verbose boilerplate. Prior to that time userpage spamming was rare and was not systematic; but since then we have only infrequently been without extended campaigns of systematic userpage spam. The named throwaway accounts are seldom re-used, except in an immediate timeframe. The reason I block them is not to prevent re-using the names, but to autoblock the underlying IPs. This does not stop him, but it is my impression that blocking enough of them slows him down a bit, at least until he gets a fresh set of addresses to exploit. Perhaps resistance is futile. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 19:37, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::: Can we file a complaint with his ISP? [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 19:59, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::Back when I had my CU flag, I would run a check on the occasional userpage vandal like these, but I could never find a pattern between them. I'm not sure that there would be a single IP to file a complaint with. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 21:14, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::There should be a way of adding "<nowiki> </nowiki>" to the [[Special:AbuseFilter|abuse filter]], at least as a test (maybe just on user pages). ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 01:09, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::: Hmmm. I use that syntax sometimes, and in drafts in userspace too. Some kind of alert would be nice, though. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 02:04, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
{{Outdent}} Is it technically possible to make the creation of an external link subject to a captcha for new users and only new users? (I think it would be too irksome to have it for everyone.) That would solve the problem.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 07:14, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
: I don't see why it ''wouldn't'' be possible, since Wikipedia is able to prevent new users from creating articles at all. This is an excellent suggestion. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 12:36, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
:: Good idea, but it would appear that the spammer(s) already passed the captchas required to create these throwaway accounts in the first place. Doubling the labor cost by adding a captcha when editing may not be much of a deterrent. If we want to pursue this, it would involve tweaking [[mediawikiwiki:Extension:ConfirmEdit#Configuration|configuration settings]] for the ConfirmEdit extension. I do not know where to view the current settings (or whether I am allowed to). ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:22, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
::: Can we just bar new accounts from adding external links, period? No external links until you've made x number of regular edits over y number of days? [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 18:33, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
:::: This would be a very significant new policy but, yes, we can. It could be enforced by the Abuse Filter if there is no more direct method. (We would need assistance from Wikipedia's filter experts to implement something that does not give false-positives when editing a page that already contains external links.) Note that this would impact many long-term IP editors who choose not to register an account (most of whom probably do not monitor discussion pages where policy consensus is formulated). Although I favor the proposition that ''everyone'' should be required to register before posting, I must note that it is a minority view opposed even by Jimbo, with whom I agree about some other things. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:42, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
::::: BD didn't say anything about barring ''IPs'' from adding external links. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:20, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::: I believe IPs must already pass a Captcha to add any external link. Is that not correct? [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 13:35, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::: @BD: Yes, captcha is required to post an external link when one is not logged in. @Daniel: Unregistered falls below newly registered in the hierarchy of user status. The implementation for what BD describes above would be to require at least "autoconfirmed" status to post an external link. There is no precedent for granting IPs more permissions than registered accounts: doing so would create a logical snarl and would be a disincentive to registration. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:03, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::Ningauble, referring to BD's proposal, you write: "this would impact many long-term IP editors". But it wouldn't. BD suggested "No external links ''until you've made x number of regular edits over y number of days''", so clearly "long-term IP editors" would be exempt from such a limitation. You speak as if you would want to bar IPs from adding external links ''altogether'', but that seems idiotic to me, especially since they already have to pass a captcha to post them. (Well, I see you don't want IPs editing ''at all'', but yeah, that ''is'' an extreme position...) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 15:40, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::: Four points in reply to Daniel:
:::::::::# BD did not ''propose'', he enquired whether it is possible. I replied that it is, and noted that it would need a major policy discussion.
:::::::::# I did not speak for or against allowing IPs to post links. I noted that this group would be impacted, and followed up in a subsequent post explaining why they would be impacted. My remark about whether this group should be posting at all was intended purely as a disclosure.
:::::::::# Note that our long term IP editors frequently have their IPA changed by their ISP, and the same IPA may be allocated to multiple users. There is no such thing as an "IP account": an unregistered user has no account and earns no confirmation status.
:::::::::# If you think I am an idiot, you would be well advised to keep that opinion to yourself and focus instead on the issues under discussion.
::::::::: I begin to wonder whether I am wasting my time in replying to you at all. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:19, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::: I was focusing on the issue. I said "bar[ring] IPs from adding external links ''altogether'' [...] seems idiotic to me, especially since they already have to pass a captcha to post them." I didn't say I think you are an idiot, though I am sorry if the word "idiotic" offended you somehow. (For what it's worth, I think you are smart, and I do admire your ability to take things out of context.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 16:54, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::: There is little ambiguity in ascribing a desire to someone and declaring it to be idiotic. Who else might you have meant by "you" in that sentence? There is no call for insinuating that I dissemble by misrepresenting context. If you wish to accuse me of dishonesty then you may call for a vote of confidence, otherwise your insults are not welcome. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 22:52, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::::: To be clear, in "but ''that'' seems idiotic to me", the "''that''" refers to "bar[ring] IPs from adding external links ''altogether''", not to your desires. I'm not going to change the offending word now that you've made such a big fuss about it. I also have no intention of calling for a "vote of confidence" just because you happen to believe in idiotic things. (Hell, I believe in idiotic things too.) Maybe it does seem to me idiotic to want to prevent IPs from editing. So what? Feel free to block me for "incivility", if you're so overly-sensitive. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 23:33, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::: In order to avoid any misunderstanding that might arise from how my remarks have been characterized above, let me make one thing clear: I have not advocated barring IP editors from posting external links. I brought it up because, recognizing the consensus for allowing unregistered editing, I believe it would be an ''adverse'' consequence. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 00:44, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::: I am not uncomfortable with temporarily placing newly registered editors in a worse position than IP editors with respect to external links, if our persistent spam problems are coming from newly registered editors. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 17:55, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
You get spam from IPs too; I just removed some on [[Talk:Main Page]].--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 03:55, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

=== To do next ===
In the above discussion two types of action are proposed.
# To update the [[Wikiquote:Blocking policy]], adding a note about permanently blocking "spam-only accounts"
# To create an abuse filter, which automatically blocks (''more specific, I mean, disallowing edits'') of new users trying to add external links

Now I would like to propose to pursue both courses of action. Concerning the abuse filter, we can begin with a pilot for a short period of time. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:09, 16 October 2013 (UTC) / ''01:37, 18 October 2013 (UTC)''

== Nietzkov: nuisance or hoax? ==

Can anyone verify citations added by {{user|200.121.207.40}}? Googling the name "Nietzkov" appearing in quotes this user (and others[https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?search=Nietzkov]) has been adding, I find a pattern that smells like promotion of a nobody. Are celebrities really talking about him as claimed, or are we being hoaxed? ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:53, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
: As far as I can see, all these quotes are either unsourced or sourced to non-existent Youtube videos, so they can be removed as unsourced. They all look pretty fishy to me, anyway.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 03:43, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
:: Thanks for checking the YooToob links (it is impractical with my limited bandwidth). Since this much is demonstrably bogus, I will go ahead and revert it all. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:15, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

== User 98.15.141.31 ==

I have deleted a number of bogus titles created by {{IPvandal|98.15.141.31}}. The user's few remaining contributions correspond to genuine titles, but I do not know whether the contributed content is bogus. Can anyone check the accuracy of the remaining contributions? If they are not affirmatively verified then I am inclined to presumptively revert/delete them due to their vandalistic provenance. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:47, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
:His edit to [[Yu-Gi-Oh!]] ("Say hello to the unstoppable family of monsters; The five Kuriboh brothers!") sounds plausible, though I couldn't confirm it. The dialogue in [[Disney's The Kid]] is accurate, but the one in [[Radio Flyer (film)]] seems bogus. (I'd ask him about this last one.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 17:17, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
::FYI, the ''[[Radio Flyer (film)]]'' dialogue was pretty close to correct (I've since fixed the page). ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 18:09, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
: It turns out this is a long term vandal known at Wikipedia as the "[[w:Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Voice Cast Vandal|Voice Cast Vandal]]". I have blocked the IP for a year. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 13:43, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

== Template:Otherwiki ==

Just wondering if someone could edit [[Template:Otherwiki]] and change Wikivoyage-logo.svg to Wikivoyage-Logo-v3-icon.svg Thanks -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 12:04, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 13:12, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

==[[Talk:Main Page]] again==
Vandalism and spam there is picking up even more. Maybe now it can be semi-protected? --[[User:King jakob c 2|Jakob]] ([[User talk:King jakob c 2|Scream about]] [[Special:Contributions/King jakob c 2|the things I've broken]]) 15:02, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
:I really don't like the idea of ''that'' particular page being semi-protected, considering it's the talk page for what is effectively our homepage. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 15:21, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

== Broadway vandal ==
Could some admin semi-protect the articles: [[George Washington]], [[Michelle Obama]], [[Men in Black (film)]] and [[Men in Black II]]? Thanks. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 15:23, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
: This "Broadway vandal" has been around for at least three years, and has no difficulty picking new pages to deface whenever it is convenient. More than a dozen pages have been impacted. Rather than restrict editing of random pages arbitrarily selected by the vandal, it might be better if someone could implement an [[Special:AbuseFilter|abuse filter]] that screens for the pattern of content added. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:09, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
::@Ningauble, could you initiate the development of such an abuse filter? And/or a abuse filter such as mentioned in the [[#Blocking question]] discussion? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:16, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
::: I believe I ''could'', but I am not sure that I will. I have given some thought to a filter for the Broadway Vandal, and it is on my list of things to consider doing; but I have not invested the substantial time it would take to acquire the requisite expertise with the filter tool. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:01, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

== [[Total Recall]] talk page ==

For the past few days, some idiot anon's claiming Douglas Quaid has talked to him. I've been reverting [https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Total_Recall&action=history it] for sometime because I don't think it adds anything to article improvement. Can we block that guy?--[[User:Eaglestorm|Eaglestorm]] ([[User talk:Eaglestorm|talk]]) 10:55, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
:Hi Eaglestorm, the first step is to give him a warning. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 11:58, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
::I don't know if there's a warning template around here.--[[User:Eaglestorm|Eaglestorm]] ([[User talk:Eaglestorm|talk]]) 12:07, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
:::[[Wikiquote:Template messages/User talk]] -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:12, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

== Medical spam. ==

User:[[Special:Contributions/125.27.105.23|125.27.105.23]] has been spamming links on random articles related to medicine; might be worthwhile blocking ? --[[User:Aphorist|Aphorist]] ([[User talk:Aphorist|talk]]) 10:32, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
: It appears to be a single episode that has stopped. A block would be worthwhile if the activity resumes. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:12, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
:: Spamming links to the same site has continued from multiple IP addresses, so I have added the site to the spam blacklist. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 13:04, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
:::Agree with the addition to the spam blacklist, thank you. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 23:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

== Improper mischaracterization by [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] of another user's comment ==

It is alleged on my talk page[//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ningauble&diff=1632035] that I, user {{Userlinks|Ningauble}}, have improperly mischaracterized the words of user {{Userlinks|Cirt}}. Because I regard this as a serious allegation of misconduct, and because I have previously made [//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ningauble&diff=1499213 a commitment to Cirt] that I would submit his concerns about improper conduct on my part to this noticeboard for review, I invite Wikiquote's administrators to evaluate whether what I wrote was a mischaracterization of Cirt's words, and if such be the case, to recommend appropriate action to address any misconduct on my part.
* The original exchange may be found [//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AMdd&diff=1631983&oldid=1631647 here]
* The full discussion in which it occurred is at [[User talk:Mdd#Thanks much for your formatting help]]
'''My understanding of events''' is that when I joined a discussion to express opinions in support of a third contributor's edits, Cirt replied, in part, "Everything in moderation, no need for extremists, either way" and I replied, in full "''<nowiki>'</nowiki>Extremists'?'' I invite you to reconsider your characterization of those with whom you disagree." [emphasis in original] As I understand it, the allegation is that "characterization of those with whom you disagree" misrepresents that to which "no need for extremists" refers.
'''In my defense''' I offer the following points about my understanding of the referent of Cirt's remark:
# In the context of the original discussion, the word "extremists" clearly and unambiguously refers to participants in the discussion, or at least to participants in the Wikiquote project, not to the merits of the question being discussed, which concerns the appropriateness of certain article content.
# Cirt has indicated (in discussions linked above) that this was not intended to refer to any actual individuals then participating in the discussion, but to potential future participants in the discussion. Whether considered as applicable to past, present, or future participants, describing it as a "characterization of those with whom you disagree" is equally applicable to actual or hypothetical participants, and is in no way a mischaracterization.
# Whether considered as an attempt to [[w:argumentum ad hominem|disparage current participants]] in the discussion, or as an attempt to [[w:Poisoning the well|pre-emptively discredit]] future participants, or even as a [[w:Ignoratio elenchi|mere irrelevancy]] absent such intent, Cirt's remark about extremists (i.e. persons who are far outside the mainstream of society) was unmistakably and unambiguously a characterization of some people. The only assumption I made in describing his remark is that he disagrees with such people, which seems quite evident from the context.
'''My ''interpretation'' of these events''' is somewhat subjective, and is offered solely to explain ''why'' I responded to Cirt's remark in the first place, not whether the content of my response was a fair and accurate characterization of that remark. If it is determined that my response was indeed a factual misrepresentation, whether by reason of incomprehension or by deceit, understanding motive may help administrators decide upon appropriate actions to take. I replied to Cirt as I did because:
# Although Cirt's comment was prompted by my expressing an opinion with which he evidently disagrees, I did not assume it was a personal characterization of me ''individually'', and my response did not suggest that this was the case. Rather, I looked upon it as an apparent attempt to discourage or discredit ''anyone'' who might express opinions extremely different from his own, by labeling such people as extremists.
# I consider "extremists" a rather odious characterization of anyone, though there certainly are some people to whom the appellation may be applied with accuracy. Use of such language may be marginally appropriate where user conduct is the subject of discussion, but I consider it wholly inappropriate in the discussion where it was used.
# "Extremists" is also a very inapt and objectively misleading way to characterize people who argue against a practice that is itself extremely rare in Wikiquote articles. ([[User:Mdd|Mdd]]'s investigation found only about 30 instances among Wikiquote's 22,000+ articles.[//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AMdd&diff=1631453&oldid=1631429]) This is not ''extremism'' far outside the mainstream, it is defense of ordinary ''mainstream'' practice.
# I consider it unbecoming of an administrator such as Cirt to engage in ''[[w:argumentum ad hominem|argumentum ad hominem]]'' of any sort, and I consider it a duty of administrators such as myself to encourage participants to refrain from it. For this reason, and the reasons above, I thought it was appropriate to encourage Cirt to reconsider making this sort of comment.
Although I have shared some of my motivations for my remark, please bear in mind that the substance of the complaint I am submitting for your consideration is not whether the article content under discussion is a good idea, nor whether Cirt's comment about extremists was a good idea, nor whether it was a good idea for me to respond, but is whether my response was in fact, as alleged by Cirt, a mischaracterization of his words. Thank you for reviewing this complaint about the conduct of yours truly, [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 22:13, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

:Just my two cents: I agree that there is/was something off about the use of the word "extremists" in that context, which I initially (mis)read and interpreted as "extremism": referring to the editorial action of remove all further reading sections. I also think Cirt could do a better job using non-offensive/neutral talk-item titles. Offensive titles like "Mischaracterizations" tend to escalate things. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 13:05, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
::I read the discussion as it was occurring, and I've re-read it now, and I absolutely do not feel that you mischaracterized what was written. I believe that Ningauble was correct to call him on the use of such an inflammatory term as "extremists." And I also believe that the way in which Cirt was invited to reconsider showed courtesy and actually offered a chance for clarification so that the words would not be mischaracterized. My reading of the statement (both then and now) was that Cirt felt that there were two extremes of action - either completely remove the additional links, or leave them as they are. In the end, I believe that Cirt was trying to espouse a compromise, wherein some links were cut and some remain. But that is not the way the exchange was written. I believe that Ningauble acted properly and that the use of such a term as "extremists" was inappropriate. It has been my experience that Cirt has a tendency to inflame a discussion beyond the bounds of civility quite quickly if someone does not fully agree with him. In this particular case, I believe that the resulting conflict certainly could have been avoided with a better choice of language in the discussion. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 15:51, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
::: Thank you both for your thoughtful deliberation. Since nobody has (yet) endorsed Cirt's allegation, I am going to resume editing Wikiquote (including areas relating to the subject of the discussion from which the allegation arose), under the rebuttable presumption that the allegation of misconduct is without merit. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:23, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
::::'''Comment:''' Thank you all for the above comments. I realize upon further reflection that my comments were inappropriate. I shall take greater care in the future to not comment in such style in subsequent discussions. I wish you all well. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 22:22, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
'''Update:''' As far as the matter related to the ''Further reading'' sections, I realize that community consensus does not support this. Therefore, I have voluntarily gone ahead and taken the actions to remove these myself from the relevant pages. This has since been {{done}}. I made a note of this at [https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Village_pump&diff=1633186&oldid=1633164 Village Pump]. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 23:00, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

== Auto spambot detection with User:Abuse filter ==
'''Proposal :'''
# to investigate the implementation of Auto spambot detection with <s>User:Abuse filter</s> the [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:AbuseFilter Extension:AbuseFilter]
# to implement the Auto spambot detection with <s>User:Abuse filter</s> the [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:AbuseFilter Extension:AbuseFilter]
-- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:19, 17 October 2013 (UTC) (p.s. this proposal is added a day after this discussion started) / 14:04, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
----
*[[m:User:Abuse filter]]
**See also: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/Abuse_filter
**Brief description: [https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Abuse_filter&action=history note: not a bot; like User:MediaWiki default]
**See also: [[User:MediaWiki default]]
**At Italian Wikipedia: [https://it.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Speciale:Registri/Filtro_anti_abusi&offset=&limit=5000&type=&user=Filtro+anti+abusi it's currently their sixth sysop by blocks].
**According to {{user|Billinghurst}}, we need to first get community consensus supporting this and we can then have the feature turned on. After that, the most prominent issue to consider is simply supervising its activity and placing restrictions on it.

I think this could be incredibly helpful, what do you think, community? -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 14:38, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
<hr width="50%" />

*'''Support'''. Just a note that I fully support implementation of this, as nom. Cheers, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 14:38, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
** Cirt. What do you support? Above the concrete proposal is (still) missing, or am I missing something? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 17:23, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
***It was simple enough for {{w|unanimous}} support over at ''Wikinews'', shrug... -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 22:19, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
**** So far, it is completely unclear what this is about. So far I only detected that there is a user with the name "Abuse filter" on meta. The rest of the completely unclear. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 23:55, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
** Ok, let's get some things straight:
**# The tool we might import here is the [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:AbuseFilter Extension:AbuseFilter].
**# The explanation about this tool on Meta can be found [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Abuse_filter here]
**# The user on Meta with the name [[m:User:Abuse filter|Abuse filter]] has made a link on his user page to the above link.
** [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 00:02, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
*** It seems this is not correct either, because the explanation about this tool on Meta states: ''It was enabled on English Wikipedia on March 2009[1] and is now be enabled on all Wikimedia projects...'' Should this mean that it can be enabled on Wikiquote (by filling in an request)? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 00:16, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
****I believe the user you refer to is not an actual person, but part of the automated system to block spammers. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 01:19, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
*****You might be right, anyway. I added an explicit proposal on top of this discussion, so it is more clear what we are talking about. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:30, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
*'''Comments''': The heading of this section refers to ''spambot detection'', but the links provided above appear to relate to the ability of the '''[[Special:AbuseFilter|AbuseFilter]]''' to impose blocks, which is not currently enabled in Wikiquote's implementation of the abuse filter. I will assume, but correct me if I am wrong, that this ''blocking feature'' is the one you are interested in enabling, rather than ''detection'' of spambot posts using the filter. I think the first priority is the detection of spam so it can be filtered out. Blocking the accounts is dependent upon detecting the activity first, and may be of less importance if the posts are effectively filtered out. I also think it could be dangerous to implement the blocking feature at a project that does not have its own local filter experts. It would be very helpful, and would not require enabling anything, to import a filter from another wiki that is already designed for the pattern of spambot activity we have been experiencing. If anyone would care to identify such a filter in use at another English language project, I would be happy to work on importing it. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:00, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
::Okay that sounds good, agree with analysis by {{user|Ningauble}}, above. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 16:32, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' as proposed, due to lack of clarity in the proposal about what exactly is proposed to be done. (The apparent confusion displayed in discussion above reinforces my opinion that it would be unwise to enable dangerous components of a system that is not well understood by those who would use it.) ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 11:51, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
** You are quite right. I think we need to investigate this some further. What are the possibilities and how to implement this? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:27, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

*'''Explicit proposal is now added''': Due to the previous comment by Ningauble and my earlier comments an explicit proposal is now added. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:25, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
** Your restatement of an explicit proposal, inserted above Cirt's original post, suggests that you might understand what is meant better than I do. For purposes of clarification, what do you mean by ''implement with User:Abuse filter''? ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 13:48, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
*** You're quite right, the proposal is rephrased. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 14:04, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
**** Your revised restatement of what is proposed, by striking reference to "User:Abuse filter" which was the focus of Cirt's original post starting this thread, appears to be changing the subject altogether rather than clarifying it. This thread has become a real mess, with confusion about the subject exacerbated by posting comments out of chronological sequence. I suggest everyone take a deep breath, step back, and begin a fresh thread if desired. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:53, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't think we are changing the subject here:
# There is a mediawiki extension named [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:AbuseFilter Extension:AbuseFilter]
# This extension can be turned on in any specific wikiproject, as explained [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Abuse_filter here] on mediawikimedia.org
## This specific mediawikimedia.org gives a table with "Permissions configuration comparison"
## Here it seems the Abuse filter is "turned on" on a lot of Wikiproject, but not on Wikiquote
# Now I guess if a request is made and granted, the Extension:AbuseFilter will create [[User:Abuse filter]] here on Wikiquote
Now I could be mistaken (again)), but let us bear in mind we are all on unfamiliar ground here. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 17:41, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
*I have asked Jasper Deng on Wikimedia for advice (see [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jasper_Deng#Wikiquote here]), since he created the User:Abuse filter page overthere. [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:05, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
** Allow me to clear up some misunderstandings:
**# The Abuse Filter extension is already installed at en.wikiquote, as indicated at [[Special:Version]]. Its main interface may be found at [[Special:AbuseFilter]].
**# The Abuse Filter does not need to be "turned on". It is up and running, and [[Special:AbuseLog]] shows its actions.
**# The table to which you linked ''does'' show that the Abuse Filter is installed here, but information about the configuration is incomplete. Apart from a naming difference, configuration of the extension at en.wikiquote similar to that described at [[w:Wikipedia:Edit filter]], and is essentially the Wikimedia default.
**# In particular, as described at [[w:Wikipedia:Edit filter#Actions which can be assigned in response to filtered edits]], automatic account blocking is not enabled.
**# "User:Abuse filter" is the username under which the Abuse Filter performs blocks, so that the block log, recent changes, & etc. can show ''who'' [sic] did the blocking. It is only needed at projects where automatic account blocking is enabled.
:: I hope that, in light of this information, my original comment (16:00, 16 October 2013 above) may make a little more sense. I appreciate that you would like for the Abuse Filter to combat the spambot activity we have been experiencing. It would be a good thing. Unfortunately, writing filters is not easy: it requires specific technical proficiencies, and can cause massive disruption of the entire site if it is done wrong. Please proceed with the utmost caution. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 23:28, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
:::Ok thanks. We already have a [https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter Abuse filter management] system...! Now the million dollar question: is there not an extra extension/filter we can add here? It looks like we have got 15 filters running, while Wikipedia (see [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter here]) has up to about 600 filters (not all active). -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 01:56, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
::::If you want to borrow some from Meta or MediaWiki (we have some good ones), then I or a steward can help. [[User:PiRSquared17|PiRSquared17]] ([[User talk:PiRSquared17|talk]]) 21:59, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

* Although I am not a regular contributor to Wikiquote, I noticed this discussion after it was mentioned to a fellow [[m:SWMT|SWMT]] member on Meta. I personally disagree with automatically imposed blocks from an edit filter in almost all cases, but I am fine with disallowing edits. Of course, it's up to your community whether or not you want automatic blocks. [[User:PiRSquared17|PiRSquared17]] ([[User talk:PiRSquared17|talk]]) 22:07, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
** I also believe that automatic blocks are not a good idea. This is not allowed at Wikipedia, where there are a large number of filter experts. I think it is scary to even consider the idea at a project like this where there are no experts to manage it. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 23:23, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
*** @PiRSquared17. we are looking for a bot that can disallowing edits, not block user accounts (See also correction [https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard#To_do_next here]): In short, we want to disallow new users to add (any) external links to Wikiquote. Do you know how this can be done? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 01:43, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
**** @Mdd: The original purpose of this thread concerns the blocking feature, by reference to [[m:User:Abuse filter]]. (Cirt was well aware of the extension itself, having edited filters previously.[https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter/history]) Again, " I suggest everyone take a deep breath, step back, and begin a fresh thread if desired." There was not much consensus in previous discussion ([[#Blocking question]]) to disallow ''any'' external links by new users (much less unregistered ones). If we do reach a consensus for such a policy, then it would be easy to implement automatic enforcement. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:20, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
****@Mdd: This project already has AbuseFilters that can disallow edits. To create one, see [[Special:AbuseFilter]] (please test filters before enabling them). I am an admin on Meta, where we have blocking filters. Only two people (including myself) opposed it there. False positives could really discourage new users, so I think blocking filters need to be disabled and fixed after any FP. [[User:PiRSquared17|PiRSquared17]] ([[User talk:PiRSquared17|talk]]) 21:59, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

=== Abuse filter to prevent "''New users adding external links on their user or talk page''" ===
Wikisource (see [https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter here]) has an abuse filter (nr 15) up and running, that prevents "''New users adding external links on their user or talk page''". It seems like a good idea to test this Abuse filter here on Wikiquote. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 20:53, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
:Actually, they're only ''tagging'' such edits, not ''preventing'' them, as it also catches good links. If you want to try it with "disallow" enabled, that is a different story. I can (privately) give you the code that other projects use for this, but only stewards and admins on Wikisource can see what the conditions for that filter are. [[User:PiRSquared17|PiRSquared17]] ([[User talk:PiRSquared17|talk]]) 22:04, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
:: Thanks for the kind offer! I am going to follow up with PiRSquared17 about finding suitable filters that can be adapted from other wikis. They can be difficult to find and import without assistance because most are "private", i.e., the details are hidden from public view (for good reason). We do need our filters to be a little more discriminating, sensitive to recognizable patterns used by spambots, than simply looking for the presence of external links. (E.g., they should not reject things like the original version of [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User:Mdd&oldid=566688 this user's page], or the page of [[User:Sue Gardner|this seemingly well-meaning person]]. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 13:08, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
I've made [[m:Special:AbuseFilter/43]] and /44 public. Not sure what wikisource does exactly, but it should be similar. [[User:PiRSquared17|PiRSquared17]] ([[User talk:PiRSquared17|talk]]) 18:41, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
: Thanks Pi! These filters detect and tag any edit that adds links the new user's page/talk. I am not sure tagging is a great benefit, since we seem to be catching them already at New Pages and Recent Changes; but if others think it would be beneficial to tag them then I will set up these filters or something similar. (They are easy.) What would be more useful, IMO, would be something that detects the specific pattern of spam we have been dealing with and stops them from posting. I have not followed up with Pi about the pattern yet, but will do so later today or tomorrow. Unfortunately, the pattern is so variable that it will take more than a simple "regexp" to catch many of them. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 19:22, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
:: Replied. (Note: change the wikimedia.org part to wikiquote.org) [[User:PiRSquared17|PiRSquared17]] ([[User talk:PiRSquared17|talk]]) 22:55, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
{{outdent|:::}}
PiRSquared17 provided info about [[m:Special:AbuseFilter/65]], which is designed for the spambot pattern we have been experiencing. I have implemented it here, with some changes, as [[Special:AbuseFilter/16]] (on a test basis initially, to go live soon). The filter will catch many features peculiar to this spambot, but some posts will slip through due to variations in wording. Administrators who feel confident editing filters can update it as the spammer [[w:Whac-A-Mole|invents new variations]] to evade the filter. For major or tentative changes, consider forking a new filter to run in test mode. You can also help by monitoring the [[Special:AbuseLog|AbuseLog]] for false positives, because some of the triggers may be so generic that they trap innocent edits. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:48, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
:Ntsamr is changing its usual pattern significantly. No link + No <nowiki> </nowiki>: [[User:NellieStGeorge]] & [[User:ArtALXQlifa]]. I saw something like this yesterday too. No spam link on the userpage but it created a spam page on ns0. --[[User:Glaisher|Glaisher]] ([[User talk:Glaisher|talk]]) 05:45, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
::@[[User:Glaisher|Glaisher]]: do you know any filters that handle this? [[User:PiRSquared17|PiRSquared17]] ([[User talk:PiRSquared17|talk]]) 14:04, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
:::Nope, but I just saw this. [[m:User:Mathonius/Reports/BAABP]] --[[User:Glaisher|Glaisher]] ([[User talk:Glaisher|talk]]) 15:02, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
:::: The two cited examples may not reflect a change in the pattern. They may only be cases of operator error when running the bot, like an even more [https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Undelete&target=User%3AArchieKXMrxpeib&timestamp=20130918153622 egregious goof] last month when the operator not only forgot the link, but also the part "About_Yourself". ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:17, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
::::: I can't see the deleted edit, but I recommend you ask [[m:User:Billinghurst]] to fix the filter if you think it's missing something. [[User:PiRSquared17|PiRSquared17]] ([[User talk:PiRSquared17|talk]]) 23:48, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
:::::: My point was that these goofs do not appear to be a systematic pattern or recurring problem. If nuisance user pages ''without'' external links do become a persistent problem in the future then we can look into filtering them. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:10, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

== New type of spambot? ==

It seems two days ago a new type of spambot appeared (see [https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Special:DeletedContributions/Eliga here]) which just kept on adding new spambot messages (up to 25) until it was blocked.

Now today the new spambot account [https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Special:DeletedContributions/Ritubhaskar Ritubhaskar] came from the same source because it also created a page [https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Special:Undelete/Wctreeservice Wctreeservice].

Should we be worried? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 14:01, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
: I don't think worrying about it will help. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:59, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

== Complaint from a user on OTRS ==

A user has complained on OTRS (Ticket#2013090410005661 ) that as soon as User: is typed in search box, the text prompt "! !Gavin.collins ræpes babies" appears. As it could be offensive and refers to a blocked account, the account could be deleted or renamed at the earliest by taking up with Stewards--[[User:Arjunaraoc|Arjunaraoc]] ([[User talk:Arjunaraoc|talk]]) 05:21, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
:I've renamed the account and deleted the redirects on the User: and User talk: pages; it's still showing up, but that could also be something that clears itself out of the system after a short while. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 07:35, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
::Now you get "User:! Jack Merridew b& from WP", also a blocked account but rather less offensive.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 11:14, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

== Vandalism and spam patrol ==

I have lately been preoccupied by some unanticipated, somewhat urgent events in "real life" that prevent me from conducting my usual vandalism and spam patrol. This situation will probably persist for a few more days. I would be grateful if some of our less active administrators could spend a little extra time keeping an eye on things in the meanwhile. (Particularly, [//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&limit=250&hidebots=0 Recent Changes], [//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Special:NewPages&hideredirs=0&namespace=all New Pages (all)], and activity by users who tripped [//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Special:AbuseLog&wpSearchFilter=16 Filter 16].) Thanks. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 19:25, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
: I am back on the job. Thinking about asking for a 25% raise. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:48, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

== Vandalism at [[Bhagavad Gita]] ==

Heavy vandalism by a user at [[Bhagavad Gita]], and it's not by any '''new''' user of wikipedia, but the same user who vandalized the wikipedia page before too with the same spam links. Which can be seen here[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Criticism_of_Hinduism&diff=572735158&oldid=572735128] and his IP/account was banned for Edit warring. The page should be locked for now. [[User:Justicejayant|Justicejayant]] ([[User talk:Justicejayant|talk]]) 15:34, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

== Blacklisted social networking sites ==

The following websites were added to the '''[[Mediawiki:Spam-blacklist|spam blacklist]]''' a month ago by administrator [[User:Cirt|Cirt]] ([//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist&diff=1643153 dif]). Existing links to these sites are noted in this list:
* ''facebook.com'' ([//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALinkSearch&target=*.facebook.com 74 links])
* ''twitter.com'' ([//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALinkSearch&target=*.twitter.com 118 links])
* ''myspace.com'' ([//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALinkSearch&target=*.myspace.com 104 links])
One user, [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]], has requested that Twitter be removed from the blacklist ([//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ningauble&diff=1654603 dif]). Note also that citation to this type of site has been discussed at [[Wikiquote talk:Quotability#Tweets, blogs, chatrooms, &c.]] without reaching consensus. Should any or all of these sites be blacklisted or un-blacklisted? Is this an administrative call, or is broader community discussion needed? ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:52, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' removing any of the above. They are unreliable, as they are not durably archived. They are used for spamming as well. Best to stick to reliable secondary sources, whenever possible. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 17:09, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Twitter is sometimes the true source of celebrated quotes, such as the ones by [[Richard Dawkins#Twitter|Richard Dawkins]]. Twitter is the most accurate (and reliable) source in such cases, for verified Twitter users, and has been used on Wikiquote for a long time. Could some admin who actually contributes to Wikiquote remove this recent addition of Twitter to the "spam" blacklist? Or will edits [https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Richard_Dawkins&diff=1652405&oldid=1652404 like] [https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Justin_Bieber&diff=1657858&oldid=1655323 these] continue to be disrupted from now on? Come on. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:43, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
: I cannot see any logical reason to block these sites totally and would support removal from the blacklist.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 11:18, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
:: I tend to agree with their prohibition. If a quote from Twitter or Facebook or the like is worth quoting, it will be quoted in secondary sources, which can then be cited as evidence of the quotability of the quote. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 13:24, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
::: I tend to STRONGLY disagree with their prohibition. EVEN if one wishes to primarily encourage quotes that are already widely quoted elsewhere, as some seem to be inclined to do (and I do not), the blacklisting of these sites PREVENTS the linking to the original sources, and seems quite unnecessary, and actually more detrimental than helpful, especially when pages of certain celebrities are of "verified" status within these sites. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 13:33, 26 December 2013 (UTC) + tweaks
::@[[User:BD2412|BD]]: do you have anything against primary sources? If you do, you must be on the wrong website. I want to link Dawkins' quotes to their true source, not to some journalist's opinion on why his tweet was offensive, thank you very much. [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 14:41, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
::: The question is not whether some journalist found a comment to be offensive (or praiseworthy), but whether it was notable at all. If Dawkins (or some similarly famous person) tweets their grocery list, should it be possible for that to be added here as a quote? By what principle, then, should we ''not'' add to Dawkins' page his entire Twitter stream of over 14,000 tweets (including, in the past few days, "Listening to the Carols from King’s College, Cambridge. Very lovely (except for the pretentious rolled Rs), matching the sublime building."; "Catholic Church has a legitimate right & authority to veto scientific conclusions that directly contradict her dogma [link]"; and "I LOVE this video. [link] Anybody know if music copyright problems'd make it hard for me to do something like it myself?" [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 15:54, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
::::You seem to be working under the assumption that unless you block websites like Twitter, total chaos will ensue, and everybody is going to start adding banal quotes to our articles. Well, sorry to break it to you, BD, but despite your much-repeated and beloved example, no one is actually interested in adding grocery lists to Wikiquote. No matter how much you may fear subjectivity, I affirm that any selection of quotes is ''necessarily'' subjective, and I find it strange that you should ask by what criteria are quotes chosen when you yourself follow up by selecting a number of quotes which, presumably, are to appeal to our common sense for what constitutes triviality. How did you do that? By what "principle" did you select those quotes? (By what principles do journalists select ''their'' quotes?) You see, I trust our readers' and editors' intelligence in the selection quotes, as I do that of our reviewers (like yourself), who are free to remove from any article quotes which they deem too trivial for inclusion. I only fear subjectivity in administrative areas, where force is used, for example in selecting the period of time for which a person should be blocked. I resent that we are only having this discussion ''after'' primary sources like Twitter were blocked, and that the "rules" were changed in the middle of the game, with no consultation. I would like to say a few more words about this, but last time I did so, you blocked me for three months, and God knows for how many months you will block me next time. That's exactly the kind of arbitrary judgment that concerns me. Not fear of grocery lists. [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:02, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
::::: It is entirely possible to discuss the best practice without discussing the personalities involved, so let's focus on that. Let's say we forget grocery lists then, and look at the actual Twitter stream. Here are the last eight tweets by Dawkins which are not already mentioned above, and which are not merely retweets or pointing to links:
:::::*Are dreams epiphenomenal or have they Darwinian survival value? I find "tidying the hard disk" (Evans, Crick) to be not a big enough theory.
:::::*Been watching recent David Attenborough DVDs. He just goes on getting better and better. Truly superb, magical.
:::::*Again accused of ignorance of theology. But what is there in "theology" to be ignorant ABOUT? Tell me 1 theological fact & I'll learn it.
:::::*Religious acts between consenting adults should not be illegal. #Turing
:::::*Oral sex is illegal in several US states. Homosexuality is illegal in many countries. What kind of person thinks it's the state's business?
:::::*What kind of moralist makes a "crime" out of a private act, which harms nobody, simply because it's forbidden in some old book? #Turing
:::::*What kind of moralist makes a "crime" out of a private act, simply because they'd prefer not to do that act themselves? #Turing
:::::*"Overturn a conviction" sounds a lot better than "pardon". "Pardon" implies that #Turing did something wrong in the first place.
:::::*It’s not a posthumous Pardon that Alan Turing needs, but a posthumous Apology. Same for the many others convicted of the same “crime”.
::::: Perhaps these are "quotable"; I don't propose to judge that, but to leave it to the objective filter of whether anyone has ''quoted'' them. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 19:29, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
:::::: You are still operating under the fallacy that if Twitter was allowed people would even considering adding such statements to Wikiquote, which is a tiresome straw-man (and very much against all evidence). But let me ask you the opposite, which is actually relevant. Take, for example, the quote from ''[[Mortals and Others]]'' by [[Bertrand Russell]], "While genius is individual, sanity is social." Now Google it, and see how many times it was "quoted". Result? Zero times. Was it too "subjective" of me to add that quote by Bertrand Russell, perhaps? It would seem that according to your pseudo-objective criteria, such a quote has no place on Wikiquote, and should thus be removed (unlike whatever Miley Cyrus will say tomorrow, which I'm sure will be "quoted" in several media outlets, and so pass with flying colors your "objective filter"). [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:51, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
::::::: There are plenty of junk quotes that make it through in TV show articles. I would say that the difference between published books and things posted on the Internet is that at least books have to go through the filter of publication. Stuff on Twitter and Facebook goes through no filter at all. That said, after thinking it over, I'm not sure that blocking links to these websites is the best avenue to serve this purpose. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 01:23, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
:::::::: Not really a straw-man: People have not only ''considered'' adding tweets that are trivial or even rubbish to Wikiquote articles, they have ''done so'': Evidence may be found [//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Merlin_Mann&diff=1364805 here] and among the links to Twitter identified above. The criterion of quoting things that are actually quoted is not "pseudo-objective", it is the objective basis for such compendia as ''Bartlett's Familiar Quotations'', which expresses the concept in its title. It has been suggested from time to time that Wikiquote limit itself to ''only'' quotations that are famous, like ''Bartlett's'', but that is not the consensus and I do not support it. Contributors are encouraged to make subjective choices, subject to consensus, for including lesser-known statements from widely known, notable works. This broader scope encompasses the example from ''Mortals and Others'', so that example is a bit of a red herring. Another difference between published books and things posted on the interestnet is, as noted above, their durability. The contents of a social networking site may be rewritten, redacted, or deleted at any time. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:42, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

:For what it's worth, I'm totally fine with removing Twitter from the blacklist but keeping Facebook and MySpace blacklisted; Twitter seems to have far fewer layers between the person being quoted and the actual comment, versus Facebook with is more advertising-oriented (and MySpace is MySpace, so screw that). [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 19:45, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

== 20 December 2013 QOTD ==

The layout at [[Wikiquote talk:Quote of the day/December 20, 2013]] will have to be placed into [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/December 20, 2013]] by an admin; the auto-protection has already kicked in on that QOTD page. The 21st and 22nd are already done. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 20:26, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 20:47, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Mohammed Alkobaisi

2013-12-23T16:00:44Z

EVula: - ar:محمد بن عيادة الكبيسي

[[File:Dr Mohammed Alkobaisi in Zayed University.jpg|thumb|Dr Mohammed Alkobaisi in Zayed University about woman role in education and its social and economical impacts on the woman and the society.]]

'''Mohammed bin Eyada Alkobaisi''' (Arabic (محمد بن عيادة الكبيسي) (referred to in honor as '''Sheikh Mohammed Alkobaisi''', and as '''Dr. Mohammed Alkobaisi''') is a [[w:Grand Mufti|Grand Mufti]], an [[Ulama|Islamic scholar]], a public figure and a TV personality.

==Sourced==
* '''Beliefs & practices are the core of Islam. Yet, Islam is not considered complete without ethics and morals.'''
** Understanding Islam, [http://vod.dmi.ae/media/96716/Ep_03_Morals_and_Ethics "Morals and Ethics"] ''Dubai Media''

* '''Ethic is the core of humanity and the foundation of civilization.'''
** Understanding Islam, [http://vod.dmi.ae/media/96716/Ep_03_Morals_and_Ethics "Morals and Ethics"] ''Dubai Media''

* '''Islam has emphasized Ethics, good deeds and nice words in order to build a better world and an ideal society as it aims at bringing up the best in humans.'''
** Understanding Islam, [http://vod.dmi.ae/media/96716/Ep_03_Morals_and_Ethics "Morals and Ethics"] ''Dubai Media''

* '''Doing good to other people is not only a nice extra thing to do, but it is actually part of Emaan or the Faith; The Prophet (pbuh) said: “Whosoever believes in Allah and the Last Day should be generous to his neighbor [treat his neighbor with kindness], and whosoever believes in Allah and the Last Day should be generous to his guest”.'''
** Understanding Islam, [http://vod.dmi.ae/media/96716/Ep_03_Morals_and_Ethics "Morals and Ethics"] ''Dubai Media''

* '''Imagine!, the two most important [[w:Sahabah|Sahabah]] in Islam, racing to help an old blind woman, at night and at the edge of the city!.'''
** Understanding Islam, [http://vod.dmi.ae/media/96716/Ep_03_Morals_and_Ethics "Morals and Ethics"] ''Dubai Media''

* '''Islam considers Ethics & Morals as a way to attain rewards and entitlement to Heavens.'''
** Understanding Islam, [http://vod.dmi.ae/media/96716/Ep_03_Morals_and_Ethics "Morals and Ethics"] ''Dubai Media''

* '''The real concept of morality is benefiting people and avoiding harming them.'''
** Understanding Islam, [http://vod.dmi.ae/media/96716/Ep_03_Morals_and_Ethics "Morals and Ethics"] ''Dubai Media''

* '''A Muslim should live up to his character, and employ his powers in doing what is good, beneficial and helpful.'''
** Understanding Islam, [http://vod.dmi.ae/media/96716/Ep_03_Morals_and_Ethics "Morals and Ethics"] ''Dubai Media''

* '''Any intentional inequitable harm is a danger zone!'''
** Understanding Islam, [http://vod.dmi.ae/media/96716/Ep_03_Morals_and_Ethics "Morals and Ethics"] ''Dubai Media''

* '''goodness is not only required in action, but also in speech.'''
** Understanding Islam, [http://vod.dmi.ae/media/96716/Ep_03_Morals_and_Ethics "Morals and Ethics"] ''Dubai Media''

* '''Goodness is required even in thoughts and desires.'''
** Understanding Islam, [http://vod.dmi.ae/media/96716/Ep_03_Morals_and_Ethics "Morals and Ethics"] ''Dubai Media''

* '''If you succeeded with patience, you should try to reach a higher state of morality; which is to counter evil with good.'''
** Understanding Islam, [http://vod.dmi.ae/media/96716/Ep_03_Morals_and_Ethics "Morals and Ethics"] ''Dubai Media''

* '''Evil must not be countered with another evil but, rather, repelled by an act of goodness.'''
** Understanding Islam, [http://vod.dmi.ae/media/96716/Ep_03_Morals_and_Ethics "Morals and Ethics"] ''Dubai Media''

* '''The final level - of good ethics - is to deal with your enemy in the best kind of treatment as though he is a close friend!'''
** Understanding Islam, [http://vod.dmi.ae/media/96716/Ep_03_Morals_and_Ethics "Morals and Ethics"] ''Dubai Media''

* '''Foil hatred with goodness and love and make those enemy your true friends!'''
** Understanding Islam, [http://vod.dmi.ae/media/96716/Ep_03_Morals_and_Ethics "Morals and Ethics"] ''Dubai Media''

* '''It is relatively easy to control your anger after a while, but to do that after facing such extremes and at the height of your troubles, when you are wearied and exhausted, when you are heart-broken and depressed, that is sublime morality and magnificent ethics.'''
** Understanding Islam, [http://vod.dmi.ae/media/96716/Ep_03_Morals_and_Ethics "Morals and Ethics"] ''Dubai Media''

* '''-Ethic- is especially important while conducting business, in law suits and trials, when people act rudely, etc.'''
** Understanding Islam, [http://vod.dmi.ae/media/96716/Ep_03_Morals_and_Ethics "Morals and Ethics"] ''Dubai Media''

* '''Ethics are not theoretical! They are practical and affect our everyday life; at homes, in our neighborhood, at the road, at our work place.'''
** Understanding Islam, [http://vod.dmi.ae/media/96716/Ep_03_Morals_and_Ethics "Morals and Ethics"] ''Dubai Media''

* '''A true Muslim will surely strive to improve his manners and correct his condition, and purify his demeanor and his innermost feelings.'''
** Understanding Islam, [http://vod.dmi.ae/media/96716/Ep_03_Morals_and_Ethics "Morals and Ethics"] ''Dubai Media''

* '''Each one of us should ask himself; Am I being the best I can be to my family? Am I being the best parent I can be? Am I being the best child I can be? The best friend? The best neighbor? The best for my brothers and sisters? The best for my society? The best for humanity? Where am I from the saying: “The best of people, is the best TO the people”?'''
** Understanding Islam, [http://vod.dmi.ae/media/96716/Ep_03_Morals_and_Ethics "Morals and Ethics"] ''Dubai Media''

* '''There is always room for improvement in our lives. Are we willing to try?! Are we going to try?!'''
** Understanding Islam, [http://vod.dmi.ae/media/96716/Ep_03_Morals_and_Ethics "Morals and Ethics"] ''Dubai Media''

==External links==
{{Wikipedia}}
{{commons}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Alkobaisi, Mohammed bin Eyada}}
[[Category:Grand Muftis]]
[[Category:Ulama]]
[[Category:Islamic scholar]]
[[Category:Muslims]]
[[Category:Living people]]
[[Category:Iraqis]]

User:AndraFosdick

2013-11-12T23:56:36Z

EVula: revert; if there's no link, it isn't spam, and this is the only edit the account has ever made on any project, so it isn't a cross-wiki problem

I like Target Shooting. I also try to learn Spanish in my spare time.

Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/The Internship

2013-11-12T22:47:04Z

EVula: yeah, it's crap

{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Wikiquote| |{{error:not substituted|vfd-new2}}<div style="display:none;">}}
== [[:The Internship]] ==

[[WQ:Q|Unmemorable quotes]]: Nothing here is remotely original or eloquent. — [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:19, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
*'''Vote closes''': 18:00, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

*'''Delete''' as nom. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:19, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom. [[User:Nick1372|Nick1372]] ([[User talk:Nick1372|talk]]) 19:39, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Agree with the nom, but it would take a minimal amount of effort (from somebody that has seen the movie, which I have not) to bring it up to an acceptable quality level. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 22:47, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Wikiquote:Administrators' noticeboard

2013-11-08T07:35:19Z

EVula: /* Complaint from a user on OTRS */ renamed

User talk:Renamed vandal account~enwikiquote

2013-11-08T07:33:14Z

EVula: EVula moved page User talk:! !Gavin.collins ræpes babies to User talk:Renamed vandal account: Automatically moved page while renaming the user "! !Gavin.collins ræpes babies" to "[[User:Renamed vandal a...

{{vblock}} - [[User:InvisibleSun|InvisibleSun]] 06:07, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

User:Renamed vandal account~enwikiquote

2013-11-08T07:33:14Z

EVula: EVula moved page User:! !Gavin.collins ræpes babies to User:Renamed vandal account: Automatically moved page while renaming the user "! !Gavin.collins ræpes babies" to "[[User:Renamed vandal account|Ren...

{{vblock}} - [[User:InvisibleSun|InvisibleSun]] 06:06, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

The Lord of the Rings

2013-10-29T04:35:41Z

EVula: Reverted edit by 153.107.33.154 (talk • contributions) to last version by DanielTom

{{mergefrom|Faramir}}
{{mergefrom|Gimli}}
[[Image:Unico Anello.png|244px|thumb|right|One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them, One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.]]

This is a portal page for quotes from the three standard volumes of the novel '''''[[w:The Lord of the Rings|The Lord of the Rings]]''''' by [[J. R. R. Tolkien]]; they contain some '''"spoilers"'''. For quotations from the movie adaptations, go to the page for '''[[The Lord of the Rings (movies)|''The Lord of the Rings'' movies]]'''.

The following four titles ''are '''links''''' to separate pages of quotes from ''each'' of the three volumes, and the appendices:
:'''Books I and II - ''[[The Fellowship of the Ring]]'''''
:'''Books III and IV - ''[[The Two Towers]]'''''
:'''Books V and VI - ''[[The Return of the King]]'''''
:'''[[Appendices to The Lord of the Rings|Appendices to ''The Lord of the Rings'']]'''

== Foreword to the Second Edition (October 1966) ==

* The prime motive was the desire of a tale-teller to try his hand at a really long story that would hold the attention of readers, amuse them, delight them, and at times maybe excite them or deeply move them.

* Some who have read the book, or at any rate have reviewed it, have found it boring, absurd, or contemptible; and I have no cause to complain, since I have similar opinions of their works, or of the kinds of writing that they evidently prefer.

* The most critical reader of all, myself, now finds many defects, minor and major, but being fortunately under no obligation either to review the book or to write it again, he will pass over these in silence, except one that has been noted by others: the book is too short.

* I cordially dislike allegory in all its manifestations, and always have done so since I grew old and wary enough to detect its presence. I much prefer history, true or feigned, with its varied applicability to the thought and experience of readers. I think that many confuse 'applicability' with 'allegory'; but the one resides in the freedom of the reader, and the other in the purposed domination of the author.

== Quotes about ''The Lord of the Rings'' ==

* I rarely remember a book about which I have had such violent arguments. Nobody seems to have a moderate opinion: either, like myself, people find it a masterpiece of its genre or they cannot abide it, and among the hostile there are some, I must confess, for whose literary judgment I have great respect. A few of these may have been put off by the first forty pages of the first chapter of the first volume in which the daily life of the hobbits is described; this is light comedy and light comedy is not Mr. Tolkien's forte. In most cases, however, the objection must go far deeper. I can only suppose that some people object to Heroic Quests and Imaginary Worlds on principle; such, they feel, cannot be anything but light "escapist" reading. That a man like Mr. Tolkien, the English philologist who teaches at Oxford, should lavish such incredible pains upon a genre which is, for them, trifling by definition, is, therefore, very shocking.
** [[W. H. Auden]] in [http://www.nytimes.com/1956/01/22/books/tolkien-king.html "At the End of the Quest, Victory" in ''The New York Times'' (22 January 1956)]

* To present the conflict between Good and Evil as a war in which the good side is ultimately victorious is a ticklish business. Our historical experience tells us that physical power and, to a large extent, mental power are morally neutral and effectively real: wars are won by the stronger side, just or unjust. ... As readers of the preceding volumes will remember, the situation in the War of the Ring is as follows: Chance, or Providence, has put the Ring in the hands of the representatives of Good, Elrond, Gandalf, Aragorn. By using it they could destroy Sauron, the incarnation of evil, but at the cost of becoming his successor. If Sauron recovers the Ring, his victory will be immediate and complete, but even without it his power is greater than any his enemies can bring against him, so that, unless Frodo succeeds in destroying the Ring, Sauron must win. ... The demands made on the writer's powers in an epic as long as "The Lord of the Rings" are enormous and increase as the tale proceeds — the battles have to get more spectacular, the situations more critical, the adventures more thrilling — but I can only say that Mr. Tolkien has proved equal to them.
** [[W. H. Auden]] in "At the End of the Quest, Victory" in ''The New York Times'' (22 January 1956)

* Oh, f***, not another elf!
** [[w:Hugo Dyson|Hugo Dyson]], Tolkien's friend and fellow academic, during a reading of ''The Lord of the Rings'' at a meeting of the [[w:Inklings|Inklings]]; as quoted in [http://books.google.com/books?id=CPSHssBejUsC&pg=PA217&dq=%22not+another+elf%22&ei=Q-OOR4TuNYneiQHowYCuBw&sig=V1nI2xcG562O5Wai_Y_x00GAFdE#PPA217,M1 ''C.S. Lewis: A Biography'' (1990)] by [[w:A. N. Wilson|A. N. Wilson]], p. 217
** Variants:
** And ''The Lord of the Rings'' would begin with Hugo lying on the couch, and lolling and shouting and saying, "Oh God, no more Elves."
*** [[w:Christopher Tolkien|Christopher Tolkien]]'s account of readings of ''The Lord of the Rings'' in the television documentary ''A Film Portrait of J. R. R. Tolkien'' (1992) directed by Derek Bailey.
** On one memorable occasion a small group had gathered in Lewis's rooms and were listening to Tolkien read the last installment of ''The Lord of the Rings''. They were sitting there puffing on pipes and sipping tea when Hugo Dyson, who had been lounging on a sofa and growing increasingly bored with the proceedings, suddenly exclaimed: "Oh, f***! Not another elf!"
*** As quoted in [http://books.google.com/books?id=fRkNJeEqbokC&pg=PA152&dq=%22not+another+elf%22&ei=_eiOR5vNEZnuiQHQqtiZBw&sig=Zqvu9cCwAGl6AfNA-kd7Zr6r3fY ''C.S. Lewis: Creator of Narnia'' (2005)] by [[w:Michael White (author)|Michael White]], p. 152

* J.R.R. Tolkien's epic trilogy remains the ultimate quest, the ultimate battle between good and evil, the ultimate chronicle of stewardship of the earth. Endlessly imitated, it never has been surpassed.
** John Mark Eberhart and Matthew Schofield, "After half a century, The Lord of the Rings towers over fantasy fiction — and now the films loom," ''The Kansas City Star'', 1 October 2000: J1.

* I wonder how could he have been able to invent all this stuff. It feels more like Tolkien discovered some sort of long-lost scrolls.
** [[Peter Jackson]] ''Morning Edition'', National Public Radio, [[17 December]] [[2001]]

* Such a book has of course its predestined readers, even now more numerous and more critical than is always realised. To them a reviewer need say little, except that here are beauties which pierce like swords or burn like cold iron; here is a book that will break your heart.
** Review by [[C.S. Lewis]], as quoted in ''The Essential J. R. R. Tolkien Sourcebook: A Fan's Guide to Middle-Earth and Beyond'' (2004) by George W. Beahm, p. 28

* I always felt like Gandalf should have stayed [[Death|dead]]. That was such an incredible sequence in ''Fellowship of the Ring'' when he faces the Balrog on the Khazad-dûm and he falls into the gulf, and his last words are, “Fly, you [[fools]].” What [[power]] that had, how that grabbed me. And then he comes back as Gandalf the White, and if anything he's sort of improved. I never liked Gandalf the White as much as Gandalf the Grey, and I never liked him coming back. I think it would have been an even stronger story if Tolkien had left him dead.
** [[George R. R. Martin]], interview on [http://www.maximumfun.org/sound-young-america/george-r-r-martin-author-song-ice-and-fire-series-interview-sound-young-america#transcript The Sound of Young America], September 2011.

* There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year-old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and [[Atlas Shrugged]]. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.
** [[John Rogers]], in one of his "Ephemera" [http://kfmonkey.blogspot.com/2009/03/ephemera-2009-7.html posts], quoted in "[http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/23/im-ellsworth-toohey/ I'm Ellsworth Toohey!]" by [[Paul Krugman]].

* One is puzzled to know why the author should have supposed he was writing for adults. There are, to be sure, some details that are a little unpleasant for a children's book, but except when he is being pedantic and also boring the adult reader, there is little in ''The Lord of the Rings'' over the head of a seven-year-old child.
** [[Edmund Wilson]], [http://www.jrrvf.com/sda/critiques/The_Nation.html Oo, THOSE AWFUL ORCS!], ''The Nation'', April 14, 1956.

* At the end of this long romance, I had still no conception of the wizard Gandalph, who is a cardinal figure, had never been able to visualize him at all. For the most part such characterizations as Dr. Tolkien is able to contrive are perfectly stereotyped: Frodo the good little Englishman, Samwise, his dog-like servant, who talks lower-class and respectful, and never deserts his master. These characters who are no characters are involved in interminable adventures the poverty of invention displayed in which is, it seems to me, almost pathetic.
** [[Edmund Wilson]], "Oo, THOSE AWFUL ORCS!", ''The Nation'', April 14, 1956.

* Once Sauron's realm is invaded, we think we are going to meet him; but he still remains nothing but a burning eye scrutinizing all that occurs from the window of a remote dark tower. This might, of course, be made effective; but actually it is not; we never feel Sauron's power. And the climax, to which we have been working up through exactly nine hundred and ninety-nine large close-printed pages, when it comes, proves extremely flat. The ring is at last got rid of by being dropped into a fiery crater, and the kingdom of Sauron « topples » in a brief and banal earthquake that sets fire to everything and burns it up, and so releases the author from the necessity of telling the reader what exactly was so terrible there.
** [[Edmund Wilson]], "Oo, THOSE AWFUL ORCS!", ''The Nation'', April 14, 1956.

=== Not fully sourced ===

All the following are from the 'blurb' on the back dust wrapper of the hardback copy of the 1966 Second Edition of The Fellowship of the Rings...

* The English-speaking world is divided into those who have read ''The Hobbit'' and ''The Lord of the Rings'' and those who are going to read them.
** ''The Sunday Times''

* Among the greatest works of imaginative fiction of the mid-20th century.
** ''The Sunday Telegraph''

==Related Works==

* ''[[The Hobbit]]''
* ''[[The Silmarillion]]''

==References==

<references/>

== External links ==

* [http://www.tolkien.co.uk/frame.asp HarperCollins: UK & Worldwide Publishers]
* [http://www.houghtonmifflinbooks.com/features/lordoftheringstrilogy Houghton Mifflin: US Publisher]
* [http://www.lordoftherings.net Official Site of the Movie Trilogy]
* [http://www.theonering.com/quotes/index.sd?catid=6&headTitle=Lord%20of%20the%20Rings Hundreds of Lord of the Rings Quotes at The One Ring: Tolkien Online ]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Lord of the Rings, The}}
[[Category:Fantasy books]]
[[Category:J. R. R. Tolkien]]

[[de:Der Herr der Ringe]]
[[et:Sõrmuste isand]]
[[es:El señor de los anillos]]
[[eo:La Mastro de l' Ringoj]]
[[fr:Le Seigneur des anneaux]]
[[he:שר הטבעות]]
[[hr:Gospodar prstenova]]
[[it:Il Signore degli Anelli]]
[[pl:Władca Pierścieni]]
[[pt:Senhor dos Anéis, O]]
[[sk:Pán prsteňov]]
[[sl:Gospodar prstanov]]
[[tr:Yüzüklerin Efendisi (film)]]
[[zh:魔戒]]

The Hobbit

2013-10-29T04:35:34Z

EVula: reverting vandalism

{{for|the 2012 movie|The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey}}
[[File:Blender3D Dragonfight 03.jpg|244px|thumb|right|"Never laugh at live dragons, Bilbo you fool!" he said to himself, and it became a favorite saying of his later, and passed into a proverb.]]
'''''[[w:The Hobbit|The Hobbit, or There and Back Again]]''''' (1937) is a [[w:high fantasy|high fantasy]] novel by [[J. R. R. Tolkien]].

==Chapter I: An Unexpected Party==

* '''In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit. Not a nasty, dirty, wet hole, filled with the ends of worms and an oozy smell, nor yet a dry, bare, sandy hole with nothing in it to sit down on or to eat: it was a hobbit-hole, and that means comfort.'''

* "Good morning!" said Bilbo, and he meant it. The sun was shining, and the grass was very green. But Gandalf looked at him from under long bushy eyebrows that stuck out farther than the brim of his shady hat.
:"What do you mean?" he said. "Do you wish me a good morning, or mean that it is a good morning whether I want it or not; or that you feel good this morning; or that it is a morning to be good on?"
:"All of them at once," said Bilbo.

* "I am looking for someone to share in an adventure that I am arranging, and it's very difficult to find anyone."
:"I should think so — in these parts! We are plain quiet folk and have no use for adventures. Nasty disturbing uncomfortable things! Make you late for dinner!"

* ''Far over the misty mountains cold To dungeons deep and caverns old We must away ere break of day To seek the pale enchanted gold.''

* As they sang the hobbit felt the love of beautiful things made by hands and by cunning and by magic moving through him, a fierce and a jealous love, the desire of the hearts of dwarves.

* The stars were out in a dark sky above the trees. He thought of the jewels of the dwarves shining in dark caverns. Suddenly in the wood beyond The Water a flame leapt up - probably somebody lighting a wood-fire - and he thought of plundering dragons settling on his quiet Hill and kindling it all to flames. He shuddered; and very quickly he was plain Mr Baggins of Bag-End, Under-Hill, again.

* "I should like to know about risks, out-of-pocket expenses, time required and remuneration, and so forth" - by which he meant: "What am I going to get out of it? and am I going to come back alive?"

* Old Took's great-grand-uncle Bullroarer...was so huge (for a hobbit) that he could ride a horse. He charged the ranks of the goblins of Mount Gram in the Battle of The Green Fields, and knocked their king Golfimbul's head clean off with a wooden club. It sailed a hundred yards through the air and went down a rabbit hole, and in this way the battle was won and the game of Golf invented at the same moment.

==Chapter II: Roast Mutton==

*"Trolls are slow in the uptake, and mighty suspicious about anything new to them."
*"Mutton today, Mutton Yesterday, and blimey if it don't look like mutton tomorrer!"
*"Who shall we sit on first?" said the voice."

==Chapter V: Riddles in the Dark==

* He guessed as well as he could, and crawled along for a good way, till suddenly his hand met what felt like a tiny ring of cold metal lying on the floor of the tunnel. It was a turning point in his career, but he did not know it. He put the ring in his pocket almost without thinking; certainly it did not seem of any particular use at the moment.

* ''What has roots as nobody sees, Is taller than trees, Up, up it goes, And yet never grows?
** One of Gollum's riddles for Bilbo. The answer is "mountain".

* ''Thirty white horses on a red hill,'' ''First they champ,'' ''Then they stamp,'' ''Then they stand still.''
** One of Bilbo's riddles for Gollum. The answer is "teeth".

* ''Voiceless it cries, Wingless flutters, toothless bites, Mouthless mutters.''
** One of Gollum's riddles for Bilbo. The answer is "wind".

* An eye in a blue face Saw an eye in a green face. "That eye is like to this eye" Said the first eye, "but in low place Not in high place."
** One of Bilbo's riddles for Gollum. The answer is "sun on the daisies".

* It cannot be seen, cannot be felt, Cannot be heard, cannot be smelt. It lies behind stars and under hills, And empty holes it fills. It comes first and follows after, Ends life, kills laughter.
** One of Gollum's riddles for Bilbo. The answer is "dark".

* ''A box without hinges, key, or lid, yet golden treasure inside is hid.''
** One of Bilbo's riddles for Gollum. The answer is "egg".

* ''Alive without breath, As cold as death; Never thirsty, ever drinking, All in mail never clinking.''
** One of Gollum's riddles for Bilbo. The answer is "fish".

* No-legs lay on one-leg, Two-legs sat near on three-legs, Four-legs got some.
** One of Bilbo's riddles for Gollum. The answer is "fish on a little table, man at table sitting on a stool, the cat has the bones".

* ''This thing all things devours:'' ''Birds, beasts, trees, flowers;'' ''Gnaws iron, bites steel;'' ''Grinds hard stones to meal;'' ''Slays king, ruins town,'' ''And beats high mountain down.''
** One of Gollum's riddles for Bilbo. The answer is "time".
* Bilbo pinched himself and slapped himself; he gripped on his little sword; he even felt in his pocket with his other hand. There he found the ring he had picked up in the passage and forgotten about.
:"What have I got in my pocket?" he said aloud.

* “Where iss it? Where iss it?” Bilbo heard him crying. “Losst it is, my precious, lost, lost! Curse us and crush us, my precious is lost!”

* '''"Thief, thief, thief! Baggins! We hates it, we hates it, we hates it forever!"'''

==Chapter XII: Inside Information==

* There it is: dwarves are not heroes, but calculating folk with a great idea of the value of money; some are tricky and treacherous and pretty bad lots; some are not, but are decent enough people like Thorin and Company, if you don’t expect too much.

* '''It does not do to leave a live dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him.''' Dragons may not have much real use for all their wealth, but they know it to an ounce as a rule, especially after long possession; and Smaug was no exception.

* To say that Bilbo's breath was taken away is no description at all. There are no words left to express his staggerment, since Men changed the language that they learned of elves in the days when all the world was wonderful.

* 'I come from under the hill, and under the hills and over the hills my paths led. And through the air. I am he that walks unseen. I am the clue-finder, the web-cutter, the stinging fly. I was chosen for the lucky number. I am he that buries his friends alive and drowns them and draws them alive again from the water. I came from the end of bag, but no bag went over me. I am the friend of bears and the guest of eagles. I am Ring-winner and Luckwearer; and I am Barrel-rider.'

* This of course is the way to talk to dragons, if you don't want to reveal your proper name (which is wise), and don't want to infuriate them with a flat refusal (which is also very wise). No dragon can resist the fascination of riddling talk and of wasting time trying to understand it.

* '''"My armor is like tenfold shields, my teeth are swords, my claws spears, the shock of my tail a thunderbolt, my wings a hurricane, and my breath death!"'''

* '''"Never laugh at live dragons, Bilbo you fool!" he said to himself, and it became a favorite saying of his later, and passed into a proverb.'''

==Chapter XIII: Not at Home==

* The mere fleeting glimpses of treasure which they had caught as they went along had rekindled all the fire of their dwarvish hearts; and when the heart of a dwarf, even the most respectable, is wakened by gold and by jewels, he grows suddenly bold, and he may become fierce.

==Chapter XV: The Gathering of the Clouds==

* ''The king is come unto his hall Under the Mountain dark and tall. The Wyrm of Dread is slain and dead, And ever so our foes shall fall!''

==Chapter XVII: The Clouds Burst==
* "The Eagles!" cried Bilbo once more, but at that moment a stone hurtling from above smote heavily on his helm, and he fell with a crash and knew no more.

==Chapter XVIII: The Return Journey==

* Victory after all, I suppose! Well, it seems a very gloomy business. page 288

* "Farewell, good thief," he said. "I go now to the halls of waiting to sit beside my fathers, until the world is renewed. Since I leave now all gold and silver, and go where it is of little worth, I wish to part in friendship from you, and I would take back my words and deeds at the Gate." page 290

* There is more in you of good than you know, child of the kindly West. Some courage and some wisdom, blended in measure. '''If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world.''' But sad or merry, I must leave it now. Farewell! page 290

==Chapter XIX: The Last Stage==

* As all things come to an end, even this story, a day came at last when they were in sight of the country where Bilbo had been born and bred, where the shapes of the land and of the trees were as well known to him as his hands and toes.

* ''Eyes that fire and sword have seen And horror in the walls of stone Look at last on meadows green And trees and hills they have long known.''

* He took to writing poetry and visiting the elves; and though many shook their heads and touched their foreheads and said "Poor old Baggins!" and though few believed any of his tales, he remained very happy to the end of his days, and those were extraordinarily long.

* "And why not? Surely you don't disbelieve the prophecies just because you helped them come about. You don't really suppose do you that all your adventures and escapes were managed by mere luck? Just for your sole benefit? You're a very fine person, Mr. Baggins, and I'm quite fond of you. But you are really just a little fellow, in a wide world after all."
:"Thank goodness!"

== Quotes about ''The Hobbit'' ==

* I am personally immensely amused by hobbits as such, and can contemplate them eating and making their rather fatuous remarks indefinitely; but I find that is not the case with even my most devoted ‘fans’.
** [[J. R. R. Tolkien]], From a letter to C. A. Furth of Allen and Unwin, 24th July 1938, he commenting here upon the likelihood of a sequel to ''The Hobbit''. ''The Letters of J. R. R. Tolkien'', Edited by Humphrey Carpenter, Allan and Unwin (1981), p. 38

* Seventeen years ago there appeared, without any fanfare, a book called ''The Hobbit'' which in my opinion, is one of the best children's stories of this century.
** [[W. H. Auden]] in ''The New York Times Book Review''

== Related works ==
* ''[[The Lord of the Rings]]''

==External links==
{{wikipedia}}
*[http://www.tolkien.co.uk/ The official Tolkien website.]
*[http://www.hobbit.ca/Library.html collection of edition covers, 1937–2005]
*[http://www.tolkienbooks.net/html/the_hobbit.htm Every UK edition of The Hobbit]
*[http://www.tolkienlibrary.com/reviews/dutch-de_hobbit.htm Every Dutch edition of The Hobbit]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Hobbit, The}}
[[Category:Fantasy books]]
[[Category:J. R. R. Tolkien]]

[[es:El hobbit]]
[[fr:Bilbo le Hobbit]]
[[hr:Hobit (roman)]]
[[pl:Hobbit, czyli tam i z powrotem]]
[[ru:Хоббит, или Туда и обратно]]
[[sk:Hobit]]

Follow the Rabbit-Proof Fence

2013-10-29T04:35:01Z

EVula: Reverted edit by 153.107.33.154 (talk • contributions) to last version by Glaisher

'''''[[w:Follow The Rabbit Proof Fence|Follow The Rabbit Proof Fence]]''''' is a novel by [[w:Doris Pilkington Garimara|Doris Pilkington Garimara]]. It concerns the author's mother, and two other young mixed-race Aboriginal girls, who ran away from a Western Australian settlement at Moore River. It was made into a film in 2002, entitled ''[[w:Rabbit-Proof Fence (film)|Rabbit-Proof Fence]]''.

== Chapter 5- Jigalong, 1907-1931 ==

* As she grew older, Molly often wished that she didn’t have light skin.
** Pg. 38

* The common belief of the time was that half castes were smarter than full blood blacks.
** Pg.40

* Wherever they went, the trio stood out from the main community.
** Pg. 41

== Chapter 6- The Journey South ==

* All they knew was that they were going to the settlement to go to school. Rain clouds were gathering and by the time they reached the bend where large grey boulders loomed along either side of the road, the sky was black with rain clouds.
** Pg. 50

* George told them about the many the races of people in the world.
** Pg. 53

* If you go to the school you don’t see your family for years and years.
** Pg. 60

== Chapter 7-The Moore River Native Settlement, 1931 ==

* They lay feeling cold and lonely, listening to the sound of rain bouncing off the tin roof.
** Pg. 64

* "I don’t feel like climbing the hill," said Martha. "But if you go I guess I’ll go too."
** Pg. 69

* It was more like a concentration camp, then a residential school for aboriginal children.
** Pg. 72

* "We all know it’s awful," said Martha. "But we all got over it."
** Pg. 73

* "We’d better hurry, it’s going to rain again." They stood briefly on the verandah to watch the thunder clouds rumbling in the west. There was a flash of lightning, followed by another. "Quick, run," urged Martha. "It’s going to rain."
** Pg. 74

== Chapter 8-The Escape ==

* Gracie and Daisy joined her but they didn’t care for they gray, dismal day and said so in no uncertain terms.
** Pg. 75

* Bossing and bullying was everywhere around them and there were cries and squeals.
** Pg. 76

* We’ll find Rabbit Proof Fence, and follow it all the way home. We’re gonna walk all the way.
** Pg. 78

* A marbu, a sharp toothed, flesh-eating evil spirit that has been around since dream-time. The old people always had told children to be careful and to watch out for them and now the three girls had finally seen one.
** Pg. 85

* Molly lay, listening to the rain steadily falling on the sand outside.
** Pg 87

* The weather remained unchanged. The skies were grey and a cold wind was blowing across the bush-land. It looked like more rain was coming their way.
** Pg. 89

* Their big sister had proved herself to be a worthy leader. Her self control and courage, had never faltered throughout the trek.
** Pg 96

* It was only then when they realized that the sun and the blue sky had disappeared. There was nothing but dark rain clouds.
** Pg. 97

* Drizzling and darkness forced them to find a good place to set up camp for the night.
** Pg. 101

* There was no rain, only rain drops.
** Pg. 101

* Molly realized that they still had a long way to go through an unknown part of the country.
** Pg. 104

* They evaded capture by practicing survival tricks passed down from their nomadic ancestors.
** Pg. 106

* But their festering sores were still aching and they could find no relief.
** Pg. 108

* For the three runaways, the fence was a symbol of love, home, and security.
** Pg. 109

* Their need and desire for food overcame fear and caution.
** Pg 111

* Molly and Daisy lingered for as long as they dared before they accepted Gracie’s parting.
** Pg. 116

* They were in their own land now, they knew exactly where they were heading.
** Pg. 118

* These two girls had overcome their fears and proved that they could survive. It took a strong will and a purpose - they had both.
** Pg 119-120

* The trek had been no easy feat. It had taken months to complete and nothing or nobody could take this moment of happiness and satisfaction from them.
** Pg 123

== External links ==
{{wikipedia}}

[[Category:Novels]]

Rabbit-Proof Fence (film)

2013-10-29T04:34:48Z

EVula: Reverted edit by 153.107.33.154 (talk • contributions) to last version by Kalki

'''''[[w:Rabbit-Proof Fence (film)|Rabbit-Proof Fence]]''''' is a [[w:2002|2002]] [[w:Australia|Australian]] [[w:drama film|drama film]] based on the book ''[[Follow The Rabbit Proof Fence]]'' by [[w:Doris Pilkington Garimara|Doris Pilkington Garimara]]. It concerns three [[w:mixed-race|mixed-race]] [[w:Australian Aborigine|Aboriginal]] girls, who run away from the [[w:Moore River Native Settlement|Moore River Native Settlement]], north of [[w:Perth, Western Australia|Perth]], in which they were placed in 1931, in order to return to their Aboriginal families. The film follows the girls as they trek for nine weeks along 1,500 miles (2414km) of the Australian [[w:rabbit-proof fence|rabbit-proof fence]] to return to their community at [[w:Jigalong|Jigalong]] while being tracked by a white authority figure and a black tracker.
:''Directed by [[w:Phillip Noyce|Phillip Noyce]]. Written by [[Doris Pilkington]] (book) and [[w:Christine Olsen|Christine Olsen]].''
<center>'''Follow Your Heart, Follow The Fence''' ([[#Taglines|taglines]])</center>

==Molly Craig==
*This is a true story - story of my sister Daisy, my cousin Gracie and me when we were little. Our people, the Jigalong mob, we were desert people then, walking all over our land. My mum told me about how the white people came to our country. They made a storehouse here at Jigalong - brought clothes and other things - flour, tobacco, tea. Gave them to us on ration day. We came there, made a camp nearby. They were building a long fence.

==Moodoo==
*The tracker is named Moodoo; he has one daughter at the Moore River camp with him, and he led Constable Riggs the other tracker in the search for Molly, her sister, Daisie, and cousin, Gracie, when they escaped.

==[[w:A.O. Neville|A.O. Neville "Mr Devil"]]==
*If only they would understand what we are trying to do for them.
*I'm authorising their removal.
*The continuing infiltration of white blood finally stamps out the black color.
be right back
*i loved the way they lightened up my day
*i want to persue them with happiness

==Constable Riggs==
*It's the law, Maude. Got no say in it.

==Miss Jessop==
*This is your new home. We don't use that jabber here. You speak English.(In response to Gracie conversing in her native language.)

==Taglines==
*If you were kidnapped by the government, would you walk the 1500 miles back home?
*When the government kidnaps your children, you don't expect to see them again.
*If the government tore you away from your family, would you walk the 1500 miles back home?
*1500 Miles Is A Long Way Home
*Follow Your Heart, Follow The Fence
*The True Story of a Family That Defied a Nation.
*A daring escape. An epic journey. The true story of 3 girls who walked 1500 miles to find their way home.
*Based on a True Story
*What if the government kidnapped your daughter?

==Cast==
* [[w:Everlyn Sampi|Everlyn Sampi]] as Molly Craig
* [[w:Tianna Sansbury|Tianna Sansbury]] as Daisy Craig
* [[w:Laura Monaghan|Laura Monaghan]] as Gracie Fields
* [[w:Kenneth Branagh|Kenneth Branagh]] as A. O. Neville
* [[w:David Gulpilil|David Gulpilil]] as Moodoo

==See also==
*''[[Follow the Rabbit Proof Fence]]''

== External links ==
{{wikipedia}}
* [http://www.landmarktheatres.com/Stories/rabbit_frame.html Phillip Noyce's Shooting Diary]
* {{imdb title|id=0252444|title=Rabbit-Proof Fence}}
* [http://www.iofilm.co.uk/feats/interviews/r/rabbit_proof_fence_2002.shtml Phil Noyce Interview]
* [http://www.sensesofcinema.com/contents/01/19/rabbit.html Villella, Fiona A. (2002) "Long road home: Phillip Noyce's ''Rabbit-Proof Fence''" in ''Senses of Cinema'' March 2002]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Rabbit-Proof Fence}}
[[Category:2002 films]]
[[Category:Australian films]]
[[Category:Drama films]]
[[Category:Films based on non-fiction books]]

Tony Abbott

2013-10-29T04:34:39Z

EVula: Reverted edit by 153.107.33.154 (talk • contributions) to last version by Kalki

[[File:Tony Abbott - 2010.jpg|thumb|Victory is within our ready grasp...We are in reach of a famous victory]]

'''[[w:Tony Abbott|Tony Abbott]]''' (born [[4 November]] [[1957]]) is the current [[List of Australian Prime Ministers|Prime Minister]] in the [[Australian House of Representatives]] and federal leader of the [[center-right]] [[Liberal Party of Australia]].
{{people-cleanup}}

== Quotes ==
*“What the housewives of Australia need to understand as they do the ironing is that if they get it done commercially it’s going to go up in price and their own power bills when they switch the iron on are going to go up.”
Sydney Morning Herald (February 9, 2010) http://www.smh.com.au/national/abbott-accused-of-being-incredibly-oldfashioned-as-he-lets-off-steam-20100209-nnqr.html

* There may not be a great job for [aboriginal people] but whatever there is, they just have to do it... And if it's picking up rubbish around the community, it just has to be done."
** Quoted in [http://www.news.com.au/features/federal-election/aboriginal-people-must-get-jobs-says-opposition-leader-tony-abbott/story-fn5tas5k-1225886350430 "Aboriginal people must get jobs, says Opposition leader Tony Abbott" in the ''Australian'' (30 June 2010)]

*I think it would be folly to expect that women will ever dominate or even approach equal representation in a large number of areas simply because their aptitudes, abilities and interests are different for physiological reasons
** Quoted in [http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2010/s2846485.htm "FOUR CORNERS" on ''abc.net.au'' (15/03/2010)]

*""No one, however smart, however well educated, however experienced, is the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suppository suppository] of all wisdom."
** Liberal Party Campaign launch, 12/08/2013
Read more: <http://www.news.com.au/national-news/federal-election/tony-abbott-declares-8216no-one-can-be-a-suppository-of-all-wisdom8217/story-fnho52ip-1226695541167#ixzz2dV4byg55>

* I won't be rushing out to get my daughters vaccinated [for cervical cancer], maybe that's because I'm a cruel, callow, callous, heartless bastard but, look, I won't be
** Quoted in [http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/i-could-be-seen-as-cruel-on-gardasil-abbott/story-e6frg6nf-1111112494271 "I could be seen as 'cruel' on Gardasil: Abbott" in the ''Australian'' (09 November 2006)]

* "The argument [behind climate change] is absolute crap. However, the politics of this are tough for us. Eighty per cent of people believe climate change is a real and present danger."
** Quoted in [http://www.theaustralian.com.au/politics/the-town-that-turned-up-the-temperature/story-e6frgczf-1225809567009 "Town of Beaufort changed Tony Abbott's view on climate change" in the ''Australian'' (12 December 2009)]

* If we’re honest, most of us would accept that a bad boss is a little bit like a bad father or a bad husband … you find that he tends to do more good than harm. He might be a bad boss but at least he’s employing someone while he is in fact a boss.
** Quoted in [http://www.abc.net.au/am/stories/s596135.htm "Tony Abbott under fire" on ''abc.net.au'' (Tuesday, 2 July , 2002)]

*"The media is not an arm of government, and no government should ever try to make it so."
** To Parliament 18/3/2013

* Jesus knew that there was a place for everything and it’s not necessarily everyone’s place to come to Australia.
** Panel discussion [http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s2859473.htm "Tony Abbott on Q and A" on ''abc.net.au'' (Monday 5 April, 2010) ]

* The problem with the Australian practice of abortion is that an objectively grave matter has been reduced to a question of the mother’s convenience.
** Quoted in [http://www.tonyabbott.com.au/LatestNews/ArticleswrittenbyTony/tabid/87/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/3653/RATE-OF-ABORTION-HIGHLIGHTS-OUR-MORAL-FAILINGS.aspx] "RATE OF ABORTION HIGHLIGHTS OUR MORAL FAILINGS" on ''tonyabbott.com.au'' (Wednesday, 17 March 2004)]

* I think there does need to be give and take on both sides, and this idea that sex is kind of a woman’s right to absolutely withhold, just as the idea that sex is a man’s right to demand I think they are both they both need to be moderated, so to speak.
** Panel discussion [http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s2514401.htm "Religion, Sex and Politics" on ''abc.com.au'' (19 March 2009)]

* I know politicians are going to be judged on everything they say but sometimes in the heat of discussion you go a little bit further than you would if it was an absolutely calm, considered, prepared, scripted remark. The statements that need to be taken absolutely as gospel truth are those carefully prepared scripted remarks.
** Quoted in [http://www.news.com.au/national/dont-believe-everything-i-say-tony-abbott/story-e6frfkvr-1225867979082 "Don't believe everything I say - Tony Abbott" on ''news.com.au'' (18 May 2010)]

* We can’t conclusively say whether man-made carbon dioxide emissions are contributing to climate change
** Quoted in [http://www.abbottfacts.com.au/sites/default/files/Speech%20-%2027%20July%202009.pdf in the speech "A Realist’s Approach to Climate Change" (27 July 2009)]

* I am, as you know, hugely unconvinced by the so-called settled science on climate change.
** Quoted in [http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2009/s2638036.htm quoted on the "ABC 7.30 Report" (27 July 2009)]

* It seems that, notwithstanding the dramatic increases in manmade CO2 emissions over the last decade, the world's warming has stopped.
** Quoted in [http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/australias-second-warmest-year-ever-according-to-bureau-of-meteorology-figures/story-e6frf7jo-1225816322149 "2009 Australia's second warmest year ever, according to Bureau of Meteorology figures" in the ''Herald Sun'' (5 January 2010)]

* There is much to be said for an emissions trading scheme. It was, after all, the mechanism for emission reduction ultimately chosen by the Howard government.
** Quoted in [http://www.abbottfacts.com.au/sites/default/files/Speech%20-%2027%20July%202009.pdf in the speech "A Realist’s Approach to Climate Change" (27 July 2009)]

* Abortion is the easy way out. It’s hardly surprising that people should choose the most convenient exit from awkward situations.
** Quoted in [http://www.tonyabbott.com.au/LatestNews/ArticleswrittenbyTony/tabid/87/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/3653/RATE-OF-ABORTION-HIGHLIGHTS-OUR-MORAL-FAILINGS.aspx "Rate of abortion high-lights our moral failings" on ''www.tonyabbott.com.au'' (17 March 2004)]

* I think I would say to my daughters if they were to ask me this question... it [their virginity] is the greatest gift that you can give someone, the ultimate gift of giving and don't give it to someone lightly, that's what I would say.
** Quoted in [http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/the-monk-might-make-sense-20100127-mz0v.html#ixzz249o58Ykh "The Monk might make sense" (28 Jan 2010)]

* While I think men and women are equal, they are also different and I think it's inevitable and I don't think it's a bad thing at all that we always have, say, more women doing things like physiotherapy and an enormous number of women simply doing housework
** Quoted in [http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/rudd-hands-pm-a-crucial-lifeline/story-e6frfhqf-1225902277655 "Rudd hands PM a crucial lifeline" by : Laurie Oakes in the ''Herald Sun'' (06 August 2010)]

* The poor will always be with us
** Quoted in [http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/opinion/bible-bashing-the-homeless-abbott-style-20100215-o2tj.html?comments=105 "Bible bashing the homeless, Abbott style " in response to whether a government under his direction would continue with the Rudd government's goal of halving homelessness by 2020 in the ''Brisbane Times'' (30 June 2010)]

* Victory is within our ready grasp...We are in reach of a famous victory
** [http://www.theage.com.au/national/abbotts-famous-victory-remark--was-it-gospel-or-not-20100623-ywq0.html "Abbott's 'famous victory' remark ... was it gospel or not?" in ''The Age''(23 June 2010)]

* When you are challenging the young, they can come back at you with language of tremendous power and they are no respecters of sacred cows, you know, the young. There's nothing politically correct about the average young Australian when it comes to use of language.
** [http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25992545-421,00.html "Abbott OK being a 'lame, gay, churchy loser'" in ''news.com.au from all angles'' (28 August 2009)]

* There are essentially two types of conservative: those who fear change and instinctively resist it, and those who respect the society that's made them and want the future to reflect the best aspects of the past.
** ''Battlelines'' (2009)

* WorkChoices is dead, it's buried, it's cremated.
** [http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2010/s2958284.htm Quoted in 7:30 Report]

* I want to make it clear that I do not judge or condemn any woman who has had an abortion, but every abortion is a tragedy and up to 100,000 abortions a year is this generation's legacy of unutterable shame.
** Abbott to parliament in 2005{{fix cite}}

==External links==
{{wikipedia}}
{{commons category}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Abbott, Tony}}
[[Category:Australians]]
[[Category:Political leaders]]
[[Category:Living people]]

Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Hell's Kitchen

2013-10-25T03:19:53Z

EVula: Keep, but...

{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Wikiquote| |{{error:not substituted|vfd-new2}}<div style="display:none;">}}
== [[:Hell's Kitchen]] ==

No quotes on the page. --[[User:King jakob c 2|Jakob]] ([[User talk:King jakob c 2|Scream about]] [[Special:Contributions/King jakob c 2|the things I've broken]]) 01:06, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
*'''Vote closes''': 01:06, 02 November 2013 (UTC)
* '''Keep''' - I don't see any reason to delete. It's basically a disambiguation page pointing to all of the subpages with quotes organized by season. We don't delete disambiguation pages because they have no quotes… [[User:Nick1372|Nick1372]] ([[User talk:Nick1372|talk]]) 02:15, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
*'''Keep, but...''' There's some weirdness here. [[Hell's Kitchen]], as it stands right now, is just a glorified disambiguation page for the individual season articles (like [[Hell's Kitchen/Season 1]]). That in and of itself isn't a bad thing, though all the cast information from the page needs to be removed. ''However'', [[Hell's Kitchen (uncensored)]] needs to be deleted or merged into the subpages of [[Hell's Kitchen]]; there's absolutely no reason to distinguish between "uncensored" and "good clean" versions of quotes, and it's redundant to have two sets of quotes on here. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 03:19, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

George W. Bush

2013-10-25T03:14:42Z

EVula: Reverted edit by 50.14.235.104 (talk • contributions) to last version by Miszatomic

{{refimprove}}
[[Image:George-W-Bush.jpeg|244px|thumb|right|Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.]]
'''[[w:George W. Bush|George Walker Bush]]''' (born [[July 6]] [[1946]]) was the 43rd [[w:President of the United States|President of the United States]], serving from 2001 to 2009. He is a son of [[George H. W. Bush]], the husband of [[Laura Welch Bush]], and a grandson of [[w:Prescott Bush|Prescott Bush]].

== Quotes ==
=== 1980s - 1990s ===

* You know, I could run for governor and all this but I’m basically a media creation. I’ve never really done anything. I’ve worked for my dad. I worked in the oil industry. But that’s not the kind of profile you have to have to get elected to public office.
** In an interview with the ''Midland Reporter Telegram'' on July 4, 1989, quoted in ''Bush’s Brain: How Karl Rove Made George W. Bush Presidential'' (John Wiley and Sons, 2003) by James Moore and Wayne Slater, p. 161.

* You don't get everything you want. A dictatorship would be a lot easier.
** Responding to the difficulties of governing Texas, [http://www.governing.com/archive/1998/jul/bush.txt "The Taming of Texas," ''Governing Magazine'' (July 1998)]; also cited in ''Is our Children Learning?: The Case Against George W. Bush'' (2000) by Paul Begala.)

* I've heard the call. I believe God wants me to run for President.
** As recalled by minister James Robison in a telephone conversation with Bush, and first reported in the book ''The Faith of George W. Bush'' (2004) by Stephen Mansfield.

* I'm a uniter, not a divider.
** Interview with [[w:David Horowitz|David Horowitz]] for [[w:Salon.com|Salon]] magazine ([[May 6]], [[1999]]) [http://www.salon.com/news/feature/1999/05/06/bush/print.html]

* '''There ought to be limits to freedom.''' We're aware of the site, and this guy is just a garbage man, that's all he is. Of course I don't appreciate it. And you wouldn't, either.
** News conference ({{#formatdate:1999-05-21}}); also quoted in "[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPcap/1999-11/29/002r-112999-idx.html Satirical Web Site Poses Political Test]", ''The Washington Post'' ({{#formatdate:1999-11-29}})
** regarding the anti-Bush website GWBush.com

* I watched [[w:Larry King|his]] interview with [[w:Karla Faye Tucker|her]], though. He asked her real difficult questions, like 'What would you say to Governor Bush?' 'What was her answer?' I wonder. 'Please,' Bush whimpers, his lips pursed in mock desperation, 'don't kill me.'
** From: "Devil May Care" by [[w:Tucker Carlson|Tucker Carlson]], Talk Magazine, September 1999, p. 106 (During the Larry King-Karla Faye Tucker exchange, Tucker never actually asked to be spared)

* My appointees to the [Texas] board of pardons and paroles reflect my no-nonsense approach to crime and punishment. They believe people who commit crimes against innocent Texans should pay the consequences; they believe sentences imposed by juries should be carried out.
** From: [http://www.issues2000.org/2004/George_W__Bush_Crime.htm "George W. Bush on Crime"], OnTheIssues, attributed to "A Charge to Keep", p.151-152. Dec 9, 1999.

==== A Period of Consequences ([[September 23]], [[1999]])====

[http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/program/news99/92399_defense.htm Speech at the Citadel, Military College of South Carolina]

* The protection of America itself will assume a high priority in a new century. Once a strategic afterthought, homeland defense has become an urgent duty. For most of our history, America felt safe behind two great oceans. But with the spread of technology, distance no longer means security.

* Let me be clear. Our first line of defense is a simple message: Every group or nation must know, if they sponsor such attacks, our response will be devastating.

* We will defend the American homeland by strengthening our intelligence community – focusing on human intelligence and the early detection of terrorist operations both here and abroad. And when direct threats to America are discovered, I know that the best defense can be a strong and swift offense – including the use of Special Operations Forces and long-range strike capabilities.

* I will put a high priority on detecting and responding to terrorism on our soil. The federal government must take this threat seriously – working closely with researchers and industry to increase surveillance and develop treatments for chemical and biological agents.

* Defending our nation is just the beginning of our challenge. My third goal is to take advantage of a tremendous opportunity – given few nations in history – to extend the current peace into the far realm of the future. A chance to project America’s peaceful influence, not just across the world, but across the years.

* Yet today our military is still organized more for Cold War threats than for the challenges of a new century -- for industrial age operations, rather than for [[information age]] battles. There is almost no relationship between our budget priorities and a strategic vision. The last seven years have been wasted in inertia and idle talk. Now we must shape the future with new concepts, new strategies, new resolve.

* In the late 1930s, as Britain refused to adapt to the new realities of war, [[Winston Churchill]] observed, "The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close. In its place we are entering a period of consequences."

* Our military and our nation are entering another period of consequences – a time of rapid change and momentous choices.

* Now comes our time of testing. Our measure is taken, not only by what we have and use, but what we build and leave behind. And nothing this generation could ever build will matter more than the means to defend our nation and extend our peace.

==== A Distinctly American Internationalism ([[November 19]], [[1999]])====
[http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/usa/1999/991119-bush-foreignpolicy.htm Speech at Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, Simi Valley, California]

* In the defense of our nation, a president must be a clear-eyed realist. There are limits to the smiles and scowls of diplomacy. Armies and missiles are not stopped by stiff notes of condemnation. They are held in check by strength and purpose and the promise of swift punishment.

* The most powerful force in the world is not a weapon or a nation but a truth: that we are spiritual beings, and that freedom is "the soul's right to breathe."

* American foreign policy must be more than the management of crisis. It must have a great and guiding goal: to turn this time of American influence into generations of democratic peace.

* Some have tried to pose a choice between American ideals and American interests — between who we are and how we act. But the choice is false. America, by decision and destiny, promotes political freedom — and gains the most when democracy advances. America believes in free markets and free trade — and benefits most when markets are opened. America is a peaceful power — and gains the greatest dividend from democratic stability. Precisely because we have no territorial objectives, our gains are not measured in the losses of others. They are counted in the conflicts we avert, the prosperity we share and the peace we extend.

* The case for trade is not just monetary, but moral. Economic freedom creates habits of liberty. And habits of liberty create expectations of democracy.

* We are no longer fighting a great enemy, we are asserting a great principle: that the talents and dreams of average people — their warm human hopes and loves — should be rewarded by freedom and protected by peace. We are defending the nobility of normal lives, lived in obedience to God and conscience, not to government.

* America has never been an empire. We may be the only great power in history that had the chance, and refused — preferring greatness to power and justice to glory.

===2000===
* If the terriers and barriffs {{sic}} are torn down, this economy will grow.
** Campaign speech, [[w:Rochester, New York|Rochester, NY]], ([[January 7]], [[2000]]) [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfRoesb33ic Video:]

* [R]arely is the question asked,... our... is our children learning?
** [http://articles.latimes.com/2000/jan/14/news/mn-53988/2 Campaign speech], [[w:Florence, South Carolina|Florence, South Carolina]], ([[January 11]], [[2000]]) [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ej7ZEnjSeA&feature=related Video:]

* If you're a single mother with two children—which is the toughest job in America, as far as I'm concerned—you're working hard to put food on your family.
** Speech to the Nashua Chamber of Commerce in New Hampshire (27 January 2000), quoted in ''Fort Worth Star-Telegram'' (28 January 2000) "Campaign 2000 Highlights From The Campaign Trail Yesterday" [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j76bLFbpuLQ#t=0m27s]

* This is Preservation Month. I appreciate preservation. It's what you do when you run for president. You've got to preserve.
** Speaking at observance of ''Perseverance Month'', Fairgrounds Elementary School, [[w:Nashua, New Hampshire|Nashua, NH]], [[January 27]], [[2000]] [http://articles.latimes.com/2000/jan/28/news/mn-58586]

* What we Republicans should stand for is growth in the economy. We ought to make the pie higher.
** [[w:South Carolina|South Carolina]] [[w:Republican Party (United States)|GOP]] primary debate, [[w:Columbia, South Caroline|Columbia, SC]], ([[February 15]], [[2000]]) [http://www.businessweek.com/archives/2000/b3670066.arc.htm]

* The state can do what they want to do. Don't try to trap me in this state's issue like you're trying to get me into.
** Governor Bush on gay marriage, ''[[w:Larry King Live|Larry King Live]]'' ([[February 15]], [[2000]])

* I care what 51 percent of the people think about me.
** On the Oprah Winfrey Show (20 September 2000)[http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0009/19/ip.00.html]

* We can do better in Washington D.C. We can have new leadership in Washington D.C., leadership that will lift this country's spirits and raise our sights. [[w:George P. Bush|George P.]] knows what thousands of other youngsters know, that just because the White House has let us down in the past, that doesn't mean it's going to happen in the future. George P. joins us in a campaign that's going to restore honor and dignity to the White House.
** [http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0009/23/se.02.html Interview] with CNN Anchor Kyra Phillips ([[September 23]], [[2000]])

* More and more of our imports come from overseas.
** Speech [[w:Beaverton, Oregon|Beaverton, Oregon]], ([[September 25]], [[2000]]) discussing US oil imports, most of which come from within the western hemisphere [http://www.metacafe.com/watch/174420/george_w_bush_slipups/]

* I will have a foreign-handed foreign policy.
** Campaign stop, [[w:Redwood, California|Redwood, California]], [[September 27]], [[2000]] [http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2000/nov/04/uselections2000.usa5]

* I know the human being and the fish can coexist peacefully.
** Speech in Saginaw, Michigan (29 September 2000),[http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-553138.html] referring to a widely reported dispute in the Klamath region of Oregon between farmers with irrigation rights and Native Americans with fishing rights.

* If we're an arrogant nation, they'll resent us; if we're a humble nation, but strong, they'll welcome us.
** Presidential debate, [[October 12]], [[2000]] [http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/july-dec00/for-policy_10-12.html]

* Families is where our nation finds hope, where wings take dream.
** Speech in [[w:La Crosse, Wisconsin|La Crosse, Wisconsin]], ([[October 18]], [[2000]]) [http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/26/opinion/in-america-at-last-the-issues.html]

* This is an impressive crowd — the haves and the have-mores. Some people call you the elites; I call you my base.
** Speech at the [[w:Al Smith|Al Smith]] Dinner for charity ([[October 20]], [[2000]]), as quoted in [http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2000/10/18/politics/main242210.shtml "Bush And Gore Do New York" (CBS)] ([[October 20]], [[2000]]); also in [[Michael Moore]]'s ''[[w:Fahrenheit 9/11|Fahrenheit 9/11]]''.

* This issue doesn't seem to resignate {{sic}} with the people.
** [[w:Portland, Oregon|Portland, Oregon]], ([[October 31]], [[2000]]) [http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/WolfFiles/story?id=90907&page=1]

* ...they want the federal government controlling Social Security, like it's some kind of federal program.
** Speaking of "some [people] in Washington", and in support of his campaign plan to allow workers to invest some portion of their [[w:Social Security|Social Security]] payroll taxes. Campaign stop, [[November 2]], [[2000]]. [http://www.nytimes.com/2000/11/04/us/the-2000-campaign-the-vice-president-attacks-grow-sharp-as-time-dwindles.html]

* They misunderestimated me.
** Explaining his unexpected victories over GOP rival [[w:John McCain|John McCain]] in the 2000 presidential primaries; [http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1870938_1870943_1870945,00.html stump speech in Bentonville, Arkansas, Nov. 6, 2000], given just prior to the [[w:United States presidential election, 2000|2000 election]].

* I told all four [congressional leaders] that I felt like this election happened for a reason; that it pointed out — the delay in the outcome should make it clear to all of us — that we can come together to heal whatever wounds may exist, whatever residuals there may be. And I really look forward to the opportunity. I hope they've got my sense of optimism about the possible, and enthusiasm about the job. I told all four that there are going to be some times where we don't agree with each other, but that's okay. If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier... ''[Bush laughs out loud, audience laughs out loud]'' ...just so long as I'm the dictator ''[more laughter].
**[http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/july-dec00/trans_12-18.htm ''Online NewsHour''] interview, Washington, DC, ([[December 18]], [[2000]])' during his first trip to Washington as President-elect. The last sentence is also included in ''Fahrenheit 9/11''.

===2001===

* My pro-life position is I believe there's life. It's not necessarily based in religion. I think there's a life there, therefore the notion of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.
** Quoted in the San Francisco Chronicle ([[January 23]], [[2001]])

* My plan reduces the national debt, and fast. So fast, in fact, that economists worry that we're going to run out of debt to retire.
** Presidential Radio Address (24 February 2001) [http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/02/24/national/main274334.shtml]

* [T]he facts are that thousands of small businesses - Hispanically {{sic}} owned or otherwise - pay taxes at the highest marginal rate.
** [http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=45784 Speech] to the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, ([[March 19]], [[2001]])

* [M]y administration is committed to a leadership role on the issue of climate change.
** [[June 11]], [[2001]]. [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/06/20010611-2.html "President Bush Discusses Global Climate Change"].

* It was amazing I won. I was running against peace and prosperity and incumbency.
** [[June 14]], [[2001]], to [[w:Göran Persson|Göran Persson]], unaware he was still on live TV, as quoted in [http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A00EEDE1531F935A25755C0A9679C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all "The President in Europe: The President; Plain-Talking Bush Is Using His Charm On European Stage" by Frank Bruni in ''The New York Times'' (16 June 2001)].

* I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy. We had a very good dialogue. I was able to get a sense of his soul; a man deeply committed to his country and the best interests of his country. And I appreciated so very much the frank dialogue.
** On Russian Federation President [[Vladimir Putin]], in a [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/06/20010618.html press conference with Putin] (16 June 2001)

* Dealing with Congress is a matter of give and take. The president doesn't get everything he wants, the Congress doesn't get everything they want. But we're finding good common ground. A dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier, there's no question about it.
** Statement, Washington, DC, ([[July 26]], [[2001]]); as quoted in the [http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/32902_bush27.shtml ''Seattle Seattle Post-Intelligencer'' ([[July 27]], [[2001]])].

{{original recording|George W Bush Oval Office Address 9 11 2001.ogg}}

* Those in authority should take appropriate precautions to protect our citizens. But we will not allow this enemy to win the war by changing our way of life or restricting our freedoms.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010912-4.html Remarks by the President In Photo Opportunity with the National Security Team], September 12, 2001

* I can hear you, the rest of the world hears you! And the people! And the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon!
** [http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0109/14/se.55.html Impromptu speech] given at Ground Zero at WTC site ([[September 14]], [[2001]])

* Reporter: Do you want [[Osama bin Laden|bin Laden]] dead? Bush: I want justice. And there's an old poster out West, I recall, that says, "Wanted: Dead or Alive."
** {{cite news
| url = http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0109/17/se.09.html
| title = America's New War: President Bush Talks with Reporters at Pentagon
| publisher = CNN.com
| date = 17 September 2001
| accessdate = 2007-01-24
}}

* When I take action, I’m not going to fire a $2 million missile at a $10 empty tent and hit a camel in the butt. It’s going to be decisive.
** Spoken at a [[September 13]], [[2001]] meeting with the four senators from New York and Virginia. Reported in "A President Finds His True Voice", ''Newsweek'' ([[September 24]], [[2001]])

* My administration has a job to do and we're going to do it. We will rid the world of the evil-doers.
** As quoted in "[http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/gen.bush.terrorism/ "Bush vows to rid the world of 'evil-doers" at ''CNN'' (16 September 2001)

* This crusade, this war on terrorism is going to take a while.
** Remarks on the south lawn of the White House ([[September 16]], [[2001]])[http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010916-2.html]

* Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated.
** Address to a Joint Session of Congress and the American People ([[September 20]], [[2001]]) [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010920-8.html]

* Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010920-8.html]
** [http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/20/gen.bush.transcript/ Address to a Joint Session of Congress and the American People, [[September 20]], [[2001]].]

*Our nation, this generation, will lift the dark threat of violence from our people and our future. We will rally the world to this cause by our efforts, by our courage. We will not tire, we will not falter and we will not fail.
** [http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/20/gen.bush.transcript/ Address to a Joint Session of Congress and the American People, [[September 20]], [[2001]].]

* [O]ne of the great goals of this nation's war is to restore public confidence in the airline industry. It's to tell the traveling public: Get on board. Do your business around the country. Fly and enjoy America's great destination spots. Get down to Disney World in Florida.
** Remarks at [[w:Chicago|Chicago]]'s [[w:O'Hare International Airport|O'Hare Airport]] ([[September 21]], [[2001]]) [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010927-1.html]

*Now, the American people have got to go about their business. We cannot let the terrorists achieve the objective of frightening our nation to the point where we don't conduct business, where people don't shop.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/10/20011011-7.html Press conference] ([[October 11]], [[2001]])

* Well, you know, I think the American people are sacrificing now. I think they're waiting in airport lines longer than they've ever had before.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/10/20011011-7.html Press conference], in response to reporter asking why he hasn't called for any sacrifices from the American people (in the war on terror), and whether he intends to do so. ([[October 11]], [[2001]])

* Lucky me, I hit the trifecta.
** In reference to his prior, oft-repeated promises to run a year-to-year budget surplus, except in the event of war, recession, or national emergency. Statement made to budget director Mitchell Daniels, mid-September; as quoted by him in [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/omb/pubpress/daniels_conference_board_speech10-16-01.html an address to the OMB Conference Board ([[October 16]], [[2001]])] repeated as a dubious joke through 2002: at Robin Hayes for Congress and Elizabeth Dole for Senate luncheon, Charlotte NC, February 27; [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/02/20020227-6.html] at Latham for Congress Luncheon, DesMoines IA, March 1;[http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020301-6.html] at Saxby Chambliss for Senate Dinner, Atlanta GA, March 27;[http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020327-10.html] at Graham for Senate Luncheon, Greenville SC, March 27;[http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020327-5.html] at Cornyn for Senate Luncheon, Dallas TX, March 29;[http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020328.html] at Fisher for Governor Reception, Philadelphia PA, April 3;[http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/04/20020403-1.html] at Leaders of the Fiscal Responsibility Coalition, Eisenhower Executive Office Bldg, April 16;[http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/04/20020416-8.html] at Heather Wilson for Congress Luncheon, Albuquerque NM, April 29;[http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/04/20020429-4.html] at Simon for Governor Luncheon, Santa Clara CA, May 1;[http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/05/20020501-2.html] at Taft for Governor Luncheon, Columbus OH, May 10;[http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/05/20020510-3.html] at 14th Annual World Pork Expo, DesMoines IA, June 7;[http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/06/20020607-4.html] at 21st Century High Tech Forum, Eisenhower Executive Office Bldg, June 13;[http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/06/20020613-11.html] at Texans for Rick Perry, Houston TX, June 14.[http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/06/20020614-8.html]
** Quoted by Paul Krugman in "Hitting the Trifecta," ''The New York Times'' [http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/07/opinion/07KRUG.html]

* You are either with us or you are against us in the fight against terror.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/11/20011106-4.html Press conference], with President [[Jacques Chirac]] of France. ([[November 6]], [[2001]])

* We must speak the truth about terror. Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th; malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists, themselves, away from the guilty. To inflame ethnic hatred is to advance the cause of terror.
** Remarks by the President to United Nations General Assembly ([[November 10]], [[2001]]) {{source}}

* I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower. The TV was obviously on. I used to fly myself and I said, "There's one terrible pilot."
** Quoted in Elisabeth Bumiller (2001-12-05) "A Nation Challenged: The President" ''New York Times''. Colloquial English allows Bush's remark to be interpreted as "I saw that an airplane had hit the tower."

<div id="not-blink">
* The world must know that this administration will not blink in the face of danger, and will not tire when it comes to completing the missions that we said we would do.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/12/20011228-1.html Press conference, Crawford, Texas ([[December 28]], [[2001]])]
</div>

* "We're going to get [Bin Laden] Dead or alive, it doesn't matter to me." 12/14/2001 [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1711874.stm] Bush's words elsewhere was that he is "determined" to capture Bin Laden dead or alive, and is confident about succeeding [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1711717.stm]

* But all in all, it's been a fabulous year for Laura and me.
**12/21/2001 White House release: [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/12/20011221-2.html President Highlights Administration's First-Year Accomplishments]

==== First inaugural address ([[January 20]], [[2001]]) ====
:[http://www.bartleby.com/124/pres66.html Inaugural address, Washington, D.C. (January 20, 2001)]

* The peaceful transfer of authority is rare in history, yet common in our country. With a simple oath, we affirm old traditions and make new beginnings.

* America has never been united by blood or birth or soil. We are bound by ideals that move us beyond our backgrounds, lift us above our interests and teach us what it means to be citizens.

* We are not this story's author, who fills time and eternity with His purpose. Yet His purpose is achieved in our duty, and our duty is fulfilled in service to one another. Never tiring, never yielding, never finishing, we renew that purpose today; to make our country more just and generous; to affirm the dignity of our lives and every life. This work continues. This story goes on. And an Angel still rides in the whirlwind and directs this storm.
** Bush concluded his address with these lines, paraphrasing a quotation by [[w:John Page (Virginia)|John Page]] he had used earlier within it: ''We know the race is not to the swift nor the battle to the strong. Do you not think an angel rides in the whirlwind and directs this storm?''. Page himself, in a letter to Thomas Jefferson ([[20 July]] [[1776]]), was quoting a phrase from ''Ecclesiastes'' 9:11: ''I returned, and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to the intelligent, nor yet favour to men of knowledge; but time and chance happeneth to them all.''

====Reaction to the September 11 attacks ([[11 September|September 11]], [[2001]])====

:[http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/11/bush.speech.text/ Reaction to the September 11, 2001 attacks condemning them (September 11, 2001)]

* Today, our fellow citizens, our way of life, our very freedom came under attack in a series of deliberate and deadly terrorist acts. The victims were in airplanes or in their offices -- secretaries, businessmen and women, military and federal workers. Moms and dads. Friends and neighbors. Thousands of lives were suddenly ended by evil, despicable acts of terror.

* The pictures of airplanes flying into buildings, fires burning, huge structures collapsing, have filled us with disbelief, terrible sadness and a quiet, unyielding anger. These acts of mass murder were intended to frighten our nation into chaos and retreat. But they have failed. Our country is strong. A great people has been moved to defend a great nation.

* Terrorist attacks can shake the foundations of our biggest buildings, but they cannot touch the foundation of America. These acts shatter steel, but they cannot dent the steel of American resolve.

* America was targeted for attack because we're the brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in the world. And no one will keep that light from shining.

* Today, our nation saw evil, the very worst of human nature, and we responded with the best of America, with the daring of our rescue workers, with the caring for strangers and neighbors who came to give blood and help in any way they could.

* The search is underway for those who are behind these evil acts. I've directed the full resources for our intelligence and law enforcement communities to find those responsible and bring them to justice. We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them.

* America and our friends and allies join with all those who want peace and security in the world and we stand together to win the war against terrorism. Tonight I ask for your prayers for all those who grieve, for the children whose worlds have been shattered, for all whose sense of safety and security has been threatened. And I pray they will be comforted by a power greater than any of us spoken through the ages in Psalm 23: Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for You are with me.

* This is a day when all Americans from every walk of life unite in our resolve for justice and peace. America has stood down enemies before, and we will do so this time. None of us will ever forget this day, yet we go forward to defend freedom and all that is good and just in our world.

==== Invasion of Afghanistan ([[October 7]], [[2001]]) ====
:[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/specials/attacked/transcripts/bushaddress_100801.htm Invasion of Afganistan to remove the Taliban and al-Qaeda from power and capture Bin Laden (October 7, 2001)]

* More than two weeks ago, I gave Taliban leaders a series of clear and specific demands: Close terrorist training camps. Hand over leaders of the Al Qaeda network, and return all foreign nationals, including American citizens unjustly detained in our country. None of these demands were met. And now, the Taliban will pay a price.

* The United States of America is a friend to the Afghan people, and we are the friends of almost a billion worldwide who practice the Islamic faith. The United States of America is an enemy of those who aid terrorists and of the barbaric criminals who profane a great religion by committing murder in its name. This military action is a part of our campaign against terrorism, another front in a war that has already been joined through diplomacy, intelligence, the freezing of financial assets and the arrests of known terrorists by law enforcement agents in 38 countries.

* Given the nature and reach of our enemies, we will win this conflict by the patient accumulation of successes, by meeting a series of challenges with determination and will and purpose. Today we focus on Afghanistan, but the battle is broader. Every nation has a choice to make. In this conflict, there is no neutral ground. If any government sponsors the outlaws and killers of innocence, they have become outlaws and murderers themselves. And they will take that lonely path at their own peril.

* We're a peaceful nation. Yet, as we have learned, so suddenly and so tragically, there can be no peace in a world of sudden terror. In the face of today's new threat, the only way to pursue peace is to pursue those who threaten it.

* We did not ask for this mission, but we will fulfill it.

* A commander in chief sends America's sons and daughters into battle in a foreign land only after the greatest care and a lot of prayer. We ask a lot of those who wear our uniform. We ask them to leave their loved ones, to travel great distances, to risk injury, even to be prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice of their lives. They are dedicated. They are honorable. They represent the best of our country, and we are grateful. To all the men and women in our military, every sailor, every soldier, every airman, every Coast Guardsman, every Marine, I say this: Your mission is defined. The objectives are clear. Your goal is just. You have my full confidence, and you will have every tool you need to carry out your duty.

* I recently received a touching letter that says a lot about the state of America in these difficult times, a letter from a fourth grade girl with a father in the military. As much as I don't want my dad to fight, she wrote, I'm willing to give him to you. This is a precious gift. The greatest she could give. This young girl knows what America is all about.

* Since September 11, an entire generation of young Americans has gained new understanding of the value of freedom and its cost and duty and its sacrifice. The battle is now joined on many fronts. We will not waiver, we will not tire, we will not falter, and we will not fail. Peace and freedom will prevail.

=== 2002 ===
* We are working hard to convince both the Indians and the Pakis there's a way to deal with their problems without going to war.
** [http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0201/07/bn.02.html Meeting with Alan Greenspan] (January 7, 2002).

* States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world. By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger. They could provide these arms to terrorists, giving them the means to match their hatred. They could attack our allies or attempt to blackmail the United States. In any of these cases, the price of indifference would be catastrophic.
** Bush referring to Iraq, Iran, and North Korea as an "Axis of Evil" in his State of the Union Address ([[January 29]], [[2002]])

* For too long our culture has said, "If it feels good, do it." Now America is embracing a new ethic and a new creed: "[[w:Let's roll|Let's roll]]".
** Invoking the words of [[w:Todd Beamer|Todd Beamer]] (passenger on ill-fated [[w:United Airlines Flight 93|Flight 93]] on [[w:September 11, 2001 attacks|September 11, 2001]]) to suggest Americans are becoming more altruistic and willing to sacrifice. [[w:State of the Union Address|State of the Union Address]] ([[January 29]], [[2002]])

* Given the goals of rogue states and terrorists, the United States can no longer solely rely on a reactive posture as we have in the past. The inability to deter a potential attacker, the immediacy of today’s threats, and the magnitude of potential harm that could be caused by our adversaries’ choice of weapons, do not permit that option.We cannot let our enemies strike first.
** From the document “[http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/nsc/nss5.html The National Security Strategy of the United States of America],” ([[June 1]], [[2002]])

* I just want you to know that, when we talk about war, we're really talking about peace.
** [http://www.hud.gov/news/speeches/presremarks.cfm Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington, D.C.] ([[June 18]], [[2002]])

* I call upon all nations to do everything they can to stop these terrorist killers. Thank you. Now watch this drive.
** Statements to reporters during an interview on a golf course ([[August 4]] [[2002]]); publicized in the film ''[[Fahrenheit 9/11]]'' (2004) by [[Michael Moore]], and also quoted at [http://www.commonground.ca/iss/0407156/fww.shtml ''Common Ground'' (July 2004)]

* "The best ethics course is to handcuff one of the bastards."
** On Enron, meeting with his Corporate Responsibility Task Force, published by ''Wall Street Journal'', and republished by [http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-32611018_ITM ''Buffalo News''] and [http://books.google.com/books?id=RLwjP0ySmNcC&pg=PA263&sig=W1mDN3zZNfaEoqHM_5CM0EafB-E&dq=wall+street+journal+the-best-ethics-course-is-to-handcuff+%22September+27,+2002%22+%22See+John+R.+Wilke,+President+Praises+Work+of+Task+Force+on+Business+Crime,+Wall+Street+Journal,+September+27,+2002,+p.+%22 ''Corporate Bodies and Guilty Minds'' By William S. Laufer]. ([[July 12]], [[2002]])

* The federal government and the state government must not fear programs who change lives, but must welcome those faith-based programs for the embetterment {{sic}} of mankind.
** [http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/WCPD-2002-08-26/html/WCPD-2002-08-26-Pg1411.htm Remarks at a luncheon] for gubernatorial candidate [[w:Bill Simon (politician)|Bill Simon]] in [[w:Stockton, California|Stockton, California]], [[August 23]], [[2002]]

* After all, this is a guy that tried to kill my dad at one time.
** On [[Saddam Hussein]], [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/09/20020926-17.html remarks] in Houston, Texas, ([[September 26]], [[2002]])

* I hope the message that we fight not a religion, but a group of fanatics which have hijacked a religion is getting through. I understand the propaganda machines are cranked up in the international community that paints our country in a bad light. We'll do everything we can to remind people that we've never been a nation of conquerors; we're a nation of liberators. And I would ask the skeptics to look at Afghanistan, where not only this country rout the Taliban, which was one of the most barbaric regimes in the history of mankind, but thanks to our strength and our compassion, many young girls now go to school for the first time.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/12/20021204-1.html Roosevelt Room, ([[December 4]], [[2002]])]

* My trip to Asia begins here in Japan for an important reason. It begins here because for a century and a half now, America and Japan have formed one of the great and enduring alliances of modern times. From that alliance has come an era of peace in the Pacific.
** [http://www.usembassy-china.org.cn/press/release/2002/0902-gwbjapan1.html Remarks by the President to the Diet, Tokyo, Japan. ([[February 18]], [[2002]])]

* There's an old saying in Tennessee - I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee - that says, fool me once, shame on - shame on you. Fool me - you can't get fooled again.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/09/20020917-7.html Speech in] [[w:Nashville, Tennessee|Nashville, Tennessee]], ([[September 17]], [[2002]]), in which the president confused a centuries-old proverb ("Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.")

* "Deep in my heart I know [Osama bin Laden] is on the run, if he's alive at all. Who knows if he's hiding in some cave or not; we haven't heard from him in a long time. And the idea of focusing on one person is -- really indicates to me people don't understand the scope of the mission. Terror is bigger than one person. And he's just -- he's a person who's now been marginalized. His network, his host government has been destroyed. He's the ultimate parasite who found weakness, exploited it, and met his match."
** [[March 13]], [[2002]] Press Conference at the The James S. Brady Briefing Room [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html]

* I don't know why you're talking about Sweden. They're the neutral one. They don't have an army.
** In a December 2002 Oval Office meeting, after Congressman [[w:Tom Lantos|Tom Lantos]] suggested the [[w:Swedish Army|Swedish Army]] as a peacekeeping force for the [[w:West Bank|West Bank]] and [[w:Gaza Strip|Gaza Strip]]
** Quoted in {{cite news
| first = Ron
| last = Suskind
| url = http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/magazine/17BUSH.html?ex=1255665600en=890a96189e162076ei=5090
| title = Faith, Certainty and the Presidency of George W. Bush
| publisher = The New York Times
| date = [[October 17]], [[2004]]
| accessdate = 2007-01-30
}}
* Do you have blacks, too?
** At a meeting of Presidents George W. Bush and Brazilian President Fernando Henrique Cardoso. [http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/0,1518,196865,00.html]

=== 2003 ===

* Why don't they ask [Saddam's intelligence chief, Tahir Jalil Habbush] to give us something we can use to help us make our case [to prove he had WMD]?
** from Ron Suskind, ''The Way of the World'', p. 364, on Bush's frustration at the results of secret meetings between British intelligence and Saddam's intelligence chief, Tahir Jalil Habbush

* All the decades of deceit and cruelty have now reached an end. Saddam Hussein and his sons must leave Iraq within 48 hours. Their refusal to do so will result in military conflict, commenced at a time of our choosing.
** Ultimatum to Iraq (17 March 2003) [http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/mar/18/iraq.usa1]

* In any conflict, your fate will depend on your action. Do not destroy oil wells, a source of wealth that belongs to the Iraqi people. Do not obey any command to use weapons of mass destruction against anyone, including the Iraqi people. War crimes will be prosecuted. War criminals will be punished. And it will be no defense to say, "I was just following orders."
**Ultimatum to Iraq (17 March 2003) [http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/mar/18/iraq.usa1]

* Every Iraqi atrocity has confirmed the justice and the urgency of our cause. (Applause.) Against this enemy we will accept no outcome except complete victory.
** The East Room of the White House, [[March 28]], [[2003]] [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030328-6.html]

* We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories. You remember when [[Colin Powell]] stood up in front of the world, and he said, Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons. They're illegal. They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two. And we'll find more weapons as time goes on. But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/g8/interview5.html TVP Interview], Poland, {{#formatdate:2003-05-29}}

* I said you were a man of peace. I want you to know I took immense crap for that.
** to [[w:Ariel Sharon|Ariel Sharon]], quoted in {{cite news
| date = 2003-06-02
| first = Glenn
| last = Kessler
| title = Bush Sticks to the Broad Strokes; In Mideast Peace Push, President Wary of Details and Deep Intervention
| newspaper = {{w|The Washington Post}}
| page = A.01
| url = http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/washingtonpost/access/343021791.html?FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT
}}

* The United States is committed to the worldwide elimination of torture and we are leading this fight by example.
** 26 June 2003 [http://www.politicalposts.com/news/index.asp?id=180606][http://www.sltrib.com/2003/Nov/11212003/commenta/commenta.asp]

* There are some who feel like that, you know, the conditions are such that they can attack us there. My answer is, bring 'em on.
** in discussing the then-incipient [[w:Iraqi insurgency|insurgency]] in [[w:Iraq|Iraq]]; press conference, [[July 2]], [[2003]]. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKdbZWNqF00]

* I don't know of anybody in my administration who leaked classified information. If somebody did leak classified information, ''I'd like to know it.''
** Source: [[w:October 1|October 1]], [[w:2003|2003]], [http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-bush01.html Suntimes.com] (see also [[July 18]], [[2005]])

* See, free nations are peaceful nations. Free nations don't attack each other. Free nations don't develop weapons of mass destruction.
** Midwest Airlines Center, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, [[October 3]], [[2003]] [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031003-4.html]

* We're fighting on many fronts, and Iraq is now the central front. Saddam holdouts and foreign terrorists are trying desperately to undermine Iraq's progress and to throw that country into chaos. The terrorists in Iraq believe their attacks on innocent people will weaken our resolve. That's what they believe. They believe that America will run from a challenge. They're mistaken. Americans are not the running kind.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031009-7.html Speech in Portsmouth, NH] ([[October 9]], [[2003]]) These lines have sometimes been attributed to [[Paul Wolfowitz]], who was reported to have said them the next day, perhaps quoting the President's speech.

* Saddam's rape rooms and torture chambers and children's prisons are closed forever. His mass graves will claim no victims.
** [[18 October]] [[2003]], to the Philippine Congress [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031018-12.html]

* I love freedom of speech.
** Said in reference to a protest by [[w:Australian Greens Party|Greens]] member [[w:Bob Brown|Bob Brown]] during his address to the Australian Parliament as Brown was ordered to leave the parliament. [[October 23]], [[2003]] [http://theage.com.au/articles/2003/10/23/1066631538204.html?oneclick=true]

* The enemy in Iraq believes America will run, that's why they're willing to kill innocent civilians, relief workers, coalition troops. America will never run. America will do what is necessary to make our country more secure.
** Speech in Birmingham, Alabama, [[November 3]], [[2003]] [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2003/11/20031103-7.html] [http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F70914FA35540C778CDDA80994DB404482]

* My Geordie is probably just about as bad as my English.
** Asked if he will be able to understand the accent in [[Tony Blair]]'s constituency in North-East England, [[14 November]] [[2003]] [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/3269703.stm]

* The people have given us the duty to defend them, and that duty sometimes requires the violent restraint of violent men.
** Speech 11/19/2003 Whitehall Palace, London [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2004/01/20040126-6.html]

====Mission Accomplished ([[May 1]], [[2003]])====

:[http://edition.cnn.com/2003/US/05/01/bush.transcript/ Speech on board the ship USS Lincoln on the mission and progress made in Iraq (May 1 2003)]

* Admiral Kelly, Captain Card, officers and sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans, major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed. And now our coalition is engaged in securing and reconstructing that country.

* In this battle, we have fought for the cause of liberty and for the peace of the world. Our nation and our coalition are proud of this accomplishment, yet it is you, the members of the United States military, who achieved it. Your courage, your willingness to face danger for your country and for each other made this day possible. Because of you our nation is more secure. Because of you the tyrant has fallen and Iraq is free.

* When Iraqi civilians looked into the faces of our service men and women, they saw strength and kindness and good will. When I look at the members of the United States military, I see the best of our country and I am honored to be your commander in chief.

* No device of man can remove the tragedy from war, yet it is a great advance when the guilty have far more to fear from war than the innocent.

* In the images of celebrating Iraqis we have also seen the ageless appeal of human freedom. Decades of lies and intimidation could not make the Iraqi people love their oppressors or desire their own enslavement. Men and women in every culture need liberty like they need food and water and air. Everywhere that freedom arrives, humanity rejoices and everywhere that freedom stirs, let tyrants fear.

* The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11th, 2001 and still goes on. That terrible morning, 19 evil men, the shock troops of a hateful ideology, gave America and the civilized world a glimpse of their ambitions. They imagined, in the words of one terrorist, that September the 11th would be the beginning of the end of America. By seeking to turn our cities into killing fields, terrorists and their allies believed that they could destroy this nation's resolve and force our retreat from the world. They have failed.

* In these 19 months that changed the world, our actions have been focused and deliberate and proportionate to the offense. We have not forgotten the victims of September the 11th, the last phone calls, the cold murder of children, the searches in the rubble. With those attacks, the terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States, and war is what they got.

* Our war against terror is proceeding according to the principles that I have made clear to all. Any person involved in committing or planning terrorist attacks against the American people becomes an enemy of this country and a target of American justice.

* The advance of freedom is the surest strategy to undermine the appeal of terror in the world. Where freedom takes hold, hatred gives way to hope. When freedom takes hold, men and women turn to the peaceful pursuit of a better life.

* No act of the terrorists will change our purpose, or weaken our resolve, or alter their fate. Their cause is lost; free nations will press on to victory.

==== Address to the National Endowment for Democracy ([[November 6]], [[2003]]) ====
United States Chamber of Commerce, Washington, DC [http://www.ned.org/events/anniversary/oct1603-Bush.html]

* The prosperity, and social vitality and technological progress of a people are directly determined by the extent of their liberty. Freedom honors and unleashes human creativity — and creativity determines the strength and wealth of nations. Liberty is both the plan of Heaven for humanity, and the best hope for progress here on Earth.

* Are the peoples of the Middle East somehow beyond the reach of liberty? Are millions of men and women and children condemned by history or culture to live in despotism? Are they alone never to know freedom, and never even to have a choice in the matter? I, for one, do not believe it. I believe every person has the ability and the right to be free.

* The establishment of a free Iraq at the heart of the Middle East will be a watershed event in the global democratic revolution.

* The advance of freedom is the calling of our time; it is the calling of our country. From the Fourteen Points to the Four Freedoms, to the Speech at Westminster, America has put our power at the service of principle. We believe that liberty is the design of nature; we believe that liberty is the direction of history. We believe that human fulfillment and excellence come in the responsible exercise of liberty. And we believe that freedom — the freedom we prize — is not for us alone, it is the right and the capacity of all mankind.

* This is, above all, the age of liberty.

==== Remarks on U.S.-British relations and foreign policy ([[November 19]], [[2003]]) ====

Whitehall Palace, London [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2003/11/20031119-1.html]

* Americans traveling to England always observe more similarities to our country than differences. I've been here only a short time, but I've noticed the tradition of free speech exercised with enthusiasm is alive and well here in London. We have that at home too. They now have that right in Baghdad as well.

* The United States and Great Britain share a mission in the world beyond the balance of power or the simple pursuit of interest. We seek the advance of freedom and the peace that freedom brings.

* We cannot rely exclusively on military power to assure our long-term security. Lasting peace is gained as justice and democracy advance.

* If the Middle East remains a place where freedom does not flourish, it will remain a place of stagnation and anger and violence for export. And as we saw in the ruins of two towers, no distance on the map will protect our lives and way of life. If the greater Middle East joins the democratic revolution that has reached much of the world, the lives of millions in that region will be bettered, and a trend of conflict and fear will be ended at its source.

* We did not charge hundreds of miles into the heart of Iraq and pay a bitter cost of casualties and liberate 25 million people only to retreat before a band of thugs and assassins.

=== 2004 ===

* Well, no... He is the wrong father to appeal to for advice. The wrong father to go to, to appeal to in terms of strength. There's a higher Father that I appeal to.
** Response to reporter [[w:Bob Woodward|Bob Woodward]]'s inquiring as to whether, prior to the [[w:2003 invasion of Iraq|2003 Iraq invasion]], he had sought any advice from his father, [[w:George H. W. Bush|George H. W. Bush]]. (The latter, during his own presidency, had led a successful invasion of Iraq in the [[w:Gulf War|1991 Gulf War]].) Words quoted are as recalled by Woodward during his one-on-one [[w:White House|White House]] interview with Bush in 2003 or early 2004, and later recounted by Woodward in a 2004 interview with [[w:60 Minutes|60 Minutes]]. [http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/04/15/60minutes/main612067.shtml]

* We will build new ships to carry man forward into the universe, to gain a new foothold on the moon, and to prepare for new journeys to worlds beyond our own.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2004/01/20040114-3.html Speech on new space exploration initiatives] ([[January 14]], [[2004]])

* Returning to the moon is an important step for our space program. Establishing an extended human presence on the moon could vastly reduce the costs of further space exploration, making possible ever more ambitious missions. Lifting heavy spacecraft and fuel out of the Earth's gravity is expensive. Spacecraft assembled and provisioned on the moon could escape its far lower gravity using far less energy, and thus, far less cost. Also, the moon is home to abundant resources. Its soil contains raw materials that might be harvested and processed into rocket fuel or breathable air. We can use our time on the moon to develop and test new approaches and technologies and systems that will allow us to function in other, more challenging environments. The moon is a logical step toward further progress and achievement.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2004/01/20040114-3.html Speech on new space exploration initiatives] ([[January 14]], [[2004]])

* No President has ever done more for human rights than I have.
** Ken Auletta "Fortress Bush", ''The New Yorker'', [[January 19]], [[2004]], p64

* This is my chance to help this lady put some money in her pocket. Let me explain how the economy works. When you spend money to buy food it helps this lady's business. It makes it more likely somebody is going to find work. So instead of asking questions, answer mine: are you going to buy some food?
** Remarks by the President to the Press Pool, Nothin' Fancy Cafe, Roswell, New Mexico — Whitehouse Transcript[http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2004/01/20040122-5.html], Office of the Press Secretary, [[January 22]], [[2004]].

* Right here in the Oval Office I sat down with Mr. Pachachi and [[Ahmed Chalabi|Chalabi]] and al-Hakim, people from different parts of the country that have made the firm commitment, that they want a constitution eventually written that recognizes minority rights and freedom of religion.
** 2004 Feb 7, interview with [[w:Tim Russert|Tim Russert]] (broadcast next day)[http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4179618/]

* I fully understand it takes time for free societies, truly free societies to evolve. I don't expect instant success.
** Interview on Middle East Television Network, [[February 18]], [[2004]] [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2004/02/20040218-10.html]

* Those weapons of mass destruction have got to be somewhere... Nope, no weapons over there... Maybe under here.
** Narrating a humorous slide show at the [[Radio and Television News Correspondents Association]], with a series of photos depicting himself searching through the Oval Office of the White House for the weapons of mass destruction which his administration had claimed to exist, but ultimately failed to find, in Iraq.[http://www.wherearethewmd.org/evolutionary_rhetoric.php], [[March 25]], [[2004]]

* ...because the 9/11 Commission wants to ask us questions, that's why we're meeting. And I look forward to meeting with them and answering their questions. ''[...]'' Because it's a good chance for both of us to answer questions that the 9/11 Commission is looking forward to asking us, and I'm looking forward to answering them.
** ''From [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2004/04/20040413-20.html "President Addresses the Nation in Prime Time Press Conference"], Washington, D.C., on why the President and the Vice President insisted on appearing together before the 9/11 Commission, rather than separately.'' ([[April 13]], [[2004]])

* Secondly, there are such things as roving wiretaps. Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires — a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2004/04/20040420-2.html "Information Sharing, Patriot Act Vital to Homeland Security"] speech at Kleinshans Music Hall, Buffalo, New York, [[20 April]] [[2004]]; whitehouse.gov (accessed [[2006-05-18]])

* There are no longer torture chambers or rape rooms or mass graves in Iraq.
** [[April 30]], [[2004]], welcoming [[w:Paul Martin|Paul Martin]] to the Whitehouse [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2004/04/20040430-2.html White House press release]

* My meetings with [Ahmed Chalabi] were very brief. I mean, I think I met with him at the State of the Union and just kind of working through the rope line, and he might have come with a group of leaders. But I haven't had any extensive conversations with him.
** [[1 June]] [[2004]], remarks on Iraqi Interim Government[http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2004/06/20040601-2.html]

* I want to be the peace president
** [[21 July]] [[2004]] [http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsPackageArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=550630&section=news]

* Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.
** [[5 August]] [[2004]][http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/aug/06/uselections2004.usa2]

* Tribal sovereignty means that; it's sovereign. I mean, you're a — you've been given sovereignty, and you're viewed as a sovereign entity. And therefore the relationship between the federal government and tribes is one between sovereign entities.
** When asked what sovereignty would mean for Native Americans in the 21st century
** [[August 6]], [[2004]]{{source}}

* It is a ridiculous notion to assert that because the United States is on the offense, more people want to hurt us. We are on the offense because people do want to hurt us.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2004/08/20040802-2.html Remarks on Intelligence Reform, at the Rose Garden], [[August 2]], [[2004]]

* That's why I cut the taxes on everybody. I didn't cut them. The Congress cut them. I asked them to cut them.
** ''Unity Journalists of Color Convention, Washington, D.C.'' ([[August 6]], [[2004]]){{fact}}

* This young century will be liberty's century. By promoting liberty abroad, we will build a safer world. By encouraging liberty at home, we will build a more hopeful America. Like generations before us, we have a calling from beyond the stars to stand for freedom. This is the everlasting dream of America.
** Acceptance speech at Republic National Convention ([[September 2]], [[2004]])

* I don't think you can win it. But I think you can create conditions so that those who use terror as a tool are less acceptable in parts of the world.
** In response to the question of whether we can win the war on terror ([[August 30]], [[2004]]) [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5866571/]

* In this different kind of war, we may never sit down at a peace table. But make no mistake about it, we are winning, and we will win.
** Speech at the national convention of the American Legion, in Nashville, Tennessee ([[August 31]], [[2004]]) [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5865710/]

* Well, actually, he forgot [[Poland]].
** Responding to [[John Kerry]]'s criticism of Bush's "Coalition of the Willing". 1st Presidential Debate, [[September 30]], [[2004]] [http://www.debates.org/pages/trans2004a.html]
** See: [[w:You forgot Poland|You forgot Poland]] on Wikipedia

* I believe it is the job of a President to confront problems, not pass them on to future Presidents and future generations.
** Remarks to the National Association of Home Builders, [[October 2]], [[2004]] [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2004/10/20041002-7.html]

* [W]e're creating... an ownership society in this country, where more Americans than ever will be able to open up their door where they live and say, welcome to my house, welcome to my piece of property.
** Remarks to the National Association of Home Builders, Columbus, Ohio, [[October 2]], [[2004]] [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2004/10/20041002-7.html]

* I'm asking Congress to pass my Zero Down Payment Initiative. We should remove the 3 percent down payment rule for first time home buyers with FHA-insured mortgages.
** Remarks to the National Association of Home Builders, Columbus, Ohio, [[October 2]], [[2004]] [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2004/10/20041002-7.html]

* I hear there's rumors on the internets [pause] that we're going to have a draft. We're not going to have a draft, period.
** 2nd Presidential Debate, [[October 8]], [[2004]] [http://www.debates.org/pages/trans2004c.html]

* I wasn't happy when we found out there wasn't weapons [of mass destruction in Iraq]
** 2nd Presidential Debate, [[October 8]], [[2004]] {{fact}}

* Our health care system is the envy of the world.
** 3rd Presidential Debate, [[October 13]], [[2004]] [http://www.debates.org/pages/trans2004d.html]

* I just don't think I ever said I'm not worried about Osama bin Laden. It's kind of one of those exaggerations.
** 3rd Presidential Debate, [[October 13]], [[2004]] (See his [[March 13]], [[2002]] quote) {{fact}}

* I made it very plain: We will not have an all-volunteer army. [Crowd boos] Let me restate that. We will not have a draft. [Crowd Cheers]
** Bush speaking at the Daytona International Speedway with his brother, Gov. [[Jeb Bush]] of Florida, [[October 16]], [[2004]] [http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/041016/nysa024_1.html]

* A political candidate who jumps to conclusions without knowing the facts is not a person you want as your commander in chief.
** Bush to supporters at an airport rally, [[October 27]], [[2004]] [http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=6631109]

* Now that I've got the will of the people at my back, I'm going to start enforcing the one-question rule. That was three questions.
** News conference ([[4 November]] [[2004]]) [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A27833-2004Nov5.html]

* Again, he violated the one-question rule right off the bat. Obviously, you didn't listen to the will of the people.
** News conference ([[4 November]] [[2004]]) [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A27833-2004Nov5.html]

* America would do it again for our friends.
** at July 6th 2004, Normandy, France [http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/06/06/dday.main/index.html]

* And as a result of the United States military, [[w:Taliban|Taliban]] no longer is in existence.
** Speech in Springfield, Ohio, September 27, 2004 [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2004/09/20040927-4.html]

==== Speech to United Nations General Assembly ([[September 21]], [[2004]]) ====
UN Headquarters, New York, NY [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2004/09/20040921-3.html]

* For decades, the circle of liberty and security and development has been expanding in our world. This progress has brought unity to Europe, self-government to Latin America and Asia, and new hope to Africa. Now we have the historic chance to widen the circle even further, to fight radicalism and terror with justice and dignity, to achieve a true peace, founded on human freedom.

* We know that dictators are quick to choose aggression, while free nations strive to resolve differences in peace. We know that oppressive governments support terror, while free governments fight the terrorists in their midst. We know that free peoples embrace progress and life, instead of becoming the recruits for murderous ideologies.

* Every nation that wants peace will share the benefits of a freer world. And every nation that seeks peace has an obligation to help build that world.

* The security of our world is found in the advancing rights of mankind.

* Peaceful nations must stand for the advance of democracy. No other system of government has done more to protect minorities, to secure the rights of labor, to raise the status of women, or to channel human energy to the pursuits of peace.

* When it comes to the desire for liberty and justice, there is no clash of civilizations. People everywhere are capable of freedom, and worthy of freedom.

* The desire for freedom resides in every human heart. And that desire cannot be contained forever by prison walls, or martial laws, or secret police. Over time, and across the Earth, freedom will find a way.

* For too long, many nations, including my own, tolerated, even excused, oppression in the Middle East in the name of stability. Oppression became common, but stability never arrived. We must take a different approach. We must help the reformers of the Middle East as they work for freedom, and strive to build a community of peaceful, democratic nations.

* The advance of liberty is the path to both a safer and better world.

=== 2005 ===

* We had an accountability moment, and that's called the 2004 elections.
** Remarks during interview aboard Air Force One, ([[14 January]] [[2005]]) [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A12450-2005Jan15.html]

* Because the — all which is on the table begins to address the big cost drivers. For example, how benefits are calculate, for example, is on the table; whether or not benefits rise based upon wage increases or price increases. There's a series of parts of the formula that are being considered. And when you couple that, those different cost drivers, affecting those — changing those with personal accounts, the idea is to get what has been promised more likely to be — or closer delivered to what has been promised. Does that make any sense to you? It's kind of muddled. Look, there's a series of things that cause the — like, for example, benefits are calculated based upon the increase of wages, as opposed to the increase of prices. Some have suggested that we calculate — the benefits will rise based upon inflation, as opposed to wage increases. There is a reform that would help solve the red if that were put into effect. In other words, how fast benefits grow, how fast the promised benefits grow, if those — if that growth is affected, it will help on the red. ([[4 February]] [[2005]])[http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/muddled.asp]

* I think people attack me because they are fearful that I will then say that you're not equally as patriotic if you're not a religious person. ... I've never said that. I've never acted like that. I think that's just the way it is. ([http://www.washingtontimes.com/functions/print.php?StoryID=20050111-101004-3771r Washington Times, [[12 January]] [[2005]]])

* Sometimes, words have consequences you don't intend them to mean ([[14 January]] [[2005]]) [http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/01/14/bush.regrets.ap/index.html]

* Because he's hiding.
**Asked why his administration had been unable to locate and arrest Osama Bin Laden. ([[16 January]] [[2005]]) [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A12450-2005Jan15.html]

* To Poland's ''President'' [[w:Aleksander Kwaśniewski|Aleksander Kwaśniewski]]: I want to thank you for your leadership on that issue, ''Mr Prime Minister''. ([[10 February]] [[2005]]) [http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=3&art_id=qw1108009443854B221]

* This notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply ridiculous. (Short pause) And having said that, all options are on the table. (Laughter) ([[25 February]] [[2005]]) [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2005/02/20050222-8.html]

* "Hello, what's your name?" "My name is Mr. Fischer, what's your name?" "Bush. I'm Mr. Bush."
** Dialogue with German foreign minister and Vice Chancellor [[w:Joschka Fischer|Joschka Fischer]] during his visit in Germany, 24. February 2005 [http://www.taz.de/pt/2005/02/24/a0197.nf/text]

* I made it very clear to the Congress that the use of federal money, taxpayers' money to promote science which ''destroys life in order to save life is — I'm against that''. And therefore, if the bill does that, I will veto it. (emphasis added) [http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20050519182609990007&ncid=NWS00010000000001 AP, [[21 May]] [[2005]]]

* Interestingly enough, Americans now understand we have a [[w:Social Security debate (United States)|problem]]. — [[April 26]], [[2005]] [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2005/04/20050426-3.html]

* See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda. — [[May 24]], [[2005]] [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2005/05/20050524-3.html]

* I was going to say he's a piece of work, but that might not translate too well. Is that all right, if I call you a 'piece of work'?
** ''to Jean-Claude Juncker, the Prime Minister of Luxembourg'' ([[June 20]], [[2005]]) [http://www.europeanvoice.com/article/imported/juncker-is-a-piece-of-work-but-is-that-good-/52663.aspx]

* On United Nations International Day in Support of Victims of Torture, the United States reaffirms its commitment to the worldwide elimination of torture. Freedom from torture is an inalienable human right, and we are committed to building a world where human rights are respected and protected by the rule of law…Throughout the world, there are many who have been seeking to have their voices heard, to stand up for their right to freedom, and to break the chains of tyranny. Too many of those courageous women and men are paying a terrible price for their brave acts of dissent. Many have been detained, arrested, thrown in prison, and subjected to torture by regimes that fail to understand that their habits of control will not serve them well in the long-term. — June 26 [http://usinfo.state.gov/dhr/Archive/2005/Jun/27-499670.html]

* I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees. They did anticipate a serious storm. But these levees got breached. And as a result, much of New Orleans is flooded. And now we are having to deal with it and will. — [[September 1]], [[2005]]. [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2005/09/01/BL2005090100915.html]

* Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job.
** Speaking to [[w:Federal Emergency Management Agency of the United States|FEMA]] head [[Michael D. Brown]], following [[w:Hurrican Katrina|Hurrican Katrina]] at [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2005/09/20050902-2.html Mobile Regional Airport in Mobile, Alabama]. — [[September 2]], [[2005]].

* What I intend to do is lead an investigation to find out what went right and what went wrong.... I think one of the things that people want us to do here is to play a blame game. We've got to solve problems. We're problem-solvers. There will be ample time for people to figure out what went right and what went wrong. What I'm interested in is helping save lives. That's what I want to do.
** Answering a question regarding Katrina aftermath and what went wrong with government response — [[September 6]], [[2005]]. [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2005/09/20050906.html]

* I understand not everybody agrees with the decisions I've made, but that's not unique to Central or South America. Truth of the matter is, there's people who disagree with the decisions I've made all over the world. But that's what happens when you make decisions.
** At the [[w:Mar del Plata Summit of the Americas|Mar del Plata Summit of the Americas]], [[November 4]], [[2005]]. [http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/americas/11/04/bush.summit/index.html]

* Thank you. God told me to wear it. That's a joke.
** Responding to a compliment on his suit from European Commission president Jose Manuel Barroso (November 2005) [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4421818.stm]

* We do not torture.
** [[November 7]], [[2005]]. [http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/07/bush.torture.ap/] [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4415132.stm]

* As Iraqi forces gain experience and the political process advances, we will be able to decrease our troop level in Iraq without losing our capability to defeat the terrorists. These decisions about troop levels will be driven by the conditions on the ground in Iraq and the good judgment of our commanders, not by artificial timetables set by politicians in Washington.
** during address to the United States Naval Academy, [[November 30]], [[2005]]. [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10253079/]

* There was no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the attack of 9/11, I’ve never said that and never made that case prior to going into Iraq.[http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2005-12-16T211416Z_01_KNE676438_RTRUKOC_0_US-BUSH-IRAQ.xml&archived=False]

==== Second Inaugural Address ([[January 20]], [[2005]]) ====

* The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world.

* From the day of our Founding, we have proclaimed that every man and woman on this earth has rights, and dignity, and matchless value, because they bear the image of the Maker of Heaven and earth. Across the generations we have proclaimed the imperative of self-government, because no one is fit to be a master, and no one deserves to be a slave.

* We will persistently clarify the choice before every ruler and every nation — the moral choice between oppression, which is always wrong, and freedom, which is eternally right.

* As hope kindles hope, millions more will find it. By our efforts, we have lit a fire as well — a fire in the minds of men. It warms those who feel its power, it burns those who fight its progress, and one day this untamed fire of freedom will reach the darkest corners of our world.

* In America's ideal of freedom, the public interest depends on private character — on integrity and tolerance toward others and the rule of conscience in our own lives. Self-government relies, in the end, on the governing of the self. That edifice of character is built in families, supported by communities with standards,and sustained in our national life by the truths of Sinai, the Sermon on the Mount, the words of the Koran and the varied faiths of our people. Americans move forward in every generation by reaffirming all that is good and true that came before — ideals of justice and conduct that are the same yesterday, today and forever.

* The exercise of rights is ennobled by service and mercy and a heart for the weak. Liberty for all does not mean independence from one another. Our nation relies on men and women who look after a neighbor and surround the lost with love. Americans, at our best, value the life we see in one another and must always remember that even the unwanted have worth. And our country must abandon all the habits of racism because we cannot carry the message of freedom and the baggage of bigotry at the same time.

* From the perspective of a single day, including this day of dedication, the issues and questions before our country are many. From the viewpoint of centuries, the questions that come to us are narrowed and few. Did our generation advance the cause of freedom? And did our character bring credit to that cause?

* We have known divisions, which must be healed to move forward in great purposes — and I will strive in good faith to heal them. Yet those divisions do not define America. We felt the unity and fellowship of our nation when freedom came under attack, and our response came like a single hand over a single heart. And we can feel that same unity and pride whenever America acts for good, and the victims of disaster are given hope, and the unjust encounter justice, and the captives are set free.

* We go forward with complete confidence in the eventual triumph of freedom. Not because history runs on the wheels of inevitability; it is human choices that move events. Not because we consider ourselves a chosen nation; God moves and chooses as he wills. We have confidence because freedom is the permanent hope of mankind, the hunger in dark places, the longing of the soul. When our Founders declared a new order of the ages, when soldiers died in wave upon wave for a union based on liberty, when citizens marched in peaceful outrage under the banner "Freedom Now" — they were acting on an ancient hope that is meant to be fulfilled.

* History has an ebb and flow of justice, but history also has a visible direction set by liberty and the author of liberty. When the Declaration of Independence was first read in public and the Liberty Bell was sounded in celebration, a witness said, "It rang as if it meant something." In our time it means something still. America, in this young century, proclaims liberty throughout all the world and to all the inhabitants thereof. Renewed in our strength — tested, but not weary — we are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom.

==== Address to the National Endowment for Democracy ([[October 6]], [[2005]]) ====
Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center, Washington, DC [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2005/10/20051006-3.html]

* Our nation stood guard on tense borders; we spoke for the rights of dissidents and the hopes of exile; we aided the rise of new democracies on the ruins of tyranny. And all the cost and sacrifice of that struggle has been worth it, because, from Latin America to Europe to Asia, we've gained the peace that freedom brings.

* We're facing a radical ideology with inalterable objectives: to enslave whole nations and intimidate the world. No act of ours invited the rage of the killers — and no concession, bribe, or act of appeasement would change or limit their plans for murder.

* Because free peoples believe in the future, free peoples will own the future.

* Any government that chooses to be an ally of terror has also chosen to be an enemy of civilization.

* There's always a temptation, in the middle of a long struggle, to seek the quiet life, to escape the duties and problems of the world, and to hope the enemy grows weary of fanaticism and tired of murder. This would be a pleasant world, but it's not the world we live in. The enemy is never tired, never sated, never content with yesterday's brutality. This enemy considers every retreat of the civilized world as an invitation to greater violence.

* In Iraq, there is no peace without victory. We will keep our nerve and we will win that victory.

==== [http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/18/bush.transcript/index.html Address to the Nation on Iraqi Elections] (December 18, 2005) ====
* My conviction comes down to this: we do not create terrorism by fighting the terrorists. We invite terrorism by ignoring them.

* If you think the terrorists would become peaceful if only America would stop provoking them, then it might make sense to leave them alone. This is not the threat I see. I see a global terrorist movement that exploits Islam in the service of radical political aims — a vision in which books are burned, and women are oppressed, and all dissent is crushed.

* To retreat before victory would be an act of recklessness and dishonor and I will not allow it.

=== 2006 ===

* One of the hardest parts of my job is to connect Iraq with the war on terror.
** September 7, 2006 interview with Katie Couric [[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhR04RkBFhs YouTube]]

* Pakistan "will be a steadfast partner…. A force for freedom and moderation in the Arab world."
** Televised speech in India, [[March 3]], [[2006]]; According to one news report, "White House spokesman [[Scott McClellan]] later had to explain aboard Air Force One en route to Pakistan that Bush meant to say 'Muslim world' — uncomfortably noting that Pakistan is not an Arab nation."
** [http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-060303bushvisit,1,4534911.story?coll=chi-news-hed "Bush's Pakistan visit not 'risk-free'"], ''Chicago Tribune'', [[March 3]], [[2006]]

* "We support the election process. We support democracy, but that doesn't mean that we have to support governments that get elected as a result of democracy." Bush commenting about the Palestinian elections that resulted in Hamas coming to power in the Gaza Strip. [[March 29]], [[2006]]
** [http://books.google.co.kr/books?id=1mEa-o1LGa8C "Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: George W. Bush"], p.617

* I would say the best moment of all was when I caught a 7.5 pound largemouth bass in my lake.
** Revealing his "best moment since he took office in 2001" to a German newspaper reporter, Bild am Sonntag. [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4982338.stm] ([[May 7]], [[2006]])

* Ages of experience have taught us that the commitment of a husband and wife to love and to serve one another promotes the welfare of children and the stability of society. Government, by recognizing and protecting marriage, serves the interests of all.
** Radio Address ([[June 3]], [[2006]]); quoted in [http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/06/05/same.sex.marriage.ap/index.html "Bush, senators renew fight against gay marriage" at CNN.com ([[June 5]], [[2006]])]

* Eventually, these people will have trials and they will have counsel and they will be represented in a court of law.
** In reference to prisoners held at [[w:Guantanamo Bay detainment camp|Guantanamo Bay]], quoted in [http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2225793,00.html]

* Yes, Peter. Are you going to ask that question with shades on?... I'm interested in the shade look, seriously.... For the viewers, there’s no sun.
** Teasing ''Los Angeles Times'' reporter Peter Wallsten during a White House press conference, unaware that Wallsten suffers from [[w:Stargardt's_disease|Stargardt’s disease]] and is partly blind.
** [http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article1089264.ece "Bush shows his sensitive side, telling blind journalist: 'I'm interested in the shade look'"], The Independent, [[June 16]], [[2006]].

* I traveled to Baghdad to personally show our nation's commitment to a free Iraq, because it is vital for the Iraqi people to know with certainty that America will not abandon them after we have come this far. The challenges that remain in Iraq are serious. We face determined enemies who remain intent on killing the innocent, and defeating these enemies will require more sacrifice and the continued patience of our country. But our efforts in Iraq are well worth it, the mission is necessary for the security of our country, and we will succeed.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2006/06/20060617.html Radio Address], [[June 17]], [[2006]]

* Liberty can be delayed, but it cannot be denied.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2006/06/20060622-6.html]

* Yo Blair, how are you doin’?
** [http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2006330165,,00.html George W Bush to Tony Blair, on G8 summit, July 17th, 2006 - when left their microphone on by mistake]

* See, the irony is, what they need to do is get Syria to get Hezbollah to stop doing this shit and it's over.
** [http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/07/17/bush.tape/index.html George W Bush to Tony Blair, on G8 summit, July 17th, 2006 - when left their microphone on by mistake]

* Americans are sacrificing. I mean, we are. You know, we pay a lot of taxes. Americans sacrificed when they, you know, when the economy went into the tank. Americans sacrificed when, you know, air travel was disrupted. American taxpayers have paid a lot to help this nation recover. I think Americans have sacrificed.
** [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNIOmbm3KYg&feature=related In response to reporter Brian Williams' question as to whether, after 9/11, the president should have asked all Americans to sacrifice for their country, NBC News interview, August 29, 2006]

* Well, I'm reading about the battle of New Orleans right now. I’ve got an ecolectic ''(sic)'' reading list.
** [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNIOmbm3KYg&feature=related Responding to questions about his current reading, in interview with Brian Williams of NBC News, August 29, 2006]

* Look, the key for me is to keep expectations low.
** [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNIOmbm3KYg&feature=related Speaking of himself and the public perception of him, in interview with Brian Williams of NBC News, August 29, 2006]

* Too many doctors are going out of business. Too many OB-GYNs aren't able to practice their...their love with women all across this country.
** Poplar Bluff, Mo., September 6, 2004{{source}}

* In the long term, we’ve got to defeat an ideology of hate with an ideology of hope. There’s a reason why people like (al-Qaida leader Osama) bin Laden are able to recruit suiciders, because if you don’t have hope, you’re attracted to an ideology which says, it’s OK to kill people and kill yourself.
** [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14780747/ Sept. 11, 5 years later: 'We stand together'] ([[September 11]], [[2006]])

* If there’s any comparison between the compassion and decency of the American people and the terrorist tactics of extremists, it’s flawed logic. It’s just — I simply can’t accept that. It’s unacceptable to think that there’s any kind of comparison between the behavior of the United States of America and the action of Islamic extremists who kill innocent women and children to achieve an objective.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2006/09/20060915-2.html Press Conference] ([[September 15]], [[2006]])

* I know the American people understand the stakes in Iraq. They want to win. They will support the war as long as they see a path to victory. Americans can have confidence that we will prevail because thousands of smart, dedicated military and civilian personnel are risking their lives and are working around the clock to ensure our success.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2006/10/20061025.html Press Conference] ([[October 25]], [[2006]])

* Both those men are doing fantastic jobs and I strongly support them.
** In reference to Donald Rumsfeld and [[Dick Cheney]] [http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/01/bush.cheney.ap/ in an Oval Office interview], one week prior to accepting Rumsfeld’s resignation ([[November 1]], [[2006]])

* So if you happen to bump into a Democrat candidate, you might want to ask this simple question: What's your plan? If they say they want to protect the homeland, but oppose the Patriot Act, ask them this question: What's your plan? If they say they want to uncover terrorist plots, but oppose listening in on terrorist conversations, ask them this question: What's your plan? If they say they want to stop new attacks on our country, but oppose letting the CIA detain and question the terrorists who might know what those plots are, ask them this question: What's your plan? If they say they want to win the war on terror, but call for America to pull out from what al Qaeda says is the central front in this war, ask them this question: What's your plan?...The truth is, the Democrats can't answer that question. Harsh criticism is not a plan for victory. Second-guessing is not a strategy.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2006/11/20061103-1.html Remarks by the President at Missouri Victory 2006 Rally] ([[November 3]], [[2006]])

* ...Hunt asked me the question one week before the campaign, and basically it was, are you going to do something about Rumsfeld and the Vice President? And my answer was, they're going to stay on. And the reason why is I didn't want to inject a major decision about this war in the final days of a campaign. And so the only way to answer that question and to get you on to another question was to give you that answer.
** The President's reasoning for telling reporters in the Oval Office that the current Defense Secretary, Donald H. Rumsfeld, would be staying on, although Bush had already selected potential replacements. Given at a [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2006/11/20061108-2.html news conference] ([[November 8]], [[2006]])

* You know, I think an interesting construct that General [Peter] Pace uses is, "We're not winning, we're not losing."
** In response to the question “Are we winning in Iraq”? Interview with the [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/19/AR2006121900886.html Washington Post] ([[December 20]], [[2006]])

* ...I believe that we're going to win; I believe that -- and by the way, if I didn't think that, I wouldn't have our troops there. That's what you got to know. We're going to succeed.
**In response to a question concerning Bush stating two months prior "Absolutely we're winning" in Iraq and then saying in the ''Washington Post'' "We're not winning, we're not losing." [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2006/12/20061220-1.html Press Conference] from the White House Indian Treaty Room ([[December 20]], [[2006]])

* ...The battle against the Sunnis - Sunni extremists - some of them Saddamists, some of there are al Qaeda, but all of them aiming to try to drive the United States out of Iraq before the job is done.
** Press conference [http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/20/washington/20text-bush.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1166734888-gpZmokkpM7BcfwqOc9fJqQ New York Times] [http://www.wzzm13.com/news/local/grmetro_article.aspx?storyid=67311 WZZM News] [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2006/12/20061220-1.html WhiteHouse.gov] ([[December 20]], [[2006]])

==== State of the Union ([[January 31]], [[2006]]) ====

[http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/31/sotu.transcript/index.html]

{{original recording|2005 State of the union.ogg|these quotes}}
* In a complex and challenging time, the road of isolationism and protectionism may seem broad and inviting — yet it ends in danger and decline. The only way to protect our people ... the only way to secure the peace ... the only way to control our destiny is by our leadership — so the United States of America will continue to lead.

* Abroad, our nation is committed to an historic, long-term goal — we seek the end of tyranny in our world. Some dismiss that goal as misguided idealism. In reality, the future security of America depends on it.

* No one can deny the success of freedom, but some men rage and fight against it. And one of the main sources of reaction and opposition is radical Islam — the perversion by a few of a noble faith into an ideology of terror and death.

* Lacking the military strength to challenge us directly, the terrorists have chosen the weapon of fear. When they murder children at a school in Beslan or blow up commuters in London or behead a bound captive the terrorists hope these horrors will break our will, allowing the violent to inherit the earth. But they have miscalculated: We love our freedom, and we will fight to keep it.

* In a time of testing, we cannot find security by abandoning our commitments and retreating within our borders. If we were to leave these vicious attackers alone, they would not leave us alone. They would simply move the battlefield to our own shores. There is no peace in retreat. And there is no honor in retreat.

* But our enemies and our friends can be certain: The United States will not retreat from the world, and we will never surrender to evil. America rejects the false comfort of isolationism. We are the nation that saved liberty in Europe, and liberated death camps, and helped raise up democracies, and faced down an evil empire. Once again, we accept the call of history to deliver the oppressed, and move this world toward peace. We remain on the offensive against terror networks. We have killed or captured many of their leaders — and for the others, their day will come.

* Members of Congress: however we feel about the decisions and debates of the past, our nation has only one option: We must keep our word, defeat our enemies, and stand behind the American military in its vital mission.

* This terrorist surveillance program has helped prevent terrorist attacks. It remains essential to the security of America. If there are people inside our country who are talking with al Qaeda, we want to know about it — because we will not sit back and wait to be hit again.

* Our own generation is in a long war against a determined enemy — a war that will be fought by presidents of both parties, who will need steady bipartisan support from the Congress. And tonight I ask for yours. Together, let us protect our country, support the men and women who defend us, and lead this world toward freedom.

* Keeping America competitive requires affordable energy. Here we have a serious problem: America is addicted to oil, which is often imported from unstable parts of the world.

* America is a great force for freedom and prosperity. Yet our greatness is not measured in power or luxuries, but by who we are and how we treat one another. So we strive to be a compassionate, decent, hopeful society.

* As we look at these challenges, we must never give in to the belief that America is in decline, or that our culture is doomed to unravel. The American people know better than that. We have proven the pessimists wrong before — and we will do it again.

* Fellow citizens, we have been called to leadership in a period of consequence. We have entered a great ideological conflict we did nothing to invite. We see great changes in science and commerce that will influence all our lives. And sometimes it can seem that history is turning in a wide arc, toward an unknown shore. Yet the destination of history is determined by human action, and every great movement of history comes to a point of choosing.

* Today, having come far in our own historical journey, we must decide: Will we turn back, or finish well? Before history is written down in books, it is written in courage. Like Americans before us, we will show that courage and we will finish well. We will lead freedom's advance. We will compete and excel in the global economy. We will renew the defining moral commitments of this land. And so we move forward — optimistic about our country, faithful to its cause, and confident of victories to come.

==== United Nations General Assembly in September 2006 ====

[http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2006/09/20060919-4.html#]

* Imagine what it's like to be a young person living in a country that is not moving toward reform...While your peers in other parts of the world have received educations that prepare them for the opportunities of a global economy, you have been fed propaganda and [[w:conspiracy theory|conspiracy theories]] that blame others for your country's shortcomings.

* Extremists in your midst spread propaganda claiming that the West is engaged in a war against Islam. This propaganda is false, and its purpose is to confuse you and justify acts of terror. This propaganda is false, and its purpose is to confuse you and justify acts of terror. We respect Islam, but we will protect our people from those who pervert Islam to sow death and destruction. Our goal is to help you build a more tolerant and hopeful society that honors people of all faiths and promotes the peace.

=== 2007 ===
* Some say our approach is really just more troops for the same strategy. In fact, we have a new strategy with a new mission: helping secure the population, especially in Baghdad. Our plan puts Iraqis in the lead.... Members of Congress have a right to express their views, and express them forcefully. But those who refuse to give this plan a chance to work have an obligation to offer an alternative that has a better chance for success. To oppose everything while proposing nothing is irresponsible.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/01/20070113-2.html Radio address] discussing his plan to send 21,500 more troops to Iraq ([[January 13]], [[2007]])

* Well, no question decisions have made things unstable. But the question is can we succeed. And I believe we can. Listen, I'd like to see stability and a unified Iraq. A young democracy will provide the stability we look for. I will tell you that if we just isolate ourselves from the Middle East and hope for the best, we will not address the conditions that had led young suiciders to get on airplanes to come and attack us in the first place.
** [http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/14/60minutes/main2359119.shtml 60 Minutes interview] in response to the question “But wasn't it your administration that created the instability in Iraq?” ([[January 14]], [[2007]])

* Well, you know, I think a lot of people are in this fight. I mean, they sacrifice peace of mind when they see the terrible images of violence on TV every night.
** [http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/white_house/jan-june07/bush_01-16.html NewsHour interview] with Jim Lehrer in response to the question “Why have you not asked more Americans to sacrifice something?” regarding the Iraq War ([[January 16]], [[2007]])

* ...One of the things I have discovered is, in Washington, D.C. most people understand the consequences of failure. And if failure is not an option, then it's up to the president to come up with a plan that is more likely to succeed.
** Speech to the [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/01/20070126-3.html House Republican Conference] ([[January 26]], [[2007]])

* One of the things I've found in Congress is that most people recognize that failure would be a disaster for the United States. And in that I'm the decision maker, I had to come up with a way forward that precluded disaster. In other words, I had to think about what's likely to work. And so I worked with our military and I worked with [[w:Robert Gates|Secretary Gates]] to come up with a plan that is likely to succeed. And the implementor of that plan is going to be [[w:David Petraeus|General Petraeus]]. And my call to the Congress is, is that I know there is skepticism and pessimism, and that they are -- some are condemning a plan before it's even had a chance to work. And they have an obligation and a serious responsibility, therefore, to put up their own plan as to what would work. I've listened a lot to members of Congress. I've listened carefully to their suggestions. I have picked the plan that I think is most likely to succeed, because I understand, like many in Congress understand, success is very important for the security of the country.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/01/20070126.html Press Conference] introducing General [[w:David Petraeus|David Petraeus]] as the new commander of the [[w:Multinational Force Iraq|Multinational Force Iraq]] ([[January 26]], [[2007]])

* I think that the vice president is a person reflecting a half-glass-full mentality, and that is he's been able to look at – as have I, and I hope other Americans have – the fact that the tyrant was removed, 12 million people voted, there is an Iraqi constitution in place that is a model for – and unique for the Middle East.
** In an [http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=10032 NPR interview] referring to [[w:Dick Cheney|Vice-President Dick Cheney]] ([[January 31]], [[2007]])

* What we're trying to do with this reinforcement of our troops is to provide enough space so that the Iraqi government can meet certain benchmarks or certain requirements for a unity government to survive and for the country to be strong.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/02/20070205-2.html Meeting with Cabinet] ([[February 7]], [[2007]])

* [[George Washington]]'s long struggle for freedom has also inspired generations of Americans to stand for freedom in their own time. Today, we're fighting a new war to defend our liberty and our people and our way of life. And as we work to advance the cause of freedom around the world, we remember that the father of our country believed that the freedoms we secured in our revolution were not meant for Americans alone. He once wrote, "My best wishes are irresistibly excited whensoever in any country I see an oppressed nation unfurl the banners of freedom." President Washington believed that the success of our democracy would also depend on the virtue of our citizens. In his farewell address to the American people, he said, "Morality is a necessary spring of popular government." Over the centuries, America has succeeded because we have always tried to maintain the decency and the honor of our first President. His example guided us in his time; it guides us in our time, and it will guide us for all time.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/02/20070219.html President Bush Visits Mount Vernon, Honors President Washington's 275th Birthday on President's Day] ([[February 19]], [[2007]])

* It can be tempting to look at the challenges in Iraq and conclude our best option is to pack up and go home. That may be satisfying in the short run, but I believe the consequences for American security would be devastating. If American forces were to step back from Baghdad before it is more secure, a contagion of violence could spill out across the entire country. In time, this violence could engulf the region. The terrorists could emerge from the chaos with a safe haven in Iraq to replace the one they had in Afghanistan, which they used to plan the attacks of September the 11th, 2001. For the safety of the American people, we cannot allow this to happen.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/03/20070319.html President Bush Discusses Fourth Anniversary of Operation Iraqi Freedom] ([[March 19]], [[2007]])

* A year ago my approval rating was in the 30s, my nominee for the Supreme Court had just withdrawn, and my vice president had shot someone. Ah, those were the good ol' days.
** [[w:Radio and Television Correspondents' Association|Radio and Television Correspondents' Association]] dinner, [[March 28]], [[2007]]
** {{cite news
| url = http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17846185/
| title = Bush delivers punch lines
| publisher = Associated Press (via ''MSNBC.com'')
| date = [[March 29]], [[2007]]
| accessdate = 2007-03-31
}}

* Our nation is shocked and saddened by the news of the shootings at Virginia Tech today...Schools should be places of safety, and sanctuary, and learning. When that sanctuary is violated, the impact is felt in every American classroom and every American community. Today our nation grieves with those who have lost loved ones at Virginia Tech. We hold the victims in our hearts; we lift them up in our prayers; and we ask a loving God to comfort those who are suffering today.
** Statement on the massacre at Virginia Tech University from the Diplomatic Room of the White House (April 16, 2007) {{fact}}

* Laura and I have come to Blacksburg today with hearts full of sorrow. This is a day of mourning for the Virginia Tech community -- and it is a day of sadness for our entire nation. We've come to express our sympathy. In this time of anguish, I hope you know that people all over this country are thinking about you, and asking God to provide comfort for all who have been affected.Yesterday began like any other day. Students woke up, and they grabbed their backpacks and they headed for class. And soon the day took a dark turn, with students and faculty barricading themselves in classrooms and dormitories -- confused, terrified, and deeply worried. By the end of the morning, it was the worst day of violence on a college campus in American history -- and for many of you here today, it was the worst day of your lives.It's impossible to make sense of such violence and suffering. Those whose lives were taken did nothing to deserve their fate. They were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. Now they're gone -- and they leave behind grieving families, and grieving classmates, and a grieving nation.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/04/20070417-1.html Remarks by the President at Virginia Tech Memorial Convocation] (April 17, 2007)

* It makes no sense to tell the enemy when you plan to start withdrawing. All the terrorists would have to do is mark their calendars and gather their strength -- and begin plotting how to overthrow the government and take control of the country of Iraq. I believe setting a deadline for withdrawal would demoralize the Iraqi people, would encourage killers across the broader Middle East, and send a signal that America will not keep its commitments. Setting a deadline for withdrawal is setting a date for failure -- and that would be irresponsible.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070501-6.html President Bush Rejects Artificial Deadline, Vetoes Iraq War Supplemental] (May 1, 2007)

* As you watch the developments in Baghdad, it's important to understand that we will not be able to prevent every al Qaeda attack. When a terrorist is willing to kill himself to kill others, it's really hard to stop him. Yet, over time, the security operation in Baghdad is designed to shrink the areas where al Qaeda can operate, it's designed to bring out more intelligence about their presence, and designed to allow American and Iraqi forces to dismantle their network.We have a strategy to deal with al Qaeda in Iraq. But any time you say to a bunch of cold-blooded killers, success depends on no violence, all that does is hand them the opportunity to be successful. And it's hard. I know it's hard for the American people to turn on their TV screens and see the horrific violence. It speaks volumes about the American desire to protect lives of innocent people, America's deep concern about human rights and human dignity. It also speaks volumes about al Qaeda, that they're willing to take innocent life to achieve political objectives.The terrorists will continue to fight back. In other words, they understand what they're doing. And casualties are likely to stay high. Yet, day by day, block by block, we are steadfast in helping Iraqi leaders counter the terrorists, protect their people, and reclaim the capital. And if I didn't think it was necessary for the security of the country, I wouldn't put our kids in harm's way....Either we'll succeed, or we won't succeed. And the definition of success as I described is sectarian violence down. Success is not, no violence. There are parts of our own country that have got a certain level of violence to it. But success is a level of violence where the people feel comfortable about living their daily lives. And that's what we're trying to achieve.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070502-2.html President Bush Discusses War on Terror, Economy with Associated General Contractors of America] (May 2, 2007)

* The question is, who ought to make that decision? The Congress or the commanders? And as you know, my position is clear — I'm a commander guy.
** On who should decide when to increase or decrease troop levels in Iraq
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070502-2.html President Bush Discusses War on Terror, Economy with Associated General Contractors of America] (May 2, 2007)

* You helped our nation celebrate its Bicentennial in 17- ''[hastily corrects himself]'' in 1976. ''[Queen gives him a sharp look and mutters inaudibly]'' She gave me a look that only a mother could give a child.
** [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/05/07/bush-to-queen-you-helpe_n_47847.html Speech to Queen Elizabeth II] during her visit to the White House. (May 7, 2007)

* If you want to kill the bill, if you don't want to do what's right for America, you can pick one little aspect out of it, you can use it to frighten people. Or you can show leadership and solve this problem once and for all, so the people who wear the uniform in this crowd can do the job we expect them to do.
** Speaking at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070529-7.html regarding the proposed immigration bill] (May 29, 2007)

* I'll see you at the [[w:Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007|bill]] signing.
** [http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8PMHMA03&show_article=1 ''Bush Vows to Get Immigration Bill Done''] (June 11, 2007)

* Destroying human life in the hopes of saving human life is not ethical...
** Speaking [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/06/20070620-8.html regarding his veto of the most recent stem cell research bill] (June 20, 2007)

* I've heard he's been called Bush's poodle. He's bigger than that.
** ''speaking with the Sun on former British Prime Minister Tony Blair'' ([[June 27]], [[2007]]) {{fact}}

* I respect the jury’s verdict. But I have concluded that the prison sentence given to Mr. Libby is excessive. Therefore, I am commuting the portion of Mr. Libby’s sentence that required him to spend thirty months in prison.
** [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19570172/ Statement on I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby decision] (July 2, 2007)

* It's more of a theological perspective. I do believe there is an Almighty, and I believe a gift of that Almighty to all is freedom. And I will tell you that is a principle that no one can convince me that doesn't exist.
** [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/19/AR2007071901957.html Statement on the justification for the Iraq War] (July 20, 2007)

* We're kicking ass (in Iraq).
** speaking to Deputy Prime Minister of Australia about his stopover in Iraq en route to Sydney, "[http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/by-george-now-its-all-the-way-with-howard-j/2007/09/05/1188783320123.html By George: now it's all the way with Howard J]" Sydney Morning Herald (September 6, 2007)

* (He) ... said he'd like to be there but "One, I'm too old to be out there, and two, they would notice me."
** Speaking to military in Afghanistan, "[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2007/09/17/BL2007091700952_pf.html Bush's Battlefield Envy]" Washington Post, (September 17, 2007)

* I thought an interesting comment was made when somebody said to me, I heard somebody say, where's Mandela? Well, Mandela is dead, because Saddam Hussein killed all the Mandelas.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/09/20070920-2.html White House Press Conference] (September 20, 2007)
*** [http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/09/20/gwb-saddam-killed-mandelas/ Video]

* As yesterday's positive report card shows, childrens do learn when standards are high and results are measured.
** In [http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2623880720070926 speech] to schoolchildren in [[w:New York City|New York City]], urging [[w:United States Congress|Congress]] to reauthorize the [[w:No Child Left Behind Act|No Child Left Behind Act]], ([[September 26]], [[2007]]) [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ej7ZEnjSeA&feature=related Video:]

* United States can't impose peace. We can encourage the development of a state.... We can facilitate that. But we can't force people to make hard decisions. They're gonna have to do that themselves.... Gotta ask yourselves, why don't they want there to be a democracy. The answer is, because it doesn't fit in with their ideological vision.
** Oct. 17, 2007 press conference, talking about the Palestinians (not the Iraqis) {{fact}}

* We got a leader in Iran who has announced that he wants to destroy Israel. So I've told people that if you're interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them from have the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/10/20071017.html Press Conference] (October 17, 2007)

* Sometimes we must fight terror with tyranny. [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/11/20071107.html Press Conference] (November 7, 2007 press conference, talking about Pakistan)

==== Address to Nation ([[January 10]], [[2007]]) ====
[http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/01/20070110-7.html Address to the Nation] ([[January 10]], [[2007]])
* The situation in Iraq is unacceptable to the American people -- and it is unacceptable to me. Our troops in Iraq have fought bravely. They have done everything we have asked them to do. Where mistakes have been made, the responsibility rests with me.
**I've made it clear to the Prime Minister and Iraq's other leaders that America's commitment is not open-ended. If the Iraqi government does not follow through on its promises, it will lose the support of the American people -- and it will lose the support of the Iraqi people. Now is the time to act.

* Fellow citizens: The year ahead will demand more patience, sacrifice, and resolve. It can be tempting to think that America can put aside the burdens of freedom. Yet times of testing reveal the character of a nation. And throughout our history, Americans have always defied the pessimists and seen our faith in freedom redeemed. Now America is engaged in a new struggle that will set the course for a new century. We can, and we will, prevail.

* Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity and stabilizing the region in the face of extremist challenges. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria. These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We'll interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.

=== 2008 ===

* ...a clear lesson I learned in the [[w:Murambi Technical School|museum]] was that outside forces that tend to divide people up inside their country are unbelievably counterproductive. In other words, people came from other countries — I guess you’d call them colonialists — and they pitted one group of people against another.
** Press Availability with President Kagame of Rwanda (February 19, 2008) [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2008/02/20080219-6.html] [http://thinkprogress.org/2008/02/20/bush-outside-forces-tend-to-divide-people-up]

* Wait, what did you just say? You're predicting $4 a gallon gasoline?. . . That's interesting. I hadn't heard that.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2008/02/20080228-2.html Whitehouse Press Conference], after being asked about the prospect of Americans facing $4 for a gallon of gasoline (February 28, 2008)

* I hadn’t heard that.... I, frankly, have been focused elsewhere, like on gasoline prices.
** Explaining, first, that he hadn't heard gas prices were climbing to $4, then explaining he was focused on gas prices in response to a question of what groups fund his library; press conference, February 28, 2008 [http://thinkprogress.org/2008/02/28/bush-falsely-claims-hes-focused-on-gas-prices/ Watch video]

* The bill Congress sent me would take away one of the most valuable tools in the war on terror -- the CIA program to detain and question key terrorist leaders and operatives.
** [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2008/03/20080308.html President's Radio Address], regarding the President's veto of a bill that would have banned waterboarding as an interrogation technique (March 8, 2008)

* I must say, I'm a little envious. If I were slightly younger and not employed here, I think it would be a fantastic experience to be on the front lines of helping this young democracy succeed. It must be exciting for you ... in some ways romantic, in some ways, you know, confronting danger. You're really making history, and thanks.
** [http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1333111120080313?feedType=RSS&feedName=politicsNews Videoconference call with U.S. military and civilian personnel] about the challenges of the war in Afghanistan (March 13, 2008)

* It's viewed as an anti-Russian device. Well, it's not.
** [http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/04/01/bush.nato/index.html?iref=hpmostpop Commenting on missile defence shield at a news conference in Kiev following talks with the Ukrainian president]

* And yes, I'm aware our national security team met on this issue. And I approved.... I told the country we did that. And I also told them it was legal. We had legal opinions that enabled us to do it.
** [http://www.miamiherald.com/519/story/492943.html In an interview] regarding his awareness that his top national security advisors had discussed the details of harsh interrogation tactics to be used on detainees (April 11, 2008)

* Goodbye, from the world's biggest polluter.
** Concluding a private address at the Tokyo G8 summit; July 12, 2008; [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/2277298/President-George-Bush-'Goodbye-from-the-world's-biggest-polluter'.html]

* If money isn't loosened up, this sucker could go down.
** Summing up the risk to the global economy if Congressional leaders failed to approve Treasury Secretary Paulson's $700 billion financial bailout plan, at a bipartisan meeting hosted by the White House (September 26, 2008); [http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/markets/united_states/article4834487.ece]

* I suspected there would be a good-size crowd once the word got out about my hanging.
** Comments at the unveiling of his National Portrait (19 December 2008) [http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article5371693.ece]

=== 2009 ===

* I'm going to put people in my place, so when the history of this administration is written at least there's an authoritarian voice saying exactly what happened.
** Discussing his forthcoming book ([http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/17/bush-abstains-from-critic_n_176032.html ''Associated Press'', March 17, 2009])

==== Farewell speech to the nation ([[January 15]], [[2009]]) ====
:[http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/15/us/politics/15bush-text.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 George W Bush farewell speech to the nation in the white House (January 15, 2009)]

* Fellow citizens: For eight years, it has been my honor to serve as your President. The first decade of this new century has been a period of consequence – a time set apart. Tonight, with a thankful heart, I have asked for a final opportunity to share some thoughts on the journey we have traveled together and the future of our Nation.

* Five days from now, the world will witness the vitality of American democracy. In a tradition dating back to our founding, the presidency will pass to a successor chosen by you, the American people. Standing on the steps of the Capitol will be a man whose story reflects the enduring promise of our land. This is a moment of hope and pride for our whole Nation. And I join all Americans in offering best wishes to President-elect Obama, his wife Michelle, and their two beautiful girls.

* This evening, my thoughts return to the first night I addressed you from this house – September 11, 2001. That morning, terrorists took nearly 3,000 lives in the worst attack on America since Pearl Harbor. I remember standing in the rubble of the World Trade Center three days later, surrounded by rescuers who had been working around the clock. I remember talking to brave souls who charged through smoke-filled corridors at the Pentagon and to husbands and wives whose loved ones became heroes aboard Flight 93. I remember Arlene Howard, who gave me her fallen son's police shield as a reminder of all that was lost. And I still carry his badge.

* As the years passed, most Americans were able to return to life much as it had been before Nine-Eleven. But I never did. Every morning, I received a briefing on the threats to our Nation. And I vowed to do everything in my power to keep us safe.

* There is legitimate debate about many of these decisions. But there can be little debate about the results. America has gone more than seven years without another terrorist attack on our soil. This is a tribute to those who toil day and night to keep us safe – law enforcement officers, intelligence analysts, homeland security and diplomatic personnel, and the men and women of the United States Armed Forces. Our Nation is blessed to have citizens who volunteer to defend us in this time of danger. I have cherished meeting these selfless patriots and their families. America owes you a debt of gratitude. And to all our men and women in uniform listening tonight: There has been no higher honor than serving as your Commander in Chief.

* The battles waged by our troops are part of a broader struggle between two dramatically different systems. Under one, a small band of fanatics demands total obedience to an oppressive ideology, condemns women to subservience, and marks unbelievers for murder. The other system is based on the conviction that freedom is the universal gift of Almighty God and that liberty and justice light the path to peace.

* This is the belief that gave birth to our Nation. And in the long run, advancing this belief is the only practical way to protect our citizens. When people live in freedom, they do not willingly choose leaders who pursue campaigns of terror. When people have hope in the future, they will not cede their lives to violence and extremism. So around the world, America is promoting human liberty, human rights, and human dignity. We are standing with dissidents and young democracies, providing AIDS medicine to bring dying patients back to life, and sparing mothers and babies from malaria. And this great republic born alone in liberty is leading the world toward a new age when freedom belongs to all nations.

* Like all who have held this office before me, I have experienced setbacks. There are things I would do differently if given the chance. Yet I have always acted with the best interests of our country in mind. I have followed my conscience and done what I thought was right. You may not agree with some tough decisions I have made. But I hope you can agree that I was willing to make the tough decisions.

* While our Nation is safer than it was seven years ago, the gravest threat to our people remains another terrorist attack. Our enemies are patient and determined to strike again. America did nothing to seek or deserve this conflict. But we have been given solemn responsibilities, and we must meet them. We must resist complacency. We must keep our resolve. And we must never let down our guard. At the same time, we must continue to engage the world with confidence and clear purpose. In the face of threats from abroad, it can be tempting to seek comfort by turning inward. But we must reject isolationism and its companion, protectionism. Retreating behind our borders would only invite danger. In the 21st century, security and prosperity at home depend on the expansion of liberty abroad. If America does not lead the cause of freedom, that cause will not be led.

* As we address these challenges – and others we cannot foresee tonight – America must maintain our moral clarity. I have often spoken to you about good and evil. This has made some uncomfortable. But good and evil are present in this world, and between the two there can be no compromise. Murdering the innocent to advance an ideology is wrong every time, everywhere. Freeing people from oppression and despair is eternally right. This nation must continue to speak out for justice and truth. We must always be willing to act in their defense and to advance the cause of peace.

* President Thomas Jefferson once wrote, "I like the dreams of the future better than the history of the past." As I leave the house he occupied two centuries ago, I share that optimism. America is a young country, full of vitality, constantly growing and renewing itself. And even in the toughest times, we lift our eyes to the broad horizon ahead.

* In citizens like these, we see the best of our country – resilient and hopeful, caring and strong. These virtues give me an unshakable faith in America. We have faced danger and trial, and there is more ahead. But with the courage of our people and confidence in our ideals, this great Nation will never tire … never falter … and never fail.

* It has been the privilege of a lifetime to serve as your President. There have been good days and tough days. But every day I have been inspired by the greatness of our country and uplifted by the goodness of our people. I have been blessed to represent this Nation we love. And I will always be honored to carry a title that means more to me than any other: citizen of the United States of America. And so, my fellow Americans, for the final time: Good night. May God bless this house and our next President. And may God bless you and our wonderful country.

==Attributed==

===Misquotations===

* I don't know where he [Osama Bin Laden] is. I have no idea and I really don't care.
** This misquotation is frequently attributed to a White House press conference, [[March 13]], [[2002]] [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html]
** Correct quote should read: "And, again, I don't know where he [Osama Bin Laden] is. I — I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him."
** The relevant parts of the White House transcript reads:
**: THE PRESIDENT: Deep in my heart I know the man is on the run, if he's alive at all. Who knows if he's hiding in some cave or not; we haven't heard from him in a long time. And the idea of focusing on one person is — really indicates to me people don't understand the scope of the mission. Terror is bigger than one person. And he's just — he's a person who's now been marginalized. His network, his host government has been destroyed. He's the ultimate parasite who found weakness, exploited it, and met his match. He is — as I mentioned in my speech, I do mention the fact that this is a fellow who is willing to commit youngsters to their death and he, himself, tries to hide — if, in fact, he's hiding at all. So I don't know where he is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him, Kelly, to be honest with you. I'm more worried about making sure that our soldiers are well-supplied; that the strategy is clear; that the coalition is strong; that when we find enemy bunched up like we did in Shahikot Mountains, that the military has all the support it needs to go in and do the job, which they did.
**: Q: But don't you believe that the threat that bin Laden posed won't truly be eliminated until he is found either dead or alive?
**: THE PRESIDENT: Well, as I say, we haven't heard much from him. And I wouldn't necessarily say he's at the center of any command structure. And, again, I don't know where he is. I — I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him. I know he is on the run. I was concerned about him, when he had taken over a country. I was concerned about the fact that he was basically running Afghanistan and calling the shots for the Taliban.

* The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him.
** Alleged to have been made in a [[September 13]], [[2001]] press conference. This wording has not been confirmed.

* If we don't stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, then we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road.
** Quotation is from the [[October 3]], [[2000]] Presidential debate with [[Al Gore]], but is taken out of context. Bush was paraphrasing Colin Powell and Norman Schwarzkopf:
***The other day, I was honored to be flanked by [[Colin Powell]] and General Norman Schwarzkopf, who stood by my side and agreed with me. They said we could, even though we're the strongest military, that if we don't do something quickly, we don't have a clearer vision of the military, if we don't stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, then we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road. And I'm going to prevent that. I'm going to rebuild our military power. It's one of the major priorities of my administration.[http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/debates/transcripts/u221003.html]

{{Misattributed begin}}
===Misattributed===
* We will export death and violence to the four corners of the earth in defense of our great nation.
** The quote is from ''Bush at War'' by Bob Woodward, but it was not said by Bush. Woodward attributes the quote to one among "about 25 men representing three different Special Forces units and three CIA paramilitary teams" during the dedication of a September 11th memorial in the mountains of Afghanistan on [[February 5]], [[2002]].

* Numerous remarks that were previously attributed (in some cases correctly) to [[Dan Quayle]]
** See, for example, Margo Kingston (2000-11-20), "[http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/11/20/1069027245968.html From the lips of a likely leader of the free world ...]", ''Sydney Morning Herald.
{{Misattributed end}}

===Private===
These remarks were allegedly made by Bush outside the presence of reporters, and have not been confirmed by Bush's representatives nor denied by representatives of anyone present.

* I will screw him in the ass.
**[[Ariel Sharon]], speaking to Israeli reporter Uri Dan, claimed that Bush said this when asked what he would do if he caught [[Osama bin Laden]]. See Uri Dan (2007), ''Ariel Sharon: An Intimate Portrait''

* I thought the Iraqis were Muslims.
**Meeting with three Iraqi-Americans before the invasion of Iraq, regarding a potential conflict between followers of Shia and Sunni Islam. See Peter Galbraith (2006), ''The End of Iraq: How American Incompetence Created A War Without End''.

* [[w:Gog and Magog|Gog and Magog]] are at work in the Middle East. The biblical prophecies are being fulfilled. This confrontation is willed by God who wants this conflict to erase his people's enemies before a new age begins.
**Former French president [[Jacques Chirac]] claimed in late 2009 that Bush made these statements to him at some point prior the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 while "appealing to him as a Christian" and attempting to convince him to have France join the invasion. [http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/columnists/richard-ingrams/richard-ingramsrsquos-week-blair-must-be-quizzed-over-bushs-biblical-crusade-1855418.html The Independent, 2 January 2010]

* Haven't we already given money to rich people? This second tax cut's gonna do it again. Didn't we already, why are we doing it again?… shouldn’t we be giving money to the middle?
** Remarks during a 2002 White House meeting referring to Bush's second tax cut proposal, as recalled by then-[[w:United States Secretary of the Treasury|Treasury Secretary]] [[w:Paul O'Neill (cabinet member)|Paul O'Neill]]. Reported in Ron Suskind (2004), ''[[w:The Price of Loyalty|The Price of Loyalty]]'', ISBN 0-7432-5545-3.

* I trust God speaks through me. Without that, I couldn't do my job.
**Private meeting with Old Order Amish in Lancaster, Pennsylvania (9 July 2004), reported in Jack Brubacker (2004-07-16), "[http://web.archive.org/web/20040722021601/http://lancasteronline.com/pages/news/local/4/7565 Bush quietly meets with Amish here; they offer their prayers]," ''Lancaster New Era''

* Stop throwing the Constitution in my face. It's just a goddamned piece of paper!
**Remarks during an oval office meeting (November 2005), attributed in Doug Thompson (2000-12-10), [http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_7779.shtml The Rant: Bush on the Constitution: 'It's just a goddamned piece of paper']," ''Capitol Hill Blue''. Thompson claims to have contacted three unidentified people who attended the meeting for verification. Thompson acknowledges that he has often written reports without authenticating his sources and has ended up retracting many of them, but he stands by this particular report.[http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/print_did_president_bush_call_the_constitution_a.html]

{{disputed begin}}
=== Disputed ===
* The problem with the French is that they don't have a word for "entrepreneur."
** Shirley Williams, Baroness Williams of Crosby, described this as a remark to [[Tony Blair]] in a discussion of the French economy during the G8 Summit, according to Jack Malvern (9 July 2002), "Bush and Blair, ''The Times'' . Alastair Campbell, Blair's director of communications, later said that Blair never heard Bush say this and never told Baroness Williams that he said it. See Lloyd Grove (2002-07-10) "The Reliable Source," ''Washington Post''.

* We're not going to have any casualties.
**[[Pat Robertson]] claims that Bush said this to him in Nashville, Tennessee before the March 2003 invasion of Iraq. Bush campaign advisor Karen Hughes, who was not working in Washington at the time of the invasion, claimed in 2004 that Bush did not say this. See John King (2004-10-21), "[http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/19/robertson.bush.iraq/index.html No casualties? White House disputes Robertson comment]," ''CNN.com''.

* I'm driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan. And I did, and then God would tell me, George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq… And I did. And now, again, I feel God's words coming to me, go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East. And by God I'm gonna do it.
** According to Palestinian negotiator [[w:Nabil Shaath|Nabil Shaath]], said by Bush to him, apparently in the same June 2003 meeting, as reported by BBC News [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4317498.stm]. Shaath later clarified this with "We understood that he was illustrating [in his comments] his strong faith and his belief that this is what God wanted." [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4320586.stm], i.e. Shaath didn't take Bush's statement literally.
** Denied by White House spokesperson [[w:Scott McClellan|Scott McClellan]], [[October 6]], [[2005]]. Denied also by [[Mahmoud Abbas]], who attended the meeting in question. Abbas said "This report is not true. I have never heard President Bush talking about religion as a reason behind the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. President Bush has never mentioned that in front of me on any occasion and specifically not during my visit in 2003." [http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/abbas-denies-bushs-mission-from-god-remark/2005/10/08/1128563027485.html].

{{disputed end}}

== Quotes about Bush ==
:Alphabetized by author 

*[President George W. Bush] has a vision which can be described with two other words: [[Manichaean paranoia]] ... the notion that he is leading the forces of good against the empire of evil, that in that setting, the fact that we are morally superior justifies us committing immoral acts. And that is a very dangerous posture for the country that is the number one global power. ... The fact is he squandered our credibility, our legitimacy, and even respect for our power."
** [[Zbigniew Brzezinski]], ''The Daily Show with Jon Stewart'', March 14, 2007. [http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-march-14-2007/zbigniew-brzezinski]

* He does not believe that God told him to run for president. He does not believe that God told him he would win, and he certainly does not believe that God told him to drop bombs anywhere in the world.
**Rev. [[w:Kirbyjon Caldwell|Kirbyjon Caldwell]], friend of Bush; quoted in Ann Rodgers (2004-09-11) "Pastor says Bush is no zealot." ''Pittsburg Post-Gazette''

* I hate the way [President Bush] walks--shoulders flexed, elbows splayed out from his sides like a teenage boy feigning machismo.
** [[w:Jonathan Chait|Jonathan Chait]], [http://www.tnr.com/article/mad-about-you Mad about you], ''The New Republic'', September 29, 2003.

* You messed up with me, birdie. No? You don't know much about history. You don't know much about anything, you know? A great ignorance is what you've got. You are ignorant, Mr. Danger. You are an ignorant. '''You are a donkey, Mr. Danger''' ... By that I mean, you know, to say it with all its letters, to Mr. George W. Bush. You are a donkey, Mr. Bush. I'm going to tell you something, Mr. Danger. You are a coward, you know? You are a coward. Why don't you go to Iraq and command your army? It's so easy to command an army from afar. If you ever come up with the crazy idea of invading Venezuela, I'll be waiting for you in this savanna, Mr. Danger. Come on here, Mr. Danger. Come on here. Come on here, Mr. Danger. Coward, assassin, genocidal... Genocidal, you are a genocidal. You are an alcoholic, a drunk.. A drunk, Mr. Danger. You are immoral, Mr. Danger... You are the worst ever, Mr. Danger ... The worst of this planet, the very worst is called George W. Bush. God save the world from this menace. Because he is an assassin. A sick man, a psychologically ill man, I know it. Personally, he is a coward. But he has a lot of power. He has a lot of power. And look at what's happening in Iraq. Yesterday the world marched against the war... 70%, according to the surveys I've seen, of your own people, Mr. Danger, are against you, against the war. You are a liar, Mr. Danger. You are killing children, Mr. Danger, who aren't responsible for your illnesses, of your complexes. Your soldiers in Iraq are bombing cities. Just yesterday we were watching images of five children who were murdered by you soldiers. They're not the murderers. You are the murderer, coward!
** [[Hugo Chávez]], president of Venezuela, in a nationally televised [http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2_lJbIyzT64 speech] (March 2006).

* ''El diablo está en casa. Ayer estuvo el diablo aquí, en este mismo lugar. Huele a azufre todavía.''
** The devil is at home. The devil was here yesterday, in this very place. It still smells like sulfur.
** [[Hugo Chavez]], addressing the United Nations General Assembly (20 September 2006)[http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/20/world/americas/20cnd-chavez.html?ex=1316404800&en=091c3d793a1a96d2&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss]

*I stand by this man. I stand by this man because he stands for things. Not only for things, he stands on things. Things like aircraft carriers and rubble and recently flooded city squares. And that sends a strong message, that no matter what happens to America, she will always rebound — with the most powerfully staged photo ops in the world.
** [[Stephen Colbert]], White House Press Association Dinner ({{#formatdate:2006-04-29}}), quoted in ''New York Times'' (17 September 2006) "My Satirical Self" by Wyatt Mason

* The greatest thing about this man is he's steady. You know where he stands. '''He believes the same thing Wednesday that he believed on Monday — no matter what happened Tuesday.'''
** [[Stephen Colbert]], White House Press Association Dinner ({{#formatdate:2006-04-29}})

* Do as George Bush said, not as he didn't do.
** [[Stephen Colbert]] on ''[[The Colbert Report]]'' (3 December 2009)

* Economy is on the rise, kicking into overdrive / Angry liberals can't believe it's cause of W's policies / Unemployment's staying down, Democrats are wondering how / revenue is going up, can you say "tax cuts" / Bush was right! / Bush was right! / Bush was right!
** Frank Highland (of {{w|The Right Brothers}}), "Bush Was Right" (song) (October 2005)

*His eyes are so close together he could use a monocle.
** [[Christopher Hitchens]], {{cite web
| date = [[September 23]], [[2005]]
| url = http://www.hbo.com/billmaher/episode/2005_09_23_ep61.html
| title = "Episode 61"
| work = Real Time with Bill Maher
| accessdate = 2007-03-01
}}

*He's unusually incurious, abnormally unintelligent, amazingly inarticulate, fantastically uncultured, extraordinarily uneducated and apparently quite proud of all of these things.
**[[Christopher Hitchens]], {{cite web
| date = [[October 31]], [[2000]]
| url = http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fg6IVEgNu18&feature=related
| title = Hardball with Chris Matthews
| accessdate = 2010-11-21
}}

* He knows I have nothing, no mass weapons. He knows he'll never find them.
**[[Saddam Hussein]], remark to Pennsylvania National Guard Spc. Jesse Dawson quoted ''GQ'' (June 2005) "Tuesdays with Saddam" by Lisa DePaulo

*That international criminal, I mean George Bush... If there is any justice in the world, undoubtedly, this man and his ilk, without a doubt, should be sentenced to 100 deaths. There is no doubt about it.
**Yahyah Ja'fari, [http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sd&ID=SP157807 Friday Sermon in Kerman, Iran] May 2007

* I said that a solution to the problems right now, I told Bush, is a Marshall Plan. He got angry. He said the Marshall Plan is a crazy idea of the Democrats. He said the best way to revitalize the economy is war and that the United States has grown stronger with war.… Those were his exact words.… The Democrats had been wrong. All of the economic growth of the United States has been encouraged by wars. He said it very clearly.
**Argentinian President Néstor Kirchner in the film South of the Border, referring to a meeting in Monterrey, Mexico (January 2004)

*George W. Bush has inadvertently destroyed only Baghdad, not Washington, and the costs of the Iraq war in blood and treasure are far less than those of Korea and Vietnam. Yet he will be remembered for the Iraq conflict for generations, long after tax-cut-driven deficits, No Child Left Behind and comprehensive immigration reform are forgotten. The fact that Bush followed the invasion of Afghanistan, which had sheltered al-Qaeda, with the toppling of Saddam Hussein, will puzzle historians for centuries. It is as though, after Japan had bombed Pearl Harbor, FDR had asked Congress to declare war on Argentina.
**[[w:Michael Lind|Michael Lind]], [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/01/AR2006120101475.html "He's Only Fifth Worst"] (December 3, 2006)

* I heard Bush say, "You know, the truth is I honestly don't remember whether I tried it or not. We had some pretty wild parties back in the day, and I just don't remember.' I remember thinking to myself, How can that be? How can someone simply not remember whether or not they used an illegal substance like cocaine? It didn't make a lot of sense.
** Bush press secretary [[Scott McClellan]], on the cocaine rumors that surfaced during the 2000 campaign, ''What Happened'', pp. 48-49

* As I have heard Bush say, only a wartime president is likely to achieve greatness, in part because the epochal upheavals of war provide the opportunity for transformative change of the kind Bush hoped to achieve. In Iraq, Bush saw his opportunity to create a legacy of greatness.
** Bush press secretary Scott McClellan, on Bush's need to be a wartime president to improve the chance of a "great" legacy, ''What Happened'', pp. 131

* As a Texas loyalist who followed Bush to Washington with great hope and personal affection and as a proud member of his administration, I was all too ready to give him and his highly experienced foreign policy advisers the benefit of the doubt on Iraq. Unfortunately, subsequent events have showed that our willingness to trust the judgment of Bush and his team was misplaced.
** Bush press secretary Scott McClellan, ''What Happened'' [http://www.ajc.com/meetro/content/news/stories/2008/05/27/mcclellanbook_0527.html]

* I do not believe that the President was in any way directly involved in the leaking of her identity, but that was a very disillusioning moment for me when I found out when it initially hit the press, and I was in North Carolina, if I remember correctly, and a reporter shouted out to the President, "Is it true that you authorized the secret leaking of this classified information?" We walked onto Air Force One, and the President asks, "What was the reporter asking?", and I said, "He asserted that you were the one who authorized [[w:Scooter Libby|Scooter Libby]] leaking this information," and he said, "Yeah, I did."
** Bush press secretary Scott McClellan, on illegal leaking of counter-terrorist CIA agent identity; May 29, 2008; [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3719710/ Countdown]

* This is the dysfunctions and motivations of the Bush administration laid bare.
** U.S. Congressman Ed Markey, on former EPA advisor Jason Burnett's claim that the Bush administration ordered portions of Congressional testimony regarding the public health effects of global warming deleted.[http://www.time.com/time/quotes/0,26174,1825345,00.html] [http://www.smartmoney.com/news/ON/index.cfm?story=ON-20080718-000774-2229]

* In a 2003 poll, most Indonesians had a higher opinion of Osama bin Laden than they did of George W. Bush.
** [[Barack Obama]], ''The Audacity of Hope'', Page 278

* US President Bush is a great leader, great friend of Israel and a source of inspiration.
** [[Ehud Olmert]], May 14, 2008 [http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3543472,00.html]

* You know, [[Vince Lombardi]] once said that success is not about strength, it's not about knowledge, but it's about will. And that's the leadership that President George W. Bush has provided. Thank you, Mr. President.
** Georgia Governor [[w:Sonny Perdue|Sonny Perdue]], introducing Bush at the Republican Governors Association's Annual Gala, [[26 February]] [[2007]]
** Video clip, opening monologue, ''[[w:The Tonight Show with Jay Leno|The Tonight Show with Jay Leno]]'', [[27 February]] [[2007]]{{fact}}

* Who will demand accountability for the failure of our national political leadership involved in the management of this war? They have unquestionably been derelict in the performance of their duty. In my profession, these types of leaders would immediately be relieved or court martialed.
** Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, 10-12-07, [http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/wariniraq/ricardosanchezmilitaryreportersforum.htm]

* I think he's a man of good intentions. I don't doubt it. But I think he's leading us in the wrong direction.
** [[George Soros]], in [http://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/transcript_soros.html Interview with David Brancaccio (12 September 2003)]

* President Bush inadvertently played right into the hands of bin Laden. The invasion of Afghanistan was justified: that was where [[Osama bin Laden|bin Laden]] lived and al Qaeda had its training camps. The invasion of Iraq was not similarly justified. It was President Bush's unintended gift to bin Laden.
** [[George Soros]], in [http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/soros27 "Why We Must Not Reelect President Bush" (2004)], the first U.S. political advertisement by Soros, published in ''The Wall Street Journal'' and 39 regional newspapers (October 2004)

* Whether you love or loathe George W. Bush, you can not deny that he has learned how to read a teleprompter.
** T. J. Walker, {{cite web|date=[[February 1]], [[2006]]|url=http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/walker200602010038.asp|title=No Smirk!|work=National Review Online|accessdate=2007-06-29}}

==External links==
{{wikipedia}}
{{wikisource author}}
{{commons| George W. Bush}}
* [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/president/gwbbio.html Biography at the Official White House site]
* [http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/presiden/inaug/gbush1.htm Inaugural Address 2001]
* [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010911-16.html Statement by the President in His Address to the Nation, [[September 11]], [[2001]]]
* [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020129-11.html State of the Union, [[January 29]], [[2002]]]
* [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030128-19.html State of the Union [[January 28]], [[2003]]]
* [http://www.ned.org/events/anniversary/oct1603-Bush.html National Endowment for Democracy, 20th anniversary]
* [http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2004/01/20040120-7.html State of the Union [[January 20]], [[2004]]]
* [http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/piehigher.asp Snopes.com on Bush malapropisms and misattributions]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Bush, George Walker}}

[[Category:United States Presidents]]
[[Category:Christians]]
[[Category:Texans]]
[[Category:Living people]]

[[af:George W. Bush]]
[[az:Corc Uoker Buş]]
[[bg:Джордж Уокър Буш]]
[[bs:George Bush]]
[[ca:George Walker Bush]]
[[cs:George Walker Bush]]
[[de:George W. Bush]]
[[et:George W. Bush]]
[[es:George W. Bush]]
[[eo:George W. Bush]]
[[eu:George W. Bush]]
[[fa:جورج دبلیو بوش]]
[[fr:George W. Bush]]
[[gl:George Walker Bush]]
[[ko:조지 W. 부시]]
[[hr:George W. Bush]]
[[it:George W. Bush]]
[[he:ג'ורג' ווקר בוש]]
[[li:George W. Bush]]
[[hu:George W. Bush]]
[[nl:George Walker Bush]]
[[ja:ジョージ・W・ブッシュ]]
[[no:George Walker Bush]]
[[pl:George W. Bush]]
[[pt:George Walker Bush]]
[[ru:Джордж Уокер Буш]]
[[sq:George W. Bush]]
[[sk:George W. Bush]]
[[sl:George W. Bush]]
[[sr:Џорџ Буш]]
[[fi:George W. Bush]]
[[sv:George W. Bush]]
[[tr:George W. Bush]]
[[uk:Джордж Вокер Буш]]
[[zh:乔治·沃克·布什]]

Wikiquote:Village pump

2013-10-15T19:36:06Z

EVula: /* Images make mobile site UNREADABLE */ comment

__NEWSECTIONLINK__
{{Wikiquote:Village pump/Header}}

== Let's have some real last words about fake last words ==

Okay, the whole "last words in whatever" type articles frustrate me. They just don't strike me as anything worthwhile. Basically everything in [[:Category:Fictional last words]] is worthless.

Look at [[Last words in God of War series games]]; quoting "Unnamed Woman"? Oh yeah, very beneficial. Or [[Last words in Tales From the Crypt media]]; the entire show features lots of people dying, so we get gems like "What? No!", "Where's Alan?", and "Yes, let's." [[Last words in The X-Files media]] has similarly inane quotes: "No.", "Wow...", and "No." (yes, that's a repeat, because that's someone's last word multiple times) [[Last words in Harry Potter media]] says that ''Harry Potter'' has "yielded many memorable last words", which apparently includes "Harry...Potter...", "You weren't.", "Harry!", and "Ow." ''Aliens'' is one of my all-time favorite movies, and yet [[Last words in Aliens media]] lists such heavy-hitting phrases as "Alright, I'm in! Ramp closed." and "Go!"

If you think I'm picking solely on pop culture articles... well, I kind of am, but I think stuff like [[Fictional last words in literature]] is a bit of a failure as well. It's a complete mishmash of stuff, introducing more than a little bit of redundancy, without any real restriction on what should be added. Then you've got stuff thats even worse, like [[Fictional last words in internet series]] and [[Fictional last words in webcomics]]... Ugh.

That all leads me to my next point. We've got [[WQ:LOQ|limits on quotations]] for fictional material, but these completely sidestep that policy. If something actually ''is'' notable (such as Dumbledore's line "Severus...please..."), it should be placed on the page for that particular piece of media, ideally with a few lines before and after it so that we've got a bit of context for the line.

These aren't real people that we're quoting here; what ''they'' say can be legitimately quotable. These are just fictional people, saying things that someone else wrote, and we've got absolutely no scope for these pages so we can (and do) end up with utterly non-notable quotes from characters who entire purpose is to die.

In an ideal world, all of these pages would be deleted, but I thought I'd at least put a feeler out before trying to run everything thru VfD en masse; I could be the minority opinion here. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 05:57, 16 September 2012 (UTC) Heh, I just realized that the subject line suggests that we all die after discussing this. And this is why I shouldn't write things at 1am. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 15:59, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

::I wholeheartedly agree. While there may be a handful of quite memorable last lines, these would be better served to be placed on the pages for the work in which they appear rather than collections such as these. Most of what appears on these pages is hardly memorable (as demonstrated above by EVula) and require longer contextual information than the length of the "quote" itself. I would support getting rid of all of these pages. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 13:37, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
:::A page of really good last lines would be useful, but impossible to maintain; it would soon be swamped with rubbish.--[[User:Collingwood|Collingwood]] ([[User talk:Collingwood|talk]]) 20:50, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

:Just as a follow-up, here's the VfD: [[Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Category:Fictional last words]]. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 18:10, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
:: I am concerned that it is out of process to have a blanket nomination for so many different articles at different levels of quality and development. What we are really talking about here is not the quality of this set of pages, but having rules and processes, which should be formally established rather than being instituted through the backdoor means of deleting pages that don't conform with unwritten rules. [[User:Collingwood|Collingwood]] contends that "a page of really good last lines would be useful, but impossible to maintain". I agree with the first part, but I think that the possibility of maintaining such a page (and the rational for deleting the existing set of pages) would hinge on the open development of rules and procedures governing such pages. The same process should apply, by the way, to pages like [[Opening lines]]. I would propose, to this end, that rather than engaging in a mass deletion which might force us or a future generation of editors to reinvent the wheel in the future, we implement an objectively sound policy designed to permit a page of notable last words and apply this policy to the pages that now exist. I think that if we delete all of the unoriginal and non-notable examples, and impose limitations per media so that LOQ concerns are not raised, we can ultimately cull these pages to a very small number of significant quotes and merge them into a small number of theme pages. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 16:59, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

In order to avoid a process wherein the good is thrown out with the bad, I have written some proposed guidelines for last words in fictional media. These are, appropriately enough, at [[Wikiquote talk:Fictional characters#Proposed guideline for last words in fictional media]]. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 04:17, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
* Although [[Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Category:Fictional last words|the deletion debate on these pages]] ended without consensus to delete, I would still like to move forward with the guidelines proposed for these pages, which will filter out a lot of what may be considered junk. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 11:54, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

== Improving communication between your wiki and "tech people" ==

Hi. I'm posting this as part of my job for the WMF, where I currently work on technical communications.

As you'll probably agree, communication between Wikipedia contributors and "tech people" (primarily MediaWiki developers, but also designers and other engineers) hasn't always been ideal. In recent years, Wikimedia employees have made efforts to become more transparent, for example by writing [[mw:Category:Wikimedia engineering reports|monthly activity reports]], by providing [[mw:Wikimedia Features engineering|hubs listing current activities]], and by maintaining "[[mw:VisualEditor|activity pages]]" for each significant activity. Furthermore, the [[mw:Wikimedia Engineering/2012-13 Goals|yearly engineering goals]] for the WMF were developed publicly, and the more granular [[:mw:Roadmap|Roadmap]] is updated weekly.

Now, that's all well and such, but what I'd rather like to discuss is how we can better engage in true collaboration and 2-way discussion, not just reports and announcements. It's easy to post a link to a new feature that's already been implemented, and tell users "Please provide feedback!". It's much more difficult to truly collaborate every step of the way, from the early planning to deployment.

Some "big" tech projects sponsored by the WMF are lucky enough to have [[w:User:Okeyes (WMF)|Oliver Keyes]] who can spend a lot of time discussing with editors, basically incarnating this 2-way communication channel between users and engineering staff. But Oliver can only do so much: he has to focus on a handful of features, and primarily discusses with the English Wikipedia community. We want to be able to do this for dozens of engineering projects with hundreds of wikis, in many languages, and truly collaborate to build new features together. Hiring hundreds of Community Liaisons isn't really a viable option.

There are probably things in the way we do tech stuff (e.g. new software features and deployments) that drive you insane. You probably have lots of ideas about what the ideal situation should be, and how to get there: What can the developer community (staff and volunteers) do to get there? (in the short term, medium term, long term?) What can users do to get there?

I certainly don't claim to have all the answers, and I can't do a proper job to improve things without your help. So please help me help make your lives easier, and speak up.

This is intended to be a very open discussion. Unapologetic complaining is fine; suggestions are also welcome. Stock of ponies is limited. [[User:Guillom|guillom]] ([[User talk:Guillom|talk]]) 14:38, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

* I find it a little difficult to address problems of communication in general, so I will be posting some observations about particular situations, and try to generalize from these to respond to your questions about what can be done. First, I would like to mention a general conundrum that is a source of frustration to me: I feel caught in the paradoxical situation of experiencing a ''lack'' of pertinent communication and an unusable ''glut'' of information available. The lack is very apparent when we are repeatedly taken unawares by things that break when changes are rolled out. The glut exists in a multitude of venues where developments are tracked, discussed, announced, etc., at various levels ranging from picayune details to woolgathering generalities. The conundrum for useful communication lies in determining what is relevant to whom – it is not always readily apparent. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 20:28, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
*: On my talk page, [[User:Guillom|guillom]] indicates that feedback here has been incorporated at [http://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Technical_communications/Fall_2012_consultation&oldid=618343 Technical_communications/Fall_2012_consultation] (cited in and linked from reference footnote 2). I note that, in incorporating my feedback into the report/analysis, he picked up on the ''infoglut'' aspect but neglected the point about ''failure to communicate''. This latter was the point of "Case in point: MediaWiki message support" below: failure to provide targeted advance notice of "breaking changes", i.e., those which will break existing functionality. The report focuses on technical solutions to communication problems, but this is primarily a ''cultural'' and ''procedural'' issue, not a technical one. It does not matter what technical means are available if developers are going to act like bulls in a china shop anyway. I also note that the point about documentation was disregarded. Perhaps this is due to some [[Bureaucracy|organizational framework]] in which ''documenting'' what works and how to use it is not within the purview of ''[[wmf:Job openings/Technical Communications Manager|Technical Communications]]''. Technical solutions under consideration focus on access to and searching of bug trackers, mail lists, blogs, & etc. Eavesdropping on ephemera is all well and good, but it is no substitute for looking up definitive answers in comprehensive, up to date, and well organized documentation. The programmers have not historically been keen on providing this. If not the Technical Communications Manager, then who is in a position to make it happen? I might almost get the feeling that attempts to communicate are here futile, due to the perception that end users ''actually'' have nothing worthwhile to communicate. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 20:28, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
*:: I did notice the "failure to communicate" part, and I did add it to the summary, under the phrasing "Messages are missed and communication breakdowns happen because people aren't talking and listening in the same venues". I think that "failure to communicate" is how you experienced the issue in the specific case you detailed below, but it's only one side of the story. The fact is that people ''did'' communicate in advance about the change: Steven Walling started [http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.science.linguistics.wikipedia.technical/65499 a discussion on the wikitech-l list] precisely to ask how to advertise the change. Then, as you mentioned earlier, Nemo_bis left a message on the system message's talk page. Those messages were missed, and I intend to work on how to avoid this in the future, but in this case the problem wasn't that "developers [acted] like bulls in a china shop". It was that the place they were talking and the place you were listening didn't match.
*:: On documentation: I'm only one person, and as much as I'd like to, I don't have the resources, or the authority, to provide a "comprehensive, up to date, and well organized documentation" for every single feature or software change. What I try to do is make sure that ''project'' documentation is up-to-date, with tools like [[mw:Wikimedia Platform Engineering|team hubs]] and [[mw:VisualEditor|activity pages]]. More recently, I've started to expand the [[m:Glossary]] on meta to try and provide a "comprehensive, up to date" first point of entry. More generally, taking the case below as a starting point, what recommendation would you make regarding documentation to improve relations between users and developers?
*:: Last, if I thought that "end users ''actually'' ha[d] nothing worthwhile to communicate", I wouldn't have started (against my boss' wishes) a wide, lengthy and multilingual consultation process to hear their opinions and complaints. I would have just gone ahead, taken the easy path and implemented what I was told to implement, without hearing from end users. For the sake of this discussion, a tiny bit of appreciation here would be more welcome than sarcasm. [[User:Guillom|guillom]] ([[User talk:Guillom|talk]]) 13:14, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
*::: Ok, I'll bite: thank you for at least trying! On a different note, I'd like to see an automated regression suite. Look for patterns in what people complain about. Write something that can look for at least the high-runners that you know about. Then, once you have your initial population of regression cases, every time you add a new feature, think about what makes it important, and add a few new cases to the regression suite. And... never submit any code that doesn't pass the regression suite. If you're sensible about how you implement the code to execute the regression, it should run very quickly. This always beats the heck out of using users as beta testers. (In an earlier life, I managed many teams of developers; one team had internally come up with their own (quite exhaustive) automated regression test suite. Each newcomer to the team would be very skeptical, but the first time it saved their butt, they instantly stopped complaining about "process" and "overhead". That team had the highest customer satisfaction rating, and the lowest number of externally reported defects. I'm sure their first crack at writing the suite hadn't gone very well, but by the time I got there, it was smooth as silk. I was more than happy to help enforce the technical team lead's rule that nothing be put into production until all the regression cases passed, -- and all the new regression cases written -- no matter what the external deadlines wanted.) What does this have to do with communication?
:::# I have utterly no idea who else to suggest this to.
:::# The smoother the introduction of new features, the less communicating you need to do. (I might be wrong, but I have the impression much of the communicating right now, is warning that something might break, or apologizing because it did!) [[Special:Contributions/173.206.176.77|173.206.176.77]] 01:41, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

== GoodReads ==

Hello. As a proof of concept, after it.quote's pages on aNobii[http://www.anobii.com/itwikiquote/books] [http://www.anobii.com/groups/0105f4f6d9a205e8a9/] (which is very popular in Italy), I've created similar pages for en.quote[http://www.goodreads.com/enwikiquote] using the ISBN mentioned in your pages, which however are very few compared to it.quote's and didn't provide a good critical mass. Maybe using the titles without ISBNs would allow to get a better list and have more visibility, but that requires more work; let me know if you want access to the profiles (it's currently tied to a Wikimedia Italia email address). Thanks, [[User:Nemo_bis|Nemo]] 08:41, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

: I notice the account at aNobii and at least three accounts at GoodReads ([http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/4551535-wikiquote] [http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/15657291-wikiquote-in-english] [http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/15656964-wikiquote-francophone]) are using [[wmf:Trademark policy|Wikimedia Foundation trademarks]] (word mark and logo) to identify and represent themselves. Whatever the Foundation might think of this situation, my own opinion, when I have occasionally thought about blogging as a Wikiquotian (which, thus far, better judgment has prevailed against) is that ''it never entered my head'' to use Wikiquote's name and trademarks as my own. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:03, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

::In fact, as the accounts state, these are owned by Wikimedia Italia, which being a chapter as the right to use them. They don't claim to be representing anyone and are merely lists of books, by the way. In any case I said that it's a proof of concept and quite naturally if the community doesn't want to take care of them I'll close them. --[[User:Nemo_bis|Nemo]] 18:40, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

::: I did not see a statement that the accounts are owned by a licensed chapter in the account profiles, presumably because the pertinent portion of the profiles is only visible to registered accountholders at GoodReads. If Wikimedia Italia wants to index books at GoodReads, I suppose that is its business. (Even if it wants to list Italian language works as "in English".) However, it might consider doing so under its own name, in accordance with the standard [[wmf:Agreement between chapters and Wikimedia Foundation]]:
:::* "4.2. The Chapter is obliged to utilize the Wikimedia logo and name in all their related activities and is hereby authorized to do so by the Foundation." (This refers to the [[wmf:Wikimedia visual identity guidelines|Wikimedia logo]] itself.)
::: It might also consider whether this use of the Wikiquote name and logo is consistent with the intent of its limited license under that agreement:
:::* "5.2. The Foundation hereby authorizes the Chapter to utilize these additional marks noncommercially free of any payment or royalties, solely for their own use in publicity, fundraising, media relations and management." (This refers to the [[wmf:Our projects|logos of Wikimedia projects]].)
::: I realize this seems like much ado about nothing, but identities are important. At least as it is displayed to non-registrants at GoodReads, this is not a "referential use" of the Wikiquote trademarks to refer to the project, it is identifying the account as "Wikiquote" rather than as "Wikimedia Italia". ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 20:42, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

:::: Sorry, that's the only way to list and show "the books on Wikiquote" and there's no misrepresentation.
:::: All this discussion is useless, because there are only two possibilities: 1) the community considers it useful to have such a list of books on GoodReads, or 2) it doesn't. If (2), I'll delete the account, problem solved; if (1), we can find out how to do it well, improving clarity of identification etc. Please answer the real question first. Thanks, [[User:Nemo_bis|Nemo]] 10:36, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
:::::Given that there's been active disinterest in addressing the point (i.e. what's good for this project), I've deleted the account as I said. Thanks, [[User:Nemo_bis|Nemo]] 07:01, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Putting on the trademark lawyer hat for a moment, it seems to me that the use of the Wikiquote logo is unnecessary to convey the relationship between the GoodReads page and this project. I would check with the Foundation before presuming to use them. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 19:59, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

== Be a Wikimedia fundraising "User Experience" volunteer! ==

Thank you to everyone who volunteered last year on the Wikimedia fundraising 'User Experience' project. We have talked to many different people in different countries and their feedback has helped us immensely in restructuring our pages. If you haven't heard of it yet, the 'User Experience' project has the goal of understanding the donation experience in different countries (outside the USA) and enhancing the localization of our donation pages.

I am (still) searching for volunteers to spend some time on a Skype chat with me, reviewing their own country's donation pages. It will be done on a 'usability' format (I will ask you to read the text and go through the donation flow) and will be asking your feedback in the meanwhile.

The only pre-requisite is for the volunteer to actually live in the country and to have access to at least one donation method that we offer for that country (mainly credit/debit card, but also real time banking like IDEAL, E-wallets, etc...) so we can do a live test and see if the donation goes through. **All volunteers will be reimbursed of the donations that eventually succeed (and they will be very low amounts, like 1-2 dollars)**

By helping us you are actually helping thousands of people to support our mission of free knowledge across the world. If you are interested (or know of anyone who could be) please email ppena@wikimedia.org. All countries needed (excepting USA)!!

Thanks!

[[m:User:Ppena (WMF)|Pats Pena]] 
Global Fundraising Operations Manager, Wikimedia Foundation

: Sent using [[m:Global message delivery|Global message delivery]], 20:48, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


== Quote citation template ==

Hey Everyone!

I'm very new to Wikiquote, so I apologize for any ignorance. I recently created a page where I used Wikipedia style references and a {{tl|cleanup}} tag was placed on it. This led me to read the Manual of Style, where I see that "The following rules don't claim to be the last word. One way is often as good as another," I started playing around with a template that by default hides the citation, but can be viewed directly underneath the quote if [show] is selected. I was wondering if it would be okay to move this feature into the mainspace for use.

I returned to userspace to work on the template, and an example of it is <s>'''here'''.</s> It leaves the quote plain, but the rest is templated. It appears identical to the style of quoting on the site, or can appear if removing the small text and the dash. I chose these because my initial goal was to create a template like the one on [[w:Template:Quote|Wikipedia]], but that formatting is trivial in the long run. The inline citation I believe can be very useful because it does not disturb the first impression of the page: a list of quotes and who has said them. If a user wishes to check to see if it is accurate, or a reader wants to see where it came from, they would select [show] and the citation appears directly beneath. This seems to be a viable option in formatting as I see it in mainspace pages already, except it is not hidden or linked inline with the work being quoted (like [[Douglas Adams|here]]). This could also simplify pages, because using this template could remove the need of using a "Reference" section since the sources appear inline, which also removes excessive scrolling.

Since there seems to be some tolerance in formatting, would it be okay with the community if I created this in the mainspace? Any formatting concerns can be addressed; I'm not cemented in the need for the preceding dash for the source. Thank you for reading that; have a nice day :) - [[User:Starcartographer|Starcartographer]] ([[User talk:Starcartographer|talk]]) 22:47, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Also, I don't think could apply to all quotes, like in films for example; rather, this template as an ''option'' for citing quotes. - [[User:Starcartographer|Starcartographer]] ([[User talk:Starcartographer|talk]]) 22:54, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
:I like it. Standardization is good, and you've done a fine job with that template, though we already have a slew of templates in [[:Category:Citation templates]]; I think we just need to actually ''use'' them is all, but I wouldn't mind seeing their format follow yours. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 18:23, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
::Thank you Evula. I'm going to test a page or two on some subjects to see how it works out. I'll be working on [[Stevie Nicks]] for now. - [[User:Starcartographer|Starcartographer]] ([[User talk:Starcartographer|talk]]) 21:31, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
:::'''Update:''' I've added the template content to '''{{tl|Cite quote}}''', it seems to be running smoothly so far if anyone is interested. Check out the [[Stevie Nicks]] page (one of my favorite singers) and mostly found citations for the quotes originally there, as well as adding some by her and about her. - [[User:Starcartographer|Starcartographer]] ([[User talk:Starcartographer|talk]]) 02:37, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
::::Can we have some more discussion about these new templates and look and feel for pages before implementing them? It's good to have an example page (which we now have after your work on [[Stevie Nicks]]), but I noticed you've also created [[Fleetwood Mac]] with the new look as well. Please refrain from adding other pages with the new templates (or changing existing ones) until the proposed changes can be properly considered by the user community. As to the new templates, I'm not entirely crazy about them myself. I need to consider a bit more before enumerating my reasons or objections, but for one, such a radical change in our pages would entail a ton of work. I'm not against change per se, but that needs to be considered - and it would not be my recommendation to have some pages that use our traditional templates and some with a new one. In any case, the use of proposed templates that substantially alter the appearance of pages should have some period of discussion before being put into general use (not to mention changing pages already in existence). ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 15:13, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
:::::Sorry for that; I've restored the article and formatted [[Fleetwood Mac]] to look similar to existing pages.
:::::Given the choices at [[:Category:Citation templates]], I hope that the {{tl|Cite quote}} can work as an option. I've left [[Stevie Nicks]] as it was, so let's talk! - [[User:Starcartographer|Starcartographer]] ([[User talk:Starcartographer|talk]]) 21:27, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
::::::Thanks for that - I hope to be able to write more soon on the new templates. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 21:34, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

:{{outdent}}
: Pardon the lateness of my reply, but I have been a little busy; and the template under discussion is a bit of a moving target, having been edited extensively in the intervening few days. I appreciate the intention to improve the appearance of our articles, but I do not think this is headed in the right direction for Wikiquote.
:*Firstly, regarding the opening remarks about hiding citations by default, showing them only when a reader wants to investigate the source: I could not disagree more. Unlike Wikipedia, where citations are supporting information, ''quotation is the main event here, and citation is integral to it''. (Etymologically, the word "quote" originally referred to a citation, a demarcation in the source document, and only later came to be used to refer to the words quoted.) I do not doubt that some readers are not interested in the sources, and there are some websites (e.g. <s>BrainlessQuote</s>BrainyQuote and <s>ThoughtItWas</s>ThinkExist) that do not bother with citations at all; but this is what makes Wikiquote stand out: ''quotation + citation = the main body of Wikiquote content''. The citations are not something extra. Also, the expand/collapse feature of the "navbox collapsible" class does not work at Wikiquote. This is something specific to Wikipedia's custom CSS that is not currently supported on Wikiquote.
:* Secondly, regarding the use of miniscule format for citations, I do not approve of diminishing (literally) the role of citations, for the same reason as in my first point. Wikipedia's quote templates may use fine print in sidebars, marginalia, and other callouts that are incidental to the main body of text; but at Wikiquote the quotations and their citations, together, ''are'' the main body of the article.
:* Second-and-a halfly (regarding the same use of miniscule format, for a different reason): from a personal perspective, ''fine print hurts my eyes''. I think it should be reserved primarily for material one does not really ''want'' anyone to read, such as "gotcha" terms on the back of a consumer contract. The template format would render as much as half the body of some articles in fine print, and it gives me a headache to even think about reading them. (May you all live long enough to experience presbyopia firsthand.)
:* Thirdly, there is a significant glitch in the format. Inline indentation with a dash causes long text to wrap to the next line at the left margin. The resulting "outdent" in the middle of a paragraph or sentence is jarring. The standard bullet format uses a "hanging indent" to move the entire paragraph (HTML division) to the right of the bullet.
:* Fourthly, the dual (and multiple) citation structure of the template is awkward. It appears to contemplate using an abbreviated primary citation with few options for providing details, and one or more secondary citations with loads of parameters. In the first place, I do not care for the idea of incomplete primary citations. In the second place, there are a variety of reasons we include secondary citations: to give the source of a translation from the original work, to provide corroborating evidence for an attribution lacking a primary source, to identify a source that gives a primary citation which has not been verified, to cite variant texts and misquotations, to provide evidence of notability, etc. & etc. The template does not provide a way to indicate what these secondary citations are about.
:* Lastly, but very importantly, templates are hard. Simplicity of markup is essential for the success of a project that "anyone can edit", and intricate templates are flashing red stop signs for the uninitiated. This is not to say that templates are always bad – we already have templates for organizing the information ''within'' a citation, but their use is optional: they do not impact position of the citation or the structure of the page, they operate independently within the framework of the page. Combining page structure and citation details in a single template makes the template virtually mandatory for a consistent appearance. How is a user to come up with HTML to match that format when adding annotations not contemplated in the template design? How is a newcomer to figure out how to contribute anything in the first place? It is incomparably easier to type ''**'' to bullet a citation or other annotation under a quote than to figure out how to use a complex template with, at last count, over a hundred named parameters (I lost count: it is that complicated).
: I do appreciate the desire to make the quotations stand out better. People have tried a variety of ways to do this (e.g. extra whitespace, boldface, among others) with limited success. I have even mentioned some ideas of my own before (they were not very practical), so I am not saying that the old way is the only way or that there is no room for improvement. I don't think this is a better way, but by all means keep on looking for one. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:35, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

::Hey Ninguable, the delay is totally fine, I'm not in a rush! I see that Wikiquote is a small community of hardworking registered editors which is much different from my home wiki, which is not to say that there aren't hardworking editors there :)
::Thank you for going over the template and seriously considering it. Before I discuss the points you raised, I would just like to reiterate that I only intended for this to be an option, as Wikipedia has ''too many'' options for not just formatting quotes, but formatting citations and a whole mess of other things. And of course, as a Wikipedian I want to stress that my opinions are largely based on the standards and beliefs thereof, that when I say things in a definitive matter it is only my humble opinion, and that I am still green to the Wikiquote culture.
::First point: When I think of the information someone is interested in regarding who said what, when, etc., I mostly think of it as non-citation. For example, and as a warning I plan to use [[Stevie Nicks]] quotes for any examples, when quoting one of her lyrics "I don't want to know the reasons why, Love keeps right on walking down the line." is a reader interested in what book I've found a textual source to back it up? Does a reader care that it appeared in Donald Bracketts investigative look into the band "Fleetwood Mac: 40 Years of Creative Chaos"? What most would be interested in is what album it appears on and such. Having the page interrupted with
::*{{Citation
| page = 131
| title = Fleetwood Mac: 40 Years of Creative Chaos
| last = Brackett
| first = Donald
| isbn = 9780275993382
| publisher = Greenwood Publishing Group
| year = 2007
| url = http://books.google.com/books?id=loCGso06VjsC}}
::seems highly unnecessary. Another example being "Stevie bridges the gap between the powerful rock singers of the sixties, like Janis Joplin and Grace Slick, and what's going on today." as said by [[Sheryl Crow]]. It appears in a book "Rumours Exposed." Though I'm not certain, it appears among a few other famous female singers praising Nicks, I doubt that the writer of the book called them each up and asked for their opinion; I think that the writer simply collected quotes over the years and published it in the same few paragraphs. Although Crow is ''who'' is being quoted, she is not the author of the ''citation''. My point with that being that there is not necessary relevance pf the quote to the citation, it is by all means a tool to let users check if it is factual, or for readers to go further ''if'' they are interested. So when we say "citation," I think of something generally to verify, which is wholly different than information about the quote. Of course, this is not a rule, as citing an excerpt from ''[[Fahrenheit 451]]'' may not need a secondary source since stating that it occurs on page 56 will suffice (though different editions could easily muck this up, but that's a different subject). Offering a secondary source, like [http://books.google.com/books?id=M_3kNDKhxIcC&pg=PA1028&dq=it+was+a+pleasure+to+burn+fahrenheit+451&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3R_3UMvELuit0AH_kYCwBw&ved=0CEUQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=it%20was%20a%20pleasure%20to%20burn%20fahrenheit%20451&f=false this] allows a user without access to the book to verify, and although it is not the ''source'' and holds no relevance to the quote, it is a usable citation, one which I believe does not need to appear alongside a "clean" looking quote by default.
::Second point: I am ''totally'' open to changing the size in the template. I only chose that because I liked the look as it appears in Wikipedia's {{tl|Quote}} template. Sorry to hurt your eyes ;) I guess if pressed for an opinion, I like how it looks to differentiate the quote from the quote information, and it is likely a result of the way I'm used to seeing quotes on Wikipedia.
::Third point: Although I can make some templates work, my personal finest being <nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[w:Template:Infobox zodiac|Infobox Zodiac]]<nowiki>}}</nowiki> I still consider myself much of an amateur; I think that I could probably figure a way to create a hanging indent or indented box. It is not my intention to have it look that and hadn't noticed until you pointed it out and I shrunk my browser width.
::The multiple citations appearing ''are supposed'' to work thusly, though I make no claim on their effectiveness nor usability: if using one citation, the template can piggyback onto the existing {{tl|Citation}} directly within the template. For more than one citation I couldn't think of a better way than to use the template within {{tl|Cite quote}} if a better way exists I am unaware of it. The use of these for translations and such does not exist yet but it certainly could, maybe a parameter to precede the citation like "original" or "translation". - [[User:Starcartographer|Starcartographer]] ([[User talk:Starcartographer|talk]]) 22:00, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
::Last point: I agree, templating is definitely more difficult, but it's manageable and I don't think it's a reason not to use them. We can accept either, by which I mean plain citations and ''any'' citation template, not just this one, and, plain citations. Wikipedia does this and it looks disorganized. However, in the end or further down the road, these things are improved.
::Thank you for responding and giving feedback; I look forward to talking more about these things if you'd like to. - [[User:Starcartographer|Starcartographer]] ([[User talk:Starcartographer|talk]]) 03:33, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
::*An example of regular sized font: [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Sandbox&oldid=1524077 Sandbox] - [[User:Starcartographer|Starcartographer]] ([[User talk:Starcartographer|talk]]) 05:02, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
:::It's been a few days since hearing back from anyone. Where does the template I created stand, can I use it? - [[User:Starcartographer|Starcartographer]] ([[User talk:Starcartographer|talk]]) 21:08, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
::::My two cents: My first inclination with regards to the proposed template changes is that while they may look nice, I do not feel they are needed and may in fact downplay an important aspect of this site. As Ningauble more eloquently described above, the changes hide and therefore decrease in importance the citations for the quotes. I do not support this. Second, I also feel that the use of templates is not very easy, especially for newer users. If the templates could be used to render something that looks very similar to what we already have (much like the cite news or cite web templates do now) then my objection would be lessened. The point is that it would be better to have the use or non-use of a template not affect the look and feel of the page. I feel this is especially important on a site like ours that gets much less traffic than Wikipedia. If we hope to encourage new users to remain and become active, the site needs to be as easy to use as possible. I know that when I was making my first edits, not only was I quite confused on how to do it, but if it had been any more complicated, I would likely not have continued contributing (and if someone like myself, who loves quotes, wavered like this, I can imagine the casual user might be even more inclined to leave). Finally, I also believe that such a radical change to the look and feel would cause an enormous amount of work to transform existing pages to the new template. I do believe that our pages should look alike as much as possible, so if the community decided to move to a new template, I would expect that such an undertaking would be necessary. I am not using the prospect of such work as an excuse, but in this case, I believe the other deficiencies in the template outweigh the value that could be gained from all that work. I would echo Ningauble that your attempts to improve the site are to be lauded, but I'm just not sure this is the way to go. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 15:07, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
:::::I also +1 Ningauble on all points. This comment to add a couple pointers: 1) if you want to adopt template-based quotation, you have to study fr.quote first, because they already did so a long while ago ([[stats:wikiquote/EN/TablesWikipediaFR.htm|stats are not positively impressing]] and en.quote is saved by the many random contributors despite the few very active ones); 2) more useful an effort would be not templatification for the sake of it, but a thorough plan involving Wikidata: [[m:Wikidata/Notes/Future#Wikiquote]] is still a stub, more attention is needed (and you could ask/help fr.quote to pioneer, if you care about it). --[[User:Nemo_bis|Nemo]] 09:57, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
::::::Agree with Nemo, UDScott, and Ningauble. A better solution, if we actually wanted to make the citations less prominent, would be to change the CSS for <li> elements in the main namespace. [[User:121a0012|121a0012]] ([[User talk:121a0012|talk]]) 21:44, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

'''''NOTE''''': This template has been nominated for deletion at [[Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Template:Cite quote]]. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:09, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

== New Logo/Favicon ==

It's hard to recognize the current Wikiquote logo as something for a quote site. I suggest a different one with quotation marks (like possible the "Think Quarterly" favicon[http://www.thinkwithgoogle.com/images/quarterly/main/favicon.png], from "Think with Google")or the fountain pen "W" in the current logo. [[w:Syberiyxx|Syberiyxx]] ([[w:user_talk:Syberiyxx|talk]]) 03:57, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
:The problem with using quotation marks is that they aren't universal; for example, French uses a different format for quotation marks (see [[w:fr:Guillemet]]). I think the existing logo (and its favicon) is fine, but it's also not something that is likely to be changed at a local level; changing a project's logo would involve '''much''' broader involvement at Meta. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 05:30, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
:: I quite like our present logo and see no need to change it.--[[User:Collingwood|Collingwood]] ([[User talk:Collingwood|talk]]) 05:30, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
:[[User:Neolux|Neolux]] is to blame. :) [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 02:16, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

== Wikimedia sites to move to primary data center in Ashburn, Virginia. Read-only mode expected. ==

(Apologies if this message isn't in your language.) Next week, the Wikimedia Foundation will transition its main technical operations to a new data center in Ashburn, Virginia, USA. This is intended to improve the technical performance and reliability of all Wikimedia sites, including this wiki. There will be some times when the site will be in read-only mode, and there may be full outages; the current target windows for the migration are January 22nd, 23rd and 24th, 2013, from 17:00 to 01:00 UTC (see [http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Wikimedia+data+center+migration&iso=20130122T17&ah=8 other timezones] on timeanddate.com). More information is available [https://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/01/19/wikimedia-sites-move-to-primary-data-center-in-ashburn-virginia/ in the full announcement].

If you would like to stay informed of future technical upgrades, consider [[m:Tech/Ambassadors|becoming a Tech ambassador]] and [https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-ambassadors joining the ambassadors mailing list]. You will be able to help your fellow Wikimedians have a voice in technical discussions and be notified of important decisions.

Thank you for your help and your understanding.

[[:m:user:guillom|Guillaume Paumier]], via the [[:m:Global message delivery|Global message delivery system]] ([[:m:Distribution list/Global message delivery|wrong page? You can fix it.]]). 15:12, 19 January 2013 (UTC)


== Admin needed ==

'''Protected template''' Please amend [[Template:Otherwiki]] to add Wikivoyage. Thanks. —[[User:Koavf|Justin (ko'''a'''vf)]]❤[[User talk:Koavf|T]]☮[[Special:Contributions/Koavf|C]]☺[[Special:Emailuser/Koavf|M]]☯ 06:59, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} I swiped the code from [[species:Template:Sisterprojects]], which also included Wikidata. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 01:01, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
== Picture of the Year voting round 1 open ==
Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2012 Picture of the Year competition is now open. We're interested in your opinion as to which images qualify to be the Picture of the Year for 2012. Voting is open to established Wikimedia users who meet the following criteria:

:# Users must have an account, at any Wikimedia project, which was registered '''before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000''' [UTC].
:# This user account must have more than '''75 edits''' on '''any single''' Wikimedia project '''before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000''' [UTC]. Please check your account eligibility at the [//toolserver.org/~pathoschild/accounteligibility/?user=&wiki=&event=27 POTY 2012 Contest Eligibility tool].
:# Users must vote with an account meeting the above requirements either on Commons or another SUL-related Wikimedia project (for other Wikimedia projects, the account must be attached to the user's Commons account through [[meta:Help:Unified login|SUL]]).

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. From professional animal and plant shots to breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historically relevant images, images portraying the world's best architecture, maps, emblems, diagrams created with the most modern technology, and impressive human portraits, Commons features pictures of all flavors.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topic categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you can vote for as many images as you like. The first round category winners and the top ten overall will then make it to the final. In the final round, when a limited number of images are left, you must decide on the one image that you want to become the Picture of the Year.

To see the candidate images just go to [[commons:Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2012|the POTY 2012 page on Wikimedia Commons]].

Wikimedia Commons celebrates our featured images of 2012 with this contest. Your votes decide the Picture of the Year, so remember to vote in the first round by '''January 30, 2013'''.

Thanks, 
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee 

This message was delivered based on [[:m:Distribution list/Global message delivery]]. Translation fetched from: [[:commons:Commons:Picture of the Year/2012/Translations/Village Pump/en]] -- [[User:Rillke|Rillke]] ([[User talk:Rillke|talk]]) 04:18, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

== Russell's Nobel Lecture ==

Yesterday I noticed, see [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ABertrand_Russell&diff=1525947&oldid=1525919 here], that there might be a possible copyvio problem with the section of the Bertrand Russell article about Russell's Nobel Lecture. Now I don't have enough experience here. Could anybody assist in determining if there is an actual problem, explain what to do next and/or set some wheels in motion? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 14:57, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

== [[Wikiquote:Bots#RileyBot]] ==

Hi, I don't mean to be rude or too forward but I would just like to mention that there is an awaiting bot request (filed by yours truly :) at [[Wikiquote:Bots#RileyBot]]. Thank you. -[[User:Riley Huntley|Riley Huntley]] [[Meta:SWMT|(SWMT)]] 03:02, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

== Help turn ideas into grants in the new IdeaLab ==

<div class="mw-content-ltr">
[[File:Wikimedia_Foundation_RGB_logo_with_text.svg|80px|right]]
''I apologize if this message is not in your language. Please help translate it.''

*Do you have an idea for a project to improve this community or website?
*Do you think you could complete your idea if only you had some funding?
*Do you want to help other people turn their ideas into project plans or grant proposals?

Please join us in the [[m:Grants:IdeaLab|IdeaLab]], an incubator for project ideas and Individual Engagement Grant proposals.

The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking new ideas and proposals for Individual Engagement Grants. These grants fund individuals or small groups to complete projects that help improve this community. If interested, please submit a completed proposal by February 15, 2013. Please visit https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG for more information.

Thanks! --[[m:User:Sbouterse (WMF)|Siko Bouterse, Head of Individual Engagement Grants, Wikimedia Foundation]] 20:18, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Distributed via [[m:Global message delivery|Global message delivery]]. (Wrong page? [[m:Distribution list/Global message delivery|Correct it here]].)
</div>


== Template:Sister project links ==
{{Sister project links}}
Hi, after a suggestion at [[Template talk:Sisterlinks]] I created a new [[:Template:Sister project links]]. Could anybody help checking if this template is stable? I am working with google-chrome and everything looks fine? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 00:12, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
:In the article [[Art]], it looks just fine to me. ~ [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 00:23, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

::Thanks, as a (second test) the template is added in the [[:Category:Art]], and here (just for fun). Both seem to work. I guess we could just be bold and start using this template (in a day or so). -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 23:39, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

:::I just noticed in the [[:Category:Art]], that the template does need it parameters (see [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Category%3AArt&diff=1535725&oldid=1535719 here]) to link to sister categories. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 23:54, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

'''''Note''''': There is extended discussion about this at [[Template talk:Sister project links]]. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 13:47, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

== [[Wikiquote: Limits on quotations]] ==

This page is now nearly four and a half years old, and yet it is still marked as a proposed policy. There have been rumblings of altering it further and even relaxing the limits suggested in it. Can we have some discussion that will finalize it for now and move it to official policy status? Absent this, it is hard to treat it as something that should be enforced and numerous disagreements and edit wars seem to be the result. I am not against changing anything in it and see some merit in relaxing the limits it establishes, but this should be a community decision (with relevant input from those of us with some knowledge on copyright law). This issue has been dragged on long enough in my opinion and it would be nice to get some closure at last. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 14:53, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
: I certainly am inclined to assert that MOST rules determined by a very few people at ANY time should generally be VERY provisional, but perceive that within the coming weeks and months there probably should be discussion on relaxing and revising some of these proposed rules and even some of the more firmly established ones, to reach some kind of consensus upon them which can promote greater levels of harmony and cooperation, rather than discord, confusion, apathy and distress. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 15:44, 20 February 2013 (UTC) + tweak
:: My recommendations for relaxation of the limitations were premised on my experience practicing intellectual property law. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 02:05, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
:::BD2412's argument seems valid; enact it as it is. Some people who come here thumb their nose at the limits and even go as far as call me names like [[Special:Contributions/Cw6165|this guy]] and that anon who had the misfortune of messing around with me last year and hasn't appeared since. Can't hack the limitations? Leave. --[[User:Eaglestorm|Eaglestorm]] ([[User talk:Eaglestorm|talk]]) 04:31, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
:::: I agree that we need to find a way to move forward on this, because we really need something that can serve the purpose of documenting and explaining community consensus in a manner that settles or obviates most of the disputes in this area. I am not sure whether the next step should be an ''up or down vote'' on making the current version an official policy or guideline (with the caveat that [[Wikiquote:Copyrights]] is policy, which it officially is not), or whether we should first have a ''request for proposals'' to improve it in ways that might broaden consensus. The areas that have seen the most frequent and heated disputes (i.e. audiovisual and interactive media) might benefit from adjusting the numerical limits, or from providing a more persuasive explanation, targeting aficionados of such media, of why less can be better, or both. My impression of the most heated disputes is that the issue was not so much the size of the limits, but the existence of any limit; so I doubt that tinkering with numerical values alone would have much impact on the frequency or intensity of contention. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 19:56, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
:The underlying rationale behind the current limit on "Electronic games" seems to be that some people want to use limits on quotations to attempt to solve "quotability" problems, which is not a ''legitimate'' reason for having a crippling '''three''' quote limit, in my opinion. ~ [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 21:26, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
::My opinion is that we should actually revisit the limits themselves. I like the proposal that BD2412 had [[Wikiquote_talk:Limits_on_quotations#Moving_to_relax|here]] which would, in effect, double the amount of quotes for films and tv shows. I support such a change before making it official policy. I would also be open to relaxing the limits for other types of pages as well. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 00:55, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
:::Sure. Just note that the current limit is much stricter for video-games than for films/television, and that proposal doesn't mention them (electronic games). ~ [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 01:09, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
::::Which is exactly why I also mentioned that I would support relaxing limits for other types of pages too. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 01:19, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
:::::Yes, and I appreciate it (that's why I said "sure"). I suggest that ''if'' there must be a fixed "numerical value" limit for electronic games, it should be of ''at least'' 5 quotes. As for films/television, BD2412's proposal sounds plausible, and though I would think that applying ''per hour'' limits could be tricky, it already seems to be common practice here. ~ [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 01:38, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
:::::: Although Daniel was referring to a specific three quote limit, I must say that the more general proposition that it is not ''legitimate'' to use limits on quotations to solve "quotability" problems would, in my opinion, be wrong. '''[[Brevity]]''' is an important attribute of quality. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:06, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

:Question: what is the origin of the original limitation numbers? I'm curious if there are copyright issues that we have to abide by; I'm all for increasing the maximum numbers in most cases (though any many, I think the solution is to just cut crap we have), but it'd be better if we had some sort of formal guidance. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 17:30, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
:: [[User:InvisibleSun|InvisibleSun]] initially created the page, I would guess setting limits that had been proposed in previous discussions. There is some arbitrariness to these. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 02:10, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

:'''Proposal''': Again, the discussion seems to have died out a bit. So I will make a straightforward proposal: I move that we double the number of allowable quotes for each of the types of articles - with the exception of TV shows. For example, this would result in films having one quote for every 6 minutes (instead of 1 for every 12 minutes) and electronic games having up to 6 quotes. I do not propose to extend the limit for TV shows because I feel that the current limit allows for more than enough quotes (especially since TV shows usually have multiple seasons) and allowing more would lead to a lessening of quality on these pages. Any thoughts/objections/suggestions from others? ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 13:42, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
::I agree with the new limits and the rationale for leaving the TV limit the same. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 15:45, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
::: I agree, except that I would relax the limitations for TV shows that are part of a series to one quote per ten minutes of running time, rounded up (i.e., a standard 22 minute sitcom would get three quotes). I would further relax limitations for older series, allowing perhaps one extra quote per episode for every twenty years since the final season of the show in question (so that a typical 49-minute episode of ''Hill Street Blues'', which ran until 1987, would permit six quotes, one for each ten minutes, plus one extra for age, while a 26-minute episode of ''I Love Lucy'', which ran until 1960, would get five quotes, one for each ten minutes, plus two extra for age. In proposing this, I am mindful of the usual factors weighing in favor of fair use - that we are a nonprofit, educational purveyor of quotes, and that our presentation of textual transcriptions of quotes is unlikely to have an effect on the commercial value of the works in question, which are video presentations. The age bonus would recognize that the older a work is, the less likely it will have its commercial value challenged by the reproduction of quotes. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 01:38, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
::::Hmm. I like the thinking, but this seems a bit less straightforward than I was hoping. Personally, I'd rather stick to one limit and not base it on the age of the work. Instead, I would favor your suggestion of 1 quote per 10 minutes of running time, rounded up - but I would keep this standard for all shows, no matter their age. Knowing that we traditionally consider a show like ''Hill Street Blues'' to be an hour-long show (including commercials), I would favor allowing 6 quotes per episode. For half-hour shows like ''I Love Lucy'', this would result in 3 quotes per episode. And now that I am thinking about it, would it make sense to use the same standards for films - meaning having 1 quote per 10 minutes of running time? This would have the advantage of maintaining consistency between TV shows and films, as well as making it quite simple to calculate how many quotes should be allowed for a film's page (just divide by 10). ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 02:11, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
::I like the proposal, but maybe we should be more cautious... How about also including a clear upper limit for quotes per films in general (something like 15 or 20 quotes max per article)? Otherwise there could be some problems. ~ [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 13:39, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
:::I'm not sure I understand the need - if we establish how many quotes are permissible based on the running time of the film, that inherently sets the upper limit for films. Assuming the above limit (1 quote per 10 minutes of running time), the only way a page would exceed 20 quotes is if the film were longer than 200 minutes - and most films are considerably less than this (except maybe some director's cuts). Most films longer than that are not likely to be quoted here (in fact I don't see pages for any of the films listed at [[w:List of longest films by running time|List of longest films by running time]]). ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 13:54, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
::::First, let's keep in mind that quotes for films can have up to "ten lines of dialogue". That wouldn't be a problem, ''if it is as you say'', but could you explain to me how you did your math? You say "the only way a page would exceed 20 quotes is if the film were longer than 200 minutes", but actually, if we are to allow one quote for every 6 minutes, that means a film of 120 minutes could have up to 20 quotes (120/6=20). Right? ~ [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 16:30, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
:::::If you'll notice in my post immediately above your latest, I said assuming a limit of 1 quote per 10 minutes of running time, hence the math - this reflects the evolving discussion (after input from BD2412) from my original post that mentioned 1 quote per 6 minutes. Also, what I meant is that there seem to be few films above the 200-minute mark - and none that are quoted on the site so far. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 17:09, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
::::::Oh, my bad... It seems we were speaking at cross purposes. I was just trying to explain why there might be a problem with the ''first'' proposal. Sorry for the confusion: your math is, of course, correct. ~ [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 19:58, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
::::::For the record, I can agree with the proposed new limits (i.e. max 6 quotes for video-games, and 1 quote per 10 min for films/shows). ~ [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 16:55, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
Once again, I would like to raise this issue and see if we cannot finalize this as official policy. In my opinion, there are two problems that continue to plague the project: first that this is only a "proposed guideline", so it is difficult to enforce (see the recent editing and discussion surrounding the [[George Carlin]] page or [[User talk:Geezerbill|here]]) and second that there seems to remain disagreement regarding the number of allowed quotes per type of page. I have proposed some changes above, which seemed to be well-received, and yet we still have never had enough participation in the discussion to move this further along. Sure, further refinement is welcome and still possible, but can we not at least move this beyond a "proposed" state? ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 17:13, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

== Image policy again ==

I've noticed that the [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wikiquote:Image_use_policy image use policy] approved last year seems to have been ignored in some edits in recent weeks. For example, on 6 July 2012 in [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Charles_Sanders_Peirce&action=history Charles Sanders Peirce] I removed some notably irrelevant images, but these have recently been restored, together with a comment about an "imbecilic dimwit" who failed to appreciate the relevance of the images.

Leaving aside the tone of that comment, the policy page says clearly: "An image that is not a literal representation of the subject of the page may be removed by any editor who believes it to be inappropriate. Thereafter, it should not be re-added without first obtaining consensus on the article talk page." This policy seems to have been ignored in this case and perhaps also in others.

The tone of earlier discussions of this topic suggests that a very significant majority of editors do not want Wikiquote to look like a kindergarten art project. Hoag's Object seems to be coming back as an illustration of everything and anything. Is there any hope that the excellent image use policy might be followed and that this breakdown in following a clear and official policy might be ended? - [[User:Macspaunday|Macspaunday]] ([[User talk:Macspaunday|talk]]) 21:23, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

:Hi Macspaunday, it seems to me you didn't just remove an image (or two), but radically changed the way the article was illustrated. Now I also noticed you have been following a [[w:Deletionism and inclusionism in Wikipedia|deletionist]]'s path last year; this has been questioned before (for example [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Carl_Sagan#Removal_of_images here]); and this is related to the change in [[Wikiquote:Image use policy]] early last year that led to that policy (as you already stated in your opening).

:Now in this occasion you seem to have taken the policy to the new level that "All image that are not a literal representation of the subject of the page may be removed...". Here I am beginning to get some questions myself about that image policy. Is it its intention that a biographical article may not contain any thematic image? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 00:38, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

::All but two of three of the images used in that article are irrelevant decoration with no connection to the subject nor to the quotation that they are allegedly illustrating. [[User:Kalki]] has long had difficulty with this concept, and (s)he is in part the reason it was instituted, as nearly all of the articles (s)he has edited were filled to the brim with this sort of pointless, distracting decoration. [[User:121a0012|121a0012]] ([[User talk:121a0012|talk]]) 04:35, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
:::Agree with this last comment by {{user|121a0012}}, above. Cheers, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 04:43, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
:: Re. Mdd's question: Not at all, the intention is that they need to be suitably relevant and that there needs to be an affirmative consensus for them if they are contested. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 21:12, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Macspaunday, may I ask why you removed the [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Emily_Bront%C3%AB&diff=1540476&oldid=1540475 pictures] from the ''Wuthering Heights'' section in the the [[Emily Bronte]] article? To my mind, there is no question that they did improve the appearance of the page, and were all carefully and intelligently selected. Of course they are subjective, but that is inevitable unless you are prepared to say that we must ''only'' use pictures of the authors themselves. Despite the Kalki-bashing above, I don't believe there actually is consensus for such a ''radical'' position as that. Yours, [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 11:55, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

:If you don't feel there is a substantial consensus about that kind of image, I personally won't object if you revert the changes, though the image use policy requires that the question be raised on the talk page for the page itself. I think many editors feel that the art-project quality of many of these illustrations, where the same images (e.g. Hoag's Object) are used to illustrate a hundred or more pages, brings discredit to the whole project. I don't think we need to go through the whole discussion again, as this was discussed at great length on this page last summer. But if in fact the consensus is that images such as Hoag's Object are suitable on a hundred or more pages, then I certainly won't object. - [[User:Macspaunday|Macspaunday]] ([[User talk:Macspaunday|talk]]) 13:57, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

:: Macspaunday, thank you for your reasonable reply. Let me just say in passing that while deleting pictures only takes a few seconds, discussing changes on the talk page can be very time-consuming, if one is expected to justify/give reasons for each picture, and explain why they might be relevant. Now, if you don't mind, I will restore at least some pictures to the [[Emily Brontë]] article (those that do not involve galaxies). Regards, [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 14:14, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

::: As far as I'm concerned, of course you should feel free to use your judgment without any objection from me. I certainly have no wish to get into an edit war, and I think edit wars bring discredit to the project in the same way (though less visibly) that a hundred or more instances of Hoag's Object and a hundred or more instances of 19th-century genre paintings bring discredit to the project. There may be disagreement about images, but, except for one or two repeat offenders, I think there's a very strong consensus against edit wars, which discourage sensible editors from participating in the project. It seems to me that the way to get things right in a project like this is through intelligent and well-articulated policies, and this project seems to have exactly that. - [[User:Macspaunday|Macspaunday]] ([[User talk:Macspaunday|talk]]) 15:40, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
:::: I have reviewed some of the comments here, and am going to make a relatively brief one, for me (as some of you are aware). 
:::: To the extent I am able to in the coming weeks, I intend to prepare some presentations about many ideas relevant to issues evident here, in project pages and on my user pages, but I am not making excessive haste to reveal all that I can, nor even some of the most important or powerful of things I know to be true, preferring to allow the passage of time to temper some of my anger and outrage at some persistently false assumptions which I find insulting and denigrative to [[Humanity]], and to human potentials, and which have, in the past year, resulted in attempts at MASSIVE suppression of the presentation of images used to enhance and stimulate the interests of some who might just be briefly examining the project. Many of the images I believe help stimulate the imaginative capacities, which obviously some people lack, and which often prompts many to exhibit strong hostility to evidence of them in others. I usually prefer to speaking from transcendent stances where I can laugh at and forgive others for various forms of human folly to those where I must harshly chastise others for them. Sometimes that is simply unavoidable, in some situations of severe ignorance and confusion, many of which I hope can be avoided in the coming months. That is about all I have inclination to say at this point, but I perhaps will add more comments here within the next week or so. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 15:44, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
We need to apply some common sense in the use of images. We are a repository of quotes, not a picture book. I support having at least one illustrative image on each page to the extent that an image exists that illustrates the author or theme, and having a few images on long pages to break the monotony and provide further illustration. However, I oppose having a wall of images running down one side of the page, as an unnecessary distraction, and I oppose having the same abstract images used in one page after another, as any image that is nonspecific enough to be used in that way is probably too generic to be of illustrative value to the page. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 02:17, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
:Agree with this comment by {{user|BD2412}}, above. Cheers, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 13:45, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
:: I am truly not very suprised that a few of the same people continually find ways to call for further restrictions on the freedoms of others — and as usual they belittle any ideas or liberties that are indicated by implying such things to be merely childish displays, in clever or naïve ways that are far worse than merely childish. It seems the issues will have to be addressed more thoroughly soon, but I expect it will take at least several weeks for them to be resolved more clearly, and possibly longer before anything resembling a truly fair and enduring resolution in regard to many things can be reached, but no matter what the events or circumstances in coming days and weeks, I never intend to be entirely silent in my opposition to greater restrictions on liberties and the ability to express ideas in effective ways allied with all forms of art and imagination, beyond such mechanistic and legalistic rules as some shallow minded people often find necessary or even pleasing, in such ways as they can never be to those with broader and more profound perspectives on many things. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 14:14, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
::That was a rather swift and short response to recent comments, such as can occur where candor is more valued than forms of conformity, but I do wish to make it clear that whatever irritation I might have with some people's attitudes and behaviors, and the ways they misuse many of their abilities and freedoms to suppress those of others, I intend to forever respect the right of all opinions on matters to be presented, and do this out of a profound desire to allow that which is best to emerge — and NOT be suppressed by shallow or narrow expectations of what people can do or must do. '''[[Blessings]] to all.''' ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 14:20, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

:::It occurs to me there is a real problem in applying the new [[Wikiquote:Image use policy]], where those abstract image are already excluded. As to the application: In the [[Carl Sagan]] article 10 of those image where successfully removed after discussion, July 2012. And in that time in the [[Charles Sanders Peirce]] also all but three were removed. In [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Charles_Sanders_Peirce&diff=1526735&oldid=1526728 restored those images] recently, Kaki seem to disagree on how the new Image policy should be applied.

:::Just as important is, that after the Carl Sagan discussion 30 of the 40 images could stay... because they where considered relevant. It seems to me there could/should be at least a similar discussion on the [[Charles Sanders Peirce]] article, to determine which kind of images are relevant or not. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 14:26, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

: For the most part I agree with what [[User:BD2412|BD2412]] said. ~ [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 16:43, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

[[File:Anonymous.svg|link=Anonymous (group)|88px|thumb|right|I truly [[hope]] and intend to give many [[people]] far more [[reasons]] to [[trust]] and [[respect]] many of the [[ideas]] and rather [[Anarchism|anarchistic]] [[Ethics|ethical]] ideals which I promote, even if they can develop little or no admirable trust towards me personally. ~ [[User:Kalki|Kalki]] ]]
Reading Mdd's comments has prompted me to extend my own previosly brief remarks to specify a few things I believe to be important for anyone concerned about this matter to realize. One of the most glaring and appalling aspects of this page which has become touted as "official policy" which I genuinely consider largely a betrayal of many foundational principles of ALL the wikimedia projects, is that it is innately and '''''inherently'' NOT neutral''' and devised to '''REDUCE, constrain and not develop opportunities for true Neutrality in respect to contending impulses or ideas.''' ''Unlike'' the far more NATURAL and proper procedures which had LONG existed where any disputes as to content could be settled on talk pages, and which '''''prejudicially''''' favored NO particular sides in any disputes, this clearly seems to have been designed to INHERENTLY favor those seeking to '''''REMOVE''''' images — by making such a removal by ANYONE for ANY reason stated or not as a position to be FAVORED, and implied any attempt to RESTORE them to be an uncivil and deplorable and expressly FORBIDDEN act. '''The extent of my revulsion at this aspect of the page and a few others really CANNOT be adequately expressed in words, but MANY come to mind, which I will prudently refrain from presenting.''' I firmly believe that several aspects of the policies espoused are betrayals and corruptions of the ideals of FAR more free and [[Freedom|FREEDOM]] PROMOTING editing practices with which the wikis were ''founded''.

'''Taking literally and completely on its face this is nothing other than EXPLICIT SANCTIONING of even the most malicious and malevolent forms of VANDALISM, and a project level criminalization of the even the most benevolent and truly civil and social of motivations in adding or preserving images and respecting the emphasis they can place on certain remarkable quotations which editors believe deserve greater prominence.''' I believe that there can be no realistic dispute that such a rule was devised and crafted primarily as a means to strengthen the position of a VERY few people, at least some of them apparently much more interested in making rules for others than contributing constructively to the project or permitting others to do so, who insist that the use of images is an inherently bad and discreditable thing. '''On this site which gets tens of thousands of visits a day, and many of these images have been used for MANY years there have actually been only a VERY FEW controversies or disputes regarding images, and I would say that MOST of these have been involving the same few people, who seem to have various reasons to be hostile to the use of any images beyond some of the most unimaginative and trivial ways, or to me personally, or both.'''

I consider attempts at establishing and enforcing many aspects of this policy to be innately unjust. Though it was crafted by several, the major push for its completion in its existing form was clearly initiated last year by {{user|Cirt}}, during a rather active state of his periodic harassment of me and my activities over the last few years, during a time where I was far too busy with other things to spend much time in disputes here.

'''I clearly saw that I had little support among the few most active and vociferous editors clamoring for more such rules against the options avaliable to others, which to some extent seemed tailored specifically to suppress and discredit me, the interests I promoted and and many of my activities on this wiki.''' I actually also had very little opportunity to involve myself in the disputes at the time, and recognized that disputing about the situations which developed and I found appalling was not worth my time and effort, as there were many projects I could actively contribute to with far less hostility on the part of a few, and whenever I could find enough time in the future to present some of my perspectives on matters would be soon enough. In the time since then there have been many presumptive ravages of MANY pages, where those who removed the images were PLAINLY ignorant of much about the ideals and themes of the quotes they captioned as well as those evoked or often plainly represented by the images themselves.

'''I recently have begun to make clear some of my intentions to more vigorously promote the ideals of [[civil disobedience]], in opposition to attempts at making REDUCTIONS of human freedoms and respect for human ideas and liberties SEEM civil in ways which they truly are NOT.'''

I know that no matter how reasonable or extensive and sound my arguments, there are some I can reasonably expect to remain unreasonably hostile to MANY of my perspectives, as is their right as autonomous human beings. Thus, I believe that the time has come when I must make a few other ideas and truths far more apparent to some people, over coming weeks and months, which might at last persuade some to realize they have made grievous errors concerning many things. I am in no particular hurry to do so — and '''I have MANY other tasks to be involved in, but to the extent I can devote any time to clarifying some situations for others on pages throughout the project, and INDICATING, and eventually evidencing and proving various things about myself and my own motives in regard to many things on my personal talk pages, I shall do so.''' Despite my lifelong love of various forms of [[anonymity]], and the vitally important [[Necessity|NECESSITY]] of preserving it in many cases, I have actively begun considering the option of revealing MUCH about WHO and WHAT I am by various means, and WHEN and WHERE and WHY I have been active in many ways. But I make no firm commitments to this, because I remain loathe to reveal too much about myself or others to those with little or no capacity to appreciate many forms of truth that I believe most people could easily understand, where they are not misled by various forms of fear, hatred, prejudice and false and foul presumptions. I have made some indications that I have long studied various forms of arts and sciences far more extensively than most, and though I do not seek to claim to be an expert on many matters, I am someone with sufficient insight to have won respect for my knowledge and imaginative intelligence, and to distrust many of the assumptions of those supposed by themselves or others to be experts on various things, and thus I do not mind having others distrust me or my ideas, where they as yet see little or no reason to do so. '''I truly [[hope]] and intend to give many people far more [[reasons]] to [[trust]] and respect many of the [[ideas]] and [[Anarchism|anarchistic]] [[Ethics|ethical]] ideals which I promote, even if they can develop little or no admirable trust towards me personally.''' Whatever the case might be, I truly seek to provide '''[[Blessings]] to all.''' ''[[Slaughterhouse-Five|So]] [[Life|it]] [[Awareness|goes…]]'' [[File:Yyjpg.svg|18px|link= Semiotics]] [[File:Answer to Life.png|link=Love|23px]] [[File:Caput mortuum.svg|link= Absurdism|17px]] [[File:Dont panic.svg|link=Laughter|23px]] [[File:Anonymous.svg|link=Anonymous (group)|14px]] [[File:Smiley.svg|link=Watchmen|18px]] [[File:TARDIS-trans.png|link= Doctor Who|17px]][[File:Swirlyclock.png|link=Magic|23px]] [[File:Sahasrara.svg|link=The All|23px]] ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 16:44, 12 March 2013 (UTC) + tweaks

:I realize it's hard to exchange views on the [[Wikiquote:Image_use_policy|image policy]] without referring to [[User:Kalki|Kalki]], for obvious reasons, but even though we should try not to bring personal issues into the discussion, I must nevertheless confess that I too am worried and bothered to see a few users here whose only recent "contributions" to Wikiquote have been attempts at bashing [[User:Kalki|Kalki]], which look, even if done in subtle ways, quite silly, to be perfectly honest. Of course it's not my place to tell people what to do with their time, and I've been told before that it's "suicidal" of me to criticize admins here, but... Come on [[User:Cirt|Cirt]]. Your fixation with [[User:Kalki|Kalki]] isn't healthy.

:As to the [[Wikiquote:Image_use_policy|image policy]] itself, let's keep in mind that '''there are usually only one or two pictures of any author available''', which is a big problem for long articles. I have experienced this problem myself. For example, it took me countless hours to select and place pictures in the [[Bertrand Russell]] page, which still has some "subjective/imaginative" pictures, even after my going through the trouble to upload over 20 pictures of him to Wikimedia Commons. I don't actually believe many other users are willing to do that. And I hardly think that these articles should be limited to the very few available "unimaginative" pictures mentioned before.

:I myself believe that the pictures make the page look better, and help to convey and highlight important quotes, so I must make it clear that I resist policies that suggest people should be free to simply remove said pictures, disregarding the efforts of those who strove to improve the page. Heck, how about ''replacing'' the picture, instead of deleting it? If you don't like something, improve it, don't tear it down. Oh, right, that would take more than a few seconds to do. We don't want that!

: Personally, I think that only those who have gone through the process of adding pictures to articles (or replacing them), i.e., those who have had to use their imagination and creativity to improve an article, can really appreciate the efforts of others who did the same. So, I ask you, if you want to destroy something, show me that you can create something better first. I note that those who campaign against the use of pictures have yet to do that. ~ [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 22:05, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
:: It should not come as a surprise to anyone "those who campaign against the use of pictures" believe that "something better" is "fewer pictures". Again, '''Wikiquote is not someone's art project'''. It is a collection of ''quotations''. How many illustrations are there in ''Bartlett's''? I know there are none in ''Simpson's''. [[User:121a0012|121a0012]] ([[User talk:121a0012|talk]]) 02:01, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
::: I was thinking exactly that. I've never seen an illustration in any edition of ''Bartlett's'', and generally our online "competitors", in addition to generally having unsourced and undated quotes, have none. That we have a few is good, and a stylistic area of superiority. Having too many would make us a bit ridiculous, I think. Since Daniel Tomé has noted that some editors tend to obsess over Kalki, I will add that I have always thought that Kalki is an excellent contributor of quotes and organizer of quotation pages. It would therefore be a boon to efforts in that direction if some of the time he spent worrying over images were similarly spent in the expansion of our compendium. We can worry more about adding images once we have completed the task of gathering all the world's notable quotes. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 03:18, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
:::: Actually, some of our online competitors use copious images – in the advertisements included on their pages. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 21:25, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
::[[User:121a0012|121a0012]], you seem to be implying that the issue, for you, is not so much the use of "generic" or "irrelevant" pictures (such as that of galaxies or paintings), but rather that we actually have '''no''' right to use pictures ''at all'' on Wikiquote. Did I get that right? (Notice the shift here.) ~ [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 09:55, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
::: Is this inquiry intended seriously? It seems clear that "fewer" does not mean "none". ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 21:09, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
::::Hint: try to take the logic of his argument far enough. ~ [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 21:17, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
:::::Hint: try not to stretch my comments far past the breaking point. I see no need to make any other response. [[User:121a0012|121a0012]] ([[User talk:121a0012|talk]]) 01:25, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
::::::Following the argument where it leads is not a stretch. But thanks for the clarification. ~ [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 09:49, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

'''That actually IS what a few people have been inclined to assert — and it is these few people allied with a few others, who have thought it convenient to their tastes and desires to compose a contract to BIND all others who work MUCH more than most of them to THEIR will.'''

I find many of their efforts little more than a massive amount of '''''BULL PUCKY'''''. I am quoting a common expression of [[Rachel Maddow]] here, which I believe is quite apt. I certainly believe my time would indeed be well spent gathering MORE of the the world's most notable quotes rather than having to act AS IF I or anyone else here should be ABSOLUTELY limited to anyone else's narrow or shallow inclinations and sensibilities of what I should do. I am MOTIVATED to find and include great thoughts BECAUSE I can appreciate diverse forms of BEAUTY in many diverse ideas, and am much inclined to DEFYING and rejecting the will and corruptive practices and policies of those most inclined to PRESCRIBE to others what they can or cannot and should or should not do with their own time. '''I find it a morbid and mortifying attitude which seeks to hobble and cripple the inclinations of others to bring all the knowledge and skills they CAN to PRESENTING quotes and ideas.'''

Though some might have the sly cleverness to frame their attitudes as an [[absolutist]] assertion "Wikiquote is not someone's art project" — I would say that it certainly is NOT "someone's" project — for either art of imposition of legalisms — but it certainly was established as a PUBLIC ARTS project — and I firmly believe that the ARTS of quotation and presenting quotations and the ideas they indicate is certainly more than can or should be defined or delineated by those obsessed with driving away and excluding anyone who indicates more poetic insights and imaginative use of imagery than they are inclined to appreciate.

I have something which might come as a surprise for those of little imagination and discernment, but this is wiki was NOT established as a mere file cabinet for text snippets, nor is it a place that should be as tightly bound to numerous formalities as a legal brief — it is a wiki project for the PRESENTATION of quotes, and '''for well over a century now MANY presentations of quotes have been framed with images to indicate various aspects of the ideas expressed in such quotes.''' There are definite costs to producing images in printed media, but how many magazines presenting any forms of information do so without images? I find the rational for EXCLUDING images is bound to 19th century practices and potentials which seek to ignore and exclude many 21st century options.

{{quote of the day
| quote = '''[[Life]] itself is a [[quotation]].''' [[File:Terry Pratchett Arms.svg|88px]]
| author = Jorge Luis Borges
}}

'''I do not expect this rather [[mystical]] statement of Borges to appeal to everyone, nor to produce only one interpretation — nor do I expect any images to do so.''' I do expect them to prompt various forms of attention and thought that might not be awakened otherwise — perhaps including curiosity about various ancient symbols, and various associated ideas.

To strengthen some arguments in other matters, one of the disputants in this issue has at various times made note of being a lawyer, and this can be a very worthy profession, especially when employed in defense of liberty and justice and not the improper constraint of either, and I will now reveal that I have long restrained myself from noting that I have certain certifiable merits as well, and am what some would call a "super-genius" — and I am not merely being facetious nor exaggerating. I have had EXTRAORDINARILY high scores on official tests, at the upper ranges of measurability — such as would have easily permitted me to join the [[w:Prometheus Society|Prometheus Society]], or even more exclusive ones, and which make most members of [[w:Mensa|Mensa]] seem relative simpletons, ''had I actually wished to do so'', but I really am NOT all that interested in joining or promoting highly EXCLUSIVE groups, and truly do NOT believe such one-dimensional numerical measures are all that valuable an indicator of many of the most important aspects of intelligence, and am wise enough to discern that the levels of [[compassion]] and [[Charity|Charitable]] [[Love]] and rational INTEGRITY people manifest and exhibit is FAR more important to [[Humanity]] than any measures of raw intelligence has ever been or could ever be. '''What people DO with their intelligence and are inclined to do, is far more important to me than what levels of it they are capable of manifesting. Protecting and promoting human capacities for [[Justice]], [[Unity]], [[Liberty]] and [[Joy|Joyous]] [[Universalist|Universal]] [[Love]] are far more important to me than any scores or grades or popularity or forms of conventional political [[power]].'''

I mention this primarily because I believe it will permit others to better appreciate some of the discernments I had already made about various critics of the artistries and intelligence of others by the time I was 5 or 6 year old, and which I have never perceived any reasons to amend, though I have expanded my awareness of their applicability considerably since then.

'''I remember that around the age of 6 years old, I witnessed some other child about my age arrogantly deriding younger children for still being enamored of "picture" books and "baby-books" — and boasted that he had graduated to reading "grown-up" books without pictures.''' I myself had already had my first rather impressive IQ tests done, and been reading and been tested by adults out of various college level texts on various subjects by that time, and I thought how PALTRY and PATHETIC his desperate need to tease those of lesser age and knowledge and reading skills was, and thought something along the lines of "'''What a pathetically smug arrogant bully.'''" I believe I rebuked the kid rather mildly, who might have been a bit older than I, and was instantly mocked as someone who liked "baby-books" too — and IF that is what anyone wishes to call them, '''''I still do.''''' I assert that ''[[Horton Hears a Who! (film)|Horton Hears A Who!]]'' by [[Dr. Seuss]], remains one of my favorite children's stories — even though at a relatively early age I began to recognize ''[[w:Jean Valjean|Jean Valjean]]'' of ''[[Les Misérables]]'' by [[Victor Hugo]] as one of the greatest heroes of world literature, and [[Shakespeare]] as one of the greatest playwrights of all the ages of humanity. I also remember thinking how horribly constrained this kid's mind had already become with programmed responses to belittling others needlessly and that no matter how knowledgeable I became, I hoped and prayed that I never became so pathetically corrupt a person as would seek to cruelly mock or needlessly embarrass those of lesser intelligence and abilities. I still seek to ''avoid'' doing so, but there comes times when such arrogance as many exhibit must be confronted without so much reserve as I might tend to show without many relevant facts known — so with that in mind I now begin to INDICATE some aspects of things I find relevant and notable to many forms of human assessments.

I am very tired of people I perceive to be of relatively little intellectual capacity or rational integrity believing they are SO superior to people who actually have retained enough of their HUMAN capacities for appreciation of diverse forms of beauty and beautifully complex relationships, and who prefer presentations with images that often take some time to correlate well with quotes. I have stated on a few occasions, '''I am ALWAYS ready to accommodate better choices, and to debate between various options, but if the choice is between some imaginative indication and the vapid imperious mandating of NO imaginative indication, I side with that which prompts thought and ideas and against that which prompts vacuity and ignorance.'''

Though I will probably not have time today, for I expect to be doing much traveling about over the next couple of days, I do eventually intend to further address some objections which I find rather paltry and pathetic, towards both poetic principles and pragmatic practices, but no matter how harsh my criticisms of some actions or attitudes might be or become in the interests of justice and liberty, I wish to note that I forgive others readily for many of their more innocent errors, for in relation to the forms of ignorance and confusion others exhibit, I have long admired the expressions:

{{quote of the day
| quote = There, but for the [[grace]] of [[God]], go I.
| author = Paraphrase of [[John Bradford]]
}}
{{quote of the day
| quote = There but for [[fortune]], go you or I
| author = Phil Ochs
}}
I took these MUCH to heart at a VERY early age, and was always more inclined to pity rather than scorn those who in many ways lacked my levels of intelligence, imagination and perception of many aspects of many things, and regularly sought to find ways to help them develop greater awareness of their own capacities for appreciation of the beauty of all things, and especially those of other human beings. I might have been able to easily count myself among many elites — but I am NOT an elitist — '''I am too much an [[absurdist]] profoundly enamored of the [[beauty]] of [[anarchist]] [[ethics]] and [[Democracy|democratic]] MEANS towards promoting anarchist ethics to accept ANY form of absolutist delusions, such as favor many forms of elitism.'''
That might be all I have time for now — I have to prepare to leave and expect to be gone most of the day. '''[[Blessings]] to all.''' ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 11:23, 13 March 2013 (UTC) + tweaks

:[[User:Kalki|Kalki]], I appreciate what you are saying, but I should admit — as much as it pains me to say this (because my heart is on your side) — that just as I don't like seeing people bashing you, I also think it's very unbecoming of you to bash others. Needless to say, I am not exempt here, but, after all, it's not me who goes around preaching "Universal Love." We are discussing an important matter, and it's really a bad idea to say things like "my IQ is so much higher than yours, and I pity you". That is very counterproductive... And you're much better than that. ~ [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 13:22, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
:: '''Though a bit tardy in doing so, I wish to interject a few statements here in apology for some inadequacies of my previous statements.''' In somewhat of a rushed statement the other day, I did state that I "''was always more inclined to pity rather than scorn those who in many ways lacked my levels of intelligence, imagination and perception of many aspects of many things, and regularly sought to find ways to help them develop greater awareness of their own capacities for appreciation of the beauty of all things, and especially those of other human beings.''" I will concede that what I intended by that statement was clearly not as clearly communicated in such ways as I might have wished. I know that many people improperly use the word "pity" almost synonymously with the word "contempt," but I wish to make very clear that in providing indications of how others have measured or ranked my intelligence levels, I did NOT state nor intend to imply anything like "my IQ is so much higher than yours, and I pity you" — but I had actually sought rather awkwardly to indicate that my intelligence had at a VERY early age PERMITTED and IMPELLED me to embrace a strong "live and let live" attitude and to reject and oppose the notions of those who believed that their supposed "superiority" in ANY particular regards, whether in intelligence, knowledge, or any roughly or precisely measurable qualities gave them license to denigrate others or their rights to their own inclinations. '''I also sought to emphasize to people who are often accustomed to expecting vengeful and vindictive and punitive responses to errors, that I was inclined to be forgiving of them.''' I concede that there were some deficiencies in my rushed presentation, and that I was being a bit ''derisive'' of some denigrative behavior, but I contrast ''derision'' of what I hold to be improper actions and will with ''denigration'' of human beings or their aesthetic affinities as if they had little or no worth, and my motivations in specifically mentioning IQ levels here involved an effort to vigorously repudiate the repeated denigration of the use of images with quotes AS IF they were something childish and infantile, and which "sophisticated" people should reject and deplore. I believed that tempering the inclination to further use that sort of argument was worth the risks and problems I actually expected to be associated with revealing that sort of fact about myself, and though it might have been done more tactfully in another way, I believe that fact is one I had to eventually indicate, as it might perhaps permit some other aspects of my peculiar experiences and attitudes about many things become somewhat easier for others to understand. I hope some of my work in coming weeks and months will clarify some of what I have done and am doing and intend to do far better than I presently can. [[Blessings]] to all. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 00:07, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
:::If I have misquoted you, I apologize. To be honest, when I look back at some of my comments on Talk pages I often think "what an idiot I was", so please don't take me all too seriously. Although these discussions are important, I realize they can cause a lot of distress, and I don't want to contribute to any more of that, so in the future I will try to focus more on contributing to articles, which is what I enjoy doing most, and less on arguing with fellow editors. I still have my own ideas, but, at the end of the day, we are all here for the same reasons. I hope everyone can enjoy Wikiquote to the fullest. Regards, [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 01:24, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

* I agree with the proposition that Wikiquote is not a picture book or someone's art project. Having a few well selected images is a good thing; but having an excess of images, including those that are pointed and those that are pointless, has made many of our pages ridiculous, and brought discredit to our project. Regarding those that are ''pointed'', I want to be very clear: the stated objective of creatively and imaginatively expressing ideas and poetic insights about the quotations is not consistent with the [[m:Founding principles|founding principle]] of ''neutral point of view''. A given quotation may give rise to a variety of different associations in the minds of different readers, or in the mind of a single reader. Ruminations and reflections about the quotes are not just a distraction, they are an imposition of personal views. It is not acceptable to do this with images any more than to do it in the text of an article. A montage visualizing one person's stream of consciousness about what it all means just does not belong here. This is not to say that the ideas and associations expressed are childish, but that this is not the place to display them. This is not to prescribe what people can do with their own time, but what they can do in this venue. If someone wants to paint rainbows and unicorns on their body and dance naked in the park, that is none of our business. But please don't do it here. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 21:18, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
** Agreed pretty much 100% with [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]]. [[User:121a0012|121a0012]] ([[User talk:121a0012|talk]]) 01:22, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
***My feelings on this subject are that while I am not as bothered by the images as many others, I do believe that the selection of images where there is not an obvious connection to a page's subject ''does'' represent a POV that might not necessarily be shared by others. Thus, I supported, and continue to support, the revised image use policy that resulted from discussion and refinement last year. I do appreciate the concerns of some that such policies inherently, and sometimes directly, limit the creative aims of some, but I believe that some limits are sometimes needed. My objection is not that images are paired with quotes, but rather that they are selected by someone else and therefore discourage my own interpretation of the associated quotes (unless my interpretation happens to align with that of the user that selected the images). ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 02:18, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
* The key complaint here refers to POV, but I think it's all a matter of degree. If we are to be really serious about it, we should also '''forbid the use of bold'''. That also only serves to highlight important lines ''from the point of view of the editor''. What a terrible thing. And, of course, the very selection of quotes is subjective in the first place.
: Going back to the basics here, pictures are useful to highlight important quotes. I don't think anyone can question that. If you do a proper Google search to find which quotes from Wikiquote are cited the most, the ones that appear under pictures are the clear winners, and that is no coincidence. So it should be clear that preserving "creative aims" is not the main argument here (at least for me). There is much more to allowing the use of pictures than just that (even if those pictures are "subjective"). Indeed, I think it obvious that many casual readers just don't bother reading through the sea of text in long pages, and simply prefer to look at the pictures and the selected quotes there. But maybe I'm wrong. ~ [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 10:29, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
:: I find the use of boldface to be generally undesirable as well. I think it is marginally acceptable for the purpose of highlighting a particular phrase or clause from a longer quote which is objectively much better known than its context, but I don't use it myself. [[User:121a0012|121a0012]] ([[User talk:121a0012|talk]]) 02:10, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
::: I actually disagree with some assumptions of some repeated statements which a few others tend to agree with here, and though I recognize I am in the minority in some regards, and might be for some time yet, I intend to persist in dissenting on many aspects of this issue, as I gradually examine various options for further argument. '''I actually do not have any strong expectation of immediately altering many people's perceptions or attitudes.''' I might review the course of events that have developed on the Wikimedia projects, and this one in particular, before I present what I believe will be some of the more important points that can eventually be made upon some matters. There are often significant subtleties to emphasize in all statements humans can make, and no one can properly expect to communicate all which they would like to, and ONLY that, and I wish to reexamine some matters I have not attended to in quite some time. '''Blessings to all.''' ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 00:33, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
=== Image discussion : section II ===
For so far, I seem to witness two opposite positions here: that of [[:w:Deletionism and inclusionism in Wikipedia|Deletionism and Inclusionism]] towards image-use. Now in stead of going from one side to an other, it might be possible to consider other options for illustration, see for example [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Ursula_Goodenough&diff=1547995&oldid=1347198 here]. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 11:40, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

:I believe this is, at best, a misleading analogy. We do occasionally have debates on what sorts of people, works, themes, etc., ''ought'' to have Wikiquote pages, but this is not that discussion. In this topic, we are merely concerned with the spamming of Wikiquote pages with ''large numbers'' of ''objectively irrelevant'' images by certain editors who appear to regard Wikiquote as the appropriate place to display their collages. If there are two positions here, it is those who believe this is acceptable (or at least tolerable) and those who think otherwise. Should we allow random unrelated images to be dumped into every Wikiquote page, or should we instead require that images have an ''objectively demonstrable connection'' to the material they are used to illustrate? Images should serve to improve readers' understanding of a page, not leave them wondering why only one of two dozen images has any connection to the subject. Whimsy has its place, but a reference work isn't it. [[User:121a0012|121a0012]] ([[User talk:121a0012|talk]]) 05:57, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

::With "deletionism and inclusionism towards image-use" here, you can think of: (This following text was originally ''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deletionism_and_inclusionism_in_Wikipedia here]'' but "article/knowledge/sources" is replace by "image"; and "Wikipedia" by "Wikiquote"):
::* "Deletionists" are proponents of selective coverage and removal of ''images'' seen as unnecessary or highly substandard. Deletionist viewpoints are commonly motivated by a desire that ''Wikiquote'' be focused on and cover significant topics – along with the desire to place a firm cap upon proliferation of promotional use (seen as abuse of the website), trivia, and ''images'' which are of no general interest, lack suitable source material for high quality coverage, or are too short or otherwise unacceptably poor in quality.
::* "Inclusionists" are proponents of broad retention, including retention of "harmless" ''images'' and ''images'' otherwise deemed substandard to allow for future improvement. Inclusionist viewpoints are commonly motivated by a desire to keep ''Wikiquote'' broad in coverage with a much lower entry barrier for topics covered – along with the belief in that it is impossible to tell what ''images'' might be "useful" or productive, that content often starts poor and is improved if time is allowed, that there is effectively no incremental cost of coverage, that arbitrary lines in the sand are unhelpful and may prove divisive, and that goodwill requires avoiding arbitrary deletion of others' work. Some extend this to include allowing a wider range of ''images''...
::With this in mind, you can consider some changes as act of deletionism, such as: [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Carl_Sagan&diff=1459111&oldid=1459074 here] in [[Carl Sagan]] and [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Charles_Sanders_Peirce&diff=1341475&oldid=1341246 here] in [[Charles Sanders Peirce]]. And you can explain these actions as a response to too much inclusionism.

::Now I prefer this analogy, above speaking of "the spamming of Wikiquote pages with ''large numbers of objectively irrelevant images''". In the [[Carl Sagan]] article it turned out that most of those images removed were not so irrelevant after all. Eventually a compromise was reached. Now again my opinion here: ''in stead of going from one side to an other, it might be possible to consider other options for illustration''. In other words, we could/should look for new ways to find compromises. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 13:29, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

'''I certainly agree with Mdd that MANY of the removals which have occurred since this rather deplorable "policy" statement was ''crafted'' and provided sanctioning of massive removal of material from many pages have been with clear ignorance or obstinate denial of MANY forms of relevance, and exhibited a wanton disregard for ANY relationship that some people do not wish to acknowledge.''' I have thus far not addressed many of these, but assert placing preference on the REMOVAL of material others find relevant is a de-facto BETRAYAL of the very processes with which Wikimedia wikis were founded — to make contributions EASY for people. This is "policy" is clearly designed to DISCOURAGE many forms of editing a VERY FEW people object to, to make such MUCH more difficult — and to treat ANY and all use of the admittedly still rather limited ranges of images Wikimedia Commons which ANYONE objects to as "not clearly relevant" or "simply subjective" in their minds.

[[Image:Moai Easter Island InvMH-35-61-1.jpg|thumb|center|[[Fear]] makes a bad trip. Man has been on a bad trip for a long time now. It is called [[Principia_Discordia#THE_CURSE_OF_GREYFACE|THE CURSE OF GREYFACE]] ]]
[[Image:Edward r murrow challenge of ideas screenshot 2.jpg|thumb|center|Everyone is a prisoner of his own experiences. No one can eliminate [[prejudices]] — just recognize them. ~ [[Edward R. Murrow]] ]]

'''Work on Encyclopedic references to knowledge and facts in a relatively "objective" manner have their places, and one them is certainly the worthy project [[w:Wikipedia|Wikipedia]], but to declare a compendium of Quotations to be without any room for presentations of the [[wisdom]] of whimsy or [[wit]] would certainly impel a very dull drab abomination of depravity — which is precisely what some people seem to have in mind, I believe.''' To provide "objectively demonstrable connection" of anything to anything else is clearly perceived as "provable" or "unprovable" DEPENDENT upon one's subjectivities, to far greater extents than those who naively and QUITE ''subjectively'' consider themselves absolutely "objective" are ever likely to easily come to realize. To insist that most of the images used are "objectively irrelevant" in absolutist ways that seem innately ignorant and confused about the relativity and subjective relationship of nearly all terms and their own expressions — and these OBVIOUSLY intended to SEEM "authoritative" in what they take to be "objective" ways. Speaking with a bit more frank candor, '''I believe I clearly recognized most talk of "absolute objectivity" in relation to mortal minds and thought processes was a bunch of shallow, confused, and ''quite subjective'' pap and crap by the time I was seven years old.''' Like [[Søren Kierkegaard]], [[Albert Camus]] and many existentialists or [[absurdists]] opposed to many naïve and mortifying forms of [[absolutism]], I am inclined to extremely honest subjective examination of claims of "objectivity" — and find most of them deficient and flawed in more ways than can ever be fully enumerated, and simply manifestations of bigotries of people inclined to insist THEIR bigotries are NOT bigotries — and sometimes that the majority — or ALL who they believe MATTER or SHOULD matter, AGREE with them that they are NOT bigotries — and such blithely held bigotries go on existing and constraining the lives and minds of human beings.

[[File:Taijitu polarity.PNG|thumb|center|I distrust all dead and mechanical formulas for expressing anything connected with human affairs and human personalities. Putting human affairs in exact formulas shows in itself a lack of the sense of [[humor]] and therefore a lack of [[wisdom]]. ~ [[Lin Yutang]] ]]
'''Obviously, the quite derisive and denigrative statement equating the presentation of usually thoughtfully selected imagery to "random unrelated images" and "objectively irrelevant images" which are provided at the [[w:WIkimedia Commons|WIkimedia Commons]] to ENHANCE the project pages, to acts of commercial SPAMMING is something that is being presented AS IF it were a statement of clearly "objective truth" not to be doubted or denied. '''It might be my extremely honest subjective mind leading me "astray" from all too common forms of dissimulation, but it is apparent to me that what is being provided by some are attempts at maintaining or consolidating largely subjectively motivated oppositons and hostility to the use of images, supported to a great extent by some who actually ''edit'' very little here, but who seem prone to seek to COMMAND others very much, and to preemptively constrain some of those who have been most active here from the start in various ways.

Person to person, I truly do tend to be either rather reserved or casually jovial in many ways, and when I am prone to address matters harshly I am also prone to emphasize that though I have little affinity for many of the most popular and common forms of [[absolutism]]: '''the ideals which are closest to absolutes for me are those which promote [[Liberty]] and tolerant love of ALL [[humanity]], and which bind none too tightly to formulated assumptions. '''I do believe that there are many forms of extreme conflicts and confusions which tend to diminish the more that Justice and Liberty are respected.'''

[[File:Double-alaskan-rainbow.jpg|244px|thumb|center|In the worst of [[time]], there is the possibility of seeing [[hope]]... We can say "I can be a [[rainbow]] in the [[cloud]] for someone yet to be." That may be our calling. ~ [[Maya Angelou]] ]]

'''I freely confess that I do love many forms of natural images to go with natural expressions that defy or transcend unnatural and mind constraining rules.''' I especially do like many images of the heavens and living things, and don't deny a fondness for lightning storms, the sun, stars, galaxies and rainbows. These can ALL be interpreted in MANY diverse ways — as CAN many fundamental words. Culturally, intellectually and probably viscerally and intuitively, they evoke a respect for [[liberty]], [[diversity]] and ancient and modern traditions of appealing to natural and mystical beauties of nature and Reality — which '''I believe actually DO appeal to MOST people and to anyone who is not so blind, color-blind or mentally, emotionally or spiritually blind as to wish all others to be as blind and limited in options as they.'''

[[File:Lightning at China.jpg|thumb|center|''[[Holiness|Holy]] [[lightning]] strikes all that's [[evil]] Teaching us to love for [[goodness]] sake. Hear the music of [[Love]] [[Eternity|Eternal]] Teaching us to reach for goodness sake.'' ~ [[w:Jon Anderson|Jon Anderson]], in "Loved by the Sun", from the movie ''[[Legend (film)|Legend]]'' (1985) - [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQVqMkURGe4 (YouTube Video)] ]]

'''I believe that since the time I was 4 or 5 years old, I had VERY clear sense of realization that even amidst MUCH torment and adversity, which they do not ignore or deny exists, the wisest and happiest people perceive MUCH of the [[Eternal]] [[Beauty]] of Reality and without wishing to constrain or control anyone's options and liberties, wish to help others to see most of what they can and more, so that they can grow to appreciate truths and beauty beyond their own reach or capacities of appreciation, while the most foolish and miserable are often clearly unfortunate in that they perceive but little of many forms of beauty, and strive to restrict and constrain others so that they see even less than they — often so that they can control and command them with little resistance.''' As I grew older, and saw such patterns of attitudes and behavior clearly repeating at MANY levels of human society, my awareness of the validity and applicability of these observations grew far more extensive, and I truly have sometimes been amazed how many people tend to remain relatively oblivious and even hostile to recognizing such truths about such patterns of behavior for most of their lives.

'''The very ESSENCE of [[bigotry]], to me is summed up by the drive to EXCLUDE ideas and testimony, and to treat as much as possible that which does not flatter or support one's own particular views and preferences as unworthy of ANY respect or consideration or presentation.''' I have sought ways to fight bigotries of both mild and extreme kinds since I was a young child. At a relatively early age, '''amidst MANY diverse forms of bigotry and counter-bigotry among all manner of social, anti-social, political, anti-political, religious, anti-religious, scientific, anti-scientific, passionate, anti-passionate, traditional, anti-traditional, rational, and anti-rational factions of human society, I recognized all manner of people blaming other groups of people for ALL bigotry and problems that arose — and thus further promoting many forms of bigotry — and BLIND to the FACT that it was BIGOTRY itself — or ANY type which was ever and always the PRIMARY cause of many of the worst forms of human misery, stagnation and decay.''' It can be doubted or denied by few that many people are such bigots as are largely oblivious to their own forms of bigotry, and highly attentive and hostile only to the bigotries of others, and ironically eager to PUNISH many forms of bigotry other than their own, or such as they find useful or conveniently supportive of their own.

In one of his greatest and most memorable expressions, which has been one I have embraced since I was a young child, [[Friedrich Nietzsche]] declared: '''Beware of those in whom the will to punish is strong.''' Adapting this with the expression of the great Christian philosopher [[Augustine of Hippo]], who said "Hate the sin but love the sinner" I resolved years ago to hate all the foulest and worst forms of bigotry, but to love and forgive the human beings who in their ignorance and confusion often fall into many of them, instructing myself in roughly such ways as this : '''Hate bigotry, and to the fullest extent you can reject bigotry on your part, and forgive the bigots.'''

'''I know that many people have intense fears of certain words and the bold and honest use of them.''' In the interests of putting some of those who seem most oblivious to many of the common forms of bigotry many embrace at greater ease and perhaps prompting attention in all to the many diverse forms of bigotry, I will not not deny embracing some forms of what could perhaps rather "objectively" be called "bigotry" myself — and certainly some forms of prejudices. '''If it is to be ''called'' prejudicial and bigoted by some to embrace ways of life, liberty, vital freedoms and the promotion of [[diversity]] and to NOT seriously consider the ways of [[death]], destruction, morbidity, mortification and rigid constraints as having anything close to an equal or comparable appeal to me, then I believe I certainly am that sort of adamantly prejudiced bigot, and yet, confessing to this form of tolerant bigotry, I can thus forgive others more easily for being bigoted in intolerant ways that they may have believed to be right and best for them, and tend to wish to believe are right or best for everyone.''' I believe I certainly am NOT that type of bigot, and believe that it is proper and even NECESSARY for EACH and EVERY individual to determine what is BEST for themselves — perhaps with "a little help from their friends" but NOT with unjustly IMPOSED constraints which others might presume "best" for them or humanity.


Even if those relatively few people who would maintain and seek to further increase the suppressions of images prevail for a time yet, there are ideas I have long had on how to persist in making clearer my positions that there ARE and long have been and SHOULD remain far broader options, and though they will take a bit more work on my part in coming months, I am willing to bear a greater workload in efforts to protect and preserve many forms of freedoms and liberties — even those of my opponents and adversaries — which has clearly NOT always been the case with some of them towards me.

I am NOT someone eager to needlessly irritate or distress others, let alone significantly harm anyone or their rights to present ideas and opinions, yet for the sake of preserving or presenting greater options for thought and presentation to many, I will confess that I am willing to remain something an irritating gadfly to some, whose inclinations seem to be to constrain me and others in many in ways I find appalling. '''Even amidst necessary and proper conflicts in aims and intentions, I sincerely do wish all people well, and do what I can to help provide greater [[Blessings]] to all.''' ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 14:11, 19 March 2013 (UTC) + tweaks
: I find it a bit distressing that anyone would equate a policy to limit the number of images on Wikiquote pages with "bigotry", a term traditionally associated with discrimination based on race, ethnicity, or religion. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 01:55, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
:: I find it only slightly surprising and not all that distressing that someone would object to the use the QUITE CORRECT use of a word in full accord with its actual DEFINED meaning — and try to imply that BECAUSE it has developed strong associations with its use in highly specific contexts that it should be considered ineligible for use in ANY others, and perhaps imply that such a use is insulting or improper. '''I use the term PRECISELY in such ways as it is ACTUALLY DEFINED, and HAVE done so since I was a child.''' [http://machaut.uchicago.edu/?resource=Webster%27s&word=bigotry&use1913=on Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913 + 1828)] defines it precisely in such ways as I ''properly'' use it: "'''obstinate and unreasoning attachment of one's own belief and opinions, with narrow-minded intolerance of beliefs opposed to them'''." I have long had to contend with MANY forms of bigotries, as do most human beings, and accept that it is about time that more people become aware of the extent they are often pressured by all manner of overt or subtle bigotries, that many find it "inconvenient" to acknowledge as bigotries. ''' I wish to note that I do NOT seek to find excuses or reasons to PUNISH people as bigots as many might, and thus by my own rather rigorous ethical standards, descend into rather short-sighted forms of bigotry myself, but to effectively EXPOSE and FIGHT many forms of bigotry by INDICATING the REALITY that they ARE forms of BIGOTRY — though not necessarily as clearly and obviously deplorable to all as some of the profoundly stupid ethnic and religious bigotries many people rather stupidly embrace.''' I decline to accept the idea of the proper use of words being anything approaching a moral error or insult, just because some might perceive them to be, or seek to imply that they are. '''I often use words and symbols and images and signs or indicators in many diverse ways when I want to find ways to PROMPT people to actually THINK and look beyond what [[Francis Bacon]] called the [[w:Baconian method|idols of the mind]], which they often embrace and form rather casually and unthinkingly.''' I was fortunate to have been introduced to many aspects of various forms of analysis even beyond those of Bacon, when still a very young child, but even as an adult I remain open to learning new forms of analysis — and do NOT seek to close my mind to the assessments of others.
:: Though at Wiktionary there is emphasis on the common use of the term in racial contexts, it certainly does not exclude others: "'''Intolerance or prejudice''', especially religious or racial; discrimination (against); the characteristic qualities of a bigot." Though there are actually MANY diverse things which actually come to my mind in relation to this issue, I will simply close with further citations of such broad use as I do not perceive any fault in employing — at [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bigotry Merriam Webster], the synonyms listed for it are quite consistent with my usage : "'''dogmatism, illiberalism, illiberality, illiberalness, intolerance, intolerantness, narrow-mindedness, opinionatedness, partisanship, sectarianism, small-mindedness'''" as well as the usage example there: "'''a deeply ingrained ''bigotry'' prevented her from even considering the counterarguments'''." Antonyms listed as its opposites are "'''broad-mindedness, liberalism, liberality, open-mindedness, tolerance''' — and ''related'' Words are "'''conservatism, reactionaryism; insularism, insularity, parochialism, provincialism'''" — and I believe it is ABUNDANTLY clear that it is PRECISELY such which I am arguing against, and NOT trying to imply anything about the presence or absence of specifically racal, religious or ethnic bigotries. '''Like MANY terms I do NOT choose to use them in quite so NARROW and constrained ways as MANY others are inclined to do.''' Narrow interpretations of statements or words can often KILL options for progress — the spirit of broad forms of application provides people with many forms of critical potential and vitality, unconstrained by many of the common and often ridiculous subterfuges and fears many people seek to employ to constrain and limit others to arguments even more shallow and fragile than those they are accustomed to using. ''[[Slaughterhouse-Five|So]] [[Life|it]] [[Awareness|goes…]]'' [[File:Yyjpg.svg|18px|link= Semiotics]] [[File:Answer to Life.png|link=Love|23px]] [[File:Caput mortuum.svg|link= Absurdism|17px]] [[File:Dont panic.svg|link=Laughter|23px]] [[File:Anonymous.svg|link=Anonymous (group)|14px]] [[File:Smiley.svg|link=Watchmen|18px]] [[File:TARDIS-trans.png|link= Doctor Who|17px]][[File:Swirlyclock.png|link=Magic|23px]] [[File:Sahasrara.svg|link=The All|23px]] ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 03:04, 20 March 2013 (UTC) + tweaks

The opening thesis of this sub-thread is ill-conceived, unconstructive, and divisive. Firstly, the "inclusionist/deletionist" dichotomy at Wikipedia relates to the question of ''which topics are suitable for having an article.'' It is not about deciding ''what material is germane for including within an article.'' There is no doubt in my mind that someone who persisted in adding extraneous images to Wikipedia articles, in the manner that has occurred here, would be progressively warned, blocked, and banned from Wikipedia if they did not desist, for reasons that are [[w:WP:NOT|perfectly obvious]] and have absolutely nothing to do with "inclusionist/deletionist" philosophies. Secondly, although an appeal to compromise is expressed, characterizing people's positions as partisan to an extrinsic philosophical dispute has exactly the opposite effect. If it is not quite tantamount to accusing people of prejudicial bigotry, it certainly invites precisely that sort of ''ad hominem'' argument, as demonstrated by the sputum subsequently posted here. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:58, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

<hr width="50%"/>

'''I honestly assert my firm belief in many of Ningauable's good intentions, but also assert that the opening line of Ningauble's statement is itself VERY "ill-conceived, unconstructive, and divisive." ''' Far worse than that it then seems to proceed into a more overtly fear-inducing stance in a rather simplistic and officious manner.

Ninguable asserts "no doubt in my mind that someone who persisted in adding extraneous images to Wikipedia articles, in the manner that has occurred here, would be progressively warned, blocked, and banned from Wikipedia if they did not desist" — '''I actually have NO doubt of that as well — such use of images in an ENCYCLOPEDIA project would definitely be inappropriate, and I have NEVER been so STUPID as to insist it would be appropriate for an encyclopedia.''' He then goes on to assert that for reasons he believes "perfectly obvious" his interpretations of ''why'' some things are "obviously" not suitable on that project should be applied to this one — which in its earliest days was stated to be a place for the PRESENTATION of quotes — and the presentation of quotes is something I do NOT believe IS or should be something so ''narrowly'' and exclusively bound to HIS and a FEW other people's ideas of how it SHOULD or MUST be done. As was once stated PROMINENTLY and regularly: '''THIS IS NOT WIKIPEDIA.'''

To people who persist in insisting others MUST accept their views and NOT EVEN consider alternatives they do not want considered, I know it often comes as a shock to encounter such people as are not so easily intimidated into abject deference and compliance as many are.

'''I accept that there ARE conflicts of WILLS and UNDERSTANDINGS here — but I do NOT accept MANY of the rather common modes of seeking to SUPPRESS honest and OPEN discussion of various perspectives and perceptions of the roots and manifestations of the conflicts — so that they may be more thoroughly, and hopefully, properly and ''fairly'' addressed.'''

I can and do respect MANY of Ningauble's points and intentions and capacities to a great deal — which is one reason I am saddened that he persists in seeking to exclude much I and others believe is worthy to be included — and seeks to frame things in ways which EXCLUDE even many forms of QUITE valid arguments or comparisons, and apparently wishes to make them seem "totally irrelevant", because they are not all that flattering or supportive to many of his positions, and those of others who I believe to be more inclined to [[absolutist]] assumptions that the restrictions A FEW have wanted to impose on ALL should go UNQUESTIONED and UNOPPOSED.

Ningauble asserts "although an appeal to compromise is expressed, characterizing people's positions as partisan to an extrinsic philosophical dispute has exactly the opposite effect" — I assert that Mdd's appeal was genuinely worthy effort, even though I myself do not agree with his suggestion as actually a satisfactory solution to the problem — for many different reasons than Ningauble asserts. '''I believe those who seek to constrict the options available want to keep the arguments constrained to such points as would lead to absolute capitulation to their quite ''partisan'' and ''closed'' positions on THESE matters.''' Not quite so explicitly, but quite IMPLICITLY I believe that is precisely what is being demanded and asserted — and there remains adamant resistance to expanding the context of considerations beyond such as he and a few others might find fit and convenient to their positions.

'''I mention certain general philosophical stances, as might anyone, because I believe they ARE very relevant to the arguments and concerns here.''' Being a life-long [[absurdist]] who embraces a highly poetic [[pragmatism]] and highly romantic realism, and rigorous rationalism as well as many imaginative irrationalities and actually DOES accept the possibility or actuality of various types and forms of Absolutes — without futilely ''attempting'' to ''absolutely'' define ultimately indefinite ideas in terms of other ultimately indefinite things, and is INTENSELY aware of the relational and relative nature of ALL ''somewhat'' definable things, there is NO identifiable mortal or act of mortal beings which I accept as "absolutely good" or "absolutely evil" NOR "absolutely ''neither''" — nor do I accept naïve notions of absolute equalities of balances between the complex mingling of notions and perspectives on good and evil. Those most inclined to some overt or disguised embrace of such sentiments and views as declare people or inclinations or things ABSOLUTELY good or evil, or ENTIRELY meaningless, will often find if VERY difficult to realize that there truly are and can be minds which are not prone to accept such paths of simplistic presumption. '''Even when and where they accept there ARE absolutes that can be believed and postulated, and perhaps even ''proven'' to be necessary — they CANNOT actually be absolutely and incorruptibly DEFINED to mortal minds nor perfectly and certainly MANIFEST by them— and ANY assumption that they CAN is itself a corruption and an error born of ignorance of the nebulosity and inter-relationships of MANY diverse aspects of MANY things.'''

[[File:Sputum.JPG|thumb|right|Of course characterizing the views and sincere efforts of others as simply ''[[w:sputum|sputum]]'' is certainly to be excluded forever from ANY accusations of being anything related to ANY form of "prejudicial bigotry" — that seems clearly beyond all dispute here: As clear as spit. ~ [[User:Kalki|Kalki]] ]]
I choose to apologize a bit here: I realize that my absurdist stances on MANY things are such as I know will be unfamiliar and arcane and much too complicated for easy understanding in many ways to others, and this awareness is actually MUCH of what prompts me to be so meticulously elaborate in many attempts at rigorously honest statements — knowing well MANY of the inadequacies of MANY words, I yet must attempt to be as accurate as I can be, within the limits of Time and Circumstance to INDICATE much which I know to be beyond the reliable indications of words. '''I am NEVER trying to get ANYONE to think "just like me" on ANYTHING — but always trying to find ways to help others from assuming that they and others MUST think "just like ANYONE or EVERYONE" on ANY THING.'''

Ningauble closes with the assertion "If it is not quite tantamount to accusing people of prejudicial bigotry, it certainly invites precisely that sort of ''ad hominem'' argument, as demonstrated by the sputum subsequently posted here." As many should know, ''[[w:ad hominem|ad hominem]]'' arguments are those "made personally against an opponent instead of against their argument" — and is something I am QUITE familiar with, as many of my most reliable adversaries regularly use it quite casually — '''but of course characterizing the views and sincere efforts of others as simply ''[[w:sputum|sputum]]'' is certainly to be excluded forever from ANY accusations of being anything related to ANY form of "prejudicial bigotry" — that seems clearly beyond all dispute here: As clear as spit.'''

'''As an absurdist I have been laughing all my life in very many odd ways — quite often to keep from crying — at the ways all manners of [[absolutist]] bigotries are created and survive amongst people — who take their often VERY limited and constrained perspectives as encompassing the greatest depths or heights of vision which ANY should need and which ALL should be willing to accept as the limits of their own.

I have also long observed bigotries of many types at work in responses to strong and even irrefutable observations of the propriety of broader and more general perspectives of others as "divisive" because such are OFTEN not supportive or flattering to those prejudices and presumptions of unquestioned and unquestionable righteousness and authority which many of the most shallow and weak arguments often DEPEND upon.

I know that it might sound very ludicrous to many who have not had such forms of experiences and insights as I have had, but though it sometimes mars the vision, I see the world of beauty and universality of transcendent heavenly glories beyond all the hellspit of implacable and intense hatreds I have ever encountered, and even my fiercest and foulest and most dangerous adversaries have been stunned to see me RISK and ACCEPT pain, disgrace, dangers, loss, injuries and what seemed to be certain DEATH in defiance of their DEMANDS that I submit myself or others to their will or those of others. '''Believe me, this little squabble over the rights to use images in a liberal rather than highly constrained manner is but a relatively minor problem, in my considerations.'''

I myself KNOW that words of sincere contempt and disgust for arguments and views and strategies can be VERY EFFECTIVE in powerful ways — even when they are not literally accurate in narrow sense — and sometimes will use them myself quite liberally, where they are not forbidden by such rules as are often devised to strengthen the relatively unimpressive appearances of the timidities or fears which often hide the simmering hatreds and resentments of many — which is ''precisely'' what I believe I am arguing against. '''I do NOT seek to constrain others by use of words or rules devised by them — I seek to KEEP all as free as possible from those who would MISUSE words to constrain and denigrate and destroy many forms of freedom which had LONG been respected here — before some clever and ostensibly "kind and gentle" ways of DISRESPECTING them grew more prominent and accepted by A FEW people.

At the beginning of this current period of dispute, I made some allusions to the constraints accepted as unquestioned norms in '''''[[Pleasantville]]''''' — one of my favorite allegorical films of recent years. I believe most would say that I usually tend to promote and use quite relevant,  and generally pleasant imagery to enhance the pages, rather than unpleasant imagery — but as is sometimes obvious, I certainly have never sought to MANDATE that, and often recognize the appropriateness of unpleasant imagery as highly relevant in relation to some statements, relating to often unpleasant truths. '''I am adamantly AGAINST the restrictions of freedoms of ANYONE to express their honest views in any ways they see fit, so long as it is PROPERLY RESPECTFUL of the EQUALLY IMPORTANT rights of others to RESPOND.''' Where this is NOT respected, there is PLAINLY injustice and disrespect of what I hold to be the sacred principles of [[Liberty]].'''

Even for the sake of my staunchest adversaries on matters dear to me, I will fight against the assumptions that seek to strongly IMPLY there is nothing in others but error, falsehood and what I often privately have long called "Pap and Crap" — an expression for sweet and bitter forms of debilitating nonsense, which I devised in my childhood, when harsher terms were generally forbidden. I believe that people should have the right to make arguments that myself or others might perceive to be full of little more than what might be called ''sputum'' — or pap and crap — and yet I always am willing to see MUCH good and potential for good in any human being — even those most prone to see little more than bad and inclinations to what they believe to be bad or evil in me.

'''I certainly must disagree strongly with Ningauable here, in relation to many relevant issues, but I believe he is one of the more generally likable of people who happen to be my adversaries on this issue, and hope that he can transcend any hostilities he might feel towards my stances and strategies — and perhaps someday come to appreciate more of their validity and worth.''' I considered somewhat harsher as well as somewhat more humorous responses to his observations — but having slept on it, as I was very tired earlier, and having reviewed some of my earlier typings on the matter, stripped out some of my harsher observations, and now provide this reply, and wish everyone [[blessings]]. I have actually come to expect another very busy week ahead of me now with local activities around my home — but I will devote some time here to the extent I can. ''[[Slaughterhouse-Five|So]] [[Life|it]] [[Awareness|goes…]]'' [[File:Yyjpg.svg|18px|link= Semiotics]] [[File:Answer to Life.png|link=Love|23px]] [[File:Caput mortuum.svg|link= Absurdism|17px]] [[File:Dont panic.svg|link=Laughter|23px]] [[File:Anonymous.svg|link=Anonymous (group)|14px]] [[File:Smiley.svg|link=Watchmen|18px]] [[File:TARDIS-trans.png|link= Doctor Who|17px]][[File:Swirlyclock.png|link=Magic|23px]] [[File:Sahasrara.svg|link=The All|23px]] ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 16:44, 21 March 2013 (UTC) + tweaks
:: Perhaps a bit of clarification is in order. It was not my intent to suggest that ''everything'' Kalki says is "pap and crap", and that is an unfortunate interpretation of my remark. Rather, in the context of objecting to ''argumentum ad hominem'', I chose the word "sputum" to express my disgust at being ''spat upon'' with a giant loogie. I have actually considered many of Kalki's arguments carefully, but this sort of argument is one that I do, indeed, dismiss completely and without rebuttal. The essence of ''argumentum ad hominem'' is not just an attack against the person holding a position, distasteful though it may be, but, specifically, an argument that a position is wrong ''because'' of the person holding it. As such, it is generally regarded as a logical fallacy because it is [[w:Ignoratio elenchi|not relevant]] to the position in question. By disdaining the denunciation and declining to rebut it, I do not signify anything about its truth or falsity, only its relevance: neither impugning nor defending anybody's character and integrity are germane to the question. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 21:50, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Regarding the argument that '''Wikiquote is not Wikipedia''', identifying the specific [[w:Syllogistic fallacy|type of sillygism]] in the following line of reasoning is left as an exercise for the reader:
# Wikipedia is not X.
# Wikiquote is not Wikipedia.
# Therefore Wikiquote is X.
My point in comparing the situation here with Wikipedia, which was prompted by differences of philosophy at Wikipedia being raised in the initial premise of this sub-thread, was twofold. Firstly, we are discussing a practice that is not even debatable at Wikipedia, so the analogy between this issue and those philosophical differences is emphatically inapt. Secondly, the two projects are similar in that each is devoted to a specific purpose. At Wikipedia that purpose does not encompass personal essays and artistic expressions of contributors' own ideas within articles. Although this is not specifically proscribed here at [[Wikiquote:What Wikiquote is not|What Wikiquote is not]] (Wikiquote is not a lot of things that have not been enumerated), neither does it appear to me to be within the scope of [[WQ:WQ|Wikiquote's purpose]]. Note that I did not assert, as Kalki claims I did, that it is "perfectly obvious" that unsuitability for Wikipedia should apply to Wikiquote; I said the unsuitability at Wikipedia is perfectly obvious (given the link I provided to [[w:WP:NOT|WP:NOT]]). I do believe it ought to apply to this type of content here, and have said so, for reasons having to do with the Foundation's mission and principles, which reasons are a trifle subtler than what I would call "perfectly obvious". Kalki evidently disagrees, and I do not assert that this misses the obvious, only that I believe it is wrong. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 22:00, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

== [[Pac-Man (TV Series)]] ==

Noticing that not much had been done or altered since I voted to '''Keep''' the page for the [[Pac-Man (TV Series)|''Pac-Man'' (TV Series)]] at '''[[Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Pac-Man (TV Series)]]''', I have just worked on the page more, in a way that might make the page more interesting to anyone not so juvenile in age or inclinations as to take much delight in many of the quotes, and yet not in so sub-juvenile a disposition as to be resolutely hostile to such juvenile interests. I added images to it, and wikilinks to more general concepts. Since it was nominated for deletion two editors of some notable intelligence have now worked to improve the page, organizing it, adding links, images, and editing it in various ways, and '''I hope that this note and my arguments there can persuade some to alter their perceptions a bit, and vote to keep the page, which I truly believe it would be a discredit to this project to delete, even if many might consider it a minor or trivial addition.''' ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 13:26, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
:My main reason for voting to delete this page has nothing to do with whether its subject is interesting or represents diversity and I find it a bit extreme to say that its removal does a disservice to the project and would "exhibit states of strong hostility to diversity" as you wrote at [[Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Pac-Man (TV Series)]]. The point is that much of what is on the page is just of poor quality - as I wrote, some examples include "Ga ga goo goo." or "Woo hoo! Mad Pac-dog! Mad Pac-dog!" or "Ooh! I never knew I had such big feet." If the page instead had quotes of a higher quality, perhaps it might survive. I also noted that as none of the quotes are sourced by episode (as TV pages should be), it requires extensive cleanup as well. As can be seen by my edit history, I am actually more inclined to keep TV and film pages than many others, but this one is just lacking quality. In the end, I think it's a bit of an overstatement to write that it would be a discredit to this project if the page in its current form is deleted. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]])
::The quotes UDScott cited of Pac-Baby are actually equivalent to that of other "cute" characters from children's cartoons (see [[Pokemon#Pikachu|Pikachu]], for example), and they might be relevant. As I said before (sorry to repeat) people don't go to a Pac-Man page expecting to read Shakespeare. Now, I do thank Kalki for his work, but I must make it clear that, although I too disapprove of deleting the article, it should go without saying that I believe those who disagree with me do have the best interest of the project in mind, and I certainly don't question their intentions. ~ [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 15:12, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
:::And just to address the above comment - I believe that the Pikachu "quotes" are some that should be removed as well - or at least have more dialogue around them to set context. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 15:49, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
:::: UDScott is an editor whose contributions I generally admire, but IF the page is deleted there is NO chance it can grow, and I really do NOT care if this page or any page has quotes of "high quality" in terms of his standards OR of mine or those of ANY of the most frequent editors here. '''SOMEONE found the quotes interesting enough to make a page for it, and I have NEVER embraced the idea promoted by some, that MY standards or HIS, or YOURS, or OUR general standards, nor those of ANYONE should be IMPOSED as standards on anyone else as ABSOLUTE guides to their aims and actions and the continued PRESENCE of their work or activity here, if their motive is presenting quotes and some of the ideas they can INDICATE.''' I do NOT question the motives and GOOD INTENTIONS of those who have supported its deletion, but honestly consider such an attitude eager to remove any and all work many might consider to be of low or poor value, evidence of intellectually and morally impoverished intellectual SNOBBERY, even where it is not evident in most regards nor in unpopularly extreme ways. WHERE there MUST be conflict in competing issues or interests, I nearly ALWAYS side with permitting diversity and AGAINST anything suppressing it, so long as the additions or contributions are NOT clearly acts of vandalism, spam or sabatoge, and I consider the growth of the numbers of people who accept that there should be standards IMPOSED on the TASTES of others, based upon their own, for the retention of pages or other material continually appalling. '''I believe that there has been an appalling growth of inclination towards EXCLUSIONS here in recent years — and I do intend to oppose it with increased vigor in coming months.''' I hope that you will reconsider in the light of these arguments, EVEN if you continue to find the material "low quality" — '''''SO DO I''''' — but I am SINCERE in declaring that I find impulses to EXCLUDE it far LOWER, and sincerely do believe its deletion would be discreditable to the project. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 15:29, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
:::::While I appreciate your desire to err on the side of having little or no exclusions rather than to have limits imposed, I still beg to disagree in one respect. I fear that if we do not have some guidance or limits that uphold the quality of the quotes on our site, we will rapidly fall to the level of many other lesser quote sites. I am all for including as much as makes sense. But I worry that if there are no boundaries set, we will open ourselves up to a flood of such poor additions. And let me be clear - it is the ''current'' set of quotes on this particular page that I find lacking. If better quotes (grouped by episode) were presented (or even if some of these quotes had more dialogue around them that set context), I would support having this page. I am not against having a page for this show (no matter how trivial or juvenile I might personally consider it), so long as what is on the page is improved. In the end, I don't think we are as far apart as it might seem - I am all for having more added to this site. I just hope to have at least some level of quality in what is included. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 15:48, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
:::::: Really, please consider ''this'' before attempting to insist further on such standards: those who are most inclined to add such pages probably would NOT be aware or attentive to them, as has been richly evident over the years — and to bring the page up to them someone such as me or others far more interested in advanced notions of philosophy and science and arts and poetry, who are yet loathe to discourage the contributions and interests of others would have to spend even MORE of our limited time in attending to SEARCHING for something we have very little natural interest in, just because someone else with little interests in them wants to have a "clear dividing line" which would permit it to be discarded if it is not up to such standards. I truly prefer letting people with more advanced intellectual and emotional interests attend to them, and not have us burdened with having to preserve the presence of something that it is NOT actually all that burdensome to simply keep as it is. '''People should be free to contribute what actually does interest or concern them MOST — and not be burdened with excessive rules which make it a burden on those with such juvenile interests to included, and a burden on such people as myself, to spend much time protecting them from such intolerence or discouragment as I genuinely find worse than merely juvenile.''' I will probably have to be leaving soon, so I willl simply say, I hope my arguments can be persuasive to some, and increase participations in the vote, but whether that occurs or not, I send Blessings to all. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 16:14, 5 March 2013 (UTC) + tweaks

:'''Comment''': While I still believe all that I wrote above, in the interest of compromise, I have created an alternative page for consideration (see [[User:UDScott/Pac-Man (TV Series)]]). ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 18:45, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
:: I commend your extensive efforts, and though I would prefer that the images be retained, as I thought they made a fairly amusing sequence, I can accept it as a replacement, not having much actual interest in the page beyond that impelled by my defense and promotion of certain ethical principles, but I continue to object to trying to establish or develop quite so stringent standards on pages — which in this case required efforts on the part of several people who would normally not be inclined to pay it much attention at all. I much prefer manifesting a live-and-let-live attitude than a live-and-let-die one, and reject a live-and-let-kill one, if it is within my practical abilities to prevent needless destruction or suppression of innocent or proper aims. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 23:53, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

== [[Oz the Great and Powerful‎‎]] ==

Earlier I created the page for ''[[Oz the Great and Powerful‎‎]]'', and checking its [[w:Oz the Great and Powerful‎‎|'''article''' on Wikipedia]] I see there is still no link to Wikiquote there in the external links section. Because of an extensive cross-wiki campaign of harassment of me some years ago by {{user|Cirt}}, where my multiple accounts were '''speciously''' asserted to be "proof" of ''abuse'' of privilges to people relatively unfamiliar with me, and which included at least one attempt to make accusations that the standard practice of adding cross-wiki links between Wikimedia projects when corresponding pages were created here, amounted to mereley "spam" and abuse, I was in the state of having my character and reputation under attack from too many directions by a few people with too many diverse motivations for me to wish to attempt to thoroughly address them all. '''Thus I did NOT at that time bother to contest the permanent block he managed to have placed on at me, and I am still not able to edit there, and would appreciate a link to the Wikiquote article being added to the one on Wikipedia, on this opening weekend of the film.''' At the time Cirt managed to have me blocked there, I considered it a relatively minor inconvenience, compared with MANY other assaults on my presence on the Wikimedia projects which he was engaged in, and I never did get around to addressing it later. '''Within the next few months I hope to clarify many situations, so that I can have my editing privileges and proper reputation at Wikipedia restored, but for now, I still cannot even add simple and standard links to our articles there, and would appreciate someone addng these, when pages are created here.''' ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 06:29, 10 March 2013 (UTC) + tweaks
:Hi Kaki, sorry to hear from your external disputes. I have added a link at that Wikipedia article. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 10:05, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
:: Thanks much. I try to not get too concerned about too many things at once, but I usually am rather involved in more than I can easily handle — but it makes life interesting. Glad to hear this before leaving on a short trip, prior to a longer one, after which I will be gone most of the day. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 10:12, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
::: These interwiki links are a good thing. I used to add them on a regular basis when articles were created here; but my review of [[Special:NewPages|new pages]] has been rather cursory of late. (If I have been remiss, it is partly because recent expansion in the amount of CSS and JavaScript at Wikipedia make it increasingly tedious for those with limited bandwidth to read and edit pages there.) I encourage people who patrol recent changes and additions here to consider updating the corresponding Wikipedia pages at the same time. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:30, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

== Convert complex templates to Lua to make them faster and more powerful ==

(Please consider translating this message for the benefit of your fellow Wikimedians)

Greetings. As you might have seen on the [https://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/03/11/lua-templates-faster-more-flexible-pages/ Wikimedia tech blog] or the [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-ambassadors/2013-March/000171.html tech ambassadors list], a new functionality called "Lua" is being enabled on all Wikimedia sites today. [[mw:Lua|Lua]] is a scripting language that enables you to write faster and more powerful MediaWiki templates.

If you have questions about how to convert existing templates to Lua (or how to create new ones), we'll be holding two support sessions on IRC next week: [http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?hour=02&min=00&sec=0&day=20&month=03&year=2013 one on Wednesday] (for Oceania, Asia & America) and [http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?hour=18&min=00&sec=0&day=22&month=03&year=2013 one on Friday] (for Europe, Africa & America); see [[m:IRC office hours]] for the details. If you can't make it, you can also get help at [[mw:Talk:Lua scripting]].

If you'd like to learn about this kind of events earlier in advance, consider becoming a [[m:Tech/Ambassadors|Tech ambassador]] by subscribing to the [https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-ambassadors mailing list]. You will also be able to help your fellow Wikimedians have a voice in technical discussions and be notified of important decisions.

[[:m:user:guillom|Guillaume Paumier]], via the [[:m:Global message delivery|Global message delivery system]]. 19:11, 13 March 2013 (UTC) ([[:m:Distribution list/Global message delivery|wrong page? You can fix it.]])


: Thanks for the notice. I read about today's deployment first at the [[w:Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2013-03-11/Technology report|Wikipedia Signpost]]. My first thought was to wonder whether it might be prudent to restrict editing in the new "Module:" namespace before novice programmers get in over their heads. A full fledged, [[w:Turing completeness|Turing complete]] programming language is not for the uninitiated. But on the other hand, people have been free to make a muddle with the old-fashioned macro substitution <nowiki>{{</nowiki> <nowiki>}}</nowiki> templates all along. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 21:57, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

::There's not really that may templates used here, so there might not be that much of a use for it. That said though, once all the Cite templates are updated on wikipedia, it may be worth updating the cite templates here to use the lua version. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 21:01, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

== Software problem on "Jan Van Ruusbroec" page? ==

There seems to be some kind of software problem on the page: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Jan_Van_Ruusbroec

I improved the page with many additions however sometimes when you first click on it the old page comes up without my additions but if you click "edit" the improved one is there in the code and appears again if you click save.

What could be the issue?
{{unsigned|Vouthon|12:00, 20 March 2013‎}}

: This happens from time to time, sometimes more than others. It is a perennial problem for the programmers because keeping multiple server caches synchronized is something of a black art. There is not much we end-users can do about it, but if it starts happening a lot you can report it at [[bugzilla:|Bugzilla]] to prompt the programmers to have another look. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:40, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

== Uneven handling of [[WQ:CIVIL]] ==

Could the Wikiquote community please explain why it is more important to preserve uncivil and unsubstantiated comments about a real-named person, than to follow the guidelines suggested at [[WQ:CIVIL]]? Simply follow diffs forward from [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive/016&diff=prev&oldid=1549102 here], to see what I am talking about. I look forward to the thoughtful explanations of why preservation of hateful commentary is held in such high regard, even to the point of protecting a page to enshrine that hatred. -- [[Special:Contributions/2001:558:1404:0:200:5EFE:93BF:D092|2001:558:1404:0:200:5EFE:93BF:D092]] 14:52, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
: Aphaia said what Aphaia said. Not our place to edit the content of his opinion any more than it's our place to edit quotes to be more palatable. Also, it's probably not libelous to generally call someone a "liar" (need to assert a specific lie, there) and definitely not to call someone "shabby." [[Special:Contributions/74.93.215.9|74.93.215.9]] 15:26, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
::Thank you, Comcast Business Internet customer. Note, the issue here is not about "libel" but about "uncivil" comments about another user. -- [[Special:Contributions/2001:558:1404:0:200:5EFE:93BF:D092|2001:558:1404:0:200:5EFE:93BF:D092]] 16:17, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

== [[User:Kalki]] ==

Participants here may be interested in [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Proposal_to_unblock_User:Kalki this proposal] to unblock [[User:Kalki]] on en.wiki. [[User:Beyond My Ken|Beyond My Ken]] ([[User talk:Beyond My Ken|talk]]) 19:54, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
: Thanks much, for posting this notice here; I actually would not have thought to do so. '''I certainly invite anyone to comment.''' I have been burdened by that block for years now since one of the most extensive assaults upon my character by Cirt (which have occurred sporadically over the years). I forgive him for having been so morally incompetent as to wish to constrain my proper rights to edit here and elsewhere, and certainly forgive those who were duped by his subterfuges, but I would certainly like to have that quite unjust and improper block, based primarily upon his accusations, soon be lifted. [[Blessings]] to all. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 20:29, 30 March 2013 (UTC) + tweaks
: I noticed that you accuse me on that page in rather harsh terms: "Kalki routinely brought out the socks to back him up whenever another editor disagreed with him." I assert that this is simply a FALSEHOOD. There are a very ''few'' cases where such might have been ''mis-perceived'' to have occurred — but even in those it was usually quite inadvertent and unavoidable, and NOT something I intentionally aimed to do — and NEVER something I routinely or even deliberately did. In the years in which I was an admin and bureaucrat here I maintained many alternate accounts without seeking to establish too much of personality profile in regards to any of them — and NEVER a false one. You might characterize that as a "will to deceive" in ways you might wish to characterize as sinister, but I characterize it as a will to simply evade becoming a target of other people's [[Bigotry|bigoted]] delusions on MANY diverse issues — which is ironically something I believe HAS occurred. '''I truly wish you well, despite your vehement hostility to even allowing me to EDIT at all; and though I do not expect to persuade you, or alter your disposition, I truly seek to send you and all, what [[Blessings]] I can.''' ''[[Slaughterhouse-Five|So]] [[Life|it]] [[Awareness|goes…]]'' ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 21:24, 30 March 2013 (UTC) + tweaks

I am appalled at the comment [[User:Beyond My Ken|Beyond My Ken]] made there. It was really quite a misrepresentation... I have just posted my response to it now, but it was written under severe time pressure, and I now realize I forgot to add some important observations and, even more worrisome, my tone was not good; unfortunately I must leave to do other things now... I encourage everyone to participate in the discussion. Follow your conscience... ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 22:16, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
: Thank you for your support. I too am under some time pressure, and have delayed leaving for a while, but I wish to note my gratitude. [[Blessings]] to all. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 22:18, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

== Math formula formatting code problems ==

The math code that had previously worked on some pages is not currently working. Current code on the [[Leonhard Euler]] and [[Pi]] pages which once permitted the display of the equation for '''[[w:Euler's identity|Euler's identity]]''' here is thus displayed as :
:<math>e^{i \pi} + 1 = 0. \,\!</math>

The following code currently works on Wikipedia, but not here:
:<math>e^{i \pi} +1 = 0 \, </math>

Aware that there may have been many template deletions which were not challenged by me or anyone recently I am suspicious that some previously used template may have become deleted. Other than that, my first suspicions were that there might be problems with a new version of the software. I don't believe it to be a major problem, but it does detract from those pages where math equations are in use. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 04:20, 4 April 2013 (UTC) + tweaks

: This has nothing to do with any templates, deleted or otherwise, it is handled entirely by the <nowiki><math></nowiki> extension. Differences between results here and at Wikipedia may be due to [[w:Special:Version|Wikipedia still running Mediawiki version 1.21wmf12]] while [[Special:Version|Wikiquote is a guinea pig for Mediawiki version 1.22wmf1]], but I am only guessing. Although I am generally aware that the developers have been "improving" math rendering in recent months, I don't see anything in the [[mw:MediaWiki 1.22/wmf1|MediaWiki 1.22/wmf1 release notes]] that obviously relates to this discrepancy. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:51, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
:: Looks fine now; if there was a problem, I assume it's now fixed.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 11:44, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
::: Wow. I could not make much sense of this response previously, but I believe this might be some specific incompatibility in the Safari browser I normally use. Although in Safari the code does work in Wikipedia but not here, I just looked at this in Firefox and the code is working here, in that — but still not with the Safari browser. So either Apple or the Mediawiki developers will probably have to sort that out. So it goes... ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 17:47, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
::::The formulas look the same to me in Safari 6.02, Firefox 19.02, and Chrome 26.014. Weird. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 18:44, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

== Text-only optional pages • ==

I know some people have objections to the use of images for various reasons, some I find very understandable and others less so, and since last year I was thinking of various ways text only versions of pages might be implemented.

I am beginning to test a concept I have had in mind for some time, but which has just crystalized into what I believe might be a workable form in the last couple of days. I actually began to think of ways to develop some kind of text-only version of pages with many graphics for the benefit of those on dial-up or other slow connections last year, but there were significant problems I foresaw with some of the options I had envisioned, and declined to bring them up.

'''I propose that on any page with graphics on them, but especially for those with 4 or more, we should make optional Text-only pages with the same title with a SPACE and BULLET mark after the normal name, and provide a link TO and FROM illustrated versions and Text-only versions of the pages, through such buttons as I have devised below for the [[Lin Yutang]] page:'''

:[[File:Sasha Kopf's Celtic knot ring.svg|14px|link=Lin Yutang]]—illustrated version
:[[File:Yyjpg.svg|14px|link=Lin Yutang •]]—text only version

The general form of such links could be THUS:

<nowiki>
[[File:Sasha Kopf's Celtic knot ring.svg|14px|link=Lin Yutang]]—illustrated version
</nowiki>

<nowiki>
[[File:Yyjpg.svg|14px|link=Lin Yutang •]]—text only version
</nowiki>

Other graphics than the ones I have suggested as a standard might of course be used — but I would suggest that it be ''recommended'' that only svg files be used, for speed of rendering.

'''This strategy would permit those with slower connections to find pages entirely free from graphics in the search bar, identified by the bulleted name ending — AND provide direct connections between the two pages for editors — so that upkeep to both versions could be more convenient.'''

IF no one objects I might begin testing the concept on a few more pages, and if it is sufficiently approved by most of us, within a short time, I will simply start creating such pages whatever chance I have, to provide "graphic-free zones" for those who prefer such pages, for whatever reasons they might have. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 04:44, 4 April 2013 (UTC) + tweaks

Perhaps a standard template with the suggested images could be developed, and If the idea is approved that would make it that much easier for the links between the pages to be created. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 04:54, 4 April 2013 (UTC) + tweaks

: It has taken about a day for the new page to show up in the search box, but its now there, and unless anyone has strong objections, I will start creating at least a couple more text only versions of pages today. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 10:21, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

::Hi Kalki, I appreciate your effort to search for a solution, but I doubt that this is an enduring option. Those double pages also doubles the effort in maintaining and expanding the articles. Also it offers a solution (for people with slow computers), but not for the main "imago" problem. I do have a strong objection to proceeding with making more double pages right now. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 11:02, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
::: All right, I will cease. There were no comments yesterday so once the listing showed up on Lin Yutang and I knew the concept was a valid one I proceeded. I have thus far done only another four:
::::[[James Branch Cabell •‎]]
::::[[Giordano Bruno •‎‎]]
::::[[Booker T. Washington •‎‎]]
::::[[Albert Einstein •‎]]
::: I recognized that there would be need for more upkeep on more pages, but I had figured it might be worth the bother to accommodate those with slower connections. I am willing to make further efforts to do so, but am against rigorously constraining the options on the standard pages as some have been inclined to ''mandate'' in ways I believe violate many aspects of the founding principles of the wikimedia wikis. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 11:23, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
:I agree with [[User:Mdd|Mdd]]. I don't think it's practical to create a duplicate page for each existing article — for one thing, it would take too much time (and space). Besides, why should the article with no pictures be the "secondary" page? I preferred your previous idea (to "suggest an option to the software developers of turning off images"), even though it ''ain't gonna happen''... And one more thing: I don't think you should be "stripping out 144px specifications" in so many pages, not because it bothers me — it doesn't — but because it may (and I suspect it does) bother other editors, since there is no consensus to support it (and indeed, if there is any consensus at all, it would be against it). Yours, [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 12:10, 5 April 2013 (UTC) (Good effort though.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 16:46, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
:: I am just back here, and might be leaving again soon, but I can and do appreciate this idea involves complications and am thus quite ready to drop it if it proves unpopular. About the 144px specs I have been striping out, though — I believe that those who do not like having images as much as some of us do would actually like that — and it was actually suggested by one of them some time ago that that be done. I haven't tested it out lately myself, but what the 144px spec did was override any options in their preferences to reduce (or increase) the standard display of thumbnails. Thus by stripping them out, though the default size is now 180px, I believe, the OPTIONAL sizes for such displays could be as low as 120px. I know that even that will not make everyone happy — but I do believe it can help those who do wish to minimize the size of images displayed. I can agree with them though, being able to turn off the displays entirely in the local software would be a good option. I have in the past suggested that people use a second alternative browser to their normal one with settings not to display images if they truly are that bothersome to them, for any of various reasons, and believe that too is a good solution that could be immediately implemented by most. I used to have a browser set up in such a fashion, I believe it was usually "Camino", a mac-browser, which I set in such ways — but the speeds on the internet have usually been so good for me now that I haven't done that in years. As I said, I am quite willing to drop this particular idea if few people are all that eager to support it, and await a further indication of consensus. So it goes.... ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 14:51, 5 April 2013 (UTC) + tweaks

: I don't think creating duplicate pages is really practical because there is no way to automatically keep them synchronized. I am also concerned that forking unsynchronized versions with different markup could lead to forking separate "virtual wikis" with different editorial standards. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:32, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
:: Well, if you don't like the idea, I probably will drop it at this point. I thought it a workable way to accommodate those with slower connections. I had a few previous ones that I didn't believe to be as workable. ''SO it goes''... ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 16:37, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

:::One way to do it is to create a gadget which hides all the thumbnails. Only needs one line of css. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 12:27, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
<source lang="css">
.thumb {display:none;}
</source>

:: Wow. Thanks for that observation. That certainly would be convenient for some people with slow connections, and any full advice on how to set those up on their pages would be very welcome. You seem very familiar with aspects of the display codes, and adept at improving deficient or flawed situations regarding them, but many people (including myself) rarely deal with the variant display styles possible with css, and some might be extremely unfamiliar with how to set up alternative options here, and need clear instructions on how to use them, and develop such solutions. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 15:41, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

:::I don't do a lot of work on gadgets but I think if an admin creates [[MediaWiki:Gadget-hideimages.css]] and adds the line of css code as above to it. Then edits [[MediaWiki:Gadgets-definition]] and in the interface section, adds
<pre>
* hideimages[ResourceLoader]|hideimages.css
</pre>
And finally creates [[MediaWiki:Gadget-hideimages]] and adds "Hide all thumbnail images."
Then hopefully that will do it. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 17:21, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

* What are we doing with these? We still have these duplicate pages. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 18:30, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
*: Has someone tried WOSlinker's solution? ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:27, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
*::I just created the gadget pages; it works like a charm. Let's kill all text-only/illustrated variants and direct anyone that can't load images to use that gadget. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 23:20, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

* Start AFDs? They don't seem to offer an enduring solution. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 23:21, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
*:Nah; if Kalki is the only one that worked on them (and he appears to be), he can just give us a thumbs up and they can be speedily deleted as an author request. (they could also be prodded) No need to go thru the extra bureaucracy of an AfD. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 23:24, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
: I entirely accept that these are not necessary and can be speedy deleted as such, at my request. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 23:56, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
::{{done}} Ok thanks. I have removed the articles and the links to these articles. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 00:38, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

== Random Quote ==
There was a quote I vaguely recall reading many years ago, and I do not remember how it goes anymore. It's been driving me crazy and I've searched all over many sites and cannot find it. All I remember is bits and pieces of the ending, "...standing over the bleached white bones of your rivals....." At least I believe that's how it went. It was fairly long and had to do with victory. Does any one know this quote and/or where I can find it? Sorry I don't remember more of it than that. {{unsigned2|8 apr 2013 01:01‎ | Rw2racing}}

== Printing ==

When printing an article, currently any article notices, disambiguation hatnotes and stub notices are included in the printout. If the following was added to [[MediaWiki:Print.css]] then it would would stop them being included. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 20:12, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
<source lang="css">
/* Do not print:
1: When in mainspace: Article message boxes,
disambig links, stub notices
and items marked as metadata.
*/
.ns-0 .dablink,
.ns-0 .metadata {
display: none !important;
}
</source>

Hello, thank you WOSlinker, it seems neat to me. Is there anyone objects? --[[User:Aphaia|Aphaia]] ([[User talk:Aphaia|talk]]) 22:01, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
:The epic Aphaia is back :))) [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 22:05, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

::There doesn't seem to have been any objections. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 19:27, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

== Can Person-Event pages be created? ==

Can pages be created that relate to a specific event surrounding a person? In this case [[Death and funeral of Margaret Thatcher]]. It would be like pre-emptively splitting the page. Having a page like this on Wikiquote would solve a problem on Wikipedia (in the article of the [[wikipedia:Death and funeral of Margaret Thatcher|same name]]) but I really don't want to import a problem to this project and pretend it's a solution. Quotations are being added to and deleted from Wikipedia when they could reasonably be collected on Wikiquote. However, I think adding them directly to the [[Margaret Thatcher]] page would distabilise that page, weighting things too heavily towards recent events and away from contemporary quotations. I haven't found any policy that opposes doing this but I also haven't found anything to support it or any equivalent examples. - [[User:AdamBMorgan|AdamBMorgan]] ([[User talk:AdamBMorgan|talk]]) 12:21, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
:Yes. It has been done before (see, e.g., [[International reactions to the death of Boris Yeltsin]] and [[Execution of Saddam Hussein]]). ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 12:30, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
::Thanks. - [[User:AdamBMorgan|AdamBMorgan]] ([[User talk:AdamBMorgan|talk]]) 16:10, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

== [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders|Request for comment on inactive administrators]] ==

(Please consider translating this message for the benefit of your fellow Wikimedians. Please also consider translating [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Summary|the proposal]].)

[[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message|Read this message in English]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/ast|Lleer esti mensaxe n'asturianu]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/bn|বাংলায় এই বার্তাটি পড়ুন]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/ca|Llegiu aquest missatge en català]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/da|Læs denne besked på dansk]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/de|Lies diese Nachricht auf Deutsch]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/egl|Leś cal mesag' chè in Emiliàn]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/es|Leer este mensaje en español]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/fi|Lue tämä viesti suomeksi]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/fr|Lire ce message en français]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/gl|Ler esta mensaxe en galego]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/hi|हिन्दी]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/hr|Pročitajte ovu poruku na hrvatskom]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/id|Baca pesan ini dalam Bahasa Indonesia]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/it|Leggi questo messaggio in italiano]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/kn|ಈ ಸಂದೇಶವನ್ನು ಕನ್ನಡದಲ್ಲಿ ಓದಿ]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/mt|Aqra dan il-messaġġ bil-Malti]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/nb|norsk (bokmål)]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/nl|Lees dit bericht in het Nederlands]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/pl|Przeczytaj tę wiadomość po polsku]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/ro|Citiți acest mesaj în română]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/ru|Прочитать это сообщение на русском]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/so|Farriintaan ku aqri Af-Soomaali]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/sr|Pročitaj ovu poruku na srpskom (Прочитај ову поруку на српском)]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/th|อ่านข้อความนี้ในภาษาไทย]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/uk|Прочитати це повідомлення українською мовою]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/vi|Đọc thông báo bằng tiếng Việt]] / [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message/zh|使用中文阅读本信息。]]

Hello!

There is [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders|a new request for comment]] on Meta-Wiki concerning the removal of administrative rights from long-term inactive Wikimedians. Generally, this proposal from stewards would apply to wikis without an administrators' review process.

We are also compiling a [[m:Talk:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders|list of projects]] with procedures for removing inactive administrators on the talk page of the request for comment. Feel free to add your project(s) to the list if you have a policy on administrator inactivity.

All input is appreciated. The discussion may close as soon as 21 May 2013 (2013-05-21), but this will be extended if needed.

Thanks, [[m:User:Billinghurst|Billinghurst]] (thanks to all the [[m:Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message|translators]]!) 04:33, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
:Distributed via [[m:Global message delivery|Global message delivery]] (Wrong page? [[m:Distribution list/Global message delivery|You can fix it]].)


:'''Note''': The majority of designated administrators here are inactive, but some do not meet the two year threshold under discussion. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 20:11, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
:Heh, if we got rid of the inactive admins, our number would possibly plummet to the single digits. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 05:27, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

== Help test the new account creation and login ==

Hi all,

After many weeks of testing, We (the [[:mw:E3|editor engagement experiments]] team) are is getting close to enabling redesigns of the account creation and login pages. (There's more background about how we got here and why [http://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/04/25/try-new-login-accountcreation/ ‎our blog post].)

Right now are trying to identify any final bugs before we enable new defaults. This is where we really need your help: for now, we don't want to disrupt these critical functions if there are outstanding bugs or mistranslated interface messages. So for about a week, the new designs are opt-in only for testing purposes, and it would be wonderful if you could give them a try. Here's how:

* Go to [[Special:Createaccount|account creation]] and add <code>&useNew=1</code> to the URL, or just [https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Special:UserLogin&type=signup&returnto=Main+Page&useNew=1 use this link]
* Go to [[Special:UserLogin|login]] and add <code>&useNew=1</code> to the URL, or just [https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Special:UserLogin&returnto=Main+Page&useNew=1 use this link]

If you have questions about how to test this or why something might be the way it is, I'd definitely check out our [[:mw:Account creation user experience/Testing|step-by-step testing guide]] and the [[:mw:Account creation user experience|general documentation]].

Many thanks, [[User:Steven (WMF)|Steven (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Steven (WMF)|talk]]) 19:49, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

*''Comment:''  On the Login screen, the password field appears to be pre-filled, but is not. This can be confusing. If a visual placeholder is desired, though I don't think it is necessary, consider using greyscale to distinguish it from live data (like the Search box in the Vector screen). ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 20:34, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
*''Problem:''  After logging in with the above URL, the server has difficulty keeping track of whether I was logged in or not. Some screens showed that I was, and I could access my watchlist and some admin-only screens; but other screens showed that I was not. In attempting to post my previous comment above, the preview screen showed that I was not logged in and my "<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>" signature was not expanded. I tried logging out and in again, I tried refreshing my browser cache, I tried visiting another page and coming back, and I tried all these things repeatedly; but I was not able to post under my account name until I gave up and logged in the regular way. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 20:51, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
** Hey Ningaulble: that is a caching and session data issue, not relate to the login styles (we didn't actually change how authentication works, just the visual styles). [[User:Steven (WMF)|Steven (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Steven (WMF)|talk]]) 23:13, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
*On the Createaccount page, the "contributors this month" seems a bit large. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 21:19, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
**I see that it has been fixed [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=47693] but probably not live yet. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 21:23, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
*** Yes, that and some other fixes will be rolling out with the next MediaWiki release, next week at the latest. [[User:Steven (WMF)|Steven (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Steven (WMF)|talk]]) 23:13, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

== [en] Change to wiki account system and account renaming ==

<div class="mw-content-ltr">
Some accounts will soon be renamed due to a technical change that the developer team at Wikimedia are making. [[m:Single User Login finalisation announcement|More details on Meta]].

(Distributed via [[m:global message delivery|global message delivery]] 03:31, 30 April 2013 (UTC). Wrong page? [[m:Distribution list/Global message delivery|Correct it here]].)
</div>


:Based on this change, I granted a usurpation request on an accelerated basis earlier today. Normally, this would requires a three week wait after the request is made, meaning that it could not have been fulfilled prior to May 28, 2013. However, in accordance with the [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Single_User_Login_finalisation_announcement new single user login protocols from Meta], the account for which usurpation was sought would automatically be usurped on May 27 anyway, regardless of the account owner's preferences on the matter, and regardless of this project's action or inaction. Since the account in question (which had no edits since its creation in 2006), was inevitably going to be moved before a usurpation request could be fulfilled in accordance with our procedures, I went ahead and made the requested moves.
: Following the change being implemented at Meta, ''all'' accounts will be universal, and all renaming/usurpation will be done at Meta. At that point, our policy pages on these matters should be mothballed, as they will no longer reflect procedures available on this site. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 02:01, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

'''Notice:'''  As mentioned in the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2013-05-13/News_and_notes#In_brief ''Wikipedia Signpost''] and announced on [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2013-May/125845.html ''Wikimedia-l''], this change has been '''''postponed''''' until August or thereabout. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:35, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

== Kedar Joshi quote farming ==
{{Discussion-closed-top|remove all Kedar Joshi quotes}} Anon IP SPA !votes have been discounted on the grounds that new users are likely to be unfamiliar with the standards and policies of this project. Among more experienced editors, the vast majority support removal. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 03:46, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Articles on this person were deleted as non-notable after discussions [[Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Kedar Joshi|here]] in <s>1010</s> 2010 and [[w:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kedar Joshi|at Wikipedia]] in 2012. There has been industrious promotion of his works and quotes on numerous open hosting sites, wikis, quotation pages, etc. for several years, and his quotes have recently appeared in several Wikiquote theme articles:
:* [[Certainty]], [[Doubt]] (twice), [[Genius]], [[God]], [[Philosophy]], and [[Self]].
I removed the first few that were posted, with the edit summary ''"remove quote of a person found non-notable",'' with links to the deletion discussion. They were restored with the edit summary ''"Notability of the author is not required for a quote to be included in an article on a theme",''[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Certainty&diff=1567948][http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=God&diff=1567945][http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Genius&diff=1567946] which quotes and links to the [[Wikiquote:Quotability]] guideline. The next sentence in the guideline qualifies this, saying "It is the quote itself that must be notable," and the following section addresses ''Fame of the quote'' as a criterion for inclusion. It is not clear that any of these are actually famous quotes. Therefore, I would like to put the question before the house:
 ''Should Wikiquote '''Keep''' or '''Remove''' quotations of Kedar Joshi?'' ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:42, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
*'''Remove all'''.  Although the contributor has cited [[WQ:PRIMARY|secondary sources]], it does not appear that any of these quotes is even remotely famous. Rather, it appears that there are only a handful of people who picked up some quips that are spammed all over the internet using open hosting sites and quote aggregators. Wikiquote is better than that, and should not be used for promoting non-notable crackpots. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:42, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
*'''Remove all''' per nom. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:42, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
*'''Comment''': Google gives many hits for his quote "God is a philosophical black hole, the point where reason breaks down." But more importantly, I don't understand the need to call him a "crackpot"; very disappointing comment coming from [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]], again. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 23:20, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
**'''Comment''': [[Wikiquote:Quotability]] says that ...''The presence of a quote in a published collection of quotations is strong evidence of quotability, both as to the quote and as to the author of the quote''. The quote by Kedar Joshi quoted above by [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] has appeared numerous times in [[w:The Times of India|''The Times of India'']]’s well-known ''Sacred Space'' column, which is a published collection of quotations. [[Wikiquote:Quotability]] also says that ...''A famous quote that is generally accepted as originating from an otherwise little-known person may justify the existence of an article on that person''. - [[Special:Contributions/49.249.138.201|49.249.138.201]] 09:46, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
*** ''The Times of India'' is a periodical, not a compendium of quotations, and the column to which you refer is filler material. Although it is a significant newspaper of record, it includes a lot of filler material of a very undiscriminating nature. E.g. [http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-07-12/edit-page/29764671_1_logic-reason-eyes this] unsigned piece from its op-ed section should not be taken at face value in placing Joshi on a par with Gandhi, Nehru, and the Upanishads. My opinion of the fame of the quote would be different if he appeared in multiple major periodicals and some of them were more discriminating than ''The Times of India''. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:40, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
****It is not a compendium but a ''collection'' of quotations, though [[w:The Times of India|''The Times of India'']] also publishes [http://books.google.co.in/books/about/Sacred_Space.html?id=kQ1cPgAACAAJ&redir_esc=y a compendium/book called Sacred Space], which is ''a compilation of thoughts published in the Sacred Space column of the Times of India over the years''. The sacred space column is definitely not of the nature of a filler material of a very undiscriminating nature and indicates fame of the quote as it seems to include only notable quotations. [http://m.timesofindia.com/PDATOI/articleshow/6033557.cms This], for example, is one of the e-versions (a mobile version, in particular) of the sacred space column. Also, that ''the quotes from the Sacred Space column are eventually compiled into the Sacred Space book, which is a compendium of quotations'', is a strong evidence of quotability, both as to the quote and as to the author of the quote. And he has indeed appeared in multiple major periodicals such as [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0079661108000463 ''Lessons learned from the PICES/GLOBEC Climate Change and Carrying Capacity (CCCC) Program and Synthesis Symposium, Progress in Oceanography'' (May–June 2008)] by Harold P. Batchelder, and Suam Kim, Progress in Oceanography, Volume 77, Issues 2–3, Pages 83–91, [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=%22Kedar+Joshi%22&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C5&as_sdtp= Section 1. Introduction] and [http://imaging.onlinejacc.org/article.aspx?articleid=1310410 ''Assessment of Echocardiographic Left Atrial Size: How Accurate Do We Need to Be?'' (August 2012)] by Brian D. Hoit, MD, [[w:Journal of the American College of Cardiology|Journal of the American College of Cardiology]], Volume 5, Issue 8. Also Pedro Oller of La Republica PREMIUM said this about him: “A Hindu philosopher, of just 28 years, but stunning lucidity, has ruled that the failure of previous philosophy is essentially the failure to see the self-evident.” ([http://www.larepublica.net/app/cms/www/index.php?pk_articulo=31764 ''Fracaso''] by Pedro Oller, ''La Republica PREMIUM'', 8 December 2009 (Spanish)) Several dialogues involving him are published in [[w:Philosophy Pathways|''Philosophy Pathways'']] and the editor has [http://philosophypathways.com/newsletter/issue174.html clearly mentioned] in the editor’s note that "if you haven't seen Raam's (the author of the dialogues) previous works published in Philosophy Pathways, it might help to know that these are in fact constructed, or reconstructed, from actual dialogues, based as closely as consistency permits on what was actually said by the participants". - [[Special:Contributions/49.249.122.97|49.249.122.97]] 16:31, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
***** Several points: (1) The compiled reprints from ''The Times of India'' does not appear to be a notable book. (2) As indicated in the above linked Wikipedia discussion, ''Philosophy Pathways'' is the newsletter[http://philosophypathways.com/newsletter/index.html] of an organization catering to undergraduates and amateurs[http://www.isfp.co.uk/index.html]. The sense in which it can be described as a peer reviewed journal is relevant only in showing who his peers are. (3) The [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=%22Kedar+Joshi%22&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C5&as_sdtp= link to Google Scholar results for Kedar Joshi] (identified above as "Section 1. Introduction") is very illuminating. It lists a stupefying quantity of self-published musings, several pieces by ''Philosophy Pathways'' contributor R. P. Gokhale, and a mere handful of quips quoted independently (including those cited above by 49.249.122.97). Those few quotes are no more than is to be expected when someone is aggressively spammed all over the internet, and certainly are not an indication of ''famous quotations.'' Note that I am ''not'' saying a pseudophilosopher can never be notable or widely quoted. Some have become very widely quoted bestselling authors. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:35, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
** @DanielTom – Re. Google hits, mass quantities of quote aggregators count for nothing in my opinion: they mostly scrape everything on the web that is tagged as a quote. I do not see any significant sites in the search results. There is only one (1) hit for the quote at GoogleBooks: his own post at Goodreads. Re. "crackpot", I have reviewed his [[w:Pseudophilosophy|pseudophilosophical]] treatise and its reception; and though my choice of terminology may be disappointing it reflects my considered opinion. Why is it relevant here? Because many people whose ideas have been found unsuitable for publication elsewhere resort to wikis and other open websites to seek attention – and when they do it aggressively they generate a lot of Google hits. Wikiquote has had plenty of experience with quote spamming by such people, and I labeled him as I did because I believe we need to be vigilant about this phenomenon. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:46, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
**:@[[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]]: you remind me of [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkU3a2eor3U Hitchens at his worst]. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:00, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
**:Ningauble replies: it's not about me. (And with my limited bandwidth, I don't do YouTube.) ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:42, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
**:(What a pity.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:24, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
***[http://m.timesofindia.com/PDATOI/articleshow/6033557.cms This] thus is a significant site in the search results. - [[Special:Contributions/49.249.122.97|49.249.122.97]] 16:36, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
***And it seems doubtable that sites such as [http://www.quotealbum.com/quote/7FsNQ/god-is-a-philosophical-black-hole-the-point-where this], which clearly says ''Famous Quotes and Sayings'', [http://www.greatthoughtstreasury.com/?q=node/194173 this], and perhaps [http://www.writeaprisoner.com/prison-quotes/Default.aspx?a=Kedar%20Joshi this] [[w:WriteAPrisoner.com|notable site]] too (though it quotes a different quote), are mass quantities of quote aggregators which would ''scrape everything on the web that is tagged as a quote''. - [[Special:Contributions/49.249.122.97|49.249.122.97]] 17:57, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
*'''Keep all''' The sources are indeed [[User:Ningauble/Useful/Primary, secondary, and tertiary sources|secondary]] and reliable. [[Wikiquote:Quotability]] also says that ...''Thus, a particularly poignant or witty quote may be included even if the identity of the author is unknown''. And also that ...''A quote is more likely to be deemed quotable if it is about a notable subject. Certain subjects, such as Love and Birth, are universally known, and are the topic of frequent comment'' (''Quotes on a less notable subject may still merit inclusion, but they must be shown to have a stronger case for inclusion based on factors such as the notability of the speaker and the quality of the quote itself.'')... The quotes under discussion are however about subjects that are ''universally known, and are the topic of frequent comment''. - [[Special:Contributions/49.249.139.156|49.249.139.156]] 00:28, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
**Keep all quotes also because the author could be presumed to be "notable as a ''source of quotes''" for ''any'' of the following two reasons. ''1.'' The author is cited as a ''source of quotes'' in multiple published [[User:Ningauble/Useful/Primary, secondary, and tertiary sources|secondary sources]] which are [[w:Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources|reliable]], intellectually independent of each other, and [[w:Wikipedia:Independent sources|independent of the author]]. (For instance, an [[w:Aphorist|aphorist]] cited as a ''source of quotes'' in thousands of reliable sources that are intellectually independent of each other and independent of the aphorist can certainly be presumed to be ''highly'' notable as a ''source of quotes'' even though he or she may ''not'' be notable [[w:Wikipedia:Notability (people)|per Wikipedia]] for the possible lack of ''significant coverage'' on him or her in independent reliable sources.) Considering the number of such sources, the author may only be ''barely (or at the most moderately)'' notable as a ''source of quotes'' though. ''2.'' The author’s quote “God is a philosophical black hole, the point where reason breaks down.” has appeared multiple times in [[w:The Times of India|''The Times of India'']]’s well-known ''Sacred Space'' column, which is a regular, small, published, thematic collection of quotations, and, as such, it is a ''tertiary'' source. Being cited as a ''source of a quote'' in a reliable tertiary source could be considered a strong evidence of notability as a ''source of quotes''. [The author's quotes have appeared in multiple reliable journal articles. e.g. ''Progress in Oceanography'', [[w:Journal of the American College of Cardiology|''Journal of the American College of Cardiology'']], [[w:Philosophy Pathways|''Philosophy Pathways'']], [[w:The Times of India|''The Times of India'']] (''The Times of India'' is not a journal but it is certainly a source that is considered reliable on en.wp and is widely cited there). Even Boloji.com, for example, is widely cited on en.wp. La Republica PREMIUM, [[w:WriteAPrisoner.com|WriteAPrisoner.com]] can be considered reliable/notable sources. So a main point is: If so many notable/reliable sources had articles on a person, with significant coverage, the person would be considered notable on Wikipedia. The same way, so many reliable sources citing a person as a ''source of quotes'' makes that person notable on Wikiquote, notable as a ''source of quotes''. Note: per [[Wikiquote:Quotability]], ''an individual's notability will be weighed more heavily if they are notable as a source of quotes''.] - [[Special:Contributions/49.249.97.214|49.249.97.214]] 18:01, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
*'''Remove all''', agree with comment by admin {{user|Ningauble}}, above. Cheers, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 04:11, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
** '''Comment''' If I recall correctly in 1011 there was no Wikiquote (nor the Net) yet.
**:Fixed my typo above, that would be 2010. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:39, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
* '''Remove all''' per nominator. --[[User:Aphaia|Aphaia]] ([[User talk:Aphaia|talk]]) 22:05, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
* '''Keep notable quotes''', and '''remove non-notable quotes''': even if one thinks that the author is a "crackpot", the quote ''God is a philosophical black hole, the point where reason breaks down'' is objectively notable, and should be kept. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 22:21, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
** ... Objectively, can you cite several notable works or notable persons that quote it? I would be surprised if any notables quote this sophomoric usage of a [http://www.google.com/search?q=%22philosophical+black+hole%22&hl=en&tbm=bks preexisting trope.] (Note that Google's initial estimate of hits, in this case over 57k, can be wildly inaccurate. There are [http://www.google.com/search?q=%22God+is+a+philosophical+black+hole,+the+point+where+reason+breaks+down%22&hl=en&start=100 actually about 100] (excluding duplicates), which is not exactly indicative of a full-blown internet meme.) ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:51, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
*** The links that [[Special:Contributions/49.249.139.156|49.249.139.156]] provided are satisfactory to me. You do realize that many pages on Wikiquote have quotes that are far less cited, do you not? Does that quote bother you somehow? Compare it with a quote by [[Bertrand Russell|Russell]], for example: "The battle for economic democracy will be the next great struggle for justice in human affairs." Guess how many Google hits that produces... The answer? Just one (1). (Our very own [[Mortals and Others]] page.) My point is that quotes should also be judged on its own merits. I think many people may like that God/blackhole quote, it is not completely unknown, and so I gave my opinion: it should be kept. (Others may disagree, of course.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 17:58, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
**** Yes, I do realize that [[w:WP:OTHERSTUFF|other stuff exists]]. What "bothers" me is that we are dealing with a non-notable quote spammer. Your [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Village_pump&diff=1572151 edit summary] suggesting there is a double standard is actually correct: notable and non-notable people are treated differently. Including lesser-known quotes of notable people, and especially notable works, has been discussed several times; and there is well established consensus for the practice. Comparison with someone as widely read and discussed as Bertrand Russell [[w:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS|is painfully invalid]]. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:42, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
***** [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]], are you going to keep citing that [[w:WP:OTHERSTUFF|essay]] every time I give an example? ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:13, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
******Sorry to jump in, but I ''do'' consider the citing of this essay to be absolutely pertinent to the discussion - and support Ningauble's use of it. The point is that whether or not to keep the quotes (or a page for their author) under discussion should be considered on their own merit and not try to compare them or their author to other pages which may or may not also need work or pruning. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 19:27, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
******* You do realize that was my point exactly, right? Please see above, after giving that example, I wrote: ''My point is that quotes should also be judged on its own merits.'' See, this is why [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] should stop citing that same essay over and over again, it's very distracting. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:39, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
********Yes, you wrote that, but you still prefaced it by a comparison to another page - and that is why that essay was cited. I don't see the "distraction." In any case, no need to belabor the point...let's return to the general discussion about these particular quotes and their author. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 19:51, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
*********@[[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] - But the point is, although the author may be non-notable on Wikipedia, he may be notable (as a ''source of quotes'') on Wikiquote for the reasons given earlier. And per [[Wikiquote:Quotability]], ''an individual's notability will be weighed more heavily if they are notable as a source of quotes''. - [[Special:Contributions/49.200.242.250|49.200.242.250]] 06:24, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
* '''Remove''' all, per above discussion and past VFD discussions on this person. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 18:11, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
*'''NOTE:'''  There is an appeal to reinstate a standalone article for [[Kedar Joshi]] at [[Wikiquote:Deletion review#Kedar Joshi|Wikiquote:Deletion review]]. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:45, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
* '''Remove''' all, for all the excellent reasons cited above, and for the good of the whole project. - [[User:Macspaunday|Macspaunday]] ([[User talk:Macspaunday|talk]]) 14:41, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
* '''Keep''' all. The author does seem notable as a source of quotes, for having been cited as a source of quotes in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable and independent; and therefore there should be a standalone article on him too. -- [[Special:Contributions/115.109.10.160|115.109.10.160]] 05:29, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
* '''Keep''' all, the author of the quotes clearly appears notable as a source of quotes. ~ [[User:RogDel|RogDel]] ([[User talk:RogDel|talk]]) 10:41, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
:Since this is ''Wikiquote'' (a compendium of ''quotes''), not ''Wikipedia'', anyone ''notable as a source of quotes'' is certainly notable here. According to [[WQ:Quotability]], a famous quote that is generally accepted as originating from an otherwise little-known person may justify the existence of an article on that person. Such person, for example, may be non-notable on Wikipedia and yet s/he is considered notable enough on Wikiquote to warrant an article on him/her. In the same way, a person objectively notable as a source of quotes is notable according to Wikiquote, though he may be non-notable according to Wikipedia. ~ [[User:RogDel|RogDel]] ([[User talk:RogDel|talk]]) 11:40, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
:''A more systematic argument may be found in my essay [[User:RogDel/Notability as a source of quotes|"Notability as a source of quotes"]].'' ~ [[User:RogDel|RogDel]] ([[User talk:RogDel|talk]]) 16:34, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' all. No superhyperbolic doubt given for non-notable Non-spatial Epistemological Theologies Kind Of Original Knowledge (NETKOOK) theories in our non-superultramodern deletion policy. Not widely known crackpot, despite considerable effort of self-aggrandizement, suggest adding quotes by Archimedes Plutonium instead. [[User:Jni|jni]] ([[User talk:Jni|talk]]) 08:59, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
*: Kedar embarrassingly states: [http://philosophypathways.com/newsletter/issue169.html "I don't know if anyone since Plato has written philosophical dialogues."] Maybe someone should direct him to our [[George Berkeley|Berkeley]] page. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 16:01, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
*::Examples of modern Socratic dialogues are too numerous to mention, so this does illustrate his [[w:sophomoric|sophomoric]] ignorance; ''however'', the issue here is not whether he is a buffoon, but whether he is a notable one. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 13:34, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
*'''Keep all'''. [http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Kedar%20Joshi An entry] into a [[w:Urban Dictionary|highly notable]], but hmmm... probably not so reliable, tertiary source might be a strong indication of notability. (With regards to reliability of the dictionary, it should be taken into account that, as mentioned in its Wikipedia article, the website was referenced in a 2011 District Court complaint by [[w:Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives|ATF]] agents to document the meaning of the [[w:Vulgarism|vulgarism]] "murk" as used in a criminal threat; that the website seems to be cited in [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AWhatLinksHere&target=Urban+Dictionary&namespace=0 quite a number of enWikipedia articles]; and also that the dictionary [http://www.urbandictionary.com/add.php claims to exclude definitions naming non-celebrities].) [[w:mr:केदार जोशी|Substantial coverage]] in notable and widely read & cited sources like [[w:Kesari (newspaper)|Kesari]], [[w:Lokmat|Lokmat]], [[w:Navshakti|Navshakti]], [[w:Pudhari|Pudhari]] and [[w:Maharashtra Times|Maharashtra Times]] is a strong indication of notability too. [[Special:Contributions/61.17.77.234|61.17.77.234]] 13:01, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
** The above linked entry at ''Urban Dictionary'' has been deleted (on my recommendation) as a blatant violation of their editorial policy. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:31, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
*** Maybe UD does have editorial policies ([http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Kedar%20Joshi&defid=7071844 take a look at this entry on Kedar Joshi]), but its editorial control looks pretty weak. ~ [[User:RogDel|RogDel]] ([[User talk:RogDel|talk]]) 14:40, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
**** That entry, just posted yesterday after the previous one was deleted, has already been [http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Kedar+Joshi deleted from their index]. The submission is still viewable using the link you provided, but it will disappear from the cache in a little while. Just like Wikiquote, UD is an open user contribution site that must constantly struggle against a tide of inappropriate content such as spam and vanity pages. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:02, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

*''' Comment:''' For anyone interested in statistics: two of the anonymous "keep" votes ([[Special:Contributions/61.17.77.234|61.17.77.234]] and [[Special:Contributions/49.249.122.97|49.249.122.97]]) are geolocated in the same city in India: Pune. Even though Pune has more than three million people, it still seems statistically remarkable that at least two of the very small number of "keep" votes and comments here should come from the same place. - [[User:Macspaunday|Macspaunday]] ([[User talk:Macspaunday|talk]]) 14:09, 31 May 2013 (UTC) 14:07, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
:: And I didn't notice it before, but it turns out that yet another of the anonymous "Keep" votes comes from the same city of Pune: [[Special:Contributions/115.109.10.160|115.109.10.160]]. That makes three anonymous "keep" votes from the same city. This is statistically very remarkable indeed. - [[User:Macspaunday|Macspaunday]] ([[User talk:Macspaunday|talk]]) 23:24, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
::: And even more extraordinary: two of the other "keep" anonymous votes also come from a single city in India, Bangalore: [[Special:Contributions/49.249.97.214|49.249.97.214]] and [[Special:Contributions/49.249.139.156|49.249.139.156]]. And all five of these anonymous "keep" votes and comments have IP addresses from the same provider, called Tata. Even more interestingly, all these IP addresses seem to have been used only for participating in this discussion. It will be interesting to see whether there will suddenly be a number of "keep" votes from new accounts, now that this pattern has been pointed out. There are only two "keep" votes from named accounts; the rest are from IP addresses used only to participate in this discussion. - [[User:Macspaunday|Macspaunday]] ([[User talk:Macspaunday|talk]]) 23:33, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
::::Macspaunday, whom were you referring to when you said "in fact one editor posted two separate ''keep'' votes"? Please be specific. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 23:49, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
::::: My mistake - I misread two separate paragraphs by a single editor as two separate "keep" votes, but there are in fact no duplicate votes by named editors, and I was entirely wrong to say that there were. I've corrected my comment above to avoid confusion. Apologies to all; the mistake was entirely mine. Unless I'm mistaken, there are seven "remove" (or "delete") votes from named editors and two "keep" votes from named editors, plus five "keep" votes from IP addresses (all from the same service provider) that have been used only to participate in this discussion. - [[User:Macspaunday|Macspaunday]] ([[User talk:Macspaunday|talk]]) 01:08, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
::::::No problem. Apologies from me too, for being a bit confrontational. Okay, take care, [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 01:16, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
::::: I forgot to add one more anonymous IP comment, also from Bangalore, also from the same service provider: [[Special:Contributions/49.200.242.250|49.200.242.250]]. This IP address didn't vote, but did comment in favor of keeping the quotations. So there are votes or comments from six anonymous IP addresses, all favoring "keep," all from either Bangalore or Pune, all from the same service provider (Tata). - [[User:Macspaunday|Macspaunday]] ([[User talk:Macspaunday|talk]]) 18:24, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
::::::Macspaunday, each and every contribution here by IP that starts with 49.XXX.XXX.XXX is mine; it’s a dynmaic IP. And I’m voting just once; there are no duplicate votes from me. I only said ''Keep all quotes '''also because'''''..., but that was not meant as a separate vote. So there are only 3, not 6, anonymous IP addresses favouring keep. And Tata is a very big service provider in India. So no wonder that multiple anonymous users have a common service provider! I apologize for the confusion I may have caused. - [[Special:Contributions/49.249.139.166|49.249.139.166]] 21:38, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
*'''Comment:''' Urban Dictionary seems to have a very weak and ineffective editorial control. An entry into it may certainly not be taken as a strong indication of notability. I have checked most of the Marathi language sources mentioned by the IP above. They do have substantial coverage of the subject. But maybe coverage by those non-English sources would not constitute sufficient grounds for notability for English Wikipedia. However, in my opinion, and as I have argued before, the subject does appear notable (as a source of quotes) for Wikiquote. ~ [[User:RogDel|RogDel]] ([[User talk:RogDel|talk]]) 14:22, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
*'''Note''': Recently on 26 May 2013, Wikiversity has also found Joshi's work non-notable and [http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Requests_for_Deletion#Kedar_Joshi have deleted them]. [[User:Dharmadhyaksha|Dharmadhyaksha]] ([[User talk:Dharmadhyaksha|talk]]) 10:17, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
** The consensus here also seems to favor the deletion of his quotes from Wikiquote. (I do not object to someone closing this thread now, nor to the implementation of that decision, as it seems to be the clear community consensus.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:35, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
*** I don't think consensus has been reached. Wikiquote is not a democracy, is it? I think I've clearly demonstrated in my [[User:RogDel/Notability as a source of quotes|essay]] that he, like some others, is notable for WQ purposes. And so far nobody seems to have been able to successfully challenge it, though [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] once tried to on its [[User talk:RogDel/Notability as a source of quotes|talk page]]. ~ [[User:RogDel|RogDel]] ([[User talk:RogDel|talk]]) 20:22, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
***:Not everyone shares the same opinion, nor have we all reached the same conclusion, so there isn't a consensus in that sense. But even though I agree that at least some quotes by him may be "notable for WQ purposes", I still recognize that the vast majority of editors here believes that his quotes should be removed, so although this is not a "direct vote", their numbers still carry some weight. Anyway, if you disagree, then I don't think this discussion should be closed yet. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 20:42, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
***::As per my essay, 3 of his 7 quotes that have been added here to various theme articles are notable in themselves. Remaining 4 are non-notable in themselves. However, according to the same essay, he looks clearly (moderately) notable (as a source of quotes). The 4 quotes which are non-notable in themselves could be considered notable in light of the notability of their author as well as the nature of the secondary/tertiary sources that cite them. ~ [[User:RogDel|RogDel]] ([[User talk:RogDel|talk]]) 20:56, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
'''Remove all'''[[User:Kedaaar Jo Sheee|Kedaaar Jo Sheee]] ([[User talk:Kedaaar Jo Sheee|talk]]) 18:38, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
{{Discussion-closed-bottom}}

== [en] Change to section edit links ==

<div class="mw-content-ltr">
The default position of the "edit" link in page section headers is going to change soon. The "edit" link will be positioned adjacent to the page header text rather than floating opposite it.

Section edit links will be to the immediate right of section titles, instead of on the far right. If you're an editor of one of the wikis which already implemented this change, nothing will substantially change for you; however, scripts and gadgets depending on the previous implementation of section edit links will have to be adjusted to continue working; however, nothing else should break even if they are not updated in time.

[[m:Change to section edit links|Detailed information and a timeline]] is available on meta.

Ideas to do this all the way to 2009 at least. It is often difficult to track which of several potential section edit links on the far right is associated with the correct section, and many readers and anonymous or new editors may even be failing to notice section edit links at all, since they read section titles, which are far away from the links.

(Distributed via [[m:global message delivery|global message delivery]] 18:20, 30 April 2013 (UTC). Wrong page? [[m:Distribution list/Global message delivery|Correct it here]].)
</div>


== Changes on the "Revision history" screen ==

I have revised the header of the "Revision history" screen ([[MediaWiki:Histlegend]]), primarily to add a link to the [http://stats.grok.se/en.q/latest/{{FULLPAGENAMEE}} page view statistics] tool, which has [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Henrik&oldid=555524965#.22Page_view_statistics.22_for_Wikiquote recently been enhanced] to work better for "sister projects" like Wikiquote. I also took the opportunity to incorporate some other information and formatting, trying to keep it simple. I hope this will be helpful, but if I goofed please holler because it is a highly visible screen. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 19:03, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

== Tech newsletter: Subscribe to receive the next editions ==

<div style="width:auto; padding: 1em; background:#fdf6e3;" class="plainlinks" ><big>Latest '''[[m:Tech/News|Tech news]]''' from the Wikimedia technical community.</big> ''Please inform other users about these changes.''</div>
<div style="width:auto; padding: 1em; border: 2px solid #fdf6e3;" class="plainlinks" >
;Recent software changes: ''(Not all changes will affect you.)''

* The latest version of MediaWiki (version [[mw:MediaWiki 1.22/wmf4|1.22/wmf4]]) was added to non-Wikipedia wikis on May 13, and to the English Wikipedia (with a Wikidata software update) on May 20. It will be updated on all other Wikipedia sites on May 22. [https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/gitweb?p=operations/mediawiki-config.git;a=commitdiff;h=ed976cf0c14fa3632fd10d9300bb646bfd6fe751;hp=c6c7bb1e5caaddf7325de9eef0e7bf85bcf5cc35] [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2013-May/069458.html]
* A software update will perhaps result in temporary issues with images. Please [[m:Tech/Ambassadors|report any problems]] you notice. [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2013-May/069458.html]
* MediaWiki recognizes links in twelve new [[:w:en:URI scheme|schemes]]. Users can now link to [[:w:en:SSH|SSH]], [[:w:en:XMPP|XMPP]] and [[:w:en:Bitcoin|Bitcoin]] directly from wikicode. [https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/gitweb?p=mediawiki/core.git;a=commitdiff;h=a89d623302b5027dbb2d06941a22372948757685]
* VisualEditor was added to [[bugzilla:48430|all content namespaces]] on mediawiki.org on May 20. [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2013-May/069458.html]
* A new extension ("TemplateData") was added to all Wikipedia sites on May 20. It will allow a future version of VisualEditor to [[bugzilla:44444|edit templates]]. [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2013-May/069458.html]
* New sites: [[:voy:el:|Greek Wikivoyage]] and [[:wikt:vec:|Venetian Wiktionary]] joined the Wikimedia family last week; the total number of project wikis is now 794. [https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/gitweb?p=operations/mediawiki-config.git;a=commit;h=5d7536b403730bb502580e21243f923c3b79da0e] [https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/gitweb?p=operations/mediawiki-config.git;a=commit;h=43c9eebdfc976333be5c890439ba1fae3bef46f7]
* The logo of 18 Wikipedias was changed to [[w:en:Wikipedia:Wikipedia_logos#The_May_2010_logo|version 2.0]] in a [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2013-May/125999.html third group of updates]. [https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/gitweb?p=operations/mediawiki-config.git;a=commitdiff;h=4688adbe467440eea318eecf04839fdd9ffa0565]
* The [[:commons:Special:UploadWizard|UploadWizard]] on Commons now shows links to the old upload form in 55 languages ([[:bugzilla:33513|bug 33513]]). [https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/gitweb?p=operations/mediawiki-config.git;a=commit;h=4197fa18a22660296d0e5b84820d5ebb4cef46d4]

;Future software changes:
* The next version of MediaWiki (version 1.22/wmf5) will be added to Wikimedia sites starting on May 27. [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2013-May/069458.html]
* An updated version of [[mw:Echo (Notifications)|Notifications]], with new features and fewer bugs, will be added to the English Wikipedia on May 23. [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2013-May/069458.html]
* The [[m:Special:MyLanguage/Single User Login finalisation announcement|final version]] of the "single user login" (which allows people to use the same username on different Wikimedia wikis) is moved to August 2013. The software will [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-ambassadors/2013-April/000217.html automatically rename] some usernames. [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-ambassadors/2013-May/000233.html]
* A [[m:Special:MyLanguage/Flow|new discussion system]] for MediaWiki, called "Flow", is under development. Wikimedia designers need your help to inform other users, [http://unicorn.wmflabs.org/flow/ test the prototype] and discuss the interface. [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2013-May/069433.html].
* The Wikimedia Foundation is hiring people to act as links between software developers and users for VisualEditor. [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-ambassadors/2013-May/000245.html]
</div>
<div style="font-size:90%; font-style:italic; background:#fdf6e3; padding:1em;">'''[[m:Tech/News|Tech news]]''' prepared by [[m:Tech/Ambassadors|tech ambassadors]] and posted by [[m:Global message delivery|Global message delivery]] • [[m:Tech/News#contribute|Contribute]] • [[m:Tech/News/2013/21|Translate]] • [[m:Tech|Get help]] • [[m:Talk:Tech/News|Give feedback]] • [[m:Global message delivery/Targets/Tech ambassadors|Unsubscribe]] • 20:28, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
</div>

<div style="float:left; background:#eee8d5; border: .2em solid #dc322f; border-left: .7em solid #dc322f; padding: 1em; ">Important note: This is the first edition of the [[m:Tech/News|Tech News]] weekly summaries, which help you monitor recent software changes likely to impact you and your fellow Wikimedians.

'''If you want to continue to receive the next issues every week''', please '''[[m:Global message delivery/Targets/Tech ambassadors|subscribe to the newsletter]]'''. You can subscribe your personal talk page and a community page like this one. The newsletter can be [[m:Tech/News/2013/21|translated into your language]].

You can also [[m:Tech/Ambassadors|become a tech ambassador]], [[m:Tech/News|help us write the next newsletter]] and [[m:Talk:Tech/News|tell us what to improve]]. Your feedback is greatly appreciated. [[m:user:guillom|guillom]] 20:28, 20 May 2013 (UTC)</div>

{{Clear}}

== Account creation and login redesigns ==

After months of testing, we're finally ready to enable the new designs for account creation and login. We plan on doing this today (May 29) around 23:00 UTC. If you're intersted in the background, there is documentation about [[:mw:Account creation user experience|why we did this]] and [[:m:R:ACUX|how we tested it]]. (I previously posted about it here.)

As we [http://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/04/25/try-new-login-accountcreation/ announced on the blog] a while back, you can try out the new look here before it's launched. (See the blog post for instructions.) If you see any lingering translation issues, please either fix them on translatewiki.net (where the volunteer translation for software is done). I am happy to help with any local customizations you think you might need, so please don't hesitate to reply here with any questions or requests.

Many thanks, [[User:Steven (WMF)|Steven (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Steven (WMF)|talk]]) 22:40, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

== Trademark discussion ==

Hi, apologies for posting this in English, but I wanted to alert your community to a discussion on Meta about potential changes to the Wikimedia Trademark Policy. Please translate this statement if you can. We hope that you will all participate in the discussion; we also welcome translations of the legal team’s statement into as many languages as possible and encourage you to voice your thoughts there. Please see the [[:m:Trademark practices discussion|Trademark practices discussion (on Meta-Wiki)]] for more information. Thank you! --[[:m:User:Mdennis_(WMF)|Mdennis (WMF)]] ([[:m:User talk:Mdennis_(WMF)|talk]])


== About the quotes of Kedar Joshi ==

Kedar Joshi is not a notable person. User [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/User_talk:RogDel RogDel] seems Kedar Joshi himself or other but he is constantly adding material to wikiquote. I request action about his behavior of this. [[User:Kedaaar Jo Sheee|Kedaaar Jo Sheee]] ([[User talk:Kedaaar Jo Sheee|talk]]) 18:14, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
:There already is a discussion about Kedar Joshi's notability (or lack thereof) above. See [[Wikiquote:Village pump#Kedar Joshi quote farming]]. You are welcome to voice your opinion in that discussion, but please let us await its conclusion before unilaterally removing his quotes from articles. Thanks ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:20, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

== Old "sourced/unsourced" practice ==

Hi, folks! Sorry I've been a stranger. I was just about to sort out [[Gordon Brown]], pulling the unsourced or inadequately sourced quotes into the "Unsourced" section, when I noticed there ''is'' no "Unsourced" anymore. I see that I've missed some gradual changes to [[Wikiquote:Sourcing]] over several years and then its formal approval in mid-June 2012. (Serves me right for being inattentive! By the way, [[Wikiquote:Sourced and Unsourced sections]] doesn't seem to be retired.)

I seem to recall two of the reasons we had decided to go with the Sourced/Unsourced approach were (1) insisting on reliable sources, immediately, significantly raised the barrier for addition, especially for novices; and (2) given the ratio of frequent editors to other participants, it seemed better to have an obvious section for unsourced quotes than to have them litter the page, waiting months or even years for cleanup. Plus, source-mad folks like myself could easily find what needed sourcing and dispatch it quickly.

Now that the current policy has been in place for a year or so, has the community found the more strict policy preferable? Is the source-cleanup/quote-removal work in line with community expectations? ~ [[User:Jeffq|Jeff Q]] [[User talk:Jeffq|(talk)]] 09:31, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
: Greetings, friend. As to the newer policy, I believe most find it acceptable, so long as obsolete "unsourced" sections are moved to the talk pages, and I am sometimes irritated when casual and careless removal of such sections does not transfer them onto the talk page of the article, where they should go, for relatively easy access of those who wish to seek sources for them. I'm glad to see you back, and hope you stick around a while, as you always seemed one of the more well-balanced and active admins here for quite a while, and your input might be important on many issues. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 09:59, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

:: ''[blush]'' Thanks, Kalki! I'm still somewhat erratic in my appearances, but most of the time when I edit on WP and here to a lesser extent, I've got an urge to source. If we're being sterner with non-sourcers, I'll just have to come here more often to help out with the research. ~ [[User:Jeffq|Jeff Q]] [[User talk:Jeffq|(talk)]] 07:15, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

== [[:m:Requests_for_comment/X!'s_Edit_Counter|X!'s Edit Counter]] ==

<div class="plainlinks mw-content-ltr" lang="en" dir="ltr">
(Sorry for writing in English. You can [[:m:Special:MyLanguage/Requests_for_comment/X!%27s_Edit_Counter/Summary|translate the proposal]].)

Should [[tools:~tparis/pcount|X!'s edit counter]] retain the opt-in requirement? Your input is strongly encouraged. [[:m:Requests_for_comment/X!'s_Edit_Counter|Voice your input here]].—[[:m:w:User:Cyberpower678|cyberpower]] [[:m:w:User talk:Cyberpower678|Chat]]Automation 04:21, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
:Distributed via [[:m:Global message delivery|Global message delivery]]. (Wrong page? [[:m:Distribution list/Global message delivery|Fix here]].)
</div>


== Authority Control ==

Hey everyone, I've copied over the English Wikisource's authority control template; it can be found, oddly enough, at {{tl|authority control}}.

What is [[w:authority control|authority control]]? It's a standardized method of referencing individuals, regardless of language. For example, [[William Shakespeare]] is also Ουίλλιαμ Σαίξπηρ, 莎士比亞, উইলিয়াম শেকসপিয়র, and Уильям Шекспир, depending on the language. However, now his Wikiquote article has the same authority control data as Wikisource[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=William_Shakespeare&diff=1595049&oldid=1594920], which links to Shakepeare's entry in three different databases, with no ambiguity of language.

What does this mean for us? Not too much, to be honest; it's just another level of organization, but one we don't really have to do much for. You can copy and paste the template usage from Wikipedia, Wikisource, and Commons pages, and it should work just fine here. I don't think we need to undertake a massive implementation here, but if you've got any favorite author pages, feel free to copy over the authority control data from elsewhere. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 21:41, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
:Thank you, that's a good thing to have. Perhaps a bot could be set up to copy the authorities over from WP articles where this is possible and unambiguous. [[User:121a0012|121a0012]] ([[User talk:121a0012|talk]]) 01:54, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

::Does it work with Wikidata? -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 09:25, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
:::No; Wikidata doesn't work with any of the projects other than Wikipedia at the moment. Nothing we can do about that, too. :\ [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 18:36, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

== [[Wikiquote:Bartlett's 1919 Index]] ==

Several years ago, I imported the contents of the 1919 Bartlett's Quotations (the last public domain version of this work) into Wikiquote project space. Since then, Bartlett's selections from over 600 authors have been incorporated into our pages. However, this work remains to be done for the last 39 authors on the [[Wikiquote:Bartlett's 1919 Index]] page. The quotes from these authors are contained in ten pages in project space linked at the top of the index page. Please help work through these quotes, deleting those that we already have and fully sourcing and adding those that are still missing from our collection. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 00:05, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
: The number of quotes remaining in most sections is relatively small, so I am going to go ahead and copy these into the existing pages under a "''Bartlett's Familiar Quotations'', 10th ed. (1919)" header. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 13:58, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
::Just go ahead, it seems you are in the best position to finish this job as you planned. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 00:34, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
::: Are you sure you want help, BD? Your 7-years project is almost completed now! (And Hercules must perform his labors alone.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 14:19, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
:::: It only appears to be almost completed. I have moved many of the remaining quotes by section the pages of the individual authors. See, e.g., [[Henry Wadsworth Longfellow#Bartlett's Familiar Quotations, 10th ed. (1919)]]. Although citation to ''Bartlett's'' is sufficient to include these quotes on the pages of the authors, it would be preferable for the quotes to be fully cited to the original work, leaving no need to cite ''Bartlett's'' at all. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 15:06, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
::::: Are Plutarch and Terence the [[Wikiquote:Bartlett's 1919 Index/quotes|only two missing]]? Where are the other quotes? ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:31, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::: There are still [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=default&search=Bartlett%27s+Familiar+Quotations%2C+10th+ed.+%281919%29&fulltext=Search several articles] that have a ''Bartlett's'' section needing original source citations, or more complete ones. Note that in some cases Mr. Bartlett was wrong, so they need to be verified. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:54, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::: I am going to make a template to call the Bartlett's 1919 section header, which will also provide a category containing all pages with such sections. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 19:23, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::: Categorization is a good use of templatizing, but remember that section headings within templates cause the "[edit]" link to go the template rather than the page in which it appears. (People have been asking the developers to provide an option to control this for years...) ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 20:20, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::::: Actually, what I have in mind is a template that calls the small-text indented line below the section heading. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 20:33, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

== Universal Language Selector will be enabled on 2013-07-09 ==

<div class="plainlinks mw-content-ltr" lang="en" dir="ltr">
On July 9, 2013, [[mw:Universal Language Selector|Universal Language Selector]] (ULS) will be enabled on this wiki. The ULS provides a flexible way to configure and deliver language settings like interface language, fonts, and input methods (keyboard mappings). Making it available here is the last phase of making ULS available on all Wikimedia wikis.

Please read the announcement on [[m:Announcement Universal Language Selector|Meta-Wiki]] for more information. [[m:User_talk:Siebrand|Siebrand]] 12:21, 4 July 2013 (UTC) (via [[m:Global message delivery|Global message delivery]]).
</div>


== Two Quote limit per episode? ==

I was going through some old edits on the M*A*S*H page after noticing the number of quotes from the pilot episode, because I remembered someone saying there was a two quote limit "per WQ rules". I just took a quick look through the guidelines and found nothing so I thought I'd better throw this to the Village Pump for a check. [[User:TLPG|TLPG]] ([[User talk:TLPG|talk]]) 03:51, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
:The guideline in question is [[WQ:LOQ|Wikiquote:Limits on quotations]]. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 06:20, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
:: Of course, that is merely a proposed policy. Since it has gone for years without garnering the support of the community, we might need to archive it and start again from scratch. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 14:09, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

== Thanks ==

Thanks to all who supported my RfA and to Evula for promoting me. i hope to prove worthy of your faith in me.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 09:02, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

== Congratulations Wikiquote! ==
I know Wikiquote is not a community social networking service, but someone must note that Eng Wikiquote is now ten years old! Thousands of Wiki sites has been created since Eng Wikiquote's inception, still Wikiquote stands out as the most successful yet ambititious Wiki ever seen. This we have to thank for a united community and ambitious contributors. I take this opportunity to especially praise [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] and [[User:BD2412|BD2412]] on their work on tracing quote origins respective adding quotations for the Theme pages. Let us hope and strive for that in ten years Wikiquote will not be ''a'' quotation page but ''the'' quotation page, having tentacles spreading everywhere like the barracuda conglomerations Google and Facebook. --[[User:Spannerjam|Spannerjam]] ([[User talk:Spannerjam|talk]]) 15:54, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
: I forgot all about the anniversary of "quote.wikipedia.org" created 10 July 2003. Time flies when you are having fun. I have only been here for the last five years, but will likely be around for the next ten. We owe a debt of gratitude to many people who did a lot of heavy lifting in the early days but may have moved on to other things since. I would like to especially thank the "Defenders of the Wiki" who resisted [[m:Wikimedia Forum/On disbanding Wikiquote|efforts to shut the project down]] when it was only five years old, and all those who worked on reforming Wikiquote's practices to address problems raised there. Wikiquote has become ''the quotation site that cites its sources'' as a result! The work goes on, and some of the policy initiatives begun in response to that incident have yet to be finalized.... ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:06, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

== Pywikipedia is migrating to git ==

Hello, Sorry for English but It's very important for bot operators so I hope someone translates this.
[[mw:PWB|Pywikipedia]] is migrating to Git so after July 26, SVN checkouts won't be updated If you're using Pywikipedia you have to switch to git, otherwise you will use out-dated framework and your bot might not work properly. There is a [[mw:Manual:Pywikipediabot/Gerrit|manual]] for doing that and a [https://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/07/23/pywikipediabot-moving-to-git-on-july-26/ blog post] explaining about this change in non-technical language. If you have question feel free to ask in [[mw:Manual talk:Pywikipediabot/Gerrit]], [https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/pywikipedia-l mailing list], or in the [irc://irc.freenode.net/#pywikipediabot IRC channel]. Best [[mw:User:Ladsgroup|Amir]] (via [[m:Global message delivery|Global message delivery]]). 13:07, 23 July 2013 (UTC)


== HTTPS for users with an account ==

Greetings. Starting on August 21 (tomorrow), all users with an account will be using [[m:w:en:HTTPS|HTTPS]] to access Wikimedia sites. HTTPS brings better security and improves your privacy. More information is available at [[m:HTTPS]].

If HTTPS causes problems for you, tell us [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org on bugzilla], [[m:IRC|on IRC]] (in the <code>#wikimedia-operations</code> channel) or [[m:Talk:HTTPS|on meta]]. If you can't use the other methods, you can also send an e-mail to <code>https@wikimedia.org</code>.

[[m:User:Greg (WMF)|Greg Grossmeier]] (via the [[m:Global message delivery|Global message delivery]] system). 18:59, 20 August 2013 (UTC) (wrong page? [[m:Distribution list/Global message delivery|You can fix it.]])

: As [[m:HTTPS#August_28.2C_2013_-_Secure_log-in.2C_with_secure_browsing_and_editing_for_logged_in_users|I just updated on the meta page]], we've delayed this rollout by one week. The change will now take place on August 28 at 1pm Pacific Time. Please take a look at gadgets or bots you maintain to make sure they'll continue to work; more information [[m:HTTPS|at meta]]. [[User:Sharihareswara (WMF)|Sharihareswara (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Sharihareswara (WMF)|talk]]) 21:24, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

== Disambiguating biographical pages to match Wikipedia ==

I was editing [[John Green (author)]], when I noticed that there were no other pages named John Green, yet the page was disambiguated. I brought it up on the talk page (You can see the discussion at [[Talk:John Green (author)#Article name]]). [[User:BD2412]] defended the naming of the article, but encouraged me to raise the issue here.

The main reason that it is my opinion that the article should be located at [[John Green]] is that it makes the URL smaller. The URL also doesn't have any weird parenthesis in it. This makes it easier for a reader to directly type in the URL to get to the page, and for an external website (or, in fact, other Wikiquote articles) to link to the article. In addition, keeping the name non-disambiguated keeps it from having to be piped when linking from another article, and it doesn't imply that we have other articles for people named John Green.

The other argument states that it is Wikiquote practice to correspond biographical articles to what they are on Wikipedia. This kept linking cross-wiki (most notably using {{tl|Wikipedia}}) simple. However, this provlem is usually fixed by piping {{tl|Wikipedia}}.

What are everyone else's opinions on this? [[User:Nick1372|Nick1372]] ([[User talk:Nick1372|talk]]) 04:21, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

: Directly typing in the url http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_Green will take a user to this page, by redirect. I concede that there is some oddness to a title redirecting to a disambiguated title when it is our only entry, but I continue to prefer that we match Wikipedia titles. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 11:30, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

:: I favor moving [[John Green (author)]] to [[John Green]]. The links should match Wikipedia (e.g., <nowiki>[[w:John Green (author)|John Green]]</nowiki>), but the titles should match Wikiquote contents. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 13:55, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

== [[m:Requests for comment/Global ban for Ottava Rima]] ==

<div class="mw-content-ltr" lang="en" dir="ltr">
Per the [[m:Global bans]] global policy, you are informed of the discussion above. Please comment there and feel free to appropriately distribute more widely in prominent community venues in order to «Inform the community on all wikis where the user has edited». [[m:User:Nemo_bis|Nemo]] 10:10, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
</div>


== [[Template_talk:Otherwiki#voy:_logo_change]] ==

Hi. Please do this request. [[User:PiRSquared17|PiRSquared17]] ([[User talk:PiRSquared17|talk]]) 14:38, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

== Are tweets of notable person Quotes? ==

Politicians, Sports person and Celebrities express their views more via Twitter and Facebook nowadays. With the recent speeches or views given as tweets, are tweets eligible to have their place in the Wikiquote page of the concerned person? Do Tweets about particular incident stand as quotes? Many newspapers resort to quote the tweets of politicians and celebrities related to event that they are covering. So, Shall we consider important tweets to be quote of such person and enter it here in Wikiquote? - [[User:Vatsan34|Vatsan34]] ([[User talk:Vatsan34|talk]]) 15:25, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
:A quote is a quote, regardless of the medium. As long as the tweet is actually something quote-worthy (a Kardashian posting what they had for breakfast wouldn't be, for example), I'd say it would be fine. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 19:51, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
::It should be fine, as long as it's certain that the actual person tweeted it. Does Twitter verify accounts of famous people like Facebook does? [[User:Nick1372|Nick1372]] ([[User talk:Nick1372|talk]]) 22:58, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
::: Twitter does, but it has also been noted that many famous people have others write and send tweets for them. This has cropped up on a number of occasions when a famous politician or public figure has tweeted something untoward, and then disavowed the tweet with the claim that it was a low-level underling who wrote and sent it under the famous person's name. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 15:55, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
:::: I think the measure of whether it is an "important tweet" lies in whether and how widely it is quoted by noteworthy sources, and that it is those sources which should be cited to show it is quoteworthy. I commented about this [[WQ:Q#Tweets, blogs, chatrooms, &c.|at some length elsewhere]]. Twitter has its own "re-tweet" function, with which we do not need to compete. (As for people who employ ghostwriters, or claim they did, the problem is not unique to Twitter. There are a number of dead-tree books quoted on Wikiquote that were ghostwrittten.) ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:40, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

== who does the music for the last season? ==

we love the back ground music and can't find out who it is can you help?
{{Unsigned|67.216.137.180}}

Hello. You are on the wrong site for that information. Please try [[w:WP:Reference desk/Entertainment|Wikipedia's Entertainment Reference Desk]]. Thank you. [[User:Nick1372|Nick1372]] ([[User talk:Nick1372|talk]]) 20:12, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

== maybe another person for the frontpage? ==

Hi! Firstly: Thank you all. On my screen's rendering, there's space for another person to be linked from the mainpage. I haven't found any policy on that (and who needs red-tape!), so if others also find there's space, perhaps we could have another woman in the list. Just off the top of my head, Eleanor Roosevelt would be one worthy nomination, though I don't claim much of a perspective and am not from the female user audience.
I don't mean to re/open any un-fun contention, so feel free to ignore this suggestion. The first issue is simply whether there's enough space generally for another.
Cheers anyway, best wishes and thank you again :)
{{Unsigned|118.210.209.43}}
:{{done}} - a fine suggestion that I've now implemented. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 15:37, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

== "Fools Create. Wise Men Imitate." by Dennis Fitzgerald ==

The quotation, "Fools Create. Wise Men Imitate" was first said by Dennis Fitzgerald and succinctly describes the single most successful method of marketing, sales, writing, screen play, gamble, etc., etc.
{{unsignedip|76.173.253.203}}

== It's time to reclaim the community logo ==
Hello community, 
this is to inform you about the (re)start of a discussion in which you might be interested. In short, myself and a few other Wikimedia editors decided to oppose the registration of the [[:File:Wikimedia Community Logo.svg|community logo]] as a trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation.

The history of the logo, the intents behind our action and our hopes for the future are described in detail on [[m:Community Logo/Reclaim the Logo|this page]]; to keep the discussion in one place, please leave your comments [[m:Talk:Community Logo/Reclaim the Logo|the talk page]]. (And if you speak a language other than English, perhaps you can translate the page and bring it to the attention of your local Wikimedia community?) I’m looking forward to hearing from you! [[m:user:odder|odder]] ([[m:user talk:odder|talk]]) 10:00, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
P.s.: You can check whether the WMF protects the logo of your project by seeing if it's listed as "registered trademark" on [[wmf:Wikimedia trademarks]].
:— Notwithstanding the inclusion of a different signature, the preceding comments were added by [[User:Nemo bis|Nemo bis]] ([[User talk:Nemo bis|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Nemo bis|contribs]]), 10:20, 21 September 2013‎

== Talk:Alan Rusbridger ==

Additional opinions are invited on a question of quotability at [[Talk:Alan Rusbridger]], where two contributors have reached an impasse. Thank you. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 13:53, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
:I've entered my opinion on that page. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 15:27, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

== [[:m:Community Logo/Request for consultation|Request for consultation on community logo]] ==

<div class="plainlinks mw-content-ltr" lang="en" dir="ltr">

[[File:Wikimedia Community Logo.svg|thumb|Request for consultation on this community logo]]

First, I’d like to apologize for the English. If you can, please help to translate this for other members of your community.

The legal team at the Wikimedia Foundation would greatly appreciate your input on the best way to manage the "community logo" (pictured here) to best balance protection of the projects with community support. Accordingly, they have created a “request for consultation” on Meta where they set out briefly some of the issues to be considered and the options that they perceive. [[:m:Community Logo/Request for consultation|Your input would be invaluable]] in helping guide them in how best to serve our mission.

Thank you! --[[m:User:Mdennis|Mdennis]] ([[m:User talk:Mdennis|talk]]) (via the [[m:Global message delivery|Global message delivery]] system). 02:19, 24 September 2013 (UTC) (wrong page? [[m:Distribution list/Global message delivery|You can fix it.]])

</div>


: I am not sure anyone here is qualified to translate from English to Quotish, but if somebody wants to give it a try... ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 20:16, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

== Misattributed? ==

Misattribution of quotes seems to me to be a major activity on the web.

If I find on the web a dubious sounding quote attributed to (famous person A), I may look it up in Wikiquote and find it listed as "misattributed to (famous person A), actually from (lesser known author B)". Since it was suspicion that led me to look it up in Wikiquote, I am inclined to believe that it really was misattributed.

But how does one know this for sure? Perhaps author B actually extracted the quote from the writings of famous person A.

In Wikiquote, what degree of certainty is supposed to be behind the labelling of a quote as either attributed or misattributed?

Thanks, [[User:WhenceThis Quote?|WhenceThis Quote?]] ([[User talk:WhenceThis Quote?|talk]]) 16:36, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

: If the entry is well cited then it should be quite evident which author has priority. If it is not well cited, with publication dates or with reference to reliable independent analysis, then it needs to be fixed. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:17, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

::Thank you. For example, "There is only one way to avoid criticism: do nothing, say nothing and be nothing." is listed in the Aristotle article as misattributed to Aristotle but actually from Elbert Hubbard, early 20th century. Is the possibility that the thought was translated from something Aristotle wrote discounted because there is a (relatively) recent source? [[User:WhenceThis Quote?|WhenceThis Quote?]] ([[User talk:WhenceThis Quote?|talk]]) 18:03, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

::: Not because there is a recent source, but because there are ''only'' recent sources:  I find no print attributions of anything like this to Aristotle prior to the 21st century. For someone who has been studied so widely and so long, un-cited modern attributions have no credibility. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 20:13, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

::::Thank you. Very clear. [[User:WhenceThis Quote?|WhenceThis Quote?]] ([[User talk:WhenceThis Quote?|talk]]) 22:23, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

== [[mw:Echo|Notifications]] ==

[[File:Notifications-Flyout-Screenshot-08-10-2013-Cropped.png|thumb|300px|Notifications inform you of new activity that affects you -- and let you take quick action.]]
''(This message is in English, please translate as needed)''

Greetings!

[[mw:Echo|Notifications]] will inform users about new activity that affects them on this wiki in a unified way: for example, this new tool will let you know when you have new talk page messages, edit reverts, mentions or links -- and is designed to augment (rather than replace) the watchlist. The Wikimedia Foundation's editor engagement team developed this tool (code-named 'Echo') earlier this year, to help users contribute more productively to MediaWiki projects.

We're now getting ready to bring Notifications to almost all other Wikimedia sites, and are aiming for a 22 October deployment, as outlined in [[mw:Echo/Release_Plan_2013|this release plan]]. It is important that notifications is translated for all of the languages we serve.

There are three major points of translation needed to be either done or checked:
*[https://translatewiki.net/w/i.php?title=Special%3AMessageGroupStats&x=D&group=ext-echo#sortable:3=desc Echo on translatewiki for user interface] - you must have an account on translatewiki to translate
*[https://translatewiki.net/w/i.php?title=Special%3AMessageGroupStats&x=D&group=ext-thanks#sortable:3=desc Thanks on translatewiki for user interface] - you must have an account on translatewiki to translate
*[[mw:Help:Notifications|Notifications help on mediawiki.org]]. This page can be hosted after translation on mediawiki.org or we can localize it to this Wikipedia. You do not have to have an account to translate on mediawiki, but single-user login will create it for you there if you follow the link.
:*[[mw:Echo/Release Plan 2013#Checklist|Checklist]]

Please let us know if you have any questions, suggestions or comments about this new tool. For more information, visit [[mw:Echo_(Notifications)|this project hub]] and [[mw:Help:Notifications|this help page]]. [[m:User:Keegan (WMF)|Keegan (WMF)]] ([[m:User talk:Keegan (WMF)|talk]]) 18:26, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
:(via the [[m:Global message delivery|Global message delivery]] system) (wrong page? [[m:Distribution list/Global message delivery|You can fix it.]])


: I am not sure anyone here is qualified to translate from English to Quotish, but if somebody wants to give it a try.... Regarding "localize it to this Wikipedia", it may be noted that this is not a Wikipedia, this is a Wikiquote. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:54, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
:: It's a good thing to have, though. I have found it very useful on Wikipedia. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 17:28, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
::: Yes, it is a good thing, especially for the newcomers it is primarily intended to target. My only quibbles with the implementation, and they are minor ones, are (1) If you don't want duplicate echoes via email, the option to turn them off is not on the main User Preferences tab under "Email options", the logical place to indicate you don't want auto-generated emails, but is on a less obvious subsidiary tab; and (2) It adds still more client-side scripting straws to the camel's back for users with older browsers or limited bandwidth. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:17, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

== Speak up about the trademark registration of the Community logo. ==

<div class="plainlinks mw-content-ltr" lang="en" dir="ltr">

Hi all,

Please join the consultation about the Community logo that represents Meta-Wiki: [[:m:Community Logo/Request for consultation]].

This community consultation was commenced on September 24. The following day, two individuals filed a legal opposition against the registration of the Community logo.

The question is whether the Wikimedia Foundation should seek a collective membership mark with respect to this logo or abandon its registration and protection of the trademark.

We want to make sure that everyone get a chance to speak up so that we can get clear direction from the community. We would therefore really appreciate the community's help in translating this announcement from English so that everyone is able to understand it.

Thanks,
[[m:User:Geoffbrigham|Geoff]] & [[m:User:YWelinder (WMF)|Yana]] 19:59, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
</div>


== Add All Quotes from Episode ==

Hello, the name is Blurred Lines, and I would like to ask if there's any chance that I could put in all of the quotes from an episode instead of few ones? --[[w:User:Blurred Lines|Blurred Lines]] ([[w:User talk:Blurred Lines|talk]]) 20:36, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
: Hello, Blurred Lines, and welcome to Wikiquote! Unfortunately, you can not add all of the quotes from an episode. That would be a copyright violation. Please read [[Wikiquote:Limits on quotations]] for more information on the subject. [[User:Nick1372|Nick1372]] ([[User talk:Nick1372|talk]]) 01:44, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

== "Further reading" sections ==

A question has arisen about including "Further reading" sections in Wikiquote articles.
;Recent developments:
User [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] recently identified 33 articles containing "Further reading" sections, and removed those sections with the edit summary
: ''"Removed further reading section - this is not Wikipedia"''.[//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Mdd&offset=20131008095000&target=Mdd]
The majority of the 33 articles were created or principally authored by only two contributors: [[User:Cirt|Cirt]] (20 articles) and [[User:Inesculent|Inesculent]] (5 articles). In discussion at [[User talk:Mdd#Thanks much for your formatting help|Mdd's talk page]], the removal was questioned by Cirt and endorsed by myself, [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]]. Subsequently, Cirt has partially reverted about half of these removals and created an additional article with a "Further reading" section. At present there are a total of 17 articles (to the best of my knowledge) with "Further reading" sections, all of which were added by a single contributor. These articles are:
{{Multicol|100%|2px}}
* [[American Dialect Society]]
* [[Olly Blackburn]]
* [[Campaign for "santorum" neologism]]
* [[François-Eudes Chanfrault]]
* [[Chargemaster]]
* [[Donkey Punch (novel)]]
{{Multicol-break|2px}}
* [[Sandra Fluke]]
* [[Freedom for the Thought That We Hate]]
* [[Fuck (film)]]
* [[Large-group awareness training]]
* [[MediaWiki]]
* [[OT VIII]]
{{Multicol-break|2px}}
* [[Sect]]
* [[Sexual slang]]
* [[Ma Anand Sheela]]
* [[Streisand effect]]
* [[Truth in Numbers?]]
{{Multicol-end}}
;Discussion:
In addition to discussion on Mdd's talk page, Cirt has noted re-additions on the talk pages of affected articles, soliciting compromise. There have been replies to four of these posts (that I am aware of) at [[Talk:Campaign for "santorum" neologism]], [[Talk:Donkey Punch (novel)]], [[Talk:Ma Anand Sheela]], and [[Talk:OT VIII]]. I think it would be better to consider the question, whether this type of content is appropriate for Wikiquote, in a centralized discussion here, rather than multiple, scattered venues and duplicative discussions. Does the community support or oppose including these "Further reading" sections, in particular (subject to quantitative or qualitative compromise) or in general (as a difference in kind)? ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:38, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
<hr width="50%" />

[[File:Jackalope 101.jpg|thumb|Compromise between being a jackrabbit and being an antelope?]]
*I agree with the observation by [[User:Robin Lionheart|Robin Lionheart]] that this is a question of the ''type'' of content, not the ''quantity'' thereof.[//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:OT_VIII&diff=1632308][//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Campaign_for_%22santorum%22_neologism&diff=1632307] I am not quite sure what it means to ''compromise'' between being an encyclopedia and being a compendium of quotations, rather than being one thing or the other. Like the [[w:Jackalope|Jackalope]], this seems like a mythical [[w:Chimera (mythology)|chimera]], not a plausible reality. Several of these sections, and the articles in which they appear, give the appearance, intentionally or inadvertently, of using Wikiquote as a [[w:WP:COATRACK|coatrack]] to hang content that one user is [[w:Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Cirt and Jayen466#Remedies|banned from posting at Wikipedia]]. Regardless of the propriety or impropriety of this appearance, it illustrates a broader problem: I have remarked many times about articles that seem to be essays about a topic, or collections of bibliographic and research factoids, or even exposition of a point of view, that are ''constructed from quotations'' with little or no regard for [[Wikiquote:quotability|quotability]]. This misconstrues the object of a compendium of quotations; but subjective considerations can make the phenomenon difficult to manage. The problem of using Wikiquote for purposes other than the art of quotation is greatly exacerbated by the addition of further information that is ''not even ostensibly related to quotation'', which, whatever the topic of an article may be, is the true subject of Wikiquote. I '''oppose''' including these "Further reading" sections, in particular and in general, because, as Mdd wrote, "this is not Wikipedia"; but further, though the fictive trophy pictured above might be a fine place to hang one's coat, ''this is not a jackalope.'' ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:58, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
* I '''oppose''' including such sections (as I noted on a few of the Talk pages cited above). I agree with the arguments set forth here by Ningauble - I do not find that such links have a place here at WQ. I feel that adding such links is designed more to push a particular POV than to provide opportunity for additional ''quotes''. If there are truly additional ''quoteworthy'' quotes available at the linked sites, they may certainly be quoted - but such links are much better served at an encyclopedic site than at ours. However, the feeling I get is that this is just a backdoor way of presenting additional essays or articles that on their own do not contain anything worth quoting. In fact, I feel that the addition of such sections continues a growing problem at this site in general - the inclusion of "quotes" on a topic regardless of their memorableness, instead existing as a dry recitation of facts on a given topic. To me, this is not what WQ is about - it should instead be a collection of memorable quotes from noteworthy people or works. I believe that having such additional links further waters down the product. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 19:10, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
* '''Oppose''' inclusion of "Further reading" sections. These are appropriate for Wikipedia, a general purpose encyclopedia, not for Wikiquote, a tightly focused compendium of quotes. I also completely endorse UDScott's concerns about straying too far afield from the purpose of Wikiquote, which is to provide memorable quotes from noteworthy sources. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 19:37, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
* I '''oppose''' these sections as they are used here. We're a quote compendium. No one should be coming to us looking for information about topics, let alone pointers to other sites with information about those topics. Our links to sister sites are enough for a reader interested in a topic. Keep all other external links to quotes only. [[User:Nick1372|Nick1372]] ([[User talk:Nick1372|talk]]) 22:07, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
*'''Comment:''' I clearly see the will of the community as expressed above is against the ''Further reading'' section on pages on Wikiquote. I will go about removing them voluntarily from the above pages, myself. Thank you for your time, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 22:14, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
**{{done}}, I've removed the sects in question from the above named pages. Hopefully this is now satisfactory, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 22:22, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

== Update on "Further reading" sects ==

#I did a search of "Further reading" on any remaining pages on Wikiquote.
#I removed those sects, with a note to the community consensus at [[Wikiquote:Village Pump]].
#I then made a note of this on the talk pages of those respective entries.
#Hopefully this is satisfactory.
Have a great day, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 00:08, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
: Thanks for that, Cirt. :) [[User:Nick1372|Nick1372]] ([[User talk:Nick1372|talk]]) 00:50, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

To all: Should we add the result of this discussion to [[WQ:NOT]] to prevent this from happening again? Or is there another relevant policy? [[User:Nick1372|Nick1372]] ([[User talk:Nick1372|talk]]) 00:54, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
:You're welcome! That sounds like a fine idea to me, no objections, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 01:40, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Okay, then I'd like to propose that the following text be added to [[Wikiquote:What Wikiquote is not#Wikiquote is not an encyclopedia]]:

<blockquote> Do not add "Further reading" sections to Wikiquote articles. Literature and articles about a subject do not need to be listed in Wikiquote, as it does not have encyclopedic content. </blockquote>

What does everyone think? [[User:Nick1372|Nick1372]] ([[User talk:Nick1372|talk]]) 02:23, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
: I would add that such sections may instead be added to the Wikipedia article for the topic. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 03:26, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
::Agree with both {{user|Nick1372}} and {{user|BD2412}}, above. The proposed wording sounds appropriate. Cheers, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 03:27, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
:::{{done}}, I've added the above wording by [[User:Nick1372]], with the modifications from [[User:BD2412]], to [[Wikiquote:What Wikiquote is not]], please see [https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:What_Wikiquote_is_not&diff=1633558&oldid=1550476 DIFF]. Feel free to tweak the wording further. Cheers, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 16:51, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
::::Revising policy at [[WQ:NOT#Wikiquote is not an encyclopedia]] in light of this discussion is a good idea. I was going to suggest some different wording for this, and for the existing sentence about introductions.
::::I.e., I was going to solicit feedback about rewriting the paragraph along these lines: "Wikiquote is not the same as its sister project, Wikipedia. A short introduction is used to identify an article's subject and, if needed, indicate why it is notable. Longer expositions and suggestions for further reading about the subject may be added to a corresponding Wikipedia article, but do not belong in Wikiquote."
:::: However, since the wording has already been finalized, it appears that I am just too slow (or too easily distracted by things like sleeping and eating) to participate in the fast pace at which changes to major policy pages are deliberated and executed, in less than a day. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:57, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
:::::Please re-read my last sentence in my above post. I wrote: ''"Feel free to tweak the wording further."'' I would be most happy if anyone wished to modify my changes. :) Have a great day, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 18:06, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
::::::I've gone ahead and added the helpful suggestions above by [[User:Ningauble]] to the page [[WQ:NOT#Wikiquote is not an encyclopedia]], please see [https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:What_Wikiquote_is_not&diff=1633585&oldid=1633558 DIFF]. Please anyone feel free to change or modify that page as you like. Cheers, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 18:14, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
::::::: Well, I don't think that's the way to deliberate substantive changes to a core policy page, and the {{tl|policy}} banner at the top of the page says "Please do not make significant changes to this page without prior discussion." Also, this is not a page that ''anyone'' can change as they like, because ''someone'' has semi-protected it.[//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Wikiquote%3AWhat+Wikiquote+is+not] The wording above was expressly offered to solicit feedback and, though it is gratifying that you seem to approve of my offering, there has not been much comment yet. Also, though I may not have entirely clear, I had intended that the community consider something like my proposal for use instead of, rather than in addition to (as already implemented[//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:What_Wikiquote_is_not&diff=1633585]) language suggested by Nick1372. A little deliberation might have remedied my lack of clarity. I really do not think that a core policy page should be treated like a sandbox for trying out ideas, and I really do not understand this rush to implement whatever has been recently suggested for discussion. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 19:30, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

== Images make mobile site UNREADABLE ==

I was surprised to see that there is no guideline in the FAQ about image placement, but reviewing the previous pages here makes it clear that there is an obvious heated debate with regards to the subject of images.

Well, here is some food for thought - unlike on the main site, where the images are merely annoying, on the mobile version of wikiquote the image spam makes the pages completely unreadable. This is a serious problem, and can be addressed in only two ways:

1) remove the vast majority of the (mostly irrelevant) images from wikiquote

2) provide some mechanism for the mobile page whereby it defaults to an image-free format.

Quite apart from the issue of readability, there is the discourtesy of hogging the limited mobile phone bandwidth of someone who unsuspectingly things they are heading to a primarily textually based website.

[[User:Jmackaerospace|Jmackaerospace]] ([[User talk:Jmackaerospace|talk]]) 03:54, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Ok, sorry, I had not been able to find the WQ:Image use policy due to the afformentioned mobile device... it really should be part of the FAQs however.
[[User:Jmackaerospace|Jmackaerospace]] ([[User talk:Jmackaerospace|talk]]) 04:38, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
:'''Comment:''' I would have to strongly agree with all of the comments by {{user|Jmackaerospace}}, above, regarding over-usage of images on this site. Cheers, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 14:18, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

:I have to say, I kind of agree; I just looked at the [https://en.m.wikiquote.org/wiki/Friedrich_Nietzsche mobile version] of [[Friedrich Nietzsche]] on my iPhone, and those images are definitely just in the way. Could we perhaps create a decorative image template that would allow for their use on the regular site, but prevents them from being displayed on the mobile site? I don't want to get rid of every image ever, but having a bunch of decorative images getting in the way of the actual content of the site isn't particularly helpful. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 19:36, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Mock the Week (second nomination)

2013-10-10T05:36:47Z

EVula: no such thing as FAs here

{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Wikiquote| |{{error:not substituted|vfd-new2}}<div style="display:none;">}}
== [[:Mock the Week]] ==

This title was previously deleted pursuant to [[Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Mock the Week]] because contributors could not restrain themselves from adding an overabundance of copyrighted material. The problem persists in this recreated article. Quotability is also a concern because the show consists primarily of silly, mocking ephemera [[WQ:Q#Recentism vs. the Test of Time|of no enduring interest]] for a compendium of quotations. The article has also become a magnet for silly lads to make up their own mockery, or "things we'd like to see on ''Mock the Week''". — [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:49, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
*'''Vote closes''': 17:00, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

*'''Delete''' as nom. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:49, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. [[User:NoseNuggets|NoseNuggets]] ([[User talk:NoseNuggets|talk]]) 3:55 PM US EDT Oct 5 2013.
*'''Delete''' Massive amounts of non-notable quotes that are amounting to a huge copyright violation. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 20:26, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' As said, it's mostly copyrighted and numerous times have I had to remove some quotes or change them because someone just wants to add what they want to say. [[User:Yoshi58724|Yoshi58724]] ([[User talk:Yoshi58724|talk]]) 20:44, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', per prior precedent at [[Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Mock the Week]], which was then apparently ignored. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 01:11, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
*:At it took a couple of years after it was deleted before it was recreated. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 02:36, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
*'''Keep and improve''' I don't find anything truly notible in this article. But, I don't see any reason to delete it, either. WIth some improvements this could become a featured article. --[[User:Jdaniels15|Jdaniels15]] ([[User talk:Jdaniels15|talk]]) 16:26, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
**Wikiquote doesn't have a featured article system. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 05:36, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Mock the Week (second nomination)

2013-10-06T02:36:37Z

EVula: comment

User talk:Liz (usurped)~enwikiquote

2013-10-05T20:27:25Z

EVula: moving from userpage

Hi {{PAGENAME}}. [[Wikiquote:Welcome, newcomers|Welcome]] to [[Wikiquote:About|English Wikiquote]].
* For a quick overview of what Wikiquote is, read [[Wikiquote:Wikiquote]].
** Also see [[Wikiquote:What Wikiquote is not|What Wikiquote is not]] for common activities that Wikiquote does not support.
* To ask for help or to talk with another editor, visit our [[Wikiquote:Village pump|Village pump]].
* To browse Wikiquote, take a look at our [[Wikiquote:Browse|browsing start page]].
* Before creating new articles, consult our [[Wikiquote:Guide to layout|guide]]. You may practice [[Wikiquote:How to edit a page|how to edit a page]] at [[Wikiquote:Sandbox|Sandbox]].
* Please remember to use [[Help:Edit summary|edit summaries]] when editing pages.
* When posting to a discussion, [[Wikiquote:Sign your posts on talk pages|please sign with a date]] by writing four tildes (~~~~) and saving.
* [[w:Wikipedia:Be bold|Be bold]].
Enjoy! [[User:WelcomeBot|WelcomeBot]] '''[[User talk:Cbrown1023|owner!]]'''[[Wikiquote:Village pump|question?]] 02:57, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

==Usurp request==
I'm putting in a request to usurp this account name. I hope you don't object. [[User:Nwjerseyliz|Nwjerseyliz]] ([[User talk:Nwjerseyliz|talk]]) 19:13, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

User:Liz (usurped)~enwikiquote

2013-10-05T20:27:24Z

EVula: placed on the wrong page, moving to talk page

Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Mock the Week (second nomination)

2013-10-05T20:26:15Z

EVula: Delete

Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Homestar Runner

2013-10-03T01:43:56Z

EVula: ...original research?

{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Wikiquote| |{{error:not substituted|vfd-new2}}<div style="display:none;">}}
== [[:Homestar Runner]] ==

There are no sources sited. The entire page is nothing but original research. — [[User:Jdaniels15|Jdaniels15]] ([[User talk:Jdaniels15|talk]]) 19:13, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
*'''Vote closes''': 20:00, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
* '''DELETE''' -[[User:Jdaniels15|Jdaniels15]] ([[User talk:Jdaniels15|talk]]) 19:17, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' per nom. Nothing but uncited quotes that don't meet [[WQ:Quotability]]. [[User:Nick1372|Nick1372]] ([[User talk:Nick1372|talk]]) 01:12, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' "Original research"? This isn't Wikipedia. However, it ''is'' completely unsourced, and I don't see that being fixed anytime soon. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 01:43, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Main Page

2013-09-27T15:38:58Z

EVula: and bye indeed.

{{talkheader}}
If you're reading Wikiquote after 00:00 UTC, and notice the quote of the day on the [[Main Page]] has not been updated, you can make the update happen by [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Main_Page&action=purge '''clicking here to purge the main page cache'''].

<center>This page is for discussion of the '''Main Page''' only. For general discussions or questions about Wikiquote, please go to the '''[[Wikiquote:Village pump|Village pump]]'''.</center>
''NOTE: Old discussions can be found in [[Talk:Main Page/Archives]].

== Wikiquote languages ==

Why there isn't [[:id:|Bahasa Indonesia]] if there is [[:su:|Basa Sunda]] ? Thx... [[User:Kenrick95|Kenrick95]] 09:53, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
:{{done}} Updated list of active Wikiquotes on [[Main Page]] and [[Wikiquote:Other language Wikiquotes|Other language Wikiquotes]]. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] 13:51, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

== Missing spaces ==

Can somebody add a space after Themes and Miscellaneous in the Selected pages section? Thanks. -[[User:Cwenger|Cwenger]] 16:08, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
:{{done}}. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] 16:59, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
== Why does the quote of the day not have a source?==
[[User:Levelroom|Levelroom]] 14:49, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

: There is a link to a Wikiquote article that should have information about the source. Although I think it would be good to include a citation on the main page, [[Talk:Main Page/Archives/003#Main Page: QOTD|previous discussion]] of the idea did not lead to implementing it. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] 15:35, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

== Updated ==

Please see [[Wikiquote_talk:Quote_of_the_day#Update]]. Thank you for your time, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 08:12, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
: I don't quite get it, and have commented on the above linked talk page. Perhaps I am just easily confused. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] 14:06, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
::You said the same thing at [[Wikiquote_talk:Quote_of_the_day#Update]]. Please, let us have discussion at one unified location, and not have threaded back-and-forth responses across multiple pages. The above subsection was merely meant as a notice, to direct discussion to [[Wikiquote_talk:Quote_of_the_day#Update]]. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 20:47, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

==Interwiki '''gl'''==
Could you ad interwiki '''[[:gl:]]'''? A lot of thanks--[[User:HombreDHojalata|HombreDHojalata]] 20:46, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
:{{done}}. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] 13:38, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

== How ==
How can I get an account?
: {{unsigned|76.208.34.192}}
: This has been responded to, with the "anon" template:
: {{anon}}~ [[User:Kalki|Kalki]] ([[User talk:Kalki|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Kalki|contributions]]) 20:14, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

== Daily quotes ==
It seems we've had a very "zen" streak in the front page quotes. Is there some astrological event going on that I'm not aware of? :) ~ [[User:Jc-S0CO|S0CO]]([[User_talk:Jc-S0CO|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Jc-S0CO|contribs]]) 22:51, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
:[[w:Mu (negative)|Mu]]. Always and everywhere. ~ [[User:Kalki|Kalki]] ([[User talk:Kalki|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Kalki|contributions]]) 19:29, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

== Swastikas ==

Um... any particular reason there are [[w:swastika|swastika]]s plastered all over [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/June 11, 2011|today's quote of the day]]? - [[User:Dcljr|dcljr]] 07:42, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

'''YES.''' — I do not mean to insult you or alarm you — but it is to point out MANY of the forms of stupidity of human beings, which prompt them to embrace many forms of overt or subtle forms of facism, represented by the Nazi and Neo-nazi uses of the [[w:swastika|swastika]] — and to blindly and ignorantly constrain, destroy and disrespect MANY forms of fairness and freedom — such as the ancient pagan, [[w:Jainism|Jain]], [[w:Hinduism|Hindu]], [[w:Buddhism|Buddhist]], and [[w:Falun Gong|Falun Gong]] uses of the swastika represent.

{| style="background: {{{color}}}"
| align=center | [[File:Nat Turner captured.jpg|288px]]
| align=center |  
| align=center | [[File:Swastik4.svg|29px]] [[File:Swastika nazi.svg|44px]] [[File:Crucified swastika.svg|77px]] [[File:ACWswastika.svg|44px]] [[File:Falun Gong Logo.svg|38px]] It is hopelessness even more than pain that crushes the soul. So the decision-making of daily life involves not, as in normal affairs, shifting from one annoying situation to another less annoying — or from discomfort to relative comfort, or from boredom to activity — but moving from pain to pain. One does not abandon, even briefly, one's bed of nails, but is attached to it wherever one goes. 卐卍 ~ [[William Styron]] ~ 卐卍 [[File:Swastika1.svg|33px]]   [[File:Raelian symbol.svg|44px]][[File:HinduSwastika.svg|33px]] [[File:ReceBogaSwargi.svg|44px]][[File:Indian Swastika.svg|42px]]
| align=center |  
| align=center | [[File:Bundesarchiv Bild 175-04413, KZ Auschwitz, Einfahrt.jpg|200px]] [[File:RGS 13.jpg|200px]]
|}

The excellent statement of Styron is related to his state of general personal depression, but also relates to a more generalized depression and hopeless state of confusion that exists among many people, due to their willingness to judge themselves or others and condemn MANY as absolutely unworthy of life, or any form of generous consideration or respect, because of the tragic narrowness and smallness of their existing levels of vision, awareness and mindfulness.

In the early part of the twentieth century a group of obnoxious and overt fascists seized upon the device of the swastika as a way to promote their profoundly mentally and spiritually ill agenda — and what had been from ancient times a symbol of dynamically auspicious balance and righteous activity became primarily identified in the minds of millions with the genocidal and totalitarian aims of some of the foulest and most perverse minds that have existed in the history of the world. '''I am opposed to it or ANY other symbol remaining ''primarily'' a symbol of evil in the minds of much of humanity.''' There is a need for symbols — but there is a NEED to see BEYOND any particular uses of them as well — IF people are to attain TRUE maturity and stability which doesn't impel them to retreat in fear and cowardice from shows of force or fierceness — and to fight fairly as possible against even those LEAST inclined to be fair towards them.

'''Those most foolishly simple minded will OFTEN think that there is ONLY one proper way to interpret things — THEIR way — and thus many more subtle and obvious forms of fascism abide and flourish — even among those who will insist that they are intensely antifascist — and those which are most dangerous are often those which are most subtle and most disguised.''' They will seize upon any difference they can point out that certain people "Do NOT Belong among us" — they are different and people must form "commonsensical" groups which can be defined most easily as "US vs THEM". And thus tyrants and toadies rise to power amidst the distressing hatreds and fears they feed upon and vomit forth again for others to feed upon.

Amidst all the tyrants and toadies with varying forms of power, amidst many levels of social organization or disorganization, there also abide minds innocent of such narrow overly presumptive assumptions, truly devoted to Justice, Unity, Liberty, and the Ultimate Spirit of ALL Awareness, Life, and Love — in ALL people — even the WORST of them. And in their fear of the true virtue and actual power of those who often arm themselves with little more than truth to reveal the deficiencies, flaws and farces of their apparent virtue and power, the tyrants and toadies of all stripes will unite in their hostilities to [[Herman Melville|such people]] in EVERY way they can… making them [[Socrates|drink hemlock]], [[Jesus|crucifying them]], [[Joan of Arc|burning them]] [[Giordano Bruno|at the the stake]], [[G. K. Chesterton|misjudging them]] in many shallow ways, constraining them with [[Ken Kesey|straightjackets and walls and rules "for their own good"]] — calling them [[Walt Whitman|ridiculous and overly sensitive and poetic]] — or [[Thomas Paine|overly harsh and dramatic]] in their various advocacies of freedom and fairness — and the [[Necessity|NECESSITY]] for reliance upon the ultimate power of [[Truth|TRUTH]] — and [[Leo Tolstoy|REJECTION of the needless use of force]] and punishments to damage or constrain [[Mahatma Gandhi|the lives of others]].

Fairness often speaks unpleasant truths as well as pleasant — and thus becomes ignored or undermined by those more facile at forms of flattery — and thus Fascism often flairs and becomes quite popular — until the DOOMS it impels become evident and people once again become aware of proper prudence of NOT using needless force — and respecting the NEED for Justice, Unity, Liberty, and EVER greater respect for Awareness, Life, and Love. ~ [[User:Kalki|Kalki]] ([[User talk:Kalki|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Kalki|contributions]]) 09:55, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
: In summary — MUCH of what I am trying it INDICATE is : AMBIGUITIES ABOUND — those who seek to OVERLY DEFINE the world and others in VERY constrained and limited ways and to eliminate or deny ambiguities NOT to their comfort or liking — OFTEN bring about many of the foulest forms of injustice — which they are often not troubled by at all — so long as they can hide, deny, or ignore it — or find ways which allow others to keep them largely oblivious to it. I prefer to confront MANY forms of interpretation and misinterpretation of motivations and aims and actions and wills, HONESTLY rather than deceiving anyone that there SHOULD be or CAN be only ONE interpretation of ANYTHING. I ''often'' deal with complexities far beyond the easy kenning of most — but I don't always attempt to express many of these in words. Circumstances are making me more inclined to do so lately. ~ [[User:Kalki|Kalki]] ([[User talk:Kalki|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Kalki|contributions]]) 10:04, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

:: Y-y-yeah… I'm sure you think all of that is very profound, but none of it actually justifies the use of the symbols with this particular quote, or indeed why we need 14 of them. Now, if the quote actually referenced the swastika or any philosophies, religions, or political movements that have used it, that would be different. Instead, this strikes me as [[w:soapbox|soapbox]]ing on the Main Page, albeit in a completely opaque and ineffective way. (I find your use of the phrase "''it is to point out''" especially troubling in this regard. Perhaps in the future you shouldn't try so hard to "point out" things in clever ways using the QotD feature.) As for this ''particular'' QotD, I would encourage you (or some other interested party) to remove all the swastika-related images and just keep the ones that clearly are relevant to [[William Styron|Styron]] and/or his quote (i.e., Nat Turner, Auschwitz, and I guess—even though it seems a bit on-the-nose to me—the bed of nails pic). - [[User:Dcljr|dcljr]] 11:25, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
::: I choose images both subtle and obvious in their relations to Styron and his statement and his works. A writer with as profound a discernment and aims as Styron knows that many things relate to other things in ways which are not immediately or obviously apparent — and knows that the limits of language and one's ability to communicate profound ideas can be ''very'' depressing — and often quite ''anguishing'' — but in pursuit of freedom of will and conscience against those most inclined to constrain and deny the worth of conscience — "One does not abandon, even briefly, one's bed of nails, but is attached to it wherever one goes" — and continues to attempt to increase communication and discernment among many diverse factions of humanity — in trying to prompt awareness of some vitally important forms of universal unity that transcend all shallow definitions and attempts at them — including one's own. Styron and other artists know the importance of defying the sense of futility and despair that can often arise in battles against oppressions of various deliberate or incidental kinds . ~ [[User:Kalki|Kalki]] ([[User talk:Kalki|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Kalki|contributions]]) 11:58, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

But don't you think your use of symbols actually reduces the ambiguity of the quotes by pushing people into interpreting them in the way you deem right? [[Special:Contributions/84.73.177.231|84.73.177.231]] 15:11, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

We're getting email complaints on this as well. For instance, OTRS ticket [[ticket:2011061110011006|2011061110011006]]. The swastikas are distracting to say the least and offensive to many. They force a narrow interpretation and also are tacky in terms of design. I suggest they be removed immediately and editorial integrity be asserted. [[User:Adrignola|Adrignola]] 20:29, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
:{{done}}, replaced with quote page from same day from last year. Per [[commons:Commons:OTRS|OTRS complaints about this issue]], eg OTRS ticket [[ticket:2011061110011006|2011061110011006]]. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 21:00, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
* Though I responded far more extensively to concerns expressed here, long ago in my comments below, I would like to make clear at this point that the comments on the swastikas "force a narrow interpretation" is simply false — they might prompt PUZZLEMENT to many, and incite existing narrow interpretations about things to become more evident, but they FORCE nothing. ALSO, I would like to point out that in the publicly displayed records still existing at this point this act of censorship replaced the ACTUAL quote of the day as well as the layout created for it with an IMPROPER record of what the actual Quote of the day was, and with the controversy of the Main page having swastikas on it LONG gone, the PROPER and TRUE records of what had been selected should be restored. Otherwise the strategies of the totalitarian Ministry of Information in [[George Orwell]]'s ''[[Nineteen Eighty-Four]]'' at altering the genuine records of the past will CONTINUE to be employed here by some, with apparent impunity and pride. I consider it lamentable that understandable reaction to a symbol ABUSED by authoritarian autocrats has been used to justify acts of extremely authoritarian behavior here. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 15:25, 4 February 2012 (UTC) + tweaks
** The [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Quote_of_the_day/June_11,_2011&action=history revision history] of the page appears to be intact. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] 15:51, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
*** I wasn't claiming that things had YET gone so far as to change the revision history — but the actual quote and layout that PRODUCED so much consternation and controversy has been censored from the NORMALLY viewable records, with the June 11 2010 quote and layout replacing it at '''[[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/June 2011]]''' page, such had been maintained for ALL months accessible through '''[[QOTD by month]]'''. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 16:11, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

'''Discussion''': There is a general discussion about asserting editorial control over images on the Main Page at ''[[Wikiquote:Village pump#Images on Main Page]]''. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] 21:25, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

<hr width=50%>
:The following message was composed after viewing some comments by IP 84.73.177.231 earlier today but which I was constrained from immediately responding to because of blocks Cirt had placed on the IPs of my home computers — despite this continuing to be NOT appropriate action based on community consensus. I copied it to a thumb drive and am now posting it, along with a few comments regarding actions taking in response to the images and quotes which had been selected for the QOTD. 
:: ''But don't you think your use of symbols actually reduces the ambiguity of the quotes by pushing people into interpreting them in the way you deem right? [[Special:Contributions/84.73.177.231|84.73.177.231]] 15:11, 11 June 2011 (UTC) ''

I am WELL aware that people could easily believe such things, and even KNOW that such things might be true in some limited senses, but I also know that is not the primary FACT which could be construed from examination of the montage, nor of my words in response to perplexities or irritations which have been expressed or indicated here. I am not actually reducing ambiguities at all — I am simply finding means to make a few people a little bit more aware of SOME of them.

'''The wise know that ambiguity is ubiquitous.''' This does NOT mean that expressions or indications are valueless — as some who call themselves nihilists might seek to imply or construe — often in very presumptive or authoritarian ways — but that MANY values can arise and be assigned to many things — including the words and symbols used in the common intercourse of human minds. '''Many of the wisest and most experienced explorers of thought and ideas would assert that there are no ends to the varieties of ambiguity which can arise in examining reality.''' ONE of the MOST IMPORTANT things to do is to BE AWARE of that FACT — and HELP people become so.

Throughout most of my life I have usually sought to find many ways to remain obscure and unnoticed — but when I feel that there is a need for me to be noticed at all, I usually try to be as amusing and entertaining and interesting and educational about many vitally important facts as I can be — not a mere irritation or abuser of anyone — but I am willing to sometimes irritate and be extremely harsh to those I perceive to be most casually willing to unjustly irritate and be overly harsh to others and their proper rights and liberties as human beings. I am QUITE aware that many might judge me to be sometimes overly harsh to others — and I would not deny that I might sometimes seem or be so — but usually when I am being harsh with anyone, there is indeed many aspects of justice or necessity at work that MOST people might not immediately or easily become aware of — and I ALWAYS acknowledge the right of others to disagree with me and to express their disagreements as honestly and vigorously as they wish.

Words and symbols, and the rules people devise with them ALWAYS deceive those who place too much trust in them. There is no way to be safe from deceptions — and those who seek to constrain and limit the amounts of information available to others in various ways are the MOST deceptive of all. Much of my own use of words, like that of many people, INDEED involves double-talk and multiple-entendre expressions designed to preserve and delight in ambiguities or the signaling of such, which will NOT be recognized by many — but I do NOT aim to keep anyone permanently or detrimentally deceived in ANY ways — and MOST abhor the mindsets of those who DO seek to do such things. I do NOT seek to do such people any harm — but I DO often seek to prevent them from doing needless harm to others or themselves — and this can involve letting some forms of harm to myself or others arise — to PREVENT what I perceive would be far worse harm to human liberty.

In my life I have encountered MANY who wish to END discussions SWIFTLY and with little consideration in ways which favor their own stances, and are unwilling or unable to debate or discuss matters — or even tolerate determined dissent. They often wish to RUSH discussions, and entirely lack the patience or wit to appreciate such complex genius as exhibited by [[Johnathan Swift|Swift]] or [[Herman Melville|Melville]], or [[Douglas Adams|Adams]] who I can sometimes disagree with, despite immense admiration for them, or some of the worst absurdities of cleverly effective shallowness of such people as [[Rush Limbaugh]] and [[Glenn Beck]]— who I can occasionally firmly agree with, though I abhor much of the general tenor of their expressions and many of their motives — and what they generally seek to imply with many expressions of truth or falsehoods which lead to the favoring and support of some of the foulest of falsehoods and outright lies which corrupt the minds of millions. I do NOT wish to inspire hatred or animosity for their personal lives — but I do not deny I have intense animosity for many of their aims.

IF I were to provide ANYONE a firm label for what I am it would be a COMPLEX one that would IMPEL them to examine MANY of the ambiguities and false assumptions that go into the casual use of words and labels which many use.

Though I can respect many elements of many diverse political and religious factions, I belong to NO established political party, nor organized religious institutions. In a very paradoxical paradigm of resolutions and reconciliations not easy for many to fathom, '''I might reasonably and perplexingly be called an existentially absurd passionately involved transcendently compassionate and aloof moderately pacific militant radical agnostic gnostic liberal conservative libertarian socialist democratic republican communitarian communist religiously irreligious Angelic Idiot''', with a great fondness and aversions for many called anarchists as well as those too foolish or too wise to use any such labels, with a strong abhorrence of many forms of casual anarchism, and MOST forms of rigorous authoritarianism and tyranny — ESPECIALLY by those who would seek to absolutely define themselves or anyone else by ONLY one of any of these or any other labels — and vigorously opposed to ALL forms of terrorism. I know I CERTAINLY could find MANY things to disagree with amidst any who would like to use any of those words in such an exclusive and highly exclusionary way. Even when I myself use the term fascist in reference to people's attitudes or behavior in regard to something, I usually do not mean to imply that they are ONLY or primarily fascists or irredeemably so — but apply the term like I use the term painter — as a describing ONE aspect of what they do or are inclined to do — and with a hope that the NAMING and realization of their fascist tendencies can impel the integrity of at least some of them to abandon such and become a more healthy and aware individual. There are NO people I presume to be free of some capacities for tyrannical fascism or evil, though they can come to be motivated to be such through VARIOUS delusions and errors.

Though I am quite forgiving and tolerant towards many idiots — CERTAINLY being one myself, I am a person at war with many forms of idiocy — and have been intensely most of my life — though I have not usually let this show in so obvious a way as I have recently begun to here, and consider some of the worst forms of idiocy are those which seek to brand ANYONE as WHOLLY virtuous or vile — no matter how vain, vicious or truly villainous they might be.

As a first class IDIOT who recognizes myself as such in MANY ways, and many others as IDIOTS in ways they have not even begun to recognize, I seek to become an ever-worthier ANGEL of True Eternal Grace — and inspire others to be as well.

So much for the flow of verbose verifications of a tendency towards pragmatically pompous poetics and pretensions for now… I confess I sometimes do like precipitating necessary crises, when they must come — and further confusing some of the most tragically confused, and making people who most WORSHIP the idolatry of words TIRED and weary of trying to understand things BY words that can only, AT MOST, be INDICATED through words — and PROVEN by actions and events — and never actually PROVEN in all ways conceivable even by these.

I truly believe that ultimately, ALL IS WELL, no matter how distressing and tragic MANY things and events may OFTEN seem — and MORE well in more ways than I can ever indicate through words or statements… and I know that even saying this can distress and disturb some people who cannot see ANY way how this can be so — and think that things MUST be MOSTLY wrong if THEY cannot see how they are mostly right — or even, in some impossible to percieve ways ENTIRELY right. I believe they are particularly wrong in this — and logic and reason does support me on this — though not in ways that I am deluded enough to believe many of them could immediately understand.

<hr width=50%>
I had a very few more comments beyond the above, in my original composition, but some of these are relatively insignificant as compared to issues that are now evident, as I now respond to further comments and activity which have occurred after I composed most of the above comments, as I have now arrived at my present location where my access to this wiki has not been constrained to my talk page by Cirts suppressive actions upon my home computer. I believe that the quote and imagery used was censored in activity I consider entirely inappropriate. I will seek to make a few more observations here in coming weeks, but am not immediately inclined to be overly involved in disputing what has been done at this time. I sorrow that people cannot recognize that the imagery used was in relation to the NEED for sincerely anti-fascist attitudes and behavior — and to reject behavior that are actually endorsements of fascist tendencies against what many might ignorantly suppose to be a pro-fascist presentation of symbols which have been used and abused by fascists.

For many years I have often sought to provide THOUGHT provoking imagery and quotes in the selections made for QOTD — and objected to calls for the banal and bland to be mandated by those who actually have severe problems with permitting a broad range diversity of thoughts and opinions to be presented. I expect that I will have to make further arguments on this matter within a few days, but for now will continue to do some simple editing while I consider matters. ~ [[User:Kalki|Kalki]] ([[User talk:Kalki|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Kalki|contributions]]) 00:55, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

God forgive me, but this Kalki individual is becoming increasingly bewildered and autocratic. He (and only a sad and isolated male could ever resort to the pathetic, self-serving tripe he regularly emits) uses these pages as a platform to try to exorcise his own nothingness. Best to ignore.
( His excruciatingly unsophisticated use of block capitals to evince his illogical and lack lustre opinions are particularly tiresome.) I imagine no one ever reads the paragraphs of specious nonsense he produces, but still - can this individual not be removed from editing these fine pages? Wikiquote is not a private fiefdom for semi-educated drifters on welfare... (empty curve 7 July 2011)
: I could respond to this particular form of shallow tripe more extensively, but I prefer to quote a fellow clown who knew he was a clown, as something of an antidote to those who are, and yet fail to perceive that, and would sternly punish anyone who doesn't take their tripe as seriously as they do:
:: '''In this world there is room for everyone. And the good earth is rich and can provide for everyone. The way of life can be free and beautiful, but we have lost the way.''' Greed has poisoned men's souls, has barricaded the world with hate, has goose-stepped us into misery and bloodshed. We have developed speed, but we have shut ourselves in. Machinery that gives abundance has left us in want. '''Our knowledge has made us cynical. Our cleverness, hard and unkind. We think too much and feel too little. More than machinery we need humanity. More than cleverness we need kindness and gentleness. Without these qualities, life will be violent and all will be lost.''' ~ [[Charlie Chaplin]], in ''[[w:The Great Dictator|The Great Dictator]]'' (1940)
: Like Chaplin I can laugh at myself as well as my adversaries, and not hiding or denying anger at open or disgused forms of intolerance, bigotry and fascism, do my best to expose it for what it is, even while doing my best to forgive those who are so ignorant and confused as to indulge in it in ways that are momentarily acceptable or popular because of the shallowness of many people's perceptions. Though I do speak in anger at times, I generally invite people to paths of greater ease and laughter, far more than I seek to be harshly menacing to those who are ignorant and confused and who tend to believe that they are somewhere close to the pinnacle of human wisdom in many possible regards — and fit to judge what should be the opportunities and fates of others. Those who are far higher than they in intellectual and ethical merit have abandoned such delusions for ages past, and simply seek to clarify the need for Liberty and Justice for all — NOT just those who comport themselves in ways the timid and tyrannous find most acceptable. ~ [[User:Kalki|Kalki]] ([[User talk:Kalki|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Kalki|contributions]]) 23:00, 7 July 2011 (UTC) + tweaks
: I would like to clarify further a few things about the images and symbols used, in what was intended to be a very somber and sobering assessments of human misapplication of many symbols and signs and prejudices and presumptions associated with them: In presenting the statements of [[William Styron]], which like my own were designed to actually prompt people to go beyond shallow and narrow comfort levels and probe the discrepancies between what people actually advocate and what they often do, there were 2-3 swastikas which could be properly designated Nazi swastikas which have become recognized symbols of intolerance and bigotry, and there are 16 other swastikas (as well as even those 2 or 3, however horribly misused they might be), which could be taken as evoking traditions dating back thousands of years which are ancient indications of such assertions as "ALL IS WELL" — from those of the generally gentle and pacifistic Jains — as well as those of the Hindu and Buddhists, and more recent innovations denoting ancient or modern ideas. I am always appalled when people call for strong forms of censorship and oppression to insure that views other than their own are not heard or considered — no matter how virtuous many of their own ideas might generally be — if they are truly virtuous they can withstand presentations of other ideas. ~ [[User:Kalki|Kalki]] ([[User talk:Kalki|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Kalki|contributions]]) 23:11, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

== Just an opinion on today's (17 Nov 2011) QOTD from Voltairine de Cleyre ==
(Oh Gawd!, Not that worn-out old boogeyman, "fascism" yet again!?

Yep. Sorry. Today's QOTD seems to be practically a mission statement for fascism. At least for authoritarian "leaders" in fascist regimes. One can easily imagine this quote as part of Goebbels' introduction of Hitler before a huge crowd, saying it is a triumph of the will that we have such strong leaders who tenaciously seek to impose their wishes on the populace no matter how unpopular and no matter anything else, for that matter.

I think it is perfectly fine to expose people to quotes from fascists, communists, or whomever - it makes for a better educated, and therefore just plain better, citizenry. Heck, Ronald Reagan almost bragged that he had studied ''The Communist Manifesto'' and ''Das Kapital'', and he was strongly anti-Communist, for instance.

====Afterthought====
As an afterthought, it does bother me a bit when such quotes are presented with no commentary or context to indicate the antidemocratic aspect of the quote. Open-source projects are inherently democratic, IMHO, so we should permit and maybe even require that NPOV not be followed in one small way when presenting the QOTD. Avoid turning the QOTD into a political pulpit, but just a minimalist statement that,
:"The editors identify the preceding quote as antidemocratic, and hope you consider that when thinking about today's quote, whether you consider that and then agree or disagree, our only aim is that you consider it before moving on."
Or some such boiler-plate statement, this was composed very much on the fly, and probably many of you can do something better. But maybe you see what I'm aiming for.

Again, this is just a talk page and just my opinion. I am not campaigning for or against anything; this is not a campaign in any way. My suggestion above is purely an afterthought, given momentary exposure and then moving on. I am not trolling for angry responses. If you just plain disagree with me, that's fine but please don't waste your bandwidth or everyone else's by posting flames or rants. My opinion isn't really important enough to justify that.

Thank you for listening. I hope you found it worth your time. :-)

[[Special:Contributions/69.17.65.107|69.17.65.107]] 14:59, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

: '''Though I might sometimes be harsh in my rhetoric and assertions, your honest commentaries ''are'' welcomed, and I believe any proper [[Anarchism|anarchist]] or [[w:libertarian socialist|libertarian socialist]] with high regard for the promotion of [[justice]], [[unity]] and [[liberty]] of ALL people would certainly accept ANY and all honest expressions of opinions — no matter how much they must strongly disagree with many aspects of such statements — as I certainly DO.'''

: I believe that many people do not understand that when one speaks with honest harshness, one IS being more genuinely RESPECTFUL of the rational capacities of others than one who delicately avoids indicating anything that might possibly offend or irritate the most "thin-skinned" of zealots and shallow of minds.

: I regularly observe how thin-skinned and shallow critics of notions of liberty and justice that exceed their narrow "right-wing" or "left-wing" views very often are — while those I respect as the broadest-minded ''centrists'' can weep and laugh simultaneously at the hilarious ABSURDITY of many peoples reactions to any ATTEMPTS at honest and sincere presentation of ideas outside the narrow mazes of deceit and delusion they normally tread.

:You state:
:: "Today's QOTD seems to be practically a mission statement for fascism."

:This certainly is more than a bit ''ironic'' because [[Voltairine de Cleyre]] was a very highly respected [[anarchism|anarchist]] and was speaking in this instance from a stance that could be reconciled not only with those of [[w: Individualist anarchism| Individualist anarchism]] but those of any well developed forms of [[w:Libertarian socialism|Libertarian socialism]] or [[w:Anarchist communism|Anarchist communism]]:

::''' ''Let us have Men, Men who will say a word to their souls and keep it — keep it not when it is easy, but keep it when it is hard — keep it when the storm roars and there is a white-streaked sky and blue thunder before, and one's eyes are blinded and one's ears deafened with the war of opposing things; and keep it under the long leaden sky and the gray dreariness that never lifts. Hold unto the last: that is what it means to have a Dominant Idea, which Circumstance cannot break. And such men make and unmake Circumstance.'' '''

: I myself am a person who actively strives to present MANY of the views of MANY people in thought provoking ways, and permit the presentation of even such views as I MUST disagree with and oppose — whereas many others would constrain or suppress them to such points as they could rarely if ever be heard, and NEVER in such a context as permits an adequate assessment of situations that might not accord with their preferences.

: I am certainly NOT a promoter of mere selfishness or fascism, as many who style themselves "individualists" or even libertarians all too often ARE — but neither am I passively submissive to those highly deluded or well-disguised forms of authoritarianism which would forbid and censor and restrict the free expressions of others into some narrow shallow notions of what "politically correct" people — whether ostensibly of the "right" or "left" varieties would prescribe for all.

:: "As an afterthought, it does bother me a bit when such quotes are presented with no commentary or context to indicate the antidemocratic aspect of the quote."

: At that point I mentally asked ''Who'' exactly would you have provide such enlightened commentary — a Politburo or some other bureaucracy of those MOST CONCERNED with DICTATING to others what can or cannot be said, and how or how not ANY statement can or "SHOULD" be understood?

: You extend that statement and provide an example of what you would find admirable:
:: "Open-source projects are inherently democratic, IMHO, so we should permit and maybe even require that NPOV not be followed in one small way when presenting the QOTD. Avoid turning the QOTD into a political pulpit, but just a minimalist statement that,
::"The editors identify the preceding quote as antidemocratic, and hope you consider that when thinking about today's quote, whether you consider that and then agree or disagree, our only aim is that you consider it before moving on."

: '''I would characterize open-source projects as ''inherently'' anti-authoritarian or anarchistic — arguably as an anarchist de Cleyre ''is'' arguably "antidemocratic" — and CERTAINLY so, if by democracy you mean to imply that the majority has the right to tyrannize over minorities — but she is ''definitely'' ALSO anti-authoritarian — and asserts that any truly legitimate and just democracy recognizes and adheres to principles of Liberty — and does NOT permit majorities to absolutely control and dictate the rights of minorities, any more than any powerful minority should be permitted to dictate to weak or defenseless majorities what they can or cannot do.''' Far too often the stances of modern politics, even in nominal democracies, have adhered to policies designed to weaken and marginalize OPPONENTS and adversaries rather than ERRORS, delusions and LIES — and thus those things grow strong and influential among ALL factions, and the parties diminish in rational as well as moral integrity.'''

:From my perspectives it is you who are advocating authoritarian "Thought control" and even proposing an increase in the powers of those who would make themselves or others "Thought Police" with great "officially" mandated control over people's lives and resources — often "officially sanctioned" by others MOST interested in being thought-police ''themselves''. And thus tyrants and their toadies often rise to prominence and power, while genuine advocates of Justice, Unity and Liberty in ways that are not comfortable to many are actively suppressed.

: To use the intro to "'''[[w:Authoritarianism|Authoritarianism]]'''" of which [[Fascism|Fascism]] is a variety — such are DEFINED as forms of social organization characterized by submission to authority and thus usually opposed to [[individualism]], [[liberalism]], [[democracy]], [[libertarianism]] and [[anarchism]].

: '''Anarchism is generally considered one of MOST hostile of ideologies to all the ways to fascism, and all forms of authoritarianism — and as such I strongly sympathize with MANY aspects, or most aspects of anarchist and libertarian socialist thought — though I can normally find some flaws or deficiencies in many of their expressions, I prefer their ways to any of those used to apparently justify the diminishment of human liberties and opportunities.'''

: Though I am well aware that there are people who call themselves nihilists who would also claim that they are anarchists as well, who eagerly advocate violence and oppression against those they can characterize as "unjust oppressors", I believe the most profound and genuine anarchists would always repudiate those who advocate destructive violence more dire than that which is clearly necessary to prevent greater destruction, and ALWAYS be extremely cautious in assessing where the worst forms of oppression or injustice lie.

: I recently moved a motto I have long loved: "'''Love rules without rules'''" to a prominent place on my talk page. I truly believe that those who speak with greatest authority ALWAYS speak with LOVE of TRUTH and the Truths of LOVE, while those who SEEK to rule or seek to establish rules which constrain and forbid and defame all actions outside of those they can appreciate as clearly or even immediately beneficial to their appetites and prejudices seek to create abundance of rules which forbid and constrain many forms of thought itself.

: '''These are just a few thoughts of my own, in response to yours, and I fully advocate OPEN and honest expressions of views — and generally MUST oppose the efforts of some to constrain expression of honest ideas, or to limit them in absolutist ways.''' ~ [[User:Kalki|Kalki]] ([[User talk:Kalki|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Kalki|contributions]]) 15:44, 17 November 2011 (UTC) + tweaks

:* I cannot conceive how de Cleyre's statement about commitment to one's ideas could be interpreted as a mission statement for fascism. This misunderstanding demonstrates quite clearly why it is ''not'' a good idea to include commentary from users about what they think a quote signifies. Let the quotes speak for themselves. If they can sometimes be misunderstood then so be it; it is better than inviting the blind to lead the blind, or engaging in digressive discussions. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] 17:39, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

== Time on the main page ==

Is there a reason why there's a time on the main page? It's since it's cached it doesn't serve as a useful indicator of the current time. If it's just there to serve as a last edited time, it would be helpful to label it as such and possibly move it closer to the bottom. [[User:Johnduhart|Johnduhart]] 22:15, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
: It doesn't seem particularly useful. It actually indicates the time the page was last rendered, subject to caching, not the time of the last edit, which is shown with a timestamp on the bottom of every page. This page also has another stale cache issue, though a less volatile one, due to transcluding {{tl|Main Page Quote of the day}}. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] 16:12, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

== new here ==

hi im new to this so go easy on me people {{unsigned|Alice miskits muse}}

==Telugu wikiquote==
Please give the link to Telugu wikiquote in the main page. Thank you. The link is given here: http://te.wikiquote.org/wiki/%E0%B0%AE%E0%B1%8A%E0%B0%A6%E0%B0%9F%E0%B0%BF_%E0%B0%AA%E0%B1%87%E0%B0%9C%E0%B1%80 [[User:Rajasekhar1962|Rajasekhar1962]] 06:03, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
:{{done}}. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] 15:03, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
==Today's Quote of The Day(Feb.01,2012)==
Seems in very good taste...--[[User:Oracleofottawa|Oracleofottawa]] 01:53, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
: Due to potential date shifts in different Time zones I am not sure whether you were commenting on the [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/February 2012|Hughes quote or the Joyce one]] — but the both were profound statements originally suggested by {{user|InvisibleSun}} which I attempted to present in memorable and significant ways. Thanks for the appreciation. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 02:44, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

==A Little Out of Hand?==
It really takes away from the impact of the main Wikiquote Page that it does not have any pictures at all! Surely we can work this out to the majorities satisfaction.--[[User:Oracleofottawa|Oracleofottawa]] 02:35, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

== Notice re discussion on Image use policy ==

Please see [[Wikiquote_talk:Image_use_policy#Proposed:_BD2412_suggested_criteria]]. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 04:27, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

== [[List of misquotations]] ==

Can we delink this from the main page ? It needs a lot of clean-up and isn't representative of our best work. --[[User:Tryst|Tryst]] ([[User talk:Tryst|talk]]) 12:37, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
:{{done}}, [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Main_Page_Selected_pages&diff=1437509&oldid=1398259 diff]. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 14:01, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
::Thanks. --[[User:Tryst|Tryst]] ([[User talk:Tryst|talk]]) 15:28, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

== [[:Wikiquote:Quote_of_the_day/June_10,_2012|Quote of the Day 10 Jun 2012]] ==

It reads: "You can’t make anything go anywhere. It just happens". Thelonious Monk.<nowiki>[</nowiki>[[Wikiquote:Citing sources|''citation needed'']]<nowiki>]</nowiki> Is it normal to have a {{tl|citation needed}} on the main page? '''[[User:It Is Me Here|It Is Me Here]]''' '''[[User_talk:It Is Me Here|t]] / [[Special:Contributions/It Is Me Here|c]]''' 20:46, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
: No. It is normal for the QotD to be have a link to a page on which a full citation may be found. (The quote has ''subsequently'' been added to the author page with a citation.) It is also normal for the quote to be selected from those [[June 10|nominated for the date]] rather than being posted out of the blue by a one-time IP user, but the person who normally handles it was absent. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 13:39, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

== Disband this Wiki ==

I love quotes. Probably more than I should. But this wiki is a joke and it just refuses to improve. Why don't you just give it up and disband the whole effort already? I knew that when I clicked on the link of the Seven Sages of Greece and it sent me to Wikipedia instead of a page within the wiki for directing to the individual sages that this wiki was never going to get better. No page for Chilon of Sparta, by the way? Get it together. Okay bye. --[[Special:Contributions/66.188.120.239|66.188.120.239]] 22:25, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

==Tamil Wikiquote ==

Please give link to the [http://ta.wikiquote.org/wiki/%E0%AE%AE%E0%AF%81%E0%AE%A4%E0%AE%B1%E0%AF%8D_%E0%AE%AA%E0%AE%95%E0%AF%8D%E0%AE%95%E0%AE%AE%E0%AF%8D Tamil Wikiquote] in English Wikiquote main page. Also in Wikiquote home page, I request to insert Tamil language above 100 list. Since the total number of pages in tamil wikiquote is now 109. Thank you. --[[User:Inbamkumar86|Inbamkumar86]] ([[User talk:Inbamkumar86|talk]]) 19:43, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
:{{Done}}. Updated list of active Wikiquotes on [[Main Page]] and [[Wikiquote:Other language Wikiquotes|Other language Wikiquotes]]. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 19:46, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
:::In [http://www.wikiquote.org/] home page, please also add the language Tamil to above 100 list. --[[User:Inbamkumar86|Inbamkumar86]] ([[User talk:Inbamkumar86|talk]]) 21:22, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
:::: Requests to update the portal page may be made at [[Meta:Talk:www.wikiquote.org template]]. Only the administrators of [[m:|Meta-Wiki]] can edit project portals. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:36, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

== Quote of the day 11 Sep 2011 ==

This quote does not appear on the movie's page on Wikiquote. [[Special:Contributions/83.70.170.48|83.70.170.48]] 10:13, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
: [I am assuming you mean today's date 11 September 2012]: Actually [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Ratatouille&diff=1430914&oldid=1423089 ONCE upon a time it was], but due to the herd-think mentality which absolutely emphasizes quantities rather than qualities which is currently prevailing among many here, it was removed. I have neither the time nor sufficient interest to sort out all the deletions that have occurred because those lacking in either imagination or sense believe they are serving the project by drastically REDUCING the amount of ideas available to people according to the preferences of a very few who seem most concerned with actively controlling and constraining the contributions of others, and believe that is about the best service they or anyone else could render to this project — perhaps exceeded only by the devising of rules to constrain and control the contributions of others even more, and labelling anyone with a more genuinely conservative and liberal dispositions and greater imagination and interest in PRESENTING ideas as "disruptor" or disturber of their peace. I am generally spending my time doing things where I can contribute with far more sensible imagination without facing the regular barrage of senseless impediments that are increasingly being encountered here. I usually only spend a few minutes a day here now, where once it was a place to which I regularly devoted hours of my attention on most days. Those days, at least for now, are gone. I must be leaving now. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 11:42, 11 September 2012 (UTC) + tweaks

== How can one add a quote? ==

'''Acting nowadays is an interdisciplinary course for all professions. I thought the sports and the arts are exempted. Which among these professions has the subtlety to mask the lie?''' by ''Isidro T. Savillo''
I took this from his theoretical biology web page.

== Not just a single quote of the day ==

I would suggest more than 1 quote for the day. make it 4 quotes for the day and it must cover various fields of interest... quote from a writer, from a scientist,from an actor from an imbecile, from a religious, from a prostitute or neuter, from a world circum navigator, from a hermit, from historian, from a deaf and dumb complexed human, from a gay or lesbian, from a fatty or slimmy person, from the royalty, from a paroled criminal, from a dreamer, from a provacateur, from an evil or witch, from a lawyer, from soothsayer, from a snake's hisses with an added chatter from a chicken it may form a sound pleasing enough to weave a quote of word/s, from a centenarian, from a scuba diver, from a neurotic or insane person, from a shoplifter, from a cabin crew, from a playboy or playgirl, from a dancer, from a museum curator, from a fan, from a housekeeper of old castles, from a lady in waiting, from a royal blooded baby whose mom was just one of the flings, from a dwarf or fairy, from a maniac... just like the quote you have right now- it seems so lowly low to take[[Special:Contributions/68.68.108.210|68.68.108.210]] 16:45, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

== Sanskrit wikiquote link ==

Since Sanskrit wikiquote has come out of incubator some time ago, please provide an interlanguage wiki link to Sanskrit wikiquote (sa.wikiquote.org) on the sidebar here. Thanks. -[[User:Hemant wikikosh|Hemant wikikosh]] ([[User talk:Hemant wikikosh|talk]]) 12:33, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}}. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:04, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
::Thanks.-[[User:Hemant wikikosh|Hemant wikikosh]] ([[User talk:Hemant wikikosh|talk]]) 11:56, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

== Selected pages ==

The articles that appear in that list were "selected" over five years ago. Do they really represent the best of Wikiquote? I think this is something we should discuss. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 12:33, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
: I believe some should perhaps be switched with others, and a few added, but in the past there was a preference for not changing much there without extensive consideration. I believe it probably is about time to begin considering some alternatives or additions. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 13:11, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
::Yes, I agree that it would be good to discuss what is on the list. I actually made some additions last month to the 'People' list (adding [[Ralph Waldo Emerson]], [[George Bernard Shaw]], and [[Bertrand Russell]]), but I think it is a good idea to review all categories. I recommend that you post a notice on the VP to start a discussion (and perhaps some nominations of what you might want to switch or add) ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 14:21, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
:I think that the page [[Anonymous]] should be removed from that list, because it presents almost no sources whatever. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 15:29, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
::I would finally suggest removing the [[Timothy Leary]] and [[Starhawk]] articles from the list as well, to replace them with the more noteworthy authors [[Alfred, Lord Tennyson‎]] and [[Alexander Pope‎]]. That way (if we also remove the [[Anonymous]] article, per above), the list would have exactly 30 pages. Thoughts? ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:17, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
::P.S. I would also be inclined to add [[Charles Dickens]] to the list. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 22:06, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
::: I have never been one to wish to fix definite numerical constraints on much of anything, but know there are practical limits to how many can be included. I think the recent additions have been good ones, and would support the addition of Dickens and Tennyson, but would remove Leary only if some other figure of his era replaced him, such as [[John Lennon]], and would retain [[Starhawk]] as a well known pagan feminist since the 1970s, and one of only 3 women on the list. Although there remain problems with the page, I am not inclined to remove [[Anonymous]], but don't feel strongly about it either way. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 23:37, 21 April 2013 (UTC) + tweak
::::Interesting points (you make [[Feminism|feminists]] proud). I agree with you when it comes to "definite numerical constraints"; indeed, as I wrote in an edit summary, "having only 30 pages is not strictly necessary". I don't mind if we just add to the list, say, [[Charles Dickens]], without removing any other article. But you see the problem here — if we are only willing to add (everyone is), but never to replace, eventually that list will either become disproportionately large or, as is the case now, very important writers will be left out. [[w:Stalemate|Stalemate]]. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 00:28, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
:::I wonder why we don't implement a "Good articles" system here at Wikiquote. If we could do that, we wouldn't have this problem. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 07:35, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
: It occurs to me that more room could be made for good articles on significant persons and works by clearing out the "Miscellaneous" group. It contains some links to categories or lists rather than articles (there is a separate section for categories below), and some poorly sourced pages that, though they are topics of interest, are not examples of good articles. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:44, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

== [[:Wikiquote:Quote of the day/April 2013]] - lay out ==

In the [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/April 2013]] - lay out with four images surrounding the text, I find it extremely difficult to focus on the text. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:12, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
:On the other hand, without pictures, the QOTD would go unnoticed. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 12:28, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
:The biggest problem is, I think, the selection of the pictures themselves. Indeed, that is implicit in the criticism "Wikiquote is not "Kalki's personal art project". One way to solve that problem would be to "force" Kalki to only select images of authors' portraits, thereby impossibilitating the use subjective pictures. I don't support this restriction myself, because I don't think Kalki would like it, and I fear that without him we would have no QOTD. Just a thought. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 16:25, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
:: Yes, hard to focus: it is a bit like trying to read a good book while the television is blaring at full volume in the same room. This has been discussed around the Village Pump before, at "[[Wikiquote:Village pump archive 35#Images on Main Page|Images on Main Page]]" and at "[[Wikiquote:Village pump archive 36#Main Page and images|Main Page and images]]". My recent attempts to turn the volume down a bit were all reverted,[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Quote_of_the_day/April_23,_2013&action=history][http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Quote_of_the_day/April_24,_2013&action=history][http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Quote_of_the_day/April_25,_2013&action=history][http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Quote_of_the_day/April_26,_2013&action=history][http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Quote_of_the_day/April_27,_2013&action=history][http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Quote_of_the_day/April_28,_2013&action=history] so compromise appears to be elusive; but [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Village_pump&diff=1405444 no QOTD at all] would be drastic. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:30, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

=== [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/May 2013]] – layout ===
The pattern in April remarked above, which actually began in late [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/March 2013|March 2013]], is continuing throughout [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/May 2013|May 2013]], with as many as five or six images per quote. The upshot of the discussions linked above was that [[User:Cirt|Cirt]] removed all images ''"until such time as we have a consensus as to image use policy on the Main Page"'',[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Village_pump&diff=1405199] and a request by [[User:Kalki|Kalki]] to have them restored was declined by [[User: Aphaia| Aphaia]].[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Village_pump&diff=1405414] For more than a year thereafter, there were no images accompanying the QOTD on the main page, and there has been no discussion about formulating policy for image use on the Main Page. Another take on those developments may be found on the [[QOTD by month]] project page under February 2012 ([http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=QOTD_by_month&diff=1419540&oldid=1407586 dif]), which apparently expresses notion that the Wikiquote Main Page is, or ought to be, a venue for "free expression", and contains other remarks that strike me as inappropriate for a Wikiquote project page. In the present situation, it is not really surprising that attempts to pare down to two images met with unilateral reversion. As indicated in the historical notes at [[QOTD by month]], when the use of two images rather than one was first introduced it very quickly expanded. As with sweet or salty foods, it is easy to forget that "too much of a good thing isn't good". I think an image of modest size on the Main page, or even two, is a good thing; but I think the present situation, in which our main portal and [http://stats.grok.se/en.q/top most frequently viewed] content page is ''dominated'' by this "free expression" without any policy framework, is very inappropriate. I strongly encourage the community to give serious thought to how this use of the main page can be reformed. A [[Wikiquote:Image use policy/Quote of the day|suggested addition]] of quantitative limits to the [[Wikiquote:Image use policy|Image use policy]] might work, or it might be an exercise in futility since the existing policy itself is [[WQ:VP#Image policy again|not being applied]]. One possibility, to avoid having the {{tl|Main Page Quote of the day}} template push everything else but the masthead "[[w:below the fold|below the fold]]", would be to move it to the two-column portion of the page. I would be very interested in any other suggestions for improving the situation where, as Mdd remarked above, it is extremely difficult to focus on the text or, I might add, on any of the rest of our most prominent page either. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:58, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
: 1) Kalki has only been using 2 ''main'' pictures (not 5 or 6, as you imply), one at the right, and one at the left. That seems reasonable to me. Are you objecting to the use of the other two much smaller pictures (at the top and bottom)? 2) How about specifying the size of the main pictures to be the size of the text, and never larger? That way it would be easier to focus on the quote. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 16:44, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
:: Thank you for suggesting looking at size in relation to the quote. Looking at today's Main Page, 27 May 2013, I observe that the quote and its attribution occupy just under 10% of the total size of the {{tl|Main Page Quote of the day}} box.* Part of the total is occupied by header and footer, and part is whitespace introduced by the layout of images, but it is very significant, and not unusual in recent months, that the amount of space devoted to "presentation of the quote" is an ''order of magnitude greater'' than the quote and its attribution. The subjective effect of this objective proportion is that the presentation overwhelms that which is ostensibly being presented.
::  * Individual results may vary due to screen resolution and window size. Always consult your own statistician before taking quantitative supplements.
::~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:14, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

User talk:EVula

2013-09-20T20:44:29Z

EVula: /* VfD */ response

{{User:EVula/header}}


== Talk page etiquette ==

Although it is not strictly against policy, it is typically not considered good [[w:Wikipedia:Etiquette|wiki etiquette]] to remove or comment-out other users' postings to your talk page. User talk pages exist for the purpose of communication with other users, and it is as important for other users to be able to see what has been posted to you as it is for you to read it. For instance, the standard welcome message informs other users that you have been given some basic information on the operation of Wikiquote, so newer postings may refer to it or assume that you have been properly informed. (I realize that you are also a Wikipedia user, but there ''are'' some differences between WP and WQ, so it's still a good idea to review the WQ-specific information.) If you want to "get rid" of something that you've dealt with, you can archive it and leave a link to your talk-page archive on the main user talk page, which de-clutters the page while allowing others to review your earlier discussions. (This is the same practice that is [[w:Help:Talk page#User talk pages|encouraged on Wikipedia]].) ~ [[User:Jeffq|Jeff Q]] [[User talk:Jeffq|(talk)]] 23:13, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

== Unidentified episode ==

Please do not remove the "Unidentified episode" heading (or links to that heading in a custom table of contents) in TV-show articles, as you did for ''[[Firefly (TV series)|Firefly]]''. There are two important reasons ''not'' to do this:
# Wiki articles are never finished, so one cannot say that nothing new will ever be added. Nor can we expect all editors to know exactly what episode a quote was from. (Indeed, many people add quotes they found on the Internet without any idea of a source besides the name of the overall work.) Thus we need a place to put these quotes until other editors can locate them properly (or delete them).
# Wikiquote, in general, follows the Wikipedia principle of not having headings for empty sections. However, WQ faces two problems WP does not. First, because of the very different nature of our material, we break up our articles by the quality of the sources (thus "Sourced" and "Unsourced" headings), allowing new editors to try to intuit the need to organize by and cite sources. But we've found that "Unsourced" isn't very clear in TV articles, so we have the unusual "Unidentified episode" to make this clearer. Second, we have far too many 1-time editors and too few regular editors, so it's much more important for anything usual (like an uncommon heading for material that doesn't fit under existing headings) to be made as clear as we can make it for inexperienced editors without disrupting the article for readers. This is our compromise.
As long as I'm bothering you with advice and explanations ☺, I'd also recommend that whenever you edit a custom table of contents to add, change, or remove a link, you verify that your change is also made in the article. (In ''Firefly'', you removed the "Unidentified episode" TOC link without removing the heading.) I hope you find this information useful (and not too annoying!). ~ [[User:Jeffq|Jeff Q]] [[User talk:Jeffq|(talk)]] 21:59, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
:Ah, fair enough; I hadn't even thought about that difference between WQ and WP (where I'm ''far'' more involved). My bad, thanks for the heads up. Also, I could have sworn that I ''did'' remove the heading... bah. I fail at Wikiquote. :) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // 19:21, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

== Thanks and congratulations ... ==

... on your vote here and your bureaucracy.--[[User:Cato|Cato]] 20:42, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks, and congrats on the CU bit. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // 14:57, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

== VfD for a category ==

''That was fast!'' I was afraid it would not work, and it didn't. Thanks for fixing the link. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] 19:47, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
:My pleasure. :) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // 21:25, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

::''Haigh, a chara'' :) [[User:Taramoon|Taramoon]] 21:53, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
:::...okay... [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // 00:30, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

::: Hi, Johnny :/ - [[User:Alison|'''Alison''']] [[User talk:Alison|❤]] 00:52, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

==[[Jeff Dunham]]==
Thank you for trimming the Jeff Dunham page. In our Village Pump discussions on revising the guidelines for limitations of quotes, we had reached the consensus that five quotes maximum would be allowable for spoken-word albums, including standup comedy. It's on this basis, for example, that I've been trimming the pages for [[Lewis Black]], [[Dane Cook]], [[Bill Hicks]] et al. For this reason I would like to request, since you've already worked on the page for Dunham, that you trim ''Arguing with Myself'' and ''Spark of Insanity'' to five quotes apiece. If you would prefer not to, let me know and I will do the trimming. - [[User:InvisibleSun|InvisibleSun]] 18:15, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
:Hmm... considering the wide range of characters, what about five quotes ''per character''? I can see that as keeping in line with the ''spirit'' of the policy, considering that Black, Cook, and Hicks are all single-man shows, whereas a Dunham show consists of his opening commentary (none of which is quoted, which is a good thing; it's funny, but not as easily quotable), then several different characters.

:Further compounding this is the definition of a "line", in regards to dialogue. "Later you'll realize you were actually setting a goal" is funny as hell, but only after being followed by the set up. I've tried to cluster the related jokes as best as possible (including cutting some of the jokes that run right into each other to make future pruning easier); would each "cluster" count as a line?

:I'm plenty willing to do the pruning myself, I just think that it might be too stringent, as this is a somewhat unique case. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // 19:19, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

::My two cents worth: I think that a "cluster" as you have said can be counted as a "line" in much the same way that a (small) piece of dialogue is counted for film or TV show pages. But I do think we need to try to stay within the proposed limits on the number of quotes. I agree that Jeff's shows are a bit hard to do this with, given the wide range of characters, but we face the same dilemma when dealing with TV shows or films that offer many characters. In those cases, we are setting limits based on the length of the film or show and I think we should act similarly here. Given that the average comedy show or CD is around an hour long, we have settled on the limit of 5 quotes, as we do with films and shows. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] 19:36, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
:::Hmm, bummer. I'm going to prune them in favor of how long their bits are; Bubba J.'s bit is fairly short in comparison to the Walter bit, so I might ditch all of his quotes in favor of another Walter gag.

:::Well, on the plus side, it'll mean we can get rid of the Sweet Daddy Dee quotes; I never thought he was as funny as some of his other characters. :D

:::Tonight is going to suck as far as my free time goes, but I'll try to get it done sometime between now and before the weekend is out. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // 20:06, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Alrighty, all cut. It was 38,435 bytes when I first started working on it[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Jeff_Dunham&oldid=830864], and now it weighs in at 6,775 bytes.[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Jeff_Dunham&oldid=831930] Pretty drastic[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Jeff_Dunham&diff=831930&oldid=830864]... [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // 18:25, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
:Looks great - good job! ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] 18:37, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

== Your question ==

You wrote: 
''So now that I know what the guidelines are for comedians, what about for movies? I want to clean up the ''V for Vendetta'' movie article, but want to know how much of it can be kept. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // 23:02, 10 October 2008 (UTC)''
:The general consensus is that we allow 5 quotes per hour of a given work (e.g. film or TV show), so it depends on the running time of the film. In the case of V for Vendetta, that has a running time of 132 minutes, I would say you should trim it to 11 quotes. See [[Wikiquote:Village_pump#Copyright_guidelines_for_trimming_articles]] for more discussion on the trimming efforts. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] 00:40, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
::Ah, excellent, thanks for the link. I'll see what I can do to trim down some of the stuff that I'm most familiar with. (and if anyone cuts the v-heavy line in favor of some other line, heads are going to roll. :) I'm going to leave the "Quotes from other sources" section, though; both sources are in the public domain, so there's no concern there. I'm assuming that the [[V for Vendetta (film)#Reviews|reviews]] are outside this requirement as well, yes? [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // 05:10, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

==MST3K==
I noticed that you've volunteered to trim the [[Mystery Science Theater 3000]] page. Just the other day I got a [[User talk:InvisibleSun#Twin Peaks|note]] from [[User:Jeffq|Jeffq]] in which he had also expressed an interest in trimming that article. Perhaps you might want to get in touch with him and coordinate something in this regard.Thanks for your work on the [[Jeff Dunham]] page. Standup comic pages are a constant source of copyvio. Fans naturally want to quote all of the jokes: which means, in effect, replicating entire routines. - [[User:InvisibleSun|InvisibleSun]] 19:21, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

: As I've just posted on its [[Talk:Mystery Science Theater 3000#Cutting down the article size|talk page]] (see for details), I fully support severe trimming of ''MST3K''. I've been far too negligent of this massive article, which frequently requires major trimming that I used to do periodically. I'll also try to jump in as I have time. Meanwhile, have at it! ~ [[User:Jeffq|Jeff Q]] [[User talk:Jeffq|(talk)]] 23:30, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
::I think spinning off the seasons into individual sub-pages might be an excellent way to maintain the article(s) in the future. I think we can all agree that the current size of the article makes it fairly unwieldy... [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // 23:41, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

:Actually, I've realized that I'm going to have practically zilch spare time over the next couple of months. I've removed it from my listing; I'll help out where I can, but I don't want anyone to think that I'm "reserving" that page for myself. Bummer. :\ [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // 16:08, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

== Thanks ==

Thanks for the help in handling the infantile activity that occurred earlier today. Would you accept a nomination as an admin here? ~ [[User:Kalki|Kalki]] 16:52, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
:Not a problem, always happy to help. If only I'd [[Wikiquote:Requests for adminship#Nominations for adminship|waited]], I'd be more than happy to accept a nomination. Nobody's posted a response yet; I could scrap my self-nom and just accept whatever you want to write. ;) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // 16:58, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
:: I just supported your self nomination, which I obviously had not noticed — I've been shuffling between many tasks today. I expect that we will soon have 2 new admins here within the week. Thanks again for the help. [[User:Kalki|Kalki]] 17:11, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
:::Awesome, I appreciate the vote of confidence. My only concern in posting the RfA was that it'd be seen as a knee-jerk reaction, but then I realized just how (relatively) few admins WQ has. The more the merrier. :) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // 17:15, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

== Thanks ==

Thanks for your kind words supporting my nomination for adminship. I will try not to make a mess as I learn to use the tools. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] 02:47, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
:Don't worry about it; I'm sure you'll do a fine job. :) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // 07:27, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

== Sysop status ==

Congratulations, you are now an administrator here. ~ [[User:Kalki|Kalki]] 21:53, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
:Hot damn, thanks. :) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 22:07, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
::[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete&user=EVula&page=&year=&month=-1 Putting the extra tools to good use already.] ;-) [[User:FloNight|FloNight]][[User talk:FloNight|♥♥♥]] 01:54, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
:::One of the benefits of this being my sixth (!) adminship is that there's none of that pesky "hey, what's this button do?" :) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 05:31, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

== Your header ==

Hey there, EVula. I just wanted to tell you that I based [[User:RyanCross/header|my header]] off [[User:EVula/header|yours]]. I've been thinking of making a header for some time now, and I just thought yours was the simplest. I also used some of your userboxes. I hope it's no problem with you. Oh, by the way, congratulations on your adminship here. :) Being an administrator on quite a few wikis must be a busy job for you. I'm sure someone like you can handle that rather well. – [[User:RyanCross|'''Ryan'''Cross]] ([[User talk:RyanCross|''talk'']]) 06:35, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
:I need to keep a list of people that use my header, userboxes, or matrix; if it wasn't for that damn GFDL, I could be rich! ;) (it's totally not a problem; the more the merrier)

:As for all the adminships... yeah, it's a bit tough to balance, but I'm generally on Wikipedia every day, and swing by Wikisource and Wikiquote at least once a day anyway. On Commons, I try to delete at least a handful of bad images every day. Meta and Wikispecies have pretty much dropped off my radar for the most part, but they're very well patrolled anyway; there's generally nothing for me to do around there these days. :) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 15:25, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

::Alright, thank you very much for your permission. :) Ah, well, it sounds like you handle things well around the Foundation. :) I know how it feels to try to be active on more than one wiki. I'm active on only three right now, but I ''hope'' to become more active here at English Wikiquote from now on. I was only semi-active the past three months.

::Well, I hope to see you around, EVula. If you disagree with an edit of mine, feel free to revert and tell me about it so we can discuss it. I have some experience with Wikiquote from being an active editor (and administrator) at [[:simple:Main Page|Simple English Wikiquote]], but the English Wikiquote is slightly different when it comes to articles and the [[WQ:MOS|manual of style]]. But I hope to get the hang of things very soon. :) – [[User:RyanCross|'''Ryan'''Cross]] ([[User talk:RyanCross|''talk'']]) 00:11, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
:::If ''I'' can make admin here, I'm sure you can. ;) You've at least got sysop experience at another Wikiquote; in my mind, that makes you qualified enough for here. Just for shits and giggles, I once did up a version of [[w:User:EVula/sidebar2]] that had "I'm an admin" boxes for all of the projects; I honestly didn't think I'd get as far down that list as I am now. :) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 05:35, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

::::Thank you for your kind words, and I'm honoured that you think I'm qualified for adminship, but in ''my'' mind, I just want to contribute to articles for now. :) That's why we're here, is it not? ;) Well... maybe adminship might be useful for me along the way... since I already needed some pages [[WQ:CSD|speedy deleted]] (as ''you'' can [[Special:DeletedContributions/RyanCross|see]])... but not now. Maybe you can ask later on if you want. ;) I may consider it if I feel I would be a good administrator here...

::::Heh, I wonder how long that list will go from here. :) What's next? Wikibooks? Wiktionary? Wikinews? Wikiversity (though, I never really understood their adminship process)? [[meta:User:EVula/matrix#The_Matrix|These wikis]]? ;) Just joking. Anyway, I can see you're pretty dedicated to being an administrator on wikis and doing maintenance work around. Impressive! I'm sure many people appreciate your work you do, both, with articles and the work you do as an administrator. :) I know I do at least. – [[User:RyanCross|'''Ryan'''Cross]] ([[User talk:RyanCross|''talk'']]) 06:32, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
:::::Actually, of all those projects, the English Wikinews is the only one I'm actually thinking I could run an RfA at, though not right now; I haven't been there in forever, though at one point I was actually moderately active there. Oh well... (though I have considered requesting adminship on some of the projects I'm most active in maintaining interwikis on; I could probably pass, if they accepted the "I'm just here to maintain interwikis on fully-protected templates" argument. *shrug*) As for easing into adminship, that's a good idea. Each wiki is different, and figuring out those differences can make the difference between a crappy admin and a ''good'' admin. ;) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 07:13, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
::::::Wikinews, eh? The projects I've really only had interest in are Wikipedia and Wikiquote (and Wiktionary for a short time only). Well, I wish you luck at Wikinews. :) I'm sure you'll be helpful to Wikinews as well when you run for adminship there if you decide to.
::::::Well, it's been nice talking to you. I hope to see you around, EVula. :) – [[User:RyanCross|'''Ryan'''Cross]] ([[User talk:RyanCross|''talk'']]) 07:22, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

== Thanks ==
Thanks for the speedy vandal reversion on my talk and user pages. :) -[[User:Sketchmoose|Sketchmoose]] 16:33, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
:Not a problem; I love it when vandals strike while I'm sitting at my computer. :) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 16:36, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

== Bud Selig ==

Hey there, EVula. It's me again. Could you possibly look over the [[Bud Selig]] article for me and look over the formatting of it? I've been working on it all week, so I just want someone to evaluate my work and see if there are any problems. One thing I'm not entirely sure about are the authors in the {{tl|cite web}} templates. You see, some of the sourcing as you can see say something like "''Selig's first wife quoted in Nicholas Thompson.''" It doesn't sound right, IMO. What do you think? – [[User:RyanCross|'''Ryan'''Cross]] ([[User talk:RyanCross|''talk'']]) 20:48, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
:Overall, it looks good to me (I tweaked the quote from his first wife). However, I'll readily admit that I'm not necessarily the most knowledgeable when it comes to Wikiquote's manual of style and other standard practices; I'm just a workhorse here. :) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 21:09, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
::Alright, thanks anyway. I think you gave me an idea on how I should format the authors and the person who said the quote now. And yeah, you do seem to do better with admin-related tasks. No wonder why you are an admin on so many wikis. :) – [[User:RyanCross|'''Ryan'''Cross]] ([[User talk:RyanCross|''talk'']]) 21:12, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

== !Voting in dates ==

Hey there EVula. I noticed a lot of date pages have !voting in them, such as [[January 1]] (and every other month and date). I was wondering how exactly you format your !vote. Does "1" mean you like it the most? Can you !vote with the same number in different sections? etc. I would really like to start participating in these sort of pages. Thanks, – [[User:RyanCross|'''Ryan'''Cross]] ([[User talk:RyanCross|''talk'']]) 05:44, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
:I haven't participated in a single date page, primarily because I only found out about them probably last week. :D [[User:InvisibleSun|InvisibleSun]] is probably a better person to ask. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 05:46, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
::Okay, thanks. I'll go ahead and ask him. – [[User:RyanCross|'''Ryan'''Cross]] ([[User talk:RyanCross|''talk'']]) 05:47, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
:::Hi folks. I posted an answer to this at [[User talk:RyanCross]]. Cheers! ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] 14:13, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
::::Groovy, danke. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 16:34, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

== Entertonement ==

Hi there, I noticed you reprimanded Lillylibertine88 a few days back for putting in links to entertonement.com in several pages. I need to check if such a site is valid for EL inclusion in wikiquote, because someone else complained why I removed entertonement links from [[James Bond (film series)|James Bond]]. I sort of followed your example, thinking it was spam or something. Please clarify it to both of us. Thanks. --[[User:Eaglestorm|Eaglestorm]] 14:17, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
:Well, for starters, we're not here to document every single website out there that might have something relevant to the article. However, I'd have serious reservations about linking to a massive bank of audio clips; there might be very real copyright violation issues happening there.

:I've started a discussion thread at [[Wikiquote:Village pump#Entertonement]]. We can get some clarification on what we should do with these links. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 16:20, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

::Thank you. There goes [[User:love.of.bond.of.love]]'s answer!--[[User:Eaglestorm|Eaglestorm]] 02:52, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

: Hi-- I'm David Aronchick, CEO of Entertonement. We would love to chat further about this, we have many deals in place that make linking to our sound bites (or inclusion of players) completely free and legal. We've seen users submit to Wikiquotes before, and I want to be totally clear that we ONLY want to be good citizens here. If the community is ok with the links to our pages, we'd love to have it, and I'd be glad to work with whomever would like to work with us. Otherwise, no worries! 14:24, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

== [[Jim Carrey]] ==

I noticed there was a prior deletion discussion on this: [[Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Jim Carrey]] - but I re-created the page from scratch and everything is sourced - I just wanted to doublecheck that that is okay? '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 07:44, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
:Absolutely; none of the reasons that prompted the article's deletion are still relevant. I'd even be willing to provide you with a copy of the deleted article if you'd like to try to find sources for the unsourced quotes. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 07:57, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
::Nah that's okay, I added enough sourced stuff that I think the page can stand on its own without a ''stub'' tag. :) Thank you, '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 08:20, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

== Recent changes top ideas ==

I think some of the top stuff [http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Special:RecentChanges here] could be helpful to have for our [[Special:RecentChanges]] top as well. For example ''Current Number of Articles: 13,792 | Current Number of Users: 63,634 | Current Number of Administrators: 48'' would be neat, as well as our versions of some of the other helpful links to key pages on the project. What do you think? '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 21:31, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
:Yeah, I can think of a way to incorporate that information in the formatting we've already got. I'll play around with it later tonight (I would now, but I've got a friend coming over). [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 23:20, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
::Thanksomuch. '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 03:30, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

:Added a stats line to [[MediaWiki:Recentchangestext]]. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 23:01, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

::Fantastic ideas. :-) How about adding "<nowiki>{{NUMBEROFPAGES}}</nowiki>" also? That could be useful. I mean, the more the merrier, right? :-) The best place to add that would be... probably between "edits" and "articles". – [[User:RyanCross|'''Ryan'''Cross]] ([[User talk:RyanCross|''talk'']]) 09:29, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
:::Ah, I knew there was something I was forgetting... [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 15:41, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
::::Heh, thanks for adding it. :-) [[User:RyanCross|'''Ryan''']][[User talk:RyanCross|Cross]] @ 22:01, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
::::Also, I think instead of it saying "edit this page | talk" at the bottom, it should say "view this page | talk". Technically, non-administrators can't edit the page, but they can view it. And when you click on the "edit this page" link, you're not really editing the page until you click the "edit" tab, so you are just viewing it. ;-) [[User:RyanCross|'''Ryan''']][[User talk:RyanCross|Cross]] @ 02:39, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
:::::Excellent points; edit made. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 16:55, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
::::::Again, thank you. :-) Happy holidays, [[User:RyanCross|'''Ryan''']][[User talk:RyanCross|Cross]] @ 23:36, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

== Function to add to bottom when looking at users' contribs ==

Can you add ''Subpages · Edit count · Images uploaded · SUL accounts · Global Contributions'' to the bottom of the page when looking at users' contribs? For example see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/EVula here]. Cheers, '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 20:46, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
:If I can figure out what MediaWiki page that is, sure thing. :) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 17:03, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Looks like the registered user one was done, but not the anon:
#[[MediaWiki:Sp-contributions-footer]]
#[[MediaWiki:Sp-contributions-footer-anon]]
Good model at en.wikipedia for some additional functions to add to both:
#[[w:MediaWiki:Sp-contributions-footer]]
#[[w:MediaWiki:Sp-contributions-footer-anon]]
Keep me posted. '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 21:24, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
:Just created [[MediaWiki:Sp-contributions-footer-anon]] based on the Wikipedia equivalent. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 22:51, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
::[[w:Peter Griffin|Sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeet.]] '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 22:59, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

== Simpsons quotes ==

Why did you delete the Simpsons quotes pages? --[[User:Captain Infinity|Captain Infinity]] 18:37, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
:*[[Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Homer Simpson]]
:*[[Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Bart Simpson]]
:*[[Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Lisa Simpson]]
:And there are two more about to have the same result. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 20:00, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
::Thank you. --[[User:Captain Infinity|Captain Infinity]] 21:57, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

== Friendly and/or Twinkle? ==

This might be a big project, but could [[w:WP:FRIENDLY]] and/or [[w:WP:TWINKLE]] functions be modified to work on this project? '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 04:33, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
:Hrm, those would probably take a lot more effort to port over here than, say, the UTC clock. :) I'll give 'em a look, and maybe even ask their authors about it; they might have some insight than my random poking around in the wikicode may not help with. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 23:22, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
::Ah thanks. No worries, and no rush. Something simpler might be simply a tab to add <nowiki>{{subst:welcome}}</nowiki> to a user's talk page page, which could possibly be code cut out of [[w:WP:FRIENDLY]] that might work over here. '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 23:59, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

== Thanks... ==

... for the protection of [[Teenger Divas]] (and the deletion). I was actually just about to ask for that protection since it was deleted a few minutes ago. Again, thanks. — [[User:RyanCross|'''Ryan'''Cross]] ([[User talk:RyanCross|''talk'']]) 23:20, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
:Yeah, I spotted it about five seconds before you tagged it. Got a little bit confused when I went to delete it and saw that it had already been deleted today, went back and refreshed, then saw your deletion tag. :) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 23:22, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
::Heh, yeah... that actually happened to me once or twice over at Simple English Wikipedia. I'll be like, "wait, wha...? Didn't I just delete that?" It's confusing to be an administrator sometimes on wikis. :) — [[User:RyanCross|'''Ryan'''Cross]] ([[User talk:RyanCross|''talk'']]) 23:28, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

== Haha! ==

[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Requests_for_adminship/RyanCross&curid=98173&diff=881371&oldid=881365 Haha!] Well, it is based off of your user page. ;) — [[User:RyanCross|'''Ryan'''Cross]] ([[User talk:RyanCross|''talk'']]) 00:20, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

== User Helloworld ==

Thanks for intervening with user [[Special:Contributions/Helloworld|Helloworld]]. As an interested party, I did not want to act unilaterally. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] 21:24, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
:No worries, always happy to lay the smackdown. :) It probably could have been an indefinite block, but I figured I'd start small. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 21:27, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

== Obama update ==

I noticed you beat me slightly in updating the [[Barack Obama]] page, — I actually had to log out and log back in before the update I had typed up was finally accepted, after making three previous attempts to post the intro I came up with last night, beginning from the moment he completed the oath. I am listening to the Inaugural speech right now. ~ [[User:Kalki|Kalki]] 17:14, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
:Yeah, I jumped the gun a bit; I heard the commentator downstairs say that he officially had the office at 12, regardless of not actually being sworn in yet, so I started making the edits. I also updated the Wikisource and Commons pages (same with Biden and, where relevant, W and Cheney). I tried to be at least somewhat neutral, but wasn't particularly good at it.[http://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Author:George_Walker_Bush&diff=prev&oldid=952784][http://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Author:Barack_Obama&diff=prev&oldid=952785] :) On the downside, I missed the actual swearing in, but did jump downstairs to catch all but the first minute of his speech. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 17:32, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

== Bureaucrat status ==

Congratulations, you are now a bureaucrat here at Wikiquote. ~ [[User:Kalki|Kalki]] 19:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
:Wahoo! ...watch, there won't be a rename request for two months. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 19:20, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
:*Congrat's, and thanks for volunteering to do account maintenance work. You can update the lists at [[WQ:ADMIN]] if you like. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] 20:33, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
You are most welcome, and congratulations! '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 20:35, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
:Congratulations! :-) I'm happy someone as experienced as you as a bureaucrat is now a bureaucrat for English Wikiquote. Way to volunteer to do ''even'' more extra work. ;-) — [[User:RyanCross|'''Ryan'''Cross]] ([[User talk:RyanCross|''talk'']]) 01:52, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

== [[List of Electronic Games]] ==

Can you please create a page that lists all the Electronic games and add a requested section to it so I can add what needs to be created?([[User:Dennys|Dennys]] 22:44, 20 April 2009 (UTC))
:...'''''all''''' electronic games? You'd be better off going to Wikipedia to figure that one out, as it would be an absolutely massive list. Even then, not all of the games could have decent Wikiquote entries ([[w:Superman 64|Superman 64]] comes to mind). [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 16:05, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

== [[Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/The Transformers (TV series)]] ==

Thanks for fixing the missing signature—my goof. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] 19:20, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
:No worries, I've done the same thing before when making multiple comments in a single edit. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 19:22, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

== Star Wars The Clone Wars Lightsaber Duels ==

Just get on with the deletion for that page so I can rewrite it in the future. Star Wars The Clone Wars Lightsaber Duels is requested on the requested entries list.([[User:Dennys|Dennys]] 21:06, 16 June 2009 (UTC))
:As I've already stated in an email, the fact that it's on the requested entries list doesn't mean ''anything''.

:As for deleting it, there's absolutely no reason that you have to wait for it to be deleted to work on overhauling it. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 21:10, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

== [[Jeremy Clarkson]] ==

Hello,

It has been almost a year, but can you please send me the source code for the old [[Jeremy Clarkson]] page? I would like to use some of it on a private Top Gear Wiki site.

Thank you for your time,
[[User:Sir Stig|Sir Stig]] 06:56, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
:"[[Special:EmailUser/Sir Stig|This user has not specified a valid e-mail address]]." [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 18:46, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

==[[Star Wars: The Clone Wars (2008 TV series)]]==
How about 10 quotes per anything instead of two to three quotes? I am getting sick of this puny and short pages with no memorial quotes.([[User:Dennys|Dennys]] 00:03, 14 July 2009 (UTC))
:Actual dialogue back and forth would count as a single "quote." If you're tired of pages with no memorable quotes, you should replace them with ones that are. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 00:20, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

That's not what I meant. What I really meant is every page gets a huge makeover with 10 quotes or more and I am sick of seeing puny and shrimpy pages all over the place.([[User:Dennys|Dennys]] 03:45, 14 July 2009 (UTC))
:Copyright laws trump what you're sick of seeing, and I'm running out of patience. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 13:29, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Well how about get used to untrimmed articles and again what I meant is no need to trim the clone wars tv series as you can take your trimming somewhere else like go trim wikipedia instead. If you are going to be upset with me the log out button is located at the upper right hand corner.([[User:Dennys|Dennys]] 18:59, 14 July 2009 (UTC))
:Last straw. If you can't get used to the policies of Wikiquote, you're going to have to find another site, either by your own choice or by being blocked.

:This is not a debate. This is not open to discussion. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 23:50, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

How about retire instead of listening to my complaints? Nobody wants the limit on quotes policy anymore unless at least 10 quotes are allowedv on any pages?([[User:Dennys|Dennys]] 01:43, 15 July 2009 (UTC))
:Tough shit what "nobody" wants. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 01:45, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

how about quit your job, untrimmed those puny pages or I will use my katana on you?([[User:Dennys|Dennys]] 01:48, 15 July 2009 (UTC))
:Thanks for giving me all the reason I needed to block you. You're done here. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 01:50, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

== question ==

Hey, since you seem to be online at the moment, I figured you'd be a good person to ask: is the rollback usergroup enabled here? –'''[[User:Juliancolton|Juliancolton]]''' | [[User_talk:Juliancolton|''Talk'']] 05:22, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
:Nope, apparently not. I think there was discussion about it at one point, though I can't remember; I'm getting my wikis confused. :) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 05:23, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
::Hmm, alright. Thanks. And yeah, I love [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User:EVula/monobook.js&curid=96244&diff=982299&oldid=853522 that] script. :) –'''[[User:Juliancolton|Juliancolton]]''' | [[User_talk:Juliancolton|''Talk'']] 05:33, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
:::Haven't quite figured out what it does just yet, but *shrug* [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 05:47, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
::::Purged cache? Go to your userpage and it'll list your flags in the title ("User talk:EVula [user,bureaucrat,sysop]"). –'''[[User:Juliancolton|Juliancolton]]''' | [[User_talk:Juliancolton|''Talk'']] 06:05, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
:::::It does the same thing for other people, as well... –'''[[User:Juliancolton|Juliancolton]]''' | [[User_talk:Juliancolton|''Talk'']] 06:06, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
::::::Oh, sure enough! That's neat. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 14:12, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

== My ears ==

Hmm... I [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Votes_for_deletion/Police_Academy:_The_Animated_Series&diff=982944&oldid=981809 can't] hear anymore... ;-) — [[User:RyanCross|'''Ryan'''Cross]] ([[User talk:RyanCross|''talk'']]) 21:56, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
: :D [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 21:57, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

== Matt Sanchez ==

I don't know who you are and I didn't post "everywhere", I'm just trying to maintain the standards of Wikiquote, which have been clearly violated by one of the editors. I am new here and I'd appreciate the respect of someone who is acting out of sincerity and not malice. My intent was not to annoy you, I don't even know you. If you feel you can help, please do.[[User:Bluemarine|Bluemarine]] 20:22, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
:You posted in no less than four different places.[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cato&diff=prev&oldid=986163][http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=prev&oldid=986164][http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cirt&diff=prev&oldid=986166][http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Village_pump&diff=prev&oldid=986173] That is, obviously, not ''everywhere,'' but still, it's excessive.

:At any rate, if you follow the thread at [[Wikiquote:Administrators' noticeboard#Matt Sanchez]], you'll see that I'm inclined to agree with your assessment of the situation. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 20:26, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
::He's hardly "new" here since he's been contributing to Wikiquote since May, 2007 under his username and many other contribs under various IP socks. '''-''' [[User:Allstarecho|'''A'''LLST'''✰'''R]]▼'''[[User talk:Allstarecho|echo]]''' '''[[Special:Contributions/Allstarecho|wuz here]] @''' 02:57, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Matthew_Sanchez&diff=986642&oldid=986620 This] is really unacceptable. One would actually admit it's a damn good quote because it puts Sanchez in a good light, something he keeps striving for with the constant whitewashing: It shows he owns up to his own mistakes and said it was the worst time of his life. To call it "lame" and un-related is short-sighted on your part. <s>And of course we shan't forget that you aren't a neutral, uninvolved person in this matter. If I recall correctly, when he was banned from Wikipedia, you were one his biggest cheerleaders. Should one be surprised that you're taking sides in this matter on Wikiquote? I think not.</s> '''-''' [[User:Allstarecho|'''A'''LLST'''✰'''R]]▼'''[[User talk:Allstarecho|echo]]''' '''[[Special:Contributions/Allstarecho|wuz here]] @''' 01:13, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
:The last thing '''you''' should do is say that I'm not neutral; that's truly beyond the pot calling the kettle black. As for Bluemarine himself, I have no clue what the hell you're talking about; I honestly don't recall '''ever''' interacting with Bluemarine before this. Provide diffs or leave the snarky comments to yourself. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 01:29, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

:Also, I stand by the comments; those quotes aren't particularly memorable. Perhaps if you were more familiar with Wikiquote ''outside'' the Sanchez article, you'd realize this. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 01:32, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
::My sincere apologies for disparaging your character. I got your username confused with Elonka. Again, I'm sorry. '''-''' [[User:Allstarecho|'''A'''LLST'''✰'''R]]▼'''[[User talk:Allstarecho|echo]]''' '''[[Special:Contributions/Allstarecho|wuz here]] @''' 05:10, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
:::Apology accepted, partly because you aren't the first person to confuse me with her. ;) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 14:56, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
::::Thank you. '''-''' [[User:Allstarecho|'''A'''LLST'''✰'''R]]▼'''[[User talk:Allstarecho|echo]]''' '''[[Special:Contributions/Allstarecho|wuz here]] @''' 21:52, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm all for edits, but the current edits have not gone through any type of process other than the POV of the sole editor who made them. Isn't this a collaboration?[[User:Bluemarine|Bluemarine]] 22:40, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
:I'm just as blindly reverting as you are. Removing the VfD tag was a pretty big clue that you weren't paying attention. If you revert it yet again, I'm going to block you for edit warring. Please participate in the VfD, rather than the article itself. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 22:47, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

== Template:vblock ==

FYI, [[user:Kalki|Kalki]] undid your change to {{tl|vblock}} and I added an explanation on [[Template talk:Vblock|its talk page]]. (I also tweaked the template page, but not the template output.) ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] 14:32, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
:My only concern is that the template gets closed properly. :) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 16:55, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

== Re: RFA comment ==

Thank you for that, I wouldn't genrally ask but since there were no instructions I had no choice [[User:The C of E|The C of E]] 07:31, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

*Oh wait, sorry to trouble you again but it doesn't have any information on how to create a second RFA (I had one refused 6 mounths ago and when I typed in my username it comes up on the old page) [[User:The C of E|The C of E]] 07:35, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
**Add " (2)" to the end of the username (so the page should be [[Wikiquote:Requests for adminship/The C of E (2)]]). [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 15:36, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
**Nevermind, looks like you figured it out, mostly. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 15:37, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

== Question about VFD page ==

I'm wondering if I've done something wrong (I followed the instructions as per the page) in my VfD nominations. I noticed the changes you made to the VfD subpage for Warhammer are not appearing at [[Wikiquote:Votes_for_deletion]] where the templates should make them show up. I'm not sure what's happened.... Any help would be appreciated, ''[[User:Peace and Passion|Peace and Passion]] ([[User talk:Peace and Passion|"I'm listening...."]])'' 05:58, 6 August 2009 (UTC).
:It's showing up, there's just a delay sometimes between when a page is changed and when its transclusions are updated. If you purge a page (add "?action=purge" to the end of the URL), it'll force it to update... though an easier method is to enable the UTC clock gadget; then all you have to do is click on the time and it'll purge the page. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 06:01, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
::Well that's simple, thanks for your help! :) ''[[User:Peace and Passion|Peace and Passion]] ([[User talk:Peace and Passion|"I'm listening...."]])'' 06:29, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

== Position of cleanup templates ==

I don't have a problem with your moving [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Anubhav_Srivastava&curid=106822&diff=992492&oldid=992455 this], but I usually follow the [[Wikiquote:Template messages/Cleanup#Recommended order of cleanup templates|recommended order of cleanup templates]], which places them below the intro. I only put them at the top when the intro is so long that they would otherwise fall [[w:below the fold|below the fold]]. It ''is'' kinda funky how they collide with images—another case of WikiMedia fumbling the "float" attribute. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] 17:34, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
:Hmm, I'd never seen that page before; I guess I'm used to Wikipedia, where such tags are always ''above'' everything. It was the image collision that prompted me to move the template in the first place... [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 21:10, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

==Bot question==
Didn't we once have a bot to prevent pages from being created in rapid order? - [[User:InvisibleSun|InvisibleSun]] 22:23, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
:I vaguely remember something like that, but have no idea what the name was (and, to be fair, I might be getting my wikis confused). Hmm... [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 22:28, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

== Reply ==

Hi, just a note to let you know I replied to your comment on [[User_talk:Ningauble#Reverted_Changes]]. :) ''[[User:Peace and Passion|Peace and Passion]] ([[User talk:Peace and Passion|"I'm listening...."]])'' 19:46, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

== Thanks ==

Thanks for your email response. Today I did my first two major "unstubbings" and I'm wondering if you'd give them a look over for quality to see if there's anything my eyes missed after staring at the screen all day. [[Wind]] and [[Monkeys]] (monkeys needs a move to "simians" because when I unstubbed it I used quotes about apes, monkeys, etc.). ''[[User:Peace and Passion|Peace and Passion]] ([[User talk:Peace and Passion|"I'm listening...."]])'' 08:18, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

==Prod tag==
The Prod placed on [[Auf Wiedersehen, Pet]] was one of several randomly made by [[User:Jackerson|User:Jackerson]] in an evident fit of pique because [[Starscream]] had been nominated for VfD. He had also chosen [[Vladimir Lenin]], [[Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937 film)]], etc. I thought that I had reverted them all but had missed the one you'd found. - [[User:InvisibleSun|InvisibleSun]] 03:29, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
:Oh boy... Dennys round two? ;) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 03:46, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

== Deletion of several pages ==

By deleting several pages like Boba Fett you proven that you agreed to my idea about deleting those messy pages that has no memorial quotes. You played right into my hands by deleting several pages which I wanted you to do.([[User:Jackerson|Jackerson]] 06:14, 20 September 2009 (UTC))
:It had absolutely nothing to do with you. The articles were in [[:Category:All articles proposed for deletion]] for seven days, and unlike ''your'' prods, they had valid deletion reasons. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 06:15, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

== Nominated for checkuser ==

Please see [[Wikiquote:Requests for checkuser/EVula]]. If you wish to be considered, please indicate your acceptance, and then transclude the page back to [[WQ:RFA]] in the subsection for checkuser. Good luck, '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 18:39, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
:Accepted. Let the fun begin. :) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 18:44, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

== Userrights ==

Hey EVula. I just tried to blank a talk page that hand some random gibberish on it, and had my autoconfirmed status revoked. I assume this is because I triggered something in the abuse filter. Would it be possible to add me to the usergroup "Confirmed users", or somehow re-grant me my autoconfirmed status via the abusefilter (I know that feature is enabled on en.wiki). Thank you, [[User:Tiptoety|Tiptoety]] 05:43, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
:I have no clue why your right would be ''revoked''; may sound silly, but are you sure you had it to begin with? I'm actually not entirely sure what our threshold for autoconfirmed status is; with only eight edits, perhaps you don't meet the imaginary limit. My gut says it might be just 10 edits, but I have no idea why that number sprung to mind. However, as to manually granting you the right, there are only four flags I can assign as a 'crat here: bot, admin, 'crat, and IP block exempt. Sorry. :( [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 05:51, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
::Well, I know the abusefilter has the ability to revoke user's autoconfirmed status, as do admins now via the abusefilter interface (I have done it a few times). Basically, the message I got was "''Warning: This action has been automatically identified as harmful. Unconstructive edits will be quickly reverted, and egregious or repeated unconstructive editing will result in your account or computer being blocked. If you believe this edit to be constructive, you may click Submit again to confirm it. A brief description of the abuse rule which your action matched is: Page blanking''" (I clicked submit again, but it gave me the same message). After that, I was no longer able to edit pages I was able to do before. That said, if there is nothing you can do, than there is nothing you can do. I guess I will just have to write a few <s>articles</s> pages. Thanks, [[User:Tiptoety|Tiptoety]] [[User talk:Tiptoety|talk]] 06:03, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
:::Bizarre. I've got zilch experience with the abuse filter, so I'm at a bit of a loss as far as what to do to fix it. :\ [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 06:07, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
::::No worries. Thanks for the help, [[User:Tiptoety|Tiptoety]] [[User talk:Tiptoety|talk]] 06:09, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::Sorry I couldn't be more help. :( [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 06:14, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
::::::Actually. You could deal with [[Talk:Carrie Underwood]], seeing as that is what it won't let me edit. Cheers, [[User:Tiptoety|Tiptoety]] [[User talk:Tiptoety|talk]] 06:32, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::::Done. :) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 15:27, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

== Congratulations checkuser ==

Congratulations, you are a checkuser! See [http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests/Permissions&diff=1664636&oldid=1664603]. Use the new tools well. Cheers, '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 04:22, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
:Cue the maniacal laughter... [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 04:22, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations EVula, you'll be a perfect CheckUser. :-) — [[User:RyanCross|'''Ryan'''Cross]] ([[User talk:RyanCross|''talk'']]) 06:14, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
::Congrats. [[User:Tiptoety|Tiptoety]] [[User talk:Tiptoety|talk]] 20:58, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

==Question from U7a==
EVula, please, what do you mean non semi-enciclopedic information??([[User:U7a|U7a]] 22:08, 8 October 2009 (UTC))
:You're merely stating facts in the pages you're creating, such as [[Price labels]] and [[WiFi card]]. That's not important here, unless its to give context for the quotes. However, they have no quotes, so they get deleted. Please stop. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 22:28, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

==Stop Harassing Me==
EVula, please stop harassing me! {{unsigned|CoreyAD5}}
:Doing my job as an administrator isn't the same as harassing you. As you were leaving me a message, I was commenting on your talk page. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 01:33, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I havent done anything wrong though. Some things on here ar unverifiable. {{unsigned|CoreyAD5}}
:Such as? [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 01:36, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Some of the quotes in Eleanor Roosevelts page. They are not all veriifiable. {{unsigned|CoreyAD5}}
:How so? It has a citation; if you have evidence that it's a false quote, please present it. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 01:42, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I hope you know that you dont intimidate me at all. -CoreyAD5
:I'm happy to hear that, since it isn't what I was going for at all. :) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 01:45, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

== Hi ==

Welcome to the team (I learnt it just now from user rename log) and sorry for your inconvenience until today. I've been on a long wikibreak and hence was a quick help to you for a long time. I'll try to catch up in following weeks and expect to collaborate with you.

Cheers, --[[User:Aphaia|Aphaia]] 14:05, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

== Rename ==

Please, take a look at my petition of renaming. [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wikiquote:Changing_username#Pedro00pedro_.E2.86.92_Victor.spain]

== Recent Vandalism... again... ==

This appears to be another apparent sockpuppet of the slew of vandalism connected to the user name... [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/MuchoSemen13 User:MuchoSemen13]. The same person keeps creating incessant vandalism, following around contributions and either reverting them at random or just plain vandalizing with different user names. I've found another recent sockpuppet vandalizing the same articles. Please check [[User:Black Frieza|Black Frieza]]. All the same exact edits as the person pointed above, all the same places, same reverting vandalism. Please look at how the same person is reverting all the same material using different usernames, causing vandalism on the same places. Please look after these specific articles for me and if necessary, protect them from recently joined users in order to avoid vandalism; please help me maintain and sustain resourceful articles while avoiding vandalism from this same person. - [[User:Zarbon|Zarbon]] 01:20, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

:And now there's yet another slew of obvious sockpuppets for the same user... [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Meester_Seester User:Meester Seester] and [[User:TheClownPrinceofCrime|TheClownPrinceofCrime]]. Please help me stop this vandalism, it's really getting out of hand again. - [[User:Zarbon|Zarbon]] 05:41, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

== [[Wikiquote:Village pump#Proposal to bar StarWarsFanBoy from VfD participation for one month.]] ==

As you have not been involved in this discussion, can you close it out? Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 01:42, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
:I'm willing to close it, but I don't even have a clue as to what to do, since I don't think this has been done before. :\ [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 21:21, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
:: Sorry to leave you hanging for so long. I'd say the way to close it is to mark it closed with the discussion-closing templates, include a summary of what you believe the consensus of the community was on the matter, and advise [[User:StarWarsFanBoy|StarWarsFanBoy]] accordingly. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 15:19, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

== Films by year ==

Hi, I see you've been sorting/converting the generic [[:Category:1990s films|1990s films]] category to subcategories. Are you planning on doing the [[:Category:1980s films|1980s]] (323 total)? If you are, I'd love to help. Oh, and I've just started becoming active here, so if you have any advice, it would be greatly appreciated. :) Thanks for your time, regards, [[User:Maximillion Pegasus|Maximillion Pegasus]] 21:08, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
:Eventually, I want to do 1980 as well, I just haven't had the time. In addition to the creation of the categories here, I've been checking out the interwikis to sync up everything, like I usually do; not for the faint of heart, though. :) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 21:22, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

== Unblock/unlock request ==

I am copying all five (5) Wikiquote bureaucrats, to see if some attention might be drawn to [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Thekohser&curid=72351&diff=1171579&oldid=1122286 this request] for an unblock (and un"lock", via renaming the account, then naming it back). Jimmy Wales, in the opinion of many, acted out of concert with community consensus and practice when he issued a "global ban" on [[User:Thekohser]]. Would you or another bureaucrat be kind enough to assist? -- [[User:Thekohser|Thekohser]] (using [[Special:Contributions/68.87.42.110|68.87.42.110]] 17:43, 27 August 2010 (UTC))

== Wikiquote interlanguage communication ==

Hi, I'm [[Meta:User:Nemo_bis|Nemo]] from the Italian language Wikiquote and I'm writing you (via [[m:Global message delivery|a bot]]) because you're an administrator of Wikiquote in this language; please excuse me if you've received this message more than once. 
The simple thing that I want you to know is that Wikiquote has an official [[m:Mailing lists|mailing list]], [[mail:Wikiquote-l|Wikiquote-l]], which can be used to communicate and discuss matters which interest all Wikiquotes. This mailing list was last "advertised" about three or four years ago, before many of us joined Wikiquote, and is currently almost not participated at all by Wikiquote users and very low-traffic. I ask you to subscribe, to participate in discussions and to write about your Wikiquote. 
I love Wikiquote, as you probably do, and I think that we should be proud of what we do here, share our experiences and good practices to make Wikiquote better and raise awareness of it. 
I remind you that [[Meta:|Meta-Wiki]] is the best place for Wikimedia projects coordination, and it contains [[m:|several pages about Wikiquote]], and specifically [[m:Talk:Wikiquote|this talk page]] which can be used to discuss about Wikiquote if you don't like mailing lists. 
I hope that this message has been useful for you. Cheers, [[Meta:User:Nemo_bis|Nemo]] ([[Meta:User talk:Nemo bis|write me]]) 10:11, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

:Subscribed. :) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 16:33, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
==Renaming, கலை to Kalaiarasy==
Mainly, I'm a Tamil wiki contributor and I created the account with a [http://ta.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E0%AE%AA%E0%AE%AF%E0%AE%A9%E0%AE%B0%E0%AF%8D:%E0%AE%95%E0%AE%B2%E0%AF%88&redirect=no username in Tamil]. I had problem in using the Soxred tool 'cos of this Tamil name. Besides, I felt that it would be nice to have my username in English (that everyone can read), and thus asked for renaming in ta.wiki. My username was then changed from my old username கலை to my new username [http://ta.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%AE%AA%E0%AE%AF%E0%AE%A9%E0%AE%B0%E0%AF%8D:Kalaiarasy Kalaiarasy] (that is my first name) in ta.wiki. 
Even after the renaming, I faced a few problems and have been advised to change the name in all wikis which I'm linked to. So, I made a request in [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_username_changes#.E0.AE.95.E0.AE.B2.E0.AF.88.40all_wikis Wikimedia, Meta-wiki at Steward requests page]. They helped me changing my name in wikis which don't have the local bureaucrats and asked me get the renaming locally in wikis which have the local bureaucrats. So, I'm making the requests in those wikis and the local bureaucrats complete the renaming procedure. I asked [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/User_talk:Aphaia user:Ahaia] a few days ago. As I haven't get any response, I'm asking you now. 
When I changed my old username கலை to my new username Kalaiarasy in my home wiki (that is ta.wiki), it autocreated the new account Kalairasy in some other wikis, including en.wikiquote too. You can see this [http://toolserver.org/~vvv/sulutil.php?rights=1&user=Kalaiarasy here]. I just want to confirm that both usernames are mine, and I now logged in as 'Kalaiarasy'. But I need the official renaming from கலை to Kalaiarasy. So please do the renaming in en.wikiquote and that would help me in a few things. If it's changed officially only, then I can merge the en:wikiquote too into my SUL as Kalaiarasy. See the links below too and you will find that both user names belong to me.
* [http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/User:Kalaiarasy User:Kalaiarasy]
* [http://ta.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%AE%AA%E0%AE%AF%E0%AE%A9%E0%AE%B0%E0%AF%8D:Kalaiarasy My user page in Tamil wiki as Kalaiarasy]
* [http://ta.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E0%AE%AA%E0%AE%AF%E0%AE%A9%E0%AE%B0%E0%AF%8D:%E0%AE%95%E0%AE%B2%E0%AF%88&redirect=no My user page in Tamil wiki as கலை is diverted here to User:Kalaiarasy after the renaming]
I wrote a message about my renaming in both my user pages. I wrote this in English as to inform all other wiki projects.
*[http://ta.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%AE%AA%E0%AE%AF%E0%AE%A9%E0%AE%B0%E0%AF%8D_%E0%AE%AA%E0%AF%87%E0%AE%9A%E0%AF%8D%E0%AE%9A%E0%AF%81:%E0%AE%95%E0%AE%B2%E0%AF%88#Renaming The message given in the subtitle 'Renaming' in my new user (Kalaiarasy's) talk page]
*[http://ta.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E0%AE%AA%E0%AE%AF%E0%AE%A9%E0%AE%B0%E0%AF%8D_%E0%AE%AA%E0%AF%87%E0%AE%9A%E0%AF%8D%E0%AE%9A%E0%AF%81:%E0%AE%95%E0%AE%B2%E0%AF%88&redirect=no My user talk page as கலை is diverted to talk page of Kalaiarasy]
See these two pages in en:wikiquote too.
*[http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/User:%E0%AE%95%E0%AE%B2%E0%AF%88]]
*[http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/User:Kalaiarasy] 
--[[User:Kalaiarasy|Kalaiarasy]] 00:21, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

== [[Wikiquote:Bots#EdwardsBot]] ==

Hey there. I left a request at [[Wikiquote:Bots#EdwardsBot]] just now. I'm not sure anyone is actively watching that page, however, so I'm pinging you just in case. Hope all's well! --[[User:MZMcBride|MZMcBride]] 21:20, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

== Bureaucrat requested to close one-month-old RFA ==

*[[Wikiquote:Requests for adminship/Kalki]]
Normal time frame for RFAs is one week — and this one was already extended once almost a month ago. This RFA is over one month old. It began on 17 April 2011. Current count is: '''''3 Support / 7 Oppose / 2 Neutral'''''. Respectfully request that this RFA be closed, and an assessment of the consensus given as to whether or not to promote the candidate. Thank you for your time, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 18:52, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

== Time to close Request for Checkuser after over one month? ==

:Regarding '''[[Wikiquote:Requests for checkuser/BD2412]]''' (posting notice to all bureaucrats except for the candidate in question):

----

*'''Note:''' Per [[m:Checkuser|Wikimedia Checkuser Policy]], the following must be met: ''[[m:Checkuser|"The community must approve local, non-steward, CheckUsers per consensus. The user requesting CheckUser status must request it within his local community and advertise this request properly (village pump, mailing list when available, ...). The editor must be familiar with the privacy policy. After gaining consensus (at least 70%-80% in pro/con voting or the highest number of votes in multiple choice elections) in his local community, and with at least 25-30 editors' approval, the user should list himself under Steward requests/Permissions with a link to the page with the community's decision."]]''.
#Most Requests for Adminship run for one week.
#Most Requests for Bureaucrat run for two weeks.
#[[Wikiquote:Requests for checkuser/BD2412]] = has been open for over one month, [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Requests_for_checkuser/BD2412&oldid=1297717 diff].
#The Request for Checkuser [[Wikiquote:Requests for checkuser/BD2412]] has ''failed'' to meet [[m:Checkuser|Wikimedia Checkuser Policy]] requirements. It does not have at least 25-30 support. It does not have 70%-80% consensus to promote.
#Can the request be closed at this time as unsuccessful?
Thank you for your time, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 15:37, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
:Looks like it was already closed. (I've been on vacation all week) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 20:57, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

== Hi ==

Thanks for your message, I think that if we visit wikis in other languajes we can improve the two sites, and I work like this, look wikis in other languajes for take some quotes that isn't in my languaje, is a good work, so you can find references too, if you need something, some page that it's a stub, I'm here. Good Luck!!--[[User:Zelawola|Zelawola]] 22:58, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
:Awesome, happy to hear it. :) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 23:12, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

== Usurpation Request==
Will you please usurp my user account as per [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wikiquote:Changing_username/Usurpation#Mayurbot_.E2.86.92Mayur_2].Thanks--[[User:Mayurbot|Mayurbot]] 11:15, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

== Checkuser request oustanding from 1 December 2011 ==

Please see [[Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Checkuser_request:_Deezy.D.]]. Thank you for your time, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 21:02, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

== Checkuser request ==

Please see [[Wikiquote:Administrators'_noticeboard#Request_for_Checkuser_on_Heecf]]. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 21:31, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

== Please protect Dragon Ball and Sopranos Season articles from edit by new users ==

Hello; I have maintained numerous articles on the wiki in the past; there is however an ongoing dilemma with this sockpuppeteer who keeps vandalizing the following articles amongst a few others: Sopranos seasons 1-6 and Dragon ball z seasons 1-9, as well as the Dragon Ball movies and all. Please protect them from edit by new users as almost all the usernames that have vandalized the articles are likely the same person. Also, this chaotic user has been following me and hounding me by either vandalizing all my previous contributions and/or impersonating me in some way or form. I am, quite frankly, tired of this behavior. If there's a way to protect my user talk page on wikipedia also, please do so as I'd greatly appreciate it. I have the same user name on wikipedia and its the only user name I go by. Thanks in advance. - [[User:Zarbon|Zarbon]] ([[User talk:Zarbon|talk]]) 00:13, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
:Also, on another note, once all the aforementioned articles are protected, I suggest looking at my user page to protect any articles there as well as the same vandal attempts to run down my list in order to vandalize any of my contributions. I'd also suggest a checkuser on the following recent names as they all seem to be more of his slew of puppets: Tony Soprano, Dodoria is here, Potato-Man67, and Cooper78. - [[User:Zarbon|Zarbon]] ([[User talk:Zarbon|talk]]) 00:25, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
::Yeah, I've been catching all the puppets; I've been getting ''very'' liberal with CheckUser. I just protected your enwiki talk page for a couple of weeks; I loathe protecting talk pages, but if I have to extend the protection, I will. Your local talk page is semi-protected as well. As far as protecting the local pages, I've considered it, and probably will soon. Not right now, though, since I need to actually get work done. Bah, stupid Real Life. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 14:48, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
:::Actually, I don't want to bother you at all since I myself have to deal with this kind of nonsense almost all the time on the DB wikia, for which I'm currently an admin, but this same user has been doing this for quite some time now; I believe since as early as 2002 (on all the wiki networks). If need be, we'll need to maintain some form of limited protection; new users from editing since almost all the time, the vandal will just create new user names only to vandalize and not much more than that. But since members with trustworthy accounts, such as those with a long-running activity basis, won't have to worry about edit conflicts, all should be well. Wikiquote is one of my favorite resources of the wikimedia related branches, so I'd like to keep it a nice and clean encyclopedic resource. Notify me if there's anything I can do to help; if anything does go awry with the articles, I'll just make sure to let you know in the future in case we need to protect, etc. - [[User:Zarbon|Zarbon]] ([[User talk:Zarbon|talk]]) 16:25, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

== Category:Trucks ==

Hello EVula, The [[:Category:Trucks]] in the pages ; [[Duel]], [[Ice Road Truckers]], [[Jimmy Hoffa]] and [[Smokey and the Bandit]] based to category wikipedia ; [[:w:Category:Trucker films]] is delete infos to [[User:Ningauble]] is it the category for [[:w:Portal:Trucks]] to wikipedia. please recreate category, thank you very much. [[User:FrankyLeRoutier|FrankyLeRoutier]] ([[User talk:FrankyLeRoutier|talk]]) 16:28, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
:We don't need to go into as great a detail with our film categories as Wikipedia does, and while "Trucker films" (not "Trucks") would be applicable for ''Duel'' and ''Smokey and the Bandit'', it wouldn't be relevant to Jimmy Hoffa (who is a person) or ''Ice Road Truckers'' (which is a TV show, not a film). [[:Category:Trucks]] is just not a category that we need. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 16:36, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

== Starship9000 ==

You might want to be aware of [[m:User:Rschen7754/Reports/Cross-wiki hat collectors/Starship9000]] relating to an IP you just blocked. Looks like good hand, bad hand socking. --'''[[User:Rschen7754|Rs]][[User talk:Rschen7754|chen]][[Special:Contributions/Rschen7754|7754]]''' 07:33, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
:I wish people had better things to do with their time. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 23:52, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

== RfA closure ==

Just a small note of appreciation: thanks for promptly closing that [[Wikiquote:Requests_for_adminship/Mdd|RfA]]. Take care. ~ [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 22:43, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
:Not a problem. I've been largely inactive across all my projects for a while (real life stuff), and I'd meant to close it a week ago, but your note reminded me about it. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 22:50, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
::(Good luck with your real life stuff.) ~ [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 01:26, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
:::Oh, nothing bad; I've got my own theatre company and we had a show going on, so my attention was rather diverted. But the show's done and we don't have another for a couple more months. Thanks though. :) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 04:20, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
::::Oh, good to hear. ~ [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 09:42, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

== [[m:Special:MyLanguage/Single User Login finalisation announcement|Forced user renames coming soon for SUL]] ==

<div class="mw-content-ltr">
Hi, sorry for writing in English. I'm writing to ask you, as a bureaucrat of this wiki, to [//meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Translate&group=page-Single+User+Login+finalisation+announcement%2FPersonal+announcement&filter=&action=page translate and review the notification] that will be sent to all users, also on this wiki, who will be forced to change their user name on May 27 and will probably need your help with renames.
You may also want to help with the pages [[m:Rename practices]] and [[m:Global rename policy]].
Thank you, [[m:User:Nemo_bis|Nemo]] 13:07, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
</div>


== Suspension of your CheckUser rights ==

Hello EVula. Pursuant [[CheckUser_policy#Access_to_CheckUser|CheckUser policy]] and after the removal of Aphaia's CU tools due to inactivity, and given that after that removal you will be the one single CU for this project (which CU policy prohibits), I have suspended your CU tools on this project until the community decides whether to appoint or not another CheckUser. Your CU status will be restored afterwards, should the community wants to appoint another CU for this project. Best regards. [[User:MarcoAurelio|MarcoAurelio]] ([[User talk:MarcoAurelio|talk]]) 13:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
:Bugger. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 15:22, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

== Beast Wars ==

The Beast Wars page under Dialogue[http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Beast_Wars#Dialogue] is becoming to long, there's too much dialogue. IP address user 2.124.157.173[http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2.124.157.173] shows no signs of stopping. Isn't there some kind of rule of putting too much on these pages here? [[Special:Contributions/68.75.17.95|68.75.17.95]] 14:50, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
:Yikes, that's way too much content ''everywhere''. It should be broken down by episode, not by character; we'd be better off scrapping everything and putting up just an episode list so that future additions can be properly categorized. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 17:06, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

== [[Beast Wars‎]] ==

Might as well delete the page, if you're going to remove all quotes? ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 13:56, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
:(Not that I want you to delete the page: we have many articles where quotes are organized by character, rather than by episode, but those require cleanup, not deletion.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 14:00, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
::If nobody adds anything, possibly, but there's an IP editor that ''clearly'' is passionate about the show; ideally, he'll now contribute to the article within the correct structure. (also: episode titles aren't supposed to be italicized, but put in quotes; I didn't format them like that because it looked ugly, but I don't really care enough to change the formatting) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 14:04, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
:::I think the move to delete the quotes was correct - there were just too many to try to figure out what episode they belonged to. I've done some additional formatting and added quotes for the first episode to get it started. I've also added some links (including the tv.com one) that could help someone who is interested in the show to start adding more quotes, sourced by episode. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 14:06, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
::::You also moved the article to the correct name, which I'm kicking myself for not having done already. :) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 14:08, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::Just to address your formatting comment above, EVula: actually having italicized episode titles does match the format from the template for TV show pages. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 14:09, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::It does? Huh, learn something new every day. Definitely a difference between Wikipedia's MOS and ours. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 14:21, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
::: I appreciate the point of adding a list of episodes to emphasize that quotes need to be sourced and organized by episode; ''however'', it has long been my custom to remove empty section headings. Now that the article does exemplify at least one episode with quotes, can we dispense with the placeholders? ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:12, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
::::I'd say let's let it stay like that for a few days; it's already started to be fleshed out properly, and keeping that skeleton of headers in place might be a contributing factor. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 01:57, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

== VfD ==

Hi EVula, could you close [[Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Prvoslav Vujčić|this VfD]]? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 11:57, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
:Sure thing. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 19:23, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
::Thanks for your considerations. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 20:42, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
:::Not a problem. Sorry for the delay in getting around to it. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 20:44, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Prvoslav Vujčić

2013-09-20T19:27:34Z

EVula: closing VfD; result was Delete

{{vfd top|Delete}} Not the most unanimous VfD in the world, but there are reasonable concerns about how the sources can't be verified. All in all, this seems like a much better article for the native language edition of Wikiquote, not the English edition. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 19:27, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Wikiquote| |{{error:not substituted|vfd-new2}}<div style="display:none;">}}
== [[:Prvoslav Vujčić]] ==

No quotes from the person, the person (seems to) lack(s) quotability. — [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 10:59, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
*'''Vote closes''': 11:00, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
* '''Comment''': this article only has one quote, but even that quote isn't adequately sourced. (I wouldn't be surprised if the article was deleted with the rationale "no sourced quotes".) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 11:58, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
* '''Keep''': I'm in the process of adding numerous adequately sourced quotes that have been translated. – [[User:Tempo21|Tempo21]] ([[User talk:Tempo21|talk]]) 13:32, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
::'''Comment''': While the additions are appreciated, I do not believe you actually have provided "adequate" sources since those provided are not in English. Please provide sources in English so that the quotes can be verified. Thanks. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 13:41, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
:::I don't think "sources in English" are required, as long as he cites the originals in Serbian (as far as I can tell, the English translations are his). ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 13:52, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
::::Actually, I beg to differ. One of the main purposes of having quotes properly sourced is so that the provided quotes can be verified. As this ''is'' English Wikiquote, having sources that can be read (and the quotes verified) by English-speaking people seems a given. Also, there is no way to even verify the source itself if one is unable to read what is written. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 13:55, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::I think translations by users have always been allowed on Wikiquote, if the original quotes & sources are provided. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 14:11, 14 August 2013 (UTC) P.S. Apparently, this is not a new issue. Jeff Q (2007): ''[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote_talk:FAQ&diff=638715&oldid=638641 We officially prefer to have the original quote cited (and sourced) first, then the English translation given underneath. (Whether the translation should reliably sourced or not is an ongoing debate ...)]'' ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 14:20, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::Yes, having the original quote in its original language is correct (and having a translation is fine), but when a given source has no English whatsoever, how is one to know if: (1)it is a proper source - meaning a legitimate third party and not someone's personal blog and (2) if the quote is actually on the page or even attributed to the person? My objection is not regarding a translation of the ''quote'', but rather an inability to read the purported source of said quote. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 14:40, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::::Google translate is your friend, but I agree that it may be hard to find out if the source presented is reliable (your first concern). ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 14:50, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
* '''Keep''', per recent additions. ([[User:Tempo21|Tempo21]], you should add the originals in Serbian as well, along with the translations.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 13:38, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
* '''Comment''' So far there is no prove that this author had any impact on English/American culture. His work is being translated into English only this year. Also there seems to be articles about this author present in over 20 Wikipedia's. Now I checked some of those histories and all the time a new username is created, that only created that one article (and left). It seems a lot like we are facing an extensive merchandise campaign of one person with 25+ user-id's. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 15:45, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
* '''Comment''' Respected Wikiquote editors, I may be new to Wikiquote but I am definitely not new to Wikipedia. I've been editing Wikipedia for almost a decade. There are now quotes from the author in question and he is definitely quotable as he is a writer. The sources are adequate, why does it matter if they are in English or not? However, I will try and find some quotes already in English. Also, I want to respond to Mdd. Why would this author have any impact on English and/or American culture when he is not either English or American? You are incorrect that his work is being translated into English only this year as his four new books are written in English – they are not translated. Why am I being brought into question about "facing an extensive merchandise campaign of one person with 25+ user-id's" because this is not a fair assumption. I have nothing to do with other languages. My first language is English but I also speak Serbian and neighboring languages very well hence the translations. – [[User:Tempo21|Tempo21]] ([[User talk:Tempo21|talk]]) 11:36, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
** There is a [http://sr.wikiquote.org/wiki/%D0%93%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BD%D0%B0_%D1%81%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B0 Serbian Wikiquote] for hosting quotes in Serbian. A quote in Serbian may be hosted here if a reliable source exists in which it has been translated to English. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 13:33, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' because the quotes are not properly sourced in a way that I (or any other non-Serbian speaking person) can verify them (see above discussion). I would also second BD2412's recommendation to start a page on the Serbian WQ, but not to have it here. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 13:39, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. I have to question whether something that is not found in English contexts is really notable in the context of a English compendium of quotations. Perhaps it would be a good idea to add something to our guidelines about quoting non-English works that are quoted in English literature or published in English translations. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 13:43, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' I don't know if the voting is closed yet (looks like it is?) but this definitely seems keepable and the author notable. [[User:PidgeCopetti|PidgeCopetti]] ([[User talk:PidgeCopetti|talk]]) 16:13, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
::— [[User:PidgeCopetti]] ([[User talk:PidgeCopetti|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/PidgeCopetti|contribs]]) has made [[w:Wikipedia:Single-purpose account|few or no other edits]] outside this topic. 
*'''Delete'''. After one month still no quotes from original English/American sources, only self-translated work. Still no indication of quotability. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
{{vfd bottom}}

User talk:EVula

2013-09-20T19:23:34Z

EVula: /* VfD */ sure

Wikiquote:Administrators' noticeboard

2013-09-12T15:21:57Z

EVula: /* Talk:Main Page again */ eh...

[[de:Wikiquote:Administratoren/Notizen]]
[[fa:ویکی‌گفتاورد:تابلوی اعلانات مدیران]]
[[nl:Wikiquote:Verzoekpagina aan conciërges]]
{{Wikiquote:Administrators' noticeboard/Header}}
[[Category:Wikiquote|{{PAGENAME}}]]
= Discussions =

== QOTDs for 7 & 8 January 2013 ==

{{quote of the day
| quote = The whole [[country]] is full of enterprise. Our common [[schools]] are diffusing [[intelligence]] among the [[people]] and our [[work|industry]] is fast accumulating the [[comfort|comforts]] and [[luxury|luxuries]] of [[life]]. ... It is not [[strangeness|strange]], however much it may be regretted, that such an exuberance of enterprise should cause some [[individualism|individuals]] to mistake [[change]] for [[progress]] and the invasion of the [[rights]] of others for [[nations|national]] [[Power|prowess]] and [[glory]].
| author = Millard Fillmore
}}

{{quote of the day
| quote = There is a certain [[Laziness|indolence]] in us, a [[Wishes|wish]] not to be disturbed, which [[Temptation|tempts]] us to [[Thought|think]] that when things are [[quiet]], all is well. Subconsciously, we tend to give the preference to "[[Society|social]] [[peace]]," though it be only [[Appearance|apparent]], because our lives and possessions seem then secure. Actually, [[human]] beings acquiesce too easily in [[evil]] conditions; they [[Rebellion|rebel]] far too little and too seldom. There is nothing [[nobility|noble]] about acquiescence in a cramped [[life]] or mere submission to superior [[force]].
| author = A. J. Muste
}}

These quotes at [[Wikiquote talk:Quote of the day/January 7, 2013]] & [[Wikiquote talk:Quote of the day/January 8, 2013]] will have to be placed on the project pages [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/January 7, 2013]] & [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/January 8, 2013]] rather than the talk pages by an admin. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 18:18, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 00:55, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

== CU request for HomerHorn ==

* {{user|HomerHorn}}
Please consider investigating this spambot and sharing the results with the stewards. I think this one might be related to [[Special:CentralAuth/SallyIMHV|SallyIMHV]] at the English Wikiversity, for which I'll request a CU as well ([[:m:SRCU|here]]). Kind regards, [[User:Mathonius|Mathonius]] ([[User talk:Mathonius|talk]]) 04:35, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
:All the accounts mentioned here are now locked. If anyone's interested, see [[:m:User:Mathonius/Reports/Ntsamr]] for more information. [[User:Mathonius|Mathonius]] ([[User talk:Mathonius|talk]]) 04:32, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

== Archive editing query ==

I think when I was an admin here I would have reverted this without a second thought however I am not now so I'll leave it to the community. The archive in question and edit history is [https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Reference_desk/Archive/4&curid=119735&action=history here]. Thanks --[[User:Herbythyme|Herby]] [[User talk:Herbythyme|talk thyme]] 13:11, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
: One does not need to be an administrator to undo inappropriate edits. It is always inappropriate to carry on a discussion in an archive page like this; but I usually turn a blind eye if it looks harmless – not from principle, but from laziness. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:34, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

== [[User:Collingwood|Collingwood's]] sysop flag ==

Hello, recently Collingwood's account was globally locked as a sockpuppet of ‎Poetlister by stewards (see [[m:Steward_requests/Checkuser#Collingwood.40en.wikiversity|this]] checkuser request). Since Poetlister is banned from all WMF projects, and Collingwood is now locked, his sysop flags should be removed. [[User:Techman224|Techman224]] ([[User talk:Techman224|talk]]) 18:36, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
:And ''of course'', local bureaucrats can't remove the sysop flag. I'll ask a steward at Meta. (also: holy shit, that is really disappointing) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 21:12, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

:{{done}} at [[m:Steward requests/Permissions#Collingwood@enwikiquote]]. I also removed his admin userbox. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 21:25, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

== I CAN'T log in, because I am blocked, maybe ==

This may be entirely the wrong place for this, but I am really at a loss about who to contact about this. The fact that I can't log in reduces my access to some options.

In any case, I have used the Wiki's for a long time, like most people. As time went on, and I started noticing more and more minor yet annoying, small errors in some articles, I decided to join to make corrections, and possibly sometime to create an article in a subject of my specialty. My attempts were thwarted right after joining Wikipedia. Attempts to make a global identity were blocked by information about sock puppets, some person named "Kalki", and "multiple counts of abuse".

The username I have almost always used was "Abraxas". Never before the recent couple months have I ever joined any Wiki sites. Never once have I yet edited anything in any Wiki's. And because I use and respect these sites, never have I ever "abused" anything related to this site.

So, are there 2 Abraxases? Am I punished for the sins of the other?

I have no idea who to contact, so if this is the wrong place, I am hoping that one of you may be able to direct me further into the opaque sanctum so that I can resolve this without myself having to open multiple accounts which is already getting confusing with just the few I have joined, being told in each that my previous name was already used, but not allowing log-in with that name anyway.

Can this username be rehabilitated? As with colonic bacteria, the best way to get rid of a bad guy is not just to eliminate him, but to fill his place with a good guy so he can't come back.

Thank you.
Contact: almondan(at)gmail.com
—The preceding [[Wikiquote:Sign your posts on talk pages|manually signed]] comment was added by [[Special:Contributions/67.142.172.27|67.142.172.27]] ([[User talk:67.142.172.27|talk]]) 06:36, 6 February 2013‎

:Hello. I'm not an admin, just for the record, but you are right that the account "[[User:Abraxas|Abraxas]]" was blocked (indefinitely), in May 2011, after accusations of [[w:Sockpuppet (Internet)|sockpuppetry]] (so account creation was disabled). As for your request, you may want to check the guide to making [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Guide_to_appealing_blocks unblock requests]. Good luck. ~ [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 07:47, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
:: The the currently blocked {{user|Abraxas}} account here at Wikiquote IS mine, and I had SUL claim on it, but from what I can determine with the SUL account tools available there are still MANY other UNATTACHED Abraxas accounts on other wikimedia wikis, which are NOT mine, but all of them with less use than that I made of the account before it was blocked by Cirt some years ago, in what I continue to assert was the rampage of IMPROPER account blocking and page defacement based upon many FALSE ASSUMPTIONS and accusations of misuse or abuse of my accounts. I have not yet bothered to respond to all that has occurred with the thoroughness such circumstances merit, but I expect to make some revelations in coming months which I hope will clarify MANY of the issues, from some of my perspectives, and perhaps put an end to much of the confusion that I know still exists related to past occurences and present situations. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 10:53, 6 February 2013 (UTC) + tweaks

* You should be able to create an account and log in if you choose another name. When the [http://toolserver.org/~quentinv57/tools/sulinfo.php?username=Abraxas&showinactivity=1 "SUL" query] indicates that a name has already been used, it is generally best to just pick a different one. The formal "sanctum" for your request is at [[Wikiquote:Changing username/Usurpation]], but the SUL query indicates that none of the other "Abraxas" accounts, some of which may have been yours, have been used extensively or recently, so it is probably best to just start fresh with a new name. You can rename your old "Abraxas" accounts to a new name that nobody has already taken, at the appropriate sanctum of each local wiki. I appreciate that the situation is annoying, but "[[Romeo and Juliet|a rose by any other name would smell as sweet]]". It is unfortunate that the above mentioned Kalki person reserved so many names to him/herself before being stopped, but we are now stuck with the adverse consequences of this arrogant misappropriation. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:43, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
:: '''There are many ways to view the fortunes and misfortunes of past and present events.''' I will concede my appropriation of names was ''extensive'', and ''quite'' naturally and ''properly'' would and should produce ''suspicions'' of extensively improper or even malicious behavior to those who lack clear understandings of what I was actually doing and many of the reasons why, but I will politely insist that I beleive it was NOT an act of deplorable arrogance, though I can concede also that it can easily ''seem'' that to others, within this range of time and circumstances, within which we are presently operating. Time will eventually tell where those who have made the most unfortunate errors lie, and who was most adamantly motivated to promote awareness, appreciation and profound respect for proper and sometimes vitally important freedoms, justice, liberty, life and love of ALL. '''I continue to wish others well, and will probably begin attending to some significant aspects of the VERY complex issues raised here more noticably and extensively within a few weeks.''' ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 15:22, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

*From the OP
Thanks to all who responded. This is a lot more complex than I had thought. It still doesn't explain why I can't use the same name for different Wikis, but it may somehow be involved. To note: the account names I tried to use that said they were used, but would not let me log in due to incorrect passwords, nor open an account in that name (though one already existed in Pedia), was not "Abraxas", so should not have been subject to any unusual restrictions that I know of. It looks like a "bug" to me.

Only one "Abraxas" was used by me (that I know of - I can't claim perfect, years-long recall) in Wikipedia. That name was used by me on over 5000 other internet accounts that exist in my LastPass list, and probably more, but not on any other Wikis here.

Thanks and have a good day.
[[Special:Contributions/67.142.172.23|67.142.172.23]] 21:45, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

== [[Wikiquote: Limits on quotations]] ==

Anyone care to comment on the discussion at [[Wikiquote:Village_pump#Wikiquote:_Limits_on_quotations|the Village pump]]? Thanks. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 16:38, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

== Block request for 74.131.177.233 ==

* {{user|74.131.177.233}}
Please block this IP address and [[Special:Nuke/74.131.177.233|nuke]] its vandalism. Thanks, [[User:Mathonius|Mathonius]] ([[User talk:Mathonius|talk]]) 23:37, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 02:08, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

== [[User:Whaledad]] ==

Hereby I want to file a complain against [[User:Whaledad]] for making the unfounded accusation against me by stating "''Mdd's articles violating copyright rules by indiscriminatingly copy large chunks of text to do so (he actually quoted other encyclopedias in his wikiquote articles''." [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote%3ARequests_for_adminship%2FMdd&diff=1540953&oldid=1540892]

After asking for clarification on [[User talk:Whaledad#Copyright|his talk page]], Whaledad was unable to deliver proof or even an example (present in the Internet Wayback), and he is unwilling to take back the accusation.

I think these kind of accusations go beyond the realm of criticism, and should be considered a [[WQ:NPA|personal attack]]. I request appropriate action to be taken. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:35, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

:It seems Wikipedia:No personal attacks is quite clear [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_personal_attacks#What_is_considered_to_be_a_personal_attack.3F here]: ''Accusations about personal behavior that lack evidence. Serious accusations require serious evidence. Evidence often takes the form of diffs and links presented on wiki.'' counts as PA. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:47, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

:*It's unclear what - short of a law suit - Mdd would consider proof/evidence for my statement. This situation was extensively discussed at the [http://nl.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wikiquote:De_kantine/archief_2#Hier_moet_gewoon_alles_rechtenvrij_zijn.3F nl.wikiquote Village Pump ("de Kantine")]. After that discussion about 84 articles written by Mdd were submitted to Vote for Deletion based on copyright violations ([http://nl.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wikiquote:Te_verwijderen_pagina%27s/archief_5#Nominaties_8_april_2012 VfD page from that time frame] use <Ctrl-F copyvio> to find the relevant nominations), and were deleted as such by a local Admin. With that I rest my case. [[User:Whaledad|<big>W</big><big>\|/</big><big>hale</big>'''dad''']] ([[User_talk:Whaledad#Top|Talk to me]]) 22:55, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

:*OK, I feel I need to "reopen the case" and add a link to [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive_33#Wikihounding_by_User:Whaledad a somewhat similar case on Commons], where an Admin (Jameslwoodward) among other things had the following to say: "''In this particular case -- as with all the other Mdd images that I have looked at that Whaledad has nominated -- unless we receive credible permission through OTRS, the DR should close with the deletion of the image. I note that until Whaledad came along and fixed it, Mdd was claiming copyright in File:Geert van de Camp.jpg, which is a simple crop of an image provided by another user. As similar correction was required at <follow links to 6 image>. I have tagged the following uploads of Mdd with <nowiki>{{delete}}</nowiki>: <follow list of 8 images, 6 of them now red links>. Some of them appear to be FOP problems, while others are claims of "Own Work" that do not appear to be correct. There are many other images which are web size with no EXIF which I suspect, but cannot prove, are problems.
::''So, we have here a user, Mdd, who has, through inexperience and lack knowledge, or perhaps, deliberately:''
::*''Uploaded a wide variety of images that have been deleted as copyvio''
::*''Has marked other people's work as "Own Work" a number of times''
::*''Has failed to properly attribute the photographer on images where he has made a simple crop''
::*''Has not paid attention to the underlying copyright of various artists in places where FOP does not apply''
::*''Has come here complaining of Wikihounding, when the work done by Whaledad appears to have been entirely correct, although his description of Mdd's errors may have been a little too harsh''
::''Under the circumstances, I would advise Mdd to withdraw this complaint before a similar complaint is made against him. Bringing people who are simply doing their job to ANb is a nuisance for all of us.''"
::After some more back and forth (in which Mdd even had the audacity to ask a Dutch Admin to take over his part of the discussion), Mdd conceded and withdrew his (false) accusation of Wikihounding. [[User:Whaledad|<big>W</big><big>\|/</big><big>hale</big>'''dad''']] ([[User_talk:Whaledad#Top|Talk to me]]) 23:34, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
::: I would like to briefly comment here. I have certainly witnessed or endured some attitudes and remarks I regard as severely mistaken or even slanderous in regard to many things in my life, and have on some occasions passionately defended others or myself in such ways as I have believed to be proper, and I am not unfamiliar with the bitter sorrows and anger that can be manifest in both intellectual and emotional conflicts which can occur in openly and overt or very subtle and covert ways.  '''Though I certainly sympathize and agree with him in many regards, I actually disagree with Mdd that there is any need for admin action here''', and though I might be prone to side with him in respect to so much as I can discern regarding his previous disputes and reactions to them, I do not recommend demanding any apologies of others, who have generraly done what they actually believed to be right, even if it might be wrong from the perspectives of others, and certainly do not advise seeking for any needless punishments or censures of anyone, nor to expect any beyond those that might ultimately come to some, as true necessities of remorse, with recognition of their own errors. '''I truly hope the matters in dispute can be more amiably discerned in the future, and a greater respect for all and among all can flourish.''' Blessings to all. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 01:51, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

:::: Regarding the quotation from [[w:WP:NPA|WP:NPA]], in idiomatic English the phrase "personal behavior" refers to the ''manner'' of conducting oneself, such as rudeness, disruption, dishonesty, etc. The allegation about copyright, whether it is true or not, is an objective statement about a person's actions, not a criticism of ''personal behavior''. Therefore, I do not believe this request for administrative intervention against personal attacks is well grounded. In order to suggest how this could have been handled better, I will comment to Mdd about a couple statements in the discussion at Whaledad's talk page that led up to filing this complaint:
::::* "I think I am within my rights to demand you to prove here and now the accusation you made here today."[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Whaledad&diff=1541123]
::::*:— More properly, in making your case to the community at [[Wikiquote:Requests for adminship/Mdd]], you are within your rights to say you believe the accusation is unfounded and not supported by evidence. Your demand is counterproductive: you don't ''want'' Whaledad to successfully prove it, you want the community to decide he has ''not'' proved it.
::::* "you can't deliver that proof because there isn't any. Therefor I ask you take it back, to rectifier and apologize."[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Whaledad&diff=1541221]
::::*:— You can simply make your case to the community that there isn't any proof, and let the community decide. Whether Whaledad changes his mind, and what he does about it, is up to him.
:::: I think it was a mistake to confront Whaledad about this on his talk page. Instead of telling ''him'' on his talk page to prove it or take it back, it would be better to simply tell ''us'' in the community discussion that you think we should ignore it because it is unproven. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:34, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Ok, so be it. I thank you both for sharing your insides, which does open some new perspectives I do appreciate. I admit in the heat of moment I might not used the proper tone both on the talk page, and in formulating this request. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 01:36, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
:For the record, I followed Ningauble's advice and added a footnote in the RfA discussion, [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote%3ARequests_for_adminship%2FMdd&diff=1542055&oldid=1542040 here] -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 00:08, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

== Template:Official policy ==

Just wondering if someone could update [[Template:Official policy]].
It contains two <code><nowiki></nowiki></code> tags that should be updated to <code><nowiki> </nowiki></code> tags since <code><nowiki></nowiki></code> is not a valid html tag. Thanks. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 21:35, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Also, if someone could move [[Template:WQ BW21]] to [[User:Blackwatch21/WQ BW21]] without leaving a redirect, that would be good as well. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 21:40, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

== [[Wikiquote: Limits on quotations]] ==

Once again, I have asked for further discussion on this topic at [[Wikiquote:Village_pump#Wikiquote:_Limits_on_quotations|the VP]]. Can anyone else please join the discussion? I would so love to move this further along, as it appears that we are increasingly facing edit wars and related skirmishes all related to this topic. Thanks! ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 17:16, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

== BarkingFish and sockpuppets ==

*{{checkuser|BarkingFish}}

# {{checkuser|1=Tmalmjursson}}
# {{checkuser|1=Cat in the Hat}}
# {{checkuser|1=Humblesnore}}
Per [[w:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BarkingFish/Archive]], these have all been {{confirmed}} as longtime socks of {{user|BarkingFish}}.

What do other admins think should be done about this, with regards to the main account? -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 00:14, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

:I'm not an admin, but in my opinion this user's main account should not be blocked here because he never made any disruptive edits at Wikiquote. For me it's as simple as that. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 01:18, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
::Okay, thanks for the input, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 01:23, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
: This person is evidently troubled, but I don't see what it has to do with Wikiquote. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 11:21, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
::Alright, thanks for the comment, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 21:41, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

:::There seems to be an agreement, that this sockpuppetry doesn't effect Wikiquote, yet after Cirt's latest comment a [[:Category:Wikiquote sockpuppets of BarkingFish]] was created. This kind of overhead seems against this agreement, so I started a VFD for this category.

:::This also makes me wonder, why those three sub-(puppet)-accounts are blocked? None of them have made any edit here, and there is no global block. Blocking these accounts and adding a note made them active here, which seems useless. Couldn't we avoid this next time? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:52, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
::::Well, they're certainly all technically {{confirmed}} as sockpuppets, however in this case I'll respectfully defer to the judgment expressed by the community, (which is, by the way, the reason I brought this notice, here, for discussion.) Cheers, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 06:54, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

:::::Is there something I am missing here? If I am not mistaken:
:::::* The English Wikipedia policy on Sockpuppetry is, that sockpuppetry is strongly discouraged but not forbidden. The use of sockpuppets is no reason for any blockade, just the misuse, and
:::::* Wikipedia and Wikiquote operated independently. Users cannot be blocked on Wikiquote for things they have done on Wikipedia, and vice versa, unless there misuse on multiple projects and reason for global blockade.
:::::Yet, Cirt has blocked three accounts, which were not even active here. There was no sockpuppetry use, let alone misuse here on Wikiquote. Just BarkingFish made only one (very) constructive edit here.

:::::So is there an (exceptional) rule that (sockpuppet)accounts once "technically confirmed as sockpuppets on Wikipedia" automatically get blocked on other projects? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 14:07, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
::::::Generally, yes, there are exceptions, for example, when they are part of non-acknowledged sockfarms being built up surreptitiously over time. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 16:13, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
:::::::[http://xkcd.com/285/ "Citation needed"] ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 17:00, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
::::::::''[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/BarkingFish&diff=550236211&oldid=550234304 " I've proxied into wikipedia through holes you'll never find, I've committed very tiny pieces of vandalism over a period of quite a long time, most of it before the Abuse filter was active on here, so a lot of it was missed, and had more than 20 throwaway accounts from multiple ISPs. I think i've covered everything. Smell ya later." - BarkingFish.]'' -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 17:56, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
::::::::: Please cite the ''policy'' that allows you to block accounts on projects independent of Wikipedia, where said accounts have not engaged in vandalism or any sort of malicious behavior (in this case, the accounts you blocked had zero edits here). You, Cirt, are in an awkward position if you can't cite such a policy. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:51, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
:::::: No, there is no official policy that Wikiquote should block accounts here that are blocked elsewhere (nor that Wikiquote should de-sysop accounts here that are de-sysoped elsewhere). However, [[Wikiquote:Username policy#Using multiple user accounts|"It is recommended that users not edit under multiple usernames, unless they have a very good reason"]], and it is not uncommon to block duplicate accounts as a preventative measure when the very good reason is not evident or, especially, when evidence on another wiki is suggestive of a bad reason. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 19:54, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

{{quote of the day
| quote = He that would [[live]] in [[peace]] and at ease, Must not speak all he [[knows]], nor [[judge]] all he sees.
| author = Benjamin Franklin
}}

I do not wish to personally confront what might be some of the oversights or under-sightedness of Cirt on many matters, and am willing to be forgiving of the errors of anyone, and to pardon them from even what might pass for just punishments if malice and will to do harm are rejected and abandoned.

I know that others who seek to level and constrain the language and ideas of others in ways I find appalling do not always approve of my honest commentaries or bold assessments regarding many things, but I will make a few here, which I believe can be generally helpful and beneficial.

Extremely [[nihilistic]] or opinionated vandals of very low intellectual or moral integrity and those who seek to establish or maintain what might be described as [[authoritarian]] control or habits, customs or rules developed or devised with strong infusions of such dark [[cynicism]] and cleverness as all too often passes for [[wisdom]] among the intellectually weak and naïve and the immorally or morally oppressed, have this much in common: '''they seek to promote [[fears]], suspicions, discord and drive others into forms of panic and cowardice and the embracing of a frightened and easily manipulated will to suppress and oppress all those who differ with them, dissent from them, or are effective at presenting ideas and opinions they dislike or have no affinity for, and consider rivals, opponents or enemies.''' Throughout history, at all levels of clearly or obscurely social, unsocial and antisocial engagement amidst all formal and informal alliances or groups of people, there have been MANY complex forms of influences at work, which MANY like to find ways to simplify in very deficient and flawed ways into an "US vs THEM" mentality and framework.

Throughout the ages the wisest and most healthy of minds of all political, religious and social traditions have always resisted and opposed such tendencies to the extent they believed they effectively could, knowing always that there are limitations upon themselves, their times and resources, and those of others far less discerning and far more prone to being dupes to those who regularly engage in such tropes with maliciously or callously deceitful intentions.

I have little doubt, from what little I have payed attention to this particular matter, that Barking Fish is a pathetically disturbed individual — and I have little doubt that increasing the fame and fear of such pathetically disturbed individuals serves many of their interests and desires as much as it does those who are most habitually prone to promoting such fame and fears for what they might perhaps believe to be the "good" of everyone. '''There are pathetically disturbed people in the world, ALWAYS, and to the extent they cannot be easily helped, or refuse help, and even seek to vilify and denigrate others most capable of providing help, and yet do not actively engage in unjust forms of destruction or oppression of others, they should generally be left to gradually develop or stagnate and pass away, as their own inclinations impel them, or only occasionally and gently offered such help as they might accept.''' Some might consider me harsh and cold in making such assessments, but I believe that this is preferable to being either soft-minded or hotly passionate about doing such injurious or dangerous things as need not actually be done against anyone, to the service of greater forms or aspects of the good of [[Humanity]], its proper [[rights]] everywhere and anywhere and the [[Liberty]] to assert and indicate these.

When I was an admin here, I was very swiftly reactive to clear vandalism, and squelched it rather rapidly, and was widely recognized as being extraordinarily effective at that, and battling it across MANY wikis, which led to me being "active" on many — but though there were many incidents of suspicious or distressing behavior that were not clear vandalism, I did not go about seeking people or puppet accounts of people to vent my wrath or frustrations upon others in childish and even infantile ways, which might EASILY be misdirected and applied in ERROR. '''I simply remained alert and confident that IF and WHEN many very clear abuses occurred they could rapidly be dealt with by myself and others.'''

A problem far more endemic and pervasive and dangerous to the health of many projects which I saw developing was the rather obscured or even approved abuse of many forms of privilege to suppress dissent or divergence from such will as some wished to declare "OFFICIAL" and implicitly sacred or sound, and I made some rather pointed statements to that effect, just prior to having the resources and wills of a few others directed in many ways against what long-standing good reputation as a conscientious and admirable worker as I believe I had earned by my actions, up to that point. Others later sought to use such apparent disgrace or disfavor as had developed here, to snowball that into a "generally negative" impression of me and my intentions wherever they could among the WIkimedia projects, in rather appalling ways, which I will decline to elaborate upon, at this point, as I have no intentions of belaboring many past errors and mistaken assumptions beyond such points as I believe necessary for the development of more aware and appreciative and healthy attitudes towards those who DO and MUST differ with oneself, for various reasons.

I wish to again assert that I have no personal animosity to those who fall into errors of various kinds, but I generally DO seek ways to help others out of errors — and know that others can be helpful to me, in rising out of whatever forms of error or ignorance I might seem to be in, and am usually quite grateful for what help others can and do provide me, even if sometimes unwittingly.

'''Those are just a few of my thoughts on this matter, and I congratulate others for recently showing and demonstrating capacities for far more reserved and circumspect reactions to circumstances than many are inclined to encourage or even acknowledge as either necessary or proper.''' It is evidence of a growing conscientiousness that there ALWAYS are aspects of things which are beyond one's direct observation, and though many actual or potential aspects of these CANNOT or should not ever rule one's own reactions, prior to being KNOWN, to maintain a healthy skepticism to ANY claims is ALWAYS an important procedure in maintaining healthy forms of Awareness, Life, and Love, and developing truly fair and genuinely cohesive societies, alliances and presentational projects such as this WIki. '''[[Blessings]] to all.''' ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 19:29, 24 April 2013 (UTC) + tweaks
:I agree with [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=1566471&oldid=1566469 this above comment by admin Ningauble]. Cheers, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 02:30, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
::Two things keep bothering me. First so far I have seen no indication, that this Wikipedia sockpuppetry has affected Wikiquote in the past or could possibly affect Wikiquote in the future. There seem to be no reason for preventative measure. And second, we don't automatically block all confirmed Wikipedia sockpuppets. Why would we make exceptions? It seems to me the only reason to make exceptions is, if there are indications that it might negatively affect Wikiquote.
::Just as [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wikiquote:Votes_for_deletion/Category:Wikiquote_sockpuppets_of_BarkingFish here] proposed, I like to propose to stop importing Wikipedia sockpuppet investigations and results here, when there is no indication that it might negatively affect Wikiquote. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 13:39, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
:::Best to keep it on a case-by-case basis, seeking out input from other admins and the community. In cases of obvious vandals and cross-wiki-spammers, blocks on sight for accounts on all wikis are routine. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 15:41, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

== Martha Washington ==

There was once a [[Martha Washington]] page on the wiki, deleted because of lack of source quotes, which I would like restored so that I can work on it as a base, sourcing whatever I can of what there was upon it — and adding whatever I can beyond that, in the next week or so. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 03:15, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}}, now at [[User:Kalki/Martha Washington]]. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 03:37, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
:: Thanks. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 03:39, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
:::You're most welcome, {{user|Kalki}}, have a great day! :) Cheers, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 05:11, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

== [[“You will never be able to escape from your heart. So it's better to listen to what it has to say.”]] ==

Can someone delete [[“You will never be able to escape from your heart. So it's better to listen to what it has to say.”]], it's nonsense/vandalism?[[User:King jakob c 2|King jakob c 2]] ([[User talk:King jakob c 2|talk]]) 12:15, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

:{{done}}. Next time please just tag the articles with {{Tl|Delete}} or {{Tl|Db}} ("delete because"). Then they get automatically listed in this [[:Category:Candidates for speedy deletion]] and will be deleted afterwards. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:30, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

== Spambot or other vandalism on Woodrow Wilson talk page ==

[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Woodrow_Wilson&action=history Since the 13th of April] the talk page of [[Woodrow Wilson]] has been repeatedly vandalized by what might be some persistent vandal or defective spambot of some kind, and should probably be given at least some short-term protection from anonymous edits. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 05:17, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
: {{done}} Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 02:49, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

== [[George Washington]] ==

[[George Washington]] is attracting a lot of vandalism from IPs. Can someone semi-protect it? Thanks, [[User:King jakob c 2|King jakob c 2]] ([[User talk:King jakob c 2|talk]]) 22:02, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
* {{done}} Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 23:46, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

== Personal attack by DanielTom ==

DanielTom: ''[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ADanielTom&diff=1569366&oldid=1569048 "I think you are in serious need of psychiatric help. Please seek it. ~ DanielTom"]''.

In response to my request for the user to cease posting to my talkpage, he gave a personal attack.

I would appreciate it if an admin can please warn {{user|DanielTom}} that this is inappropriate behavior.

Thank you, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 16:48, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
:While I do not wish to wade into the specifics of what the two of you are arguing about, my initial reaction to his request is that you would be wise to grow a thicker skin. Sure, you may be offended by the language DanielTom used, but I hardly find it to be behavior requiring intervention in the form of any punitive action against him. I've been subject to plenty of denigrative attacks throughout my years here - it's not entirely unexpected when there are disagreements. I also note that this is at least the second time that you have been involved in an exercise of escalating rhetoric with another user, causing what should have been a fairly minor issue at the beginning to metamorphose into something much larger. Again, yes it would be nice if we all addressed each other in the most civil manner, but that's not always realistic in an online community such as this. As a more visible member of said community in the role of an admin, I would expect you to let a bit more slide and not be so reactive to attacks. My advice: let it go (see similar advice from BD2412: [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:BD2412&diff=1568998&oldid=1568983#Request_for_advice_about_DanielTom], where he advised you "to stay calm and remain above the fray."). ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 17:43, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

* Let's say I know someone who I think is (for example) considering suicide. What [[User:Cirt|Cirt]] is saying is that, basically, if I tell that person to contact a mental health professional immediately, that would be a "personal attack". But it isn't. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:19, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
::My point is that whether or not he feels it is a personal attack is something subjective that neither I nor anyone else can decide. But surely it does not rise to the level where some action against you as the author of the comment is needed. I am saying that I believe that both sides of this dispute are overreacting a bit and I would advise both to dial it down a bit. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 18:28, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

::Thank you, [[User:UDScott|UDScott]]. In any case, [[User:Cirt|Cirt]] already got what he wanted: he put this giant and bogus title "Personal attack by DanielTom" not just here, but in every admin's Talk page. As if admins needed to be reminded to read the ''Administrators' noticeboard''. Jesus Christ. I genuinely think [[User:Cirt|Cirt]] needs mental help, all the more now. If that is a "personal attack", block me and get it over with. This is absolutely ridiculous. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:41, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

*...seriously? ''This'' is what you consider a personal attack? [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 18:59, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
**'''Reply by Cirt:''' Understood, {{user|EVula}} and {{user|UDScott}}. Thank you for your comments. No further action required. I'll take the suggested input by these two admins under advisement. I appreciate it. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 19:50, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
*** [[User:Cirt|Cirt]], you truly are an embarrassment. You harass people. You are the the most petty, childish and vindictive person I have ever come across on Wikiquote. I have less than zero respect for you. I hope that's clear enough. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 10:27, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
:::P.S. A sensible admin should now block me. I propose a one-week block. Thanks. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 10:41, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

== Mary Tyler Moore ==

There was once a [[Mary Tyler Moore]] page on the wiki, which was deleted among the various overwhelming number of deletions of prods that have been created for the relatively few active editors here. I would like that restored so that I can work on it as a base within the next week or so, sourcing what quotes I can, and adding some, perhaps. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 22:22, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} good luck. [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:52, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

== subtle vandal ==

I recently have reverted two edits where an ostensibly plausible citation was given for an implausible statement by an anon IP. Just now it was the [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Albert_Einstein&curid=2&diff=1569829&oldid=1565305 Einstein page] where it seems a citation of another actual quote was copied to make the addition seem plausible. In the previous case (though I do not immediately recall on which page I encountered it) the citation itself was a bit more implausible, but rather subtly so to anyone just giving it a casual glance, and in both cases I actually did an internet search to confirm my suspicions, before reverting the additions. I am just noting this as a heads-up on the situation, because this might indicate the currently active presence of a subtly malicious vandal at work, and as I do not monitor things anywhere near as much as I once did, there might be other incidents I failed to catch. Blessings. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 04:34, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

== DivesGreatestMan and sockpuppets ==

*{{checkuser|DivesGreatestMan‎}}

# {{checkuser|1=SonPhanGreat}}
# {{checkuser|1=WickyLicky}}
# {{checkuser|1=Sonphan1}}

I like to ask attention for this user:
* DivesGreatestMan‎ created a userpage today here on Wikiquote, claiming he is born September 13, 2003
* On April 27 April 2013‎ he created the User:SonPhanGreat page on Wikicommons with the same info, see http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:SonPhanGreat
* On 14:49, 27 April 2013 the {{w|User:SonPhanGreat}} is being blocked on Wikipedia after being idetified as sockpop of {{w|user:WickyLicky}}
* The userpage {{w|User:SonPhanGreat}} made 23:41, 24 April 2013 with the same info as User:DivesGreatestMan‎ here, is made invisible on Wikipedia
* The sock puppeteer User:WickyLicky made his first edit 21:21, 1 November 2012

Now what drew my attention in the first place was the day of birth. It seems like a very bad idea that we allow children on Wikiquote to mention there full name, and day of birth. This is why I deleted the user page this afternoon. In the meantime a new userpage with the same info is created, and an userpage with a cryptic remark.

This made me start further investigation with the above mentioned. Now it seems he has shifted his attention from Wikipedia to Wikiquote after being his block on Wikipedia. Now I would like to request feedback on how to further respond here? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:22, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

:In the meantime I blocked him (for one month) after he started vandalizing multiple (new) pages, and afterwards also blocked his talk-page for making threads. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:35, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

::Because of this pattern of cross Wiki vandalism, I would propose to block this user, and his known sockpuppets indefinitely, and have the text of his use page removed. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:49, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
:::Sorry to butt in, but is there any reason to believe that this date of birth is correct? He could be trolling.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 16:56, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
::::I simply don't know. I do know he added (almost) the same info on Wikipedia, on Wikicommons and here on Wikiquote. And this info is suppressed on the English Wikipedia, but I also do not know why (yet). I do think we should not allow this kind of info on userpages, true or false. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 17:17, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

:: I deleted the user and talk pages due to impersonating an administrator. I would have used an indefinite block for this ''vandalism only account'', rather than one month, because ''harassment & impersonation'' is a special [[w:Aggravation (law)|aggravating circumstance]] that merits swift and final expulsion. Regarding self-identified children generally, it would be appropriate to remove any personally identifying information. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:00, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} Thanks Ningauble, I have changed the block to indefinite. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 10:42, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

== Contributions 99.90.197.87 ==

*{{checkuser|99.90.197.87}}

I could be mistaken, but I don't see the anom user 99.90.197.87 making any constructive edits. Edits like today [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Olympic_Games&diff=prev&oldid=1579997], [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Apartheid&oldid=1579998] could be deleted as test-edits, but this anom user is going on for quite some time, making similar edits. Should there be some more structural action here? [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 09:13, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
: I have sent the user a warning. As Runningonbrains remarked in the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&page=User%3A99.90.197.87 Wikipedia block log,] whether this is a [[w:WP:TROLL|WP:TROLL]] or a [[w:WP:COMPETENCE|WP:COMPETENCE]] problem, either way it's disruptive. I would not hesitate to block if the behavior continues. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:59, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

==Chip Berlet Quotes Page==
Over four years ago I complained that the page about me is primarily composed of negative critical material and very unbalanced. It was originally set up as part of a series of political attacks on me and my work that spread across several Wikimedia projects and discussions. I am not allowed to edit my own page, and no one has stepped forward to remedy the problem. All of the quotes About me contain nasty personal attacks. Most of the cites and links are to more nasty personal attacks. All I am asking is that someone here in this discussion forum take on the responsibility for fixing what is clearly a biased page. --[[User:Cberlet|Cberlet]] ([[User talk:Cberlet|talk]]) 02:38, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
: Relevant discussion: [[Wikiquote:Village pump archive 21#Using Wikiquote for a vendetta]]. While we cannot delete quotes ''just because'' they contain harsh criticisms, it is indeed desirable that our articles be balanced. To this end, I have just added three (more positive) quotes to the article, including two written by yourself. See [https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Chip_Berlet&diff=1584600&oldid=1545263]. Regards, [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 09:24, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

== About the quotes of Kedar Joshi ==

Kedar Joshi is not a notable person. User [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/User_talk:RogDel RogDel] seems Kedar Joshi himself or other but he is constantly adding material to wikiquote. I request action about his behavior of this. [[User:Kedaaar Jo Sheee|Kedaaar Jo Sheee]] ([[User talk:Kedaaar Jo Sheee|talk]]) 18:14, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
:The discussion concerning Kedar Joshi's notability (or lack thereof) is still ongoing (at [[Wikiquote:Village_pump#Kedar Joshi quote farming]]), as already explained elsewhere, so, needless to say, [[User:RogDel|RogDel]]'s "behavior" was perfectly fine and legitimate. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:50, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
:: I note that this editor seems to have very strong feelings about Kedar Joshi; I have just reverted a page blank he/she made on [http://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=Kedar_Joshi&diff=prev&oldid=2535437 Wikibooks].--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 19:54, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
::: I note that user "Kedaaar Jo Sheee" has posted duplicate copies of this missive on multiple project and discussion pages, in a manner that might be considered disruptive. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 23:20, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

== Request for closure ==

* [[Wikiquote:Village pump#Kedar Joshi quote farming]]
* [[Wikiquote:Deletion review#Kedar Joshi]]
These two discussions have had ample time and participation to reach consensus, if any. I would be grateful if someone a little less heavily involved than myself would assess the results and close them. Thanks. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:10, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
: A month has passed with no further comments on these discussions.... ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 21:53, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
:: {{done}} Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 03:49, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
::: 1. If [[User:RogDel/Quotes added to WQ|these quotes]] can be included (and I see no reason why they should not be included), I see no reason why quotes by Kedar Joshi should be excluded. 2. ''“Among more experienced editors, the vast majority support removal” – [[User:BD2412|BD2412]]''
::::Since WQ is not a democracy, this seems to be an invalid argument for removal. There does not seem to have been any stronger argument countering all the [[User:RogDel/Notability as a source of quotes|simple and logical arguments]] I have made in support of inclusion of such quotations. ~ [[User:RogDel|RogDel]] ([[User talk:RogDel|talk]]) 10:50, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
::RogDel, with all due respect, I seriously doubt that we should create such explicit regulations about such exceptional situations. As to Kedar Joshi, after years of discussion we should draw a line, and not keep bringing it up. As to the regulation even for me it is confusion, trying to make a difference between quotability and notability, let alone outsiders. There are so much ins and out about, and regularly there seem to be a good understanding. Don't try to make regulations for those handful of cases we don't all agree on. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:35, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
::: <edit conflict> Regarding RogDel's first point, [[w:WP:OTHERSTUFF|other stuff]] is not always good precedent, particularly when the addition of that stuff gives the appearance of [[w:WP:POINT|making a point]] about a minority view from these discussions. Now that these discussions have been closed, there may be further action to deal with this stuff that was added while the discussions were ongoing. Regarding the second point, discussions are assessed based on a variety of factors, including (besides the votes) policies, practices, precedents, arguments, & etc. As expressly indicated in the closing remarks, from which you selectively quote, anonymous single-purpose accounts that are not cognizant of or do not address those factors have little or no weight in assessing the arguments. Regarding the essay linked above, it directly contradicts the established guideline at [[Wikiquote:Quotability]], which makes it relatively unpersuasive as an argument in these cases. If you think the guideline is wrong then it might be better to propose changing it rather than try an end-run around it. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 12:42, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
* RogDel, I think maybe only one or two people have read your (rather long and repetitive) essay. Perhaps, for their benefit, one could condense it into one sentence: "If a quote is cited in a 'highly reliable' secondary source (even if just once) then it is notable enough to be on Wikiquote." Would you accept that as a fair summary? ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 13:16, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

== new pattern-vandal ==

A new pattern-vandal has been vandalizing the [[Jimbo Wales]] page and user pages. The latest account activity has been as {{User|Technoquatic Quoticals}}, and this account and other associated accounts seem appropriate for blockage as clearly vandal accounts. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 22:22, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
: He keeps making new accounts to vandalize the same pages. {{User|Froonkfurterich‎}} seems to be his latest incarnation. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 09:16, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
::I put a short-term block on this user, but if current behavior continues, I'm sure a long-term one will be necessary. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 11:29, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
:::See also [[w:WP:Sockpuppet_investigations/Technoquat/Archive]] [[User:Vanischenu|Vanischenu]] ([[User talk:Vanischenu|talk]]) 23:17, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

== Feuding between DanielTom and Cirt ==

Per the discussion ongoing at [[User talk:UDScott#Query for help]] (and on my talk page), I am setting forth the following interaction ban in response to the incessant and disruptive feuding, baiting, and forum shopping between DanielTom and Cirt.

DanielTom could properly be blocked for incivility at this point (he has said as much). If DanielTom attempts to bait or otherwise interact with Cirt, talks to him, talks about him, or reverts or otherwise contests any of his actions, I will block DanielTom for a minimum of thirty days.

If Cirt attempts to interact with DanielTom, talks to him, talks about him, or reverts or otherwise contests any of his actions, I will move to desysop Cirt on this project. Reacting to baiting is not the trait of an administrator.

To the extent that either Cirt or DanielTom thinks the other is making improper edits or otherwise misbehaving, do nothing about and say nothing about it. The other administrators on this project are observant, and we will see and will handle any violations of policy.

I hope that my fellow administrators agree with my determination with respect to this matter. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 01:27, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

----

;Reply by Cirt to BD2412
:''Originally posted on another page: [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:UDScott&diff=1594538&oldid=1594501 diff].''

This is my reply to [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AUDScott&diff=1594501&oldid=1594445 comment by BD2412].

'''Comment:''' @{{user|BD2412}}, understood. I will take your advice to heart. I will do my best to not react to the baiting. I will do my best to only engage in a polite and constructive manner from here on out. I am sorry for troubling you with this. I will do my best to rise above this matter. Thank you for your advice and your input. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 02:44, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

;Statement by Ningauble about the ban
I endorse the interaction ban imposed by BD2412. The misconduct of both parties has been extensive and disruptive. Note that the ban as stated is indefinite in duration. I would not want to entertain an application to lift an indefinite ban in less than six months or a year.
 Regarding stipulated consequences for violating the ban by DanielTom:  I approve of handling this in a progressive manner, as has been done, rather than imposing a 30 day block on the first infraction. I think any further infractions should be met with ''steep'' progression.
 Regarding stipulated consequences for violating the ban by Cirt:  This is not really an administrative sanction. A [[WQ:VOC|vote of confidence]] may be called any time that three users concur. Administrative sanctions may still be imposed for misconduct even if it is not stipulated in this ban. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:15, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

=== Cirt has ''already'' breached the interaction ban ===

BD2412 made the terms of the interaction ban clear:
:[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=1594507&oldid=1591220 ''If Cirt attempts to interact with DanielTom, talks to him, talks about him, or reverts or otherwise contests any of his actions, I will move to desysop Cirt on this project.'']
Yet, Cirt has already completely disrespected the interaction ban: ''just one hour later'', he decided to come to my talk page, uninvited, and posted [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DanielTom&curid=139176&diff=1594537&oldid=1594424 this baiting comment].
I am tempted to reply to his baiting comment, <s>but I won't</s>, as I don't think I would particularly enjoy being unable to edit WQ for 30 days. However, after Cirt's ''direct'' breach of the interaction ban cited above, I would like to see BD keeping his word and actually "[moving] to desysop Cirt on this project". ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 08:52, 26 June 2013 (UTC) last edit: 19:07, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
: Firstly, I have blocked you for 24 hours to be sure that you understand that I am serious about this interaction ban. As I said above, if either of you thinks the other is making improper edits or otherwise misbehaving, do nothing about and say nothing about it. That includes accusing one another of violations of this interaction ban. Please do not imagine for a moment that other administrators on this site are unaware of any action that either of you is taking.
: Secondly, I hope that you agree that fair warning of a penalty to be imposed is necessary before imposition of that penalty. I saw the post Cirt made on your talk page last night, shortly after I set forth this interaction ban. Based on Cirt's edits, there is no reason to believe that he was aware of this interaction ban at the time that he made the talk page post of which you complain. You, on the other hand, were clearly aware of it before you posted this complaint.
: In case I need to make this any clearer, both of you are to carry on as if the other does not exist.
: Finally, I hope that the community approves of my determination with respect to this problem, but if any uninvolved administrator feels that I have overstepped the bounds of my authority in my actions with respect to this matter, please feel free to unblock DanielTom. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 12:05, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
::I, for one, fully endorse both the ban and your action here. Thanks. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 19:11, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
::@BD2412: thanks for blocking me, I appreciate it. Alas, I have a hard time learning from punitive blocks, so I shall make another comment here, and be blocked for it again. I must point out that your contrived naïveté ("there is no reason to believe that [Cirt] was aware of this interaction ban at the time that he made the talk page post of which you complain") is quite breathtaking. Cirt edited several different pages after you set forth this interaction ban, including yours, UDSCott's, and Ningauble's talk pages (not just mine), so he must have seen the Recent Changes page, or at least his Watchlist. To say that he somehow missed the section you had opened an hour earlier in the Administrator's Noticeboard, with his name in it, is simply absurd. In any case, as you can see, I have mentioned Cirt in this very comment, so you should block me once again, this time for "at least 30 days." Won't that be fun for you? I ''will'' miss editing articles, but I understand that I need to be blocked, as I pose such a great danger to Wikiquote. Knock yourself out. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 12:47, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
::: Since you have now specifically requested to be blocked for 30 days, I will accommodate your request. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 12:56, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
:::: I suppose if I asked you to [insert any fantasy] me, you would also "accommodate" my request? I did not request to be blocked. Sorry that you don't understand irony. (It's not a new concept, it's been around for at least a couple of years now.) In any case, you decided to abuse your tools and block me for 30 days, as a '''smokescreen''', so that you wouldn't have to properly reply to the clarification/explanation in my comment, above, but even a child can see through that. (Nice try, though.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:17, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

=== Request for reconsideration ===
DanielTom has sent me an email stating that he has learned his lesson, and will abide by the interaction ban, and therefore seeks reconsideration of the period of the block. He seems to have gotten the message, and I am inclined to unblock, if there is general support from my fellow administrators for so doing. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 02:50, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
: I have no objection.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 11:34, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:If we can have another productive editor ''and'' not have anymore back-and-forth between them, I'd say that's the best possible scenario. Thumbs up. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 14:15, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:No objections from me, assuming the dispute is not continued. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 15:22, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
::Thanks, the three of you. And thanks to Ningauble and BD as well, even though I ''am'' disappointed by their recent actions. (Anyway, time to move on.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:35, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
: Although I received a snarky email when I extended the scope of the block,[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DanielTom&diff=1595942] I do not object to giving the benefit of the doubt if others are persuaded that he is now earnest about reform. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:41, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
::: My email to you was not "snarky", and as no person reading this here has access to it, other than the two of us, it is very ungentlemanly of you to say it was. However, I should say, the message ''you'' left at my talk page after revoking my talk page access for 30 days ''was'' "snarky", as I've just briefly explained there. Finally, I cannot believe that it was in Wikiquote's best interest to have me blocked an unable to edit articles (but, then again, maybe that's me being too egocentric.) Sincerely, [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:30, 10 July 2013 (UTC) P.S. Ningauble, if you think you can revoke my talk page access ''for 30 days'' and then not hear any criticism from me, think again. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:39, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:: As the community is in agreement, the block of [[User:DanielTom]] is lifted. The interaction ban remains is place indefinitely. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 17:02, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:DanielTom had (before asking to be unblocked) sent both BD and Ningauble more than a couple emails with diffs and links to articles that could have been easily fixed in less than 10 seconds, but he was simply ignored. Given this, I (speaking in the first person now) did request to be unblocked early so that I could edit said articles again myself [as well as others, and I quote from the email: ''I just want to go back to edit[ing] articles. (Plans include adding a few quotes to the [[Bertrand Russell]] article, [[Virgil]], and then fixing the [[Death Note]] page as promised [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Death_Note&diff=1566835&oldid=1566828])'']. I should say that the original block itself was ridiculous (in my opinion, at any rate; admittedly, it is always amusing for me to be treated like a vandal — though, oddly enough, even deliberate vandals, whose only contributions have been wrecking articles, are usually only blocked for 2 days, while I found myself blocked for 30 days, but I digress), and as I had already been blocked for about two weeks, that was indeed long enough time for me to admit "lesson learnt" [where the lesson is: 1) some people apparently do not ''really'' care about article quality, and 2) punitive blocks are considered acceptable here]). I will indeed "abide by the interaction ban" from now on. Time to focus on articles again. Thanks guys for getting me unblocked, and see you 'round. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 17:41, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:: The original block was for 24 hours, this was your ''second'' block. Persistent disruption is indeed treated differently than drive-by vandalism, and blocking to "deter the continuation of present, disruptive behavior" is [[w:WP:BLOCK#PREVENTATIVE|preventative, not punitive]]. I do recognize the distinction may not be easy to appreciate when one is on the receiving end of it, but it really is not the same thing. Regarding article fixes not done: you would not believe the length of my list of things needing to be fixed. One of the coping mechanisms I employ for problems arising faster than I can address them is to [[Procrastination|defer action]] when it appears that someone else will probably handle it. Still, the list grows daily, even without distractions like this, and the priorities I choose are mostly inexplicable even to myself. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 20:53, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
::: Maybe someday someone will explain to me ''exactly'' how blocking me for 30 days for [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=1595314&oldid=1594947 this edit] was "preventive", and not punitive. Anyway, I agree with you, this really is a "distraction", and a waste of time.~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 21:21, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

== Block request for SantiagoG ==

Hi there,

{{user|SantiagoG}} is a spambot using a non-sul account, so unfortunately it can't be locked. Please consider blocking it instead. :)

Thanks, [[User:Mathonius|Mathonius]] ([[User talk:Mathonius|talk]]) 04:43, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} Spam bots like this are pretty routine, you can usually just tag the userpage and they get deleted and blocked pretty quickly. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 06:39, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
:: Alas, this particular pattern of userpage spam has become ''very'' routine lately. They will eventually realize they are wasting their time, but it can take a while because they are remarkably stupid. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:02, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
:::Back when I still had the CheckUser bit, I'd run the occasional check to see if I could catch a bunch of accounts at one time, but alas, there was never any connection between them. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 05:15, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
::::Let us just nominate and choose a second CheckUser here, and then you get your bit backs. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 18:20, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
::::: Here, here! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 03:54, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::BD2412, if you are interested you got my vote. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 10:08, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::: I appreciate the support, but since my last bid for CU status I have come around to the view that it is probably better for the project for power to be diffused rather than concentrated. As I am already a 'crat, I would feel uncomfortable also serving as a CU at this point. However, I do think we need more CUs. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 00:44, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
::::Ningauble, in the light the diffusion of power, would you be interested in the CheckUser bit? If so you got my vote. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:45, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
::::: For my own peace of mind, I prefer not to delve into the activities of bad actors more deeply than I already do with my administrative work. I don't want to be involved in researching personally identifying information about them. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:40, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::: I'd say the chances of us having a new CheckUser on Wikiquote are about 0%. Where would the candidates get the (minimum) 25 supporting votes to be "promoted", when we don't even have 10 active contributors on this wiki? ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 14:54, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::: Not necessarily. You would be surprised by who shows up for CU elections. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:13, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::: No Wikiquote CheckUser has ever been ''legitimately'' elected here, as anyone looking at the archives can now confirm. It's not just that people with almost no local contributions show up; we've also had more than one sockpuppet voting in such elections. (And, no, I wouldn't be surprised because I've seen them.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 15:34, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::::: Well, [[m:Wikimedia Forum/On disbanding Wikiquote|it has been argued]] that sock voting makes the ''entire project'' illegitimate, but I don't think we need to go there. I am satisfied by the level of participation in past CU elections that the outcomes were not influenced by the quantity of puppet votes. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:30, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::: (Where? The discussion you linked only refers to possible copyright infringements, not to "sock voting".) The outcomes were certainly influenced by puppet votes (who helped the support votes reach the minimum of 25). While I too am "satisfied", I still feel that the current minimum (a relic blindly and rigidly imposed by meta policy) is too high, and unrealistic, for Wikiquote. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 16:58, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::No legitimate CheckUser election? [[Wikiquote:Requests for checkuser/EVula|O rly]]? [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 17:33, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::Yep. Some users there had (and still do) literally ''zero'' edits on Wikiquote, other than showing up at your election to vote support (namely, and strikingly, [[Special:Contributions/Nifky%3F|User:Nifky?]], [[Special:Contributions/Razorflame|User:Razorflame]], and [[Special:Contributions/Jake Wartenberg|User:Jake Wartenberg]]). (Incidentally, there were also other users, namely [[Special:Contributions/Juliancolton|User:Juliancolton]] and [[Special:Contributions/Counterpower|User:Counterpower]], who also had zero or just a couple of edits to articles before voting there.) None of that was your fault; nay, it was pretty much ''a must'', given that we simply don't have, ''and never had'', 25 active contributors on Wikiquote. (See the larger picture?) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:03, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::: We have more active contributors (usually defined as at least 5 article edits per month) than that. See [http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikiquote/EN/TablesWikipediaEN.htm#editor_activity_levels editor activity levels] at Wikistats. Getting them to participate in community affairs is another matter. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:27, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::: @DanielTom: (Within that lengthy discussion there were strong words alleging incompetent governance in dealing with the Poetlister socks, claiming that was sufficient grounds to disband the project.) The elections were typically called as soon as they reach 25, and results would not likely have been different had they run a little longer. This is really moot unless you want to challenge [http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests/Permissions&diff=5458382 EVula's standing] for reinstatement in the event a second CU is elected. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:43, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::: No, I don't want to challenge EVula's standing. (We need more CUs, not less. But, ain't gonna happen.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:08, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::@Ningauble, thanks. Still that particular pattern of userpage spam also worries me, and I think we should search for more structural solutions. Getting the CheckUser bit back, and (let EVula) keep running occasional checks, seems the least we could/should do. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 14:56, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::: The global Stewards are well aware of this pattern, which occurs across all wikis. Unfortunately, the IP addresses used by these spambots are highly variable by design, so blocking them, even ranges of them, is ineffective. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:10, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::Yeah, any time that I would run a check on the spam IPs, I'd get nothing. It's really annoying. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 15:41, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::: Someone might investigate whether Wikipedia has developed an Abuse filter for this pattern. However, the text changes so much that keeping up with the filter might be a game of [[w:Whac-A-Mole|Whac-A-Mole]]. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 12:56, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

== Edit filter maybe ==

I don't hang out at Wikiquote, so I'm not sure how much of a problem this is. But I just ran across [//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=ANTman&oldid=1600515 an edit] that may have been able to be stopped by an [[Special:AbuseFilter|edit filter]] similar to [[w:en:Special:AbuseFilter/135]]. Perhaps somebody could copy that filter over to here. [[Special:Contributions/64.40.54.47|64.40.54.47]] 04:13, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

== Talk page spam ==

Yesterday and today I noticed a (for me) new type of spam on the talk page: an unrelated text (size about 4k) from a rotating ip address (see for example [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Great_Mouse_Detective&diff=prev&oldid=1606173 here]). Now I noticed that 7 of 9 originated ip addresses originated from one ownerid in Venezuela. If this continues, can we than block his range of IP addresses all at once? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 10:21, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
: Thus far I count 25 IP addresses used by this spambot, ranging from 60.24.11.41 to 221.10.40.232. This is too wide a range to block without blacking out entire continents. If the problem persists then someone could try using the [[Special:AbuseFilter|Abuse filter]] to mitigate it. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 12:41, 24 July 2013 (UTC)–Updated 13:43, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

== Unblock request [[User:Diogotome]] ==

::''The following unblock request is copy/paste here (partly trimmed) from [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ABD2412&diff=1609829&oldid=1608714 here] by [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 09:16, 7 August 2013 (UTC)''
*{{checkuser|Diogotome}}
As you know, my brother was blocked some time ago in many wikis where he has zero edits... He was recently unblocked at Commons, where admin asked him to write on his user page that he is my brother. (He did so [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Diogotome]...) He was also unblocked at Wikisource [http://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3ADiogotome] on the grounds that he had no edits there. (He also has no edits here.)
:Other than the strong evidence presented by email that he is my brother (including citizen card, ID), there are other things which you included can check. 1) he created his account in 2009 (I myself didn't even know about accounts till late 2012); 2) the email with which he registered his account is diofact@hotmail.com (confirm that); 3) he still uses that email, even on his Facebook account, where you can find him (Diogo Tomé). I think it is obvious that the account is his.
Also worth noting, he, just like me, registered with his real name, which is not what socks do (...). Although I know he doesn't want to edit Wikiquote, I still don't think he should be blocked here on sock grounds.
... ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 21:47, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
:: I have lifted the block. It is my understanding that [[User:Diogotome]] has no interest in editing here. I am sure you are aware that it would raise some eyebrows (on all of the above mentioned projects) if this editor suddenly began making edits that seemed as if they are made as a proxy for you, so please take care. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 12:20, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:::Thanks (your understanding is correct). ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 12:42, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:: I don't have any problem with this unblocking, but I would like to rectify some incorrect assumptions. (1) The email with which he registered his account cannot be confirmed by any technical means available to administrators here. It is confidential information that only the account holder is at liberty to disclose. (2) Registering with a real name most definitely ''is'' something that socks do. Some of the most notorious abusers are known to impersonate real people. Finally, BD's eyebrow raising admonition cuts both ways: both accounts should avoid involvement in each other's affairs. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:39, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:::"The email with which he registered his account cannot be confirmed by any technical means available to administrators here." Where can it be confirmed? ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 17:44, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:::: I assume that it could be extracted by a developer. However, it is easy enough to change the e-mail associated with an account; we have no way of knowing whether it is the original address.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 18:06, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
::::: "It is confidential information that only the account holder is at liberty to disclose." The [[foundation:Privacy policy|Privacy policy]] identifies one way he can confirm the email address currently linked to his account (using "email this user"), and indicates conditions under which the Foundation would disclose it without his consent (e.g. subpoena). ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:09, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::: I suppose even the original email ("e-mail address confirmation") could be changed if forwarded. As to the real names question, of course socks use real names, but not ''their'' real names (any name you can choose is someone else's real name). My point is that no sock has its name so close to the sockmaster's (in this case, Diogo being a Portuguese name, and our family names being the same). Maybe if I get blocked indefinitely on Wikiquote, and unable to edit, my brother may come along to return my favor here, and ask that I be unblocked, although that is exceedingly unlikely (not the block part, but the returning of the favor part from him). ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:25, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

== Semi-protection request for Mean Girls ==

Could an administrator semi-protect [[Mean Girls]]? Too much IP vandalism going on as of lately (especially {{User|65.175.216.98}}). Thanks in advance. [[User:SnapSnap|SnapSnap]] ([[User talk:SnapSnap|talk]]) 18:26, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} - but I also trimmed this very bloated page first. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 19:02, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

== QOTD for 10 & 12 August 2013 ==

The QOTD layout at [[Wikiquote talk:Quote of the day/August 10, 2013]] will have to be placed into [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/August 10, 2013]] by an admin. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 21:36, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 23:16, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

I am once again a bit late with a selection and the QOTD layout at [[Wikiquote talk:Quote of the day/August 12, 2013]] will have to be placed into [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/August 12, 2013]] by an admin. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 14:53, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 15:04, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

== [[Talk: Main Page]] ==
Can someone semi-protect this again? It's getting vandalized a lot. [[User:King jakob c 2|'''Kjc2''']] [[User talk:King jakob c 2|jabber]] 15:47, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
: I am reluctant to protect the talk page or our main public-facing portal, where newcomers and visitors should be welcome to make pertinent inquiries and comments, unless the situation becomes unmanageable. I think the current frequency of unconstructive edits on this widely watched page is being handled well enough by folks who notice and revert in a fairly timely manner. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:07, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
::It seems in the past year only one comment was made by an anom visitors, while the page is vandalized 50+ times. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:36, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
::: You are not counting registered accounts without enough local edits to be autoconfirmed, but it is true that unconstructive edits significantly outnumber constructive ones. I just don't think a handful of reverts per month is too great a price to pay for keeping the front door open. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:22, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

== Blocking question ==

Just wanted to gauge the opinions of the admins: I noticed that {{user|Mdd}} recently blocked a user indefinitely for a single instance of what I would characterize as moderate and fairly harmless spamming (linking to a site for their poetry on their user page). If it were me, I would have likely let them off with a <nowiki>{{spam}}</nowiki> warning - which is what I did earlier in the day for someone who posted a link to their blog on their user page. I'm not saying my inclination is correct or that {{user|Mdd}} is wrong, but in the spirit of consistency, what is the feeling out there? I'm just curious. Thanks. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 18:35, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
:Assuming you're talking about {{User|MelissaHg}}, I'd say it was a reasonable assumption; the page itself matches the same pattern for all the spam that we've been getting for months (right down to the double tags before the link). Plus, I'm not sure why someone from Switzerland would have a Spanish poetry site... [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 18:55, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

::In the past 4 months I have blocked about 200 new users, which where I presume all made by spam bots. The links which are presented by those spam bots differ greatly from hardporn to... indeed poetry. Does UDScott suggest, that we make go make a difference in what type of site the spambot is referring to? If indeed there are just spam-bots, it seems to me adding warnings on the talk page is a waist of time. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 19:08, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
:::In the end, I'm not really asking whether or not a block was warranted (in most cases I agree it is) - I'm just asking if it is the first step in all cases. I just want to be consistent in our treatment of spam. If it is the case that we automatically block anyone who posts spam, fine - but our [[Wikiquote:Blocking policy|blocking policy]] does not reflect this and should be updated. The only current mention of spam is that if a block is given for spamming, it should not be less than a month. And if we are going this way, then what is the purpose of the two spam warnings we have? Again, I'm not trying to criticize what anyone else has done - I'm just asking the question on how we would like to generally treat these circumstances. Thanks. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 19:12, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
::::I'd say that we need to update our blocking policy, then. I don't think warning spam accounts will do anything; it's just drive-by vandalism, but if we just delete the spam and leave the account, there's a much better chance that they'll swing right back around and spam again, increasing the amount of administrative work (not by a substantial margin, of course; but it ''is'' one more time that we have to delete their spam). [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 19:21, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
::::: Before we became inundated, as Mdd notes, with a consistent pattern userpage spam, I routinely responded as UDScott describes. Since then I have been blocking them on sight, when they appear to be using the same pattern, without investigating whether the link itself is commercial or otherwise execrable. I would not be quite so hasty with things that do not appear to match the pattern. I do not regard this as drive-by spamming: the consistency of the pattern leads me to believe we are dealing with an SEO spammer who is hired by people who want to promote their web pages. If the nature of the linked content makes no difference to the spammer, I am not sure it should make any difference to us. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 19:39, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
::::@UDScott: our regular visitors, the spambots, follow an easily-distinguishable pattern, and I think those can just be blocked with no prior warning (they aren't here to contribute to articles anyway). But when it comes to ''human'' editors who, say, post unwarranted links in "External links" article sections, then the <nowiki>{{spam}}</nowiki> templates can and should be used, as they offer useful information to the user, and serve as warnings. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:47, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::OK, understood - this pretty much matches to my understanding. I guess it's my fault that I've been spending more time on other parts of the project and I don't know that I would automatically recognize someone as a spambot, which spawned my question (I fight them when I see them, but I usually see more traditional vandals than spammers in my time here). Thanks all. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 15:58, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::: In recent months this pattern of spam has been a large proportion, even a majority, of newly created user pages. Therefore, I have been screening [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ANewPages&namespace=2 all new user pages] daily. Since becoming an administrator, Mdd has been catching most of them while my time zone is sleeping. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:29, 15 August 2013 (UTC)/16:47, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::: Question: if a spambot starts posting here, and we block them for just a month, do we have any reason to think that they will start spamming again once the month is up? I honestly don't know. It seems to me that spambots, once blocked for any reasonable length of time, just go away forever even if the block expires. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 20:48, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::::: Yes, the spambot will be back after a month. He has ''already'' been using the same pattern for several months running. This might quite possibly be the ''same'' SEO spammer that started [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive/019#Checkuser_request:_serial_one-shot_spam_accounts two years ago,] though the pattern now uses less verbose boilerplate. Prior to that time userpage spamming was rare and was not systematic; but since then we have only infrequently been without extended campaigns of systematic userpage spam. The named throwaway accounts are seldom re-used, except in an immediate timeframe. The reason I block them is not to prevent re-using the names, but to autoblock the underlying IPs. This does not stop him, but it is my impression that blocking enough of them slows him down a bit, at least until he gets a fresh set of addresses to exploit. Perhaps resistance is futile. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 19:37, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::: Can we file a complaint with his ISP? [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 19:59, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::Back when I had my CU flag, I would run a check on the occasional userpage vandal like these, but I could never find a pattern between them. I'm not sure that there would be a single IP to file a complaint with. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 21:14, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::There should be a way of adding "<nowiki> </nowiki>" to the [[Special:AbuseFilter|abuse filter]], at least as a test (maybe just on user pages). ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 01:09, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::: Hmmm. I use that syntax sometimes, and in drafts in userspace too. Some kind of alert would be nice, though. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 02:04, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
{{Outdent}} Is it technically possible to make the creation of an external link subject to a captcha for new users and only new users? (I think it would be too irksome to have it for everyone.) That would solve the problem.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 07:14, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
: I don't see why it ''wouldn't'' be possible, since Wikipedia is able to prevent new users from creating articles at all. This is an excellent suggestion. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 12:36, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
:: Good idea, but it would appear that the spammer(s) already passed the captchas required to create these throwaway accounts in the first place. Doubling the labor cost by adding a captcha when editing may not be much of a deterrent. If we want to pursue this, it would involve tweaking [[mediawikiwiki:Extension:ConfirmEdit#Configuration|configuration settings]] for the ConfirmEdit extension. I do not know where to view the current settings (or whether I am allowed to). ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:22, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
::: Can we just bar new accounts from adding external links, period? No external links until you've made x number of regular edits over y number of days? [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 18:33, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
:::: This would be a very significant new policy but, yes, we can. It could be enforced by the Abuse Filter if there is no more direct method. (We would need assistance from Wikipedia's filter experts to implement something that does not give false-positives when editing a page that already contains external links.) Note that this would impact many long-term IP editors who choose not to register an account (most of whom probably do not monitor discussion pages where policy consensus is formulated). Although I favor the proposition that ''everyone'' should be required to register before posting, I must note that it is a minority view opposed even by Jimbo, with whom I agree about some other things. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:42, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
::::: BD didn't say anything about barring ''IPs'' from adding external links. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:20, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::: I believe IPs must already pass a Captcha to add any external link. Is that not correct? [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 13:35, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::: @BD: Yes, captcha is required to post an external link when one is not logged in. @Daniel: Unregistered falls below newly registered in the hierarchy of user status. The implementation for what BD describes above would be to require at least "autoconfirmed" status to post an external link. There is no precedent for granting IPs more permissions than registered accounts: doing so would create a logical snarl and would be a disincentive to registration. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:03, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::Ningauble, referring to BD's proposal, you write: "this would impact many long-term IP editors". But it wouldn't. BD suggested "No external links ''until you've made x number of regular edits over y number of days''", so clearly "long-term IP editors" would be exempt from such a limitation. You speak as if you would want to bar IPs from adding external links ''altogether'', but that seems idiotic to me, especially since they already have to pass a captcha to post them. (Well, I see you don't want IPs editing ''at all'', but yeah, that ''is'' an extreme position...) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 15:40, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::: Four points in reply to Daniel:
:::::::::# BD did not ''propose'', he enquired whether it is possible. I replied that it is, and noted that it would need a major policy discussion.
:::::::::# I did not speak for or against allowing IPs to post links. I noted that this group would be impacted, and followed up in a subsequent post explaining why they would be impacted. My remark about whether this group should be posting at all was intended purely as a disclosure.
:::::::::# Note that our long term IP editors frequently have their IPA changed by their ISP, and the same IPA may be allocated to multiple users. There is no such thing as an "IP account": an unregistered user has no account and earns no confirmation status.
:::::::::# If you think I am an idiot, you would be well advised to keep that opinion to yourself and focus instead on the issues under discussion.
::::::::: I begin to wonder whether I am wasting my time in replying to you at all. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:19, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::: I was focusing on the issue. I said "bar[ring] IPs from adding external links ''altogether'' [...] seems idiotic to me, especially since they already have to pass a captcha to post them." I didn't say I think you are an idiot, though I am sorry if the word "idiotic" offended you somehow. (For what it's worth, I think you are smart, and I do admire your ability to take things out of context.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 16:54, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::: There is little ambiguity in ascribing a desire to someone and declaring it to be idiotic. Who else might you have meant by "you" in that sentence? There is no call for insinuating that I dissemble by misrepresenting context. If you wish to accuse me of dishonesty then you may call for a vote of confidence, otherwise your insults are not welcome. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 22:52, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::::: To be clear, in "but ''that'' seems idiotic to me", the "''that''" refers to "bar[ring] IPs from adding external links ''altogether''", not to your desires. I'm not going to change the offending word now that you've made such a big fuss about it. I also have no intention of calling for a "vote of confidence" just because you happen to believe in idiotic things. (Hell, I believe in idiotic things too.) Maybe it does seem to me idiotic to want to prevent IPs from editing. So what? Feel free to block me for "incivility", if you're so overly-sensitive. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 23:33, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::: In order to avoid any misunderstanding that might arise from how my remarks have been characterized above, let me make one thing clear: I have not advocated barring IP editors from posting external links. I brought it up because, recognizing the consensus for allowing unregistered editing, I believe it would be an ''adverse'' consequence. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 00:44, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::: I am not uncomfortable with temporarily placing newly registered editors in a worse position than IP editors with respect to external links, if our persistent spam problems are coming from newly registered editors. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 17:55, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
You get spam from IPs too; I just removed some on [[Talk:Main Page]].--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 03:55, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

== Nietzkov: nuisance or hoax? ==

Can anyone verify citations added by {{user|200.121.207.40}}? Googling the name "Nietzkov" appearing in quotes this user (and others[https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?search=Nietzkov]) has been adding, I find a pattern that smells like promotion of a nobody. Are celebrities really talking about him as claimed, or are we being hoaxed? ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:53, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
: As far as I can see, all these quotes are either unsourced or sourced to non-existent Youtube videos, so they can be removed as unsourced. They all look pretty fishy to me, anyway.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 03:43, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
:: Thanks for checking the YooToob links (it is impractical with my limited bandwidth). Since this much is demonstrably bogus, I will go ahead and revert it all. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:15, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

== User 98.15.141.31 ==

I have deleted a number of bogus titles created by {{IPvandal|98.15.141.31}}. The user's few remaining contributions correspond to genuine titles, but I do not know whether the contributed content is bogus. Can anyone check the accuracy of the remaining contributions? If they are not affirmatively verified then I am inclined to presumptively revert/delete them due to their vandalistic provenance. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:47, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
:His edit to [[Yu-Gi-Oh!]] ("Say hello to the unstoppable family of monsters; The five Kuriboh brothers!") sounds plausible, though I couldn't confirm it. The dialogue in [[Disney's The Kid]] is accurate, but the one in [[Radio Flyer (film)]] seems bogus. (I'd ask him about this last one.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 17:17, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
::FYI, the ''[[Radio Flyer (film)]]'' dialogue was pretty close to correct (I've since fixed the page). ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 18:09, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

== Template:Otherwiki ==

Just wondering if someone could edit [[Template:Otherwiki]] and change Wikivoyage-logo.svg to Wikivoyage-Logo-v3-icon.svg Thanks -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 12:04, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 13:12, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

==[[Talk:Main Page]] again==
Vandalism and spam there is picking up even more. Maybe now it can be semi-protected? --[[User:King jakob c 2|Jakob]] ([[User talk:King jakob c 2|Scream about]] [[Special:Contributions/King jakob c 2|the things I've broken]]) 15:02, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
:I really don't like the idea of ''that'' particular page being semi-protected, considering it's the talk page for what is effectively our homepage. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 15:21, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Wikiquote:Village pump

2013-09-08T19:51:22Z

EVula: /* Are tweets of notable person Quotes? */ a quote is a quote

Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Dragon Ball: Raging Blast 2

2013-09-05T19:16:56Z

EVula: Delete

{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Wikiquote| |{{error:not substituted|vfd-new2}}<div style="display:none;">}}
== [[:Dragon Ball: Raging Blast 2]] ==

Previously deleted because "Unmemorable quotes".[//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Dragon+Ball%3A+Raging+Blast+2] This new version is longer but not qualitatively different. — [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:24, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
*'''Vote closes''': 19:00, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

*'''Delete''' as nom. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:24, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Poor quotes.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 03:48, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', as per the wise comment above, by {{user|Abramsky}}, which is to the point and correct. Cheers, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 18:32, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
* '''Delete''', per nom - I see nothing memorable here. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 18:55, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' per nom, totally unmemorable quotes. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 19:16, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Ivan Turgenev

2013-09-04T05:31:45Z

EVula: authority control

[[File:Turgenev 1872 by Perov.jpg|thumb|Ivan Turgenev]]

'''[[w:Ivan Turgenev|Ivan Sergeyevich Turgenev]]''' (Russian: Ива́н Серге́евич Турге́нев IPA: [ɪˈvan sʲɪrˈgʲeɪvʲɪtɕ turˈgʲenʲɪf]) ([[November 9]] [O.S. [[October 28]] [[1818]] – [[September 3]] [O.S. August 22] [[1883]]) was a Russian novelist and playwright. His novel [[w:Fathers and Sons|Fathers and Sons]] is regarded as one of the major works of 19th-century fiction.

{{author-stub}}

==Sourced==
===Father and Sons (1862)===
Translated by Richard Hare. Full text [http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Fathers_And_Sons here]

* "Naturally," observed Nikolai Petrovich, "you were born here, so everything is bound to strike you with a special —""Really, Daddy, it makes absolutely no difference where a person is born.""Still —""No, it makes no difference at all."
** Ch. 3

* "What is Bazarov?" Arkady smiled. "Would you like me to tell you, uncle, what he really is?""Please do, nephew.""He is a nihilist!""What?" asked Nikolai Petrovich, while Pavel Petrovich lifted his knife in the air with a small piece of butter on the tip and remained motionless."He is a nihilist," repeated Arkady."A nihilist," said Nikolai Petrovich. "That comes from the Latin nihil, nothing, as far as I can judge; the word must mean a man who... who recognizes nothing?""Say — who respects nothing," interposed Pavel Petrovich and lowered his knife with the butter on it."Who regards everything from the critical point of view," said Arkady."Isn't that exactly the same thing?" asked Pavel Petrovich."No, it's not the same thing. A nihilist is a person who does not bow down to any authority, who does not accept any principle on faith, however much that principle may be revered.""Well, and is that good?" asked Pavel Petrovich. "That depends, uncle dear. For some it is good, for others very bad.""Indeed. Well, I see that's not in our line. We old-fashioned people think that without principles, taken as you say on faith, one can't take a step or even breathe. ''Vous avez changé tout cela''; may God grant you health and a general's rank, and we shall be content to look on and admire your... what was the name?""Nihilists," said Arkady, pronouncing very distinctly."Yes, there used to be Hegelists and now there are nihilists. We shall see how you will manage to exist in the empty airless void; and now ring, please, brother Nikolai, it's time for me to drink my cocoa."
** Ch. 5

* "For myself, I detest the fellow, and think him a charlatan. I am certain that, in spite of his frogs, he is making no real progress in physics."
** Ch. 10

* Bazarov drew himself up haughtily. "I don't adopt any one's ideas; I have my own."
** Ch. 13
===On the Eve (1860)===
Translated by Constance Garnett. Full text [http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_the_Eve here]
* 'There was a time,' Nikolai Artemyevitch resumed, 'when daughters did not allow themselves to look down on their parents—when the parental authority forced the disobedient to tremble. That time has passed, unhappily: so at least many persons imagine; but let me tell you, there are still laws which do not permit—do not permit—in fact there are still laws. I beg you to mark that: there are still laws——'
** Ch. 30

== External links ==
{{wikipedia}}
{{wikisource author}}
{{commons category}}
* [http://www.gutenberg.org/browse/authors/t#a922 Ivan Turgenev at Project Gutenberg]

{{Authority control|VIAF=41847346 |LCCN=n/79/144981 |GND=118643010}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Turgenev, Ivan}}
[[Category:Authors]]
[[Category:Russians]]
[[Category:1880s deaths]]

[[az:İvan Turgenev]]
[[bg:Иван Тургенев]]
[[bs:Ivan Sergejevič Turgenjev]]
[[cs:Ivan Sergejevič Turgeněv]]
[[de:Iwan Sergejewitsch Turgenew]]
[[es:Iván Turgueniev]]
[[hy:Իվան Տուրգենև]]
[[hr:Ivan Turgenjev]]
[[it:Ivan Sergeevič Turgenev]]
[[he:איוון טורגנייב]]
[[lt:Ivanas Turgenevas]]
[[pl:Iwan Turgieniew]]
[[pt:Ivan Turgenev]]
[[ru:Иван Сергеевич Тургенев]]
[[sk:Ivan Sergejevič Turgenev]]
[[tr:İvan Sergeyeviç Turgenyev]]
[[uk:Тургенєв Іван Сергійович]]
[[zh:屠格涅夫]]

User:EVula

2013-09-02T20:52:15Z

EVula: don't think we'll be getting local CUs back any time soon...

{{User:EVula/header}}

<div style="float: right; border: 1px solid #ccc; padding: 3px; background: #f6f6f6; margin-left: 10px;">

<div style="border: solid #BDBDAD 1px; margin: 3px 1px;">
{| cellspacing="0" style="width: 238px; background: #fff;"
| style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: #BDBDAD;" | [[Image:Wikiquote-logo.svg|30px|center|EVula's mop is named "Vera"]]
| style="font-size: 8pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em; color: black;" | This user is a '''[[Wikiquote:Administrators#Bureaucrats and stewards|bureaucrat]]''' on the [[Main Page|English Wikiquote]]. ([{{fullurl:Special:Listusers|limit=1&username=EVula}} verify] // [[:User:EVula|user]])
|}</div>

<div style="border:solid #BDBDAD 1px; margin: 3px 1px;">
{| cellspacing="0" style="width: 238px; background: #fff;"
| style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: #BDBDAD; text-align: center;" | [[Image:Commons-logo.svg|30px|EVula's mop is named "Vera"]]
| style="font-size: 8pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em; color: black;" | This user is an '''[[Commons:Commons:administrators|administrator]]''' on [[Commons:Main Page|Commons]]. ([{{fullurl:commons:Special:Listusers|limit=1&username=EVula}} verify] // [[commons:User:EVula|user]])
|}</div>

<div style="border: 1px solid #6ef7a7; margin: 3px 1px;">
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#c5fcdc;"
| style="width:45px;height:45px;background:#6ef7a7;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | '''en'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a '''[[:Category:User en-N|native]]''' speaker of '''[[:Category:User en|English]]'''.
|}
</div>
{{User Wikiquotian For|year=2006|month=03|day=06}}
</div>
Hi, I'm [[wikipedia:User:EVula|EVula]], and you're not.

==Pages I've worked on==
I've done extensive copyvio work on: (''removing'' copyvios, not adding them...)
* [[Jeff Dunham]]
* [[V for Vendetta (film)]]
* [[The Nostalgia Critic]] (went from 495k to just 74k [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=The_Nostalgia_Critic&diff=1012794&oldid=1012767])

For more items, check out [[Wikiquote:Copyright Cleanup Project#EVula]].

Other pages I've just had fun editing:
* [[Mystery Science Theater 3000]]
* [[Hot Fuzz]]
* [[Firefly (TV series)]]
* Created {{tl|quotation limit}}
* See [[:Category:1990s films]]? There were 585 articles just sitting there; I sorted them all, by hand, into their correct sub-categories (which didn't exist at the time).

Ezra Pound

2013-09-02T20:46:15Z

EVula: + Ezra Pound 2.jpg, authority control

[[File:Ezra Pound 2.jpg|thumb|right|Ezra Pound]]

'''[[w:Ezra Pound|Ezra Pound]]''' ([[October 30]], [[1885]] – [[November 1]], [[1972]]) was an American expatriate poet, musician and critic who was a major figure of the Modernist movement in early to mid-20th century poetry. He was the driving force behind several Modernist movements, notably [[w:Imagism|Imagism]] and [[w:Vorticism|Vorticism]].

==Sourced==
===Other===
* It is better to present one image in a lifetime than to produce voluminous work.
* Image…that which presents an intellectual and emotional complex in an instant of time.
** "Poetry: A Few Don'ts by an Imagist", ''[[w:Poetry (magazine)|Poetry: A Magazine of Verse]]'' (March 1913)

* One discards rhyme, not because one is incapable of rhyming neat, fleet, sweet, meet, treat, eat, feet but because there are certain emotions or energies which are nor represented by the over-familiar devices or patterns.
** "Affirmations: As for Imagism", ''[[w:The New Age|The New Age]]'', January 1915

* Poetry must be as well written as prose.
** Letter to Harriet Monroe, (January 1915)

* Hang it all, [[Robert Browning]], there can be but the one "Sordello."
** From ''Draft of XXX Cantos'' (1933), No.2

* Make it new!
** Book title (1935)

* But the one thing you shd. not do is suppose that when something is wrong with the arts, it is wrong with the arts ONLY.
** ''Guide to Kulchur'' (1938)

* "You damn sadist!" said mr. [[E. E. Cummings|cummings]], "you try to make people think."
** ''[[w:The Cantos|Cantos]]'', LXXXIX (1956)

* The temple is holy because it is not for sale.
** ''Cantos'', XCVII (1959)

=== ''ABC of Reading'' (1934) ===
* The author's conviction on this day of the New Year is that music begins to atrophy when it departs too far from the dance; that poetry begins to atrophy when it gets too far from music.
** Preface

* Literature is news that STAYS news.
** Ch. 1

* Any general statement is like a cheque drawn on a bank. Its value depends on what is there to meet it.
** p. 25

* The man of understanding can no more sit quiet and resigned while his country lets literature decay than a good doctor could sit quiet and contented while some ignorant child was infecting itself with tuberculosis under the impression that it was merely eating jam tarts.
** p. 33

* AT ABOUT THIS POINT the weak-hearted reader usually sits down in the road, removes his shoes and weeps that he 'is a bad linguist' or that he or she can't possibly learn all those languages. One has to divide the readers who want to be experts from those who do not, and divide, as it were, those who want to see the world from those who merely want to know WHAT PART OF IT THEY LIVE IN.
** p. 42

* Real education must ultimately be limited to one who INSISTS on knowing, the rest is mere sheep-herding.
** Ch. 8

=== ''Instigations of Ezra Pound'' (1967) ===
* Artists are the antennae of the race but the bullet-headed many will never learn to trust their great artists.

== Unsourced ==
* My worst mistake was the stupid suburban prejudice of anti-Semitism, all along.
** Quoted in ''Composed on the tongue'', "Encounters will Ezra Pound" by [[Allen Ginsberg]]

* Nothing written for pay is worth printing. ONLY what has been written AGAINST the market.

* The art of letters will come to an end before A.D. 2000. I shall survive as a curiosity.

* Properly, we should read for power. Man reading should be man intensely alive. The book should be a ball of light in one's hand.

* The apparitions of these faces in the crowd; Petals on a wet, black bough.

* Poets who are not interested in music are, or become, bad poets.

==External links==
{{Wikipedia}}

{{authority control|LCCN=n/78/97014|PND=118596039|SELIBR=206395|BNF=cb119204669|NLA=35430480|VIAF=24606774}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Pound, Ezra}}
[[Category:American poets]]
[[Category:Musicians]]
[[Category:Critics]]
[[Category:Americans]]
[[Category:1970s deaths]]

[[cs:Ezra Pound]]
[[de:Ezra Pound]]
[[es:Ezra Loomis Pound]]
[[it:Ezra Pound]]
[[hu:Ezra Pound]]
[[pl:Ezra Pound]]
[[pt:Ezra Pound]]
[[sk:Ezra Pound]]
[[sl:Ezra Pound]]
[[fi:Ezra Pound]]

Charlemagne

2013-08-28T15:04:20Z

EVula: authority control

'''[[w:Charlemagne|Charlemagne]]''' (January 29 [[745]] – [[January 28]], [[814]]) was [[w:List of Frankish kings|king of the Franks]] from 768, and became the first [[w:Holy Roman Empire|Holy Roman Emperor]] in 800. His conquests expanded his empire to cover much of western and central Europe, and his encouragement of learning helped to create the [[w:Carolingian Renaissance|Carolingian Renaissance]].

{{political-stub}}

== Sourced ==

* ''Quamvis enim melius sit benefacere quam nosse, prius tamen est nosse quam facere.''
** Right action is better than knowledge; but in order to do what is right, we must know what is right.
** "De Litteris Colendis", in [[w:Jean-Barthélemy Hauréau |Jean-Barthélemy Hauréau]] ''De la philosophie scolastique'' (1850) p. 10; translation from [[Thomas Huxley|T. H. Huxley]] ''Science and Education'' ([1893] 2007) p. 132

* ''O utinam haberem duodecim clericos ita doctos, omnique sapientia sic perfecte instructos, ut fuerunt Hieronimus et Augustinus.''
** If only I could have a dozen churchmen as wise and as well taught in all human knowledge as were [[Jerome]] and [[Augustine of Hippo|Augustine]]!
** [[w:Notker the Stammerer|Notker the Stammerer]] ''De Carolo Magno'', Bk. 1, sect. 9; translation from [[w:Einhard|Einhard]] and Notker the Stammerer (trans. [[w:Lewis Thorpe|Lewis Thorpe]]) ''Two Lives of Charlemagne'' (1969) p. 102.
** In conversation with his minister [[Alcuin]], who replied, "''Creator coeli et terrae similes illis plures non habuit, et tu vis habere duodecim'' (The Maker of heaven and earth Himself has very few scholars worth comparing with these men, and yet you expect to find a dozen!)".

{{Misattributed begin}}
== Misattributed ==

* Let my armies be the rocks and the trees and the birds in the sky.
** Widely credited to Charlemagne on the Web, though no source has been found earlier than the 1989 film ''[[Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade]]''. [http://www.quidplura.com/?p=29].
** Possibly derived from a quote by [[Bernard of Clairvaux]]: "Trees and stones will teach you what you cannot learn from masters."

*Make us eternal truths receive, And practice all that we believe; Give us Thyself that we may see The Father and the Son by Thee.
** Reported in Josiah Hotchkiss Gilbert, ''Dictionary of Burning Words of Brilliant Writers'' (1895), p. 320, but not found before publication in Wentworth Dillon, 4th Earl of Roscommon, ''A collection of divine hymns and poems upon several occasions'' (1719), p. 192, attributed as a translation by [[John Dryden]] of ''Veni, Creator Spiritus'', Stanza VI.
{{Misattributed end}}

== External links ==
{{wikipedia}}
* [http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/sbook1h.html#Charlemagne Primary sources on Charlemagne and his age.]

{{Authority control|VIAF=89643029|LCCN=n/79/43619}}

[[Category:Heads of state]]
[[Category:Royalty]]
[[Category:French people]]
[[Category:Germans]]
[[Category:9th century deaths]]

[[de:Karl der Große]]
[[es:Carlomagno]]
[[fr:Charlemagne]]
[[it:Carlo Magno]]

Margaret Cavendish, Duchess of Newcastle-upon-Tyne

2013-08-28T05:13:49Z

EVula: authority control

[[File:Margaret Cavendish.jpg|thumb|right]]
'''[[w:Margaret Cavendish|Margaret Cavendish, Duchess of Newcastle-upon-Tyne]]''' ([[1623]] – [[15 December]] [[1673]]) was an English aristocrat and writer, best known for the biography of her husband, published in 1667.
{{author-stub}}
== Sourced ==

* If Atomes are as small, as small can bee, They must in quantity of Matter all agree:
** ''The weight of Atomes.'', ''The Atomic Poems of Margaret (Lucas) Cavendish, Duchess of Newcastle, from her Poems, and Fancies, 1653 [a machine readable transcription]. Edited with an introduction by Leigh Tillman Partington.''[http://chaucer.library.emory.edu/cgi-bin/sgml2html/wwrp.pl?act=contents&f=%2Fdata%2Fwomen_writers%2Fdata%2Fatomic.sgm]

* The spider-men came first, and presented her Majesty with a table full of mathematical points, lines and figures of all sorts of squares, circles, triangles, and the like; which the Empress, notwithstanding that she had a very ready wit, and quick apprehension, could not understand; but the more she endeavoured to learn, the more was she confounded
** ''Description of a New World, Called The Blazing World'' (1666)

== External links ==
{{wikipedia}}
* [http://marcav.web.brockport.edu/links.html Margaret Cavendish society]
* [http://chaucer.library.emory.edu/wwrp/index.html Emory Women Writers Resource Project]
* [http://www.luminarium.org/sevenlit/cavendish/cavendishbib.htm Works of Margaret Cavendish]

{{Authority control|PND=118866230|LCCN=n/83/206596|VIAF=29597878}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Cavendish, Margaret}}
[[Category:English people]]
[[Category:Biographers]]
[[Category:Authors]]
[[Category:English poets]]
[[Category:17th century deaths]]

[[tr:Margaret Cavendish]]

Clement Clarke Moore

2013-08-27T20:32:58Z

EVula: authority control

[[File:The Author of 'A Visit from St. Nicholas' - Clement C. Moore crop.png|thumb|Clement Clarke Moore]]

'''[[w:Clement Clarke Moore|Clement Clarke Moore]]''' ([[July 15]], [[1779]] – [[July 10]], [[1863]]) was a professor of Oriental and Greek literature at [[w:Columbia College of Columbia University|Columbia College]] (now [[w:Columbia University|Columbia University]]) and at [[w:General Theological Seminary|General Theological Seminary]]; but is best known as the credited author of ''[[w:A Visit From St. Nicholas|A Visit From St. Nicholas]]'' (more commonly known today as ''<nowiki>'</nowiki>Twas the Night Before Christmas'').

{{author-stub}}

==Sourced==
*'T was the night before Christmas, when all through the house Not a creature was stirring,—not even a mouse; The stockings were hung by the chimney with care, In hopes that St. Nicholas soon would be there.
**''[[w:A Visit from St. Nicholas|A Visit from St. Nicholas]]'', published anonymously in the [[w:Troy, New York|Troy, New York]] ''Sentinel'' on [[December 23]], [[1823]] and was reprinted frequently thereafter with no name attached; later attributed to Clement Clarke Moore and included in an 1844 anthology of his works.

*"Now! Dasher, now! Dancer, now! Prancer, and Vixen, "On! Comet, on! Cupid, on! Dunder and Blixem; "To the top of the porch! to the top of the wall! "Now dash away! dash away! dash away all!"
**''[[w:A Visit from St. Nicholas|A Visit from St. Nicholas]]'' (1823).

*But I heard him exclaim, ere he drove out of sight — Happy Christmas to all, and to all a good night!
**''[[w:A Visit from St. Nicholas|A Visit from St. Nicholas]]'' (1823).

==External links==
{{wikipedia}}
{{wikisource author|Clement Clarke Moore}}
{{commons category}}
*[http://poets.org/viewmedia.php/prmMID/19286 A Visit from Saint Nicholas], courtesy of Poets.org
*[http://www.iment.com/maida/familytree/henry/sources/christoph1982.htm Peter Christoph, "Clement Moore revisited"], 1982
*[http://eir.library.utoronto.ca/rpo/display/poet231.html Biography of Moore at University of Toronto's ''Representative Poetry Online''.]
*[http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/historical/a/clement_c_moore.htm Urban Legends - Clement Clarke Moore: The Reluctant Mythmaker]
* [http://librivox.org/twas-the-night-before-christmas-by-clement-c-moore/ Free audiobook] of ''Twas the Night Before Christmas'' from [http://librivox.org LibriVox]
* {{gutenberg author| id=Moore+Clement+Clarke | name=Clement Clarke Moore}}

{{authority control|LCCN=n/79/131096|PND=119080710|BNF=cb12040558z|NLA=35360503|VIAF=9864972}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Moore, Clement Clarke}}
[[Category:American poets]]
[[Category:Educators]]
[[Category:1860s deaths]]

Wikiquote:Administrators' noticeboard

2013-08-16T21:14:47Z

EVula: /* Blocking question */ don't think that would work

[[de:Wikiquote:Administratoren/Notizen]]
[[fa:ویکی‌گفتاورد:تابلوی اعلانات مدیران]]
[[nl:Wikiquote:Verzoekpagina aan conciërges]]
{{Wikiquote:Administrators' noticeboard/Header}}
[[Category:Wikiquote|{{PAGENAME}}]]
= Discussions =

== QOTDs for 7 & 8 January 2013 ==

{{quote of the day
| quote = The whole [[country]] is full of enterprise. Our common [[schools]] are diffusing [[intelligence]] among the [[people]] and our [[work|industry]] is fast accumulating the [[comfort|comforts]] and [[luxury|luxuries]] of [[life]]. ... It is not [[strangeness|strange]], however much it may be regretted, that such an exuberance of enterprise should cause some [[individualism|individuals]] to mistake [[change]] for [[progress]] and the invasion of the [[rights]] of others for [[nations|national]] [[Power|prowess]] and [[glory]].
| author = Millard Fillmore
}}

{{quote of the day
| quote = There is a certain [[Laziness|indolence]] in us, a [[Wishes|wish]] not to be disturbed, which [[Temptation|tempts]] us to [[Thought|think]] that when things are [[quiet]], all is well. Subconsciously, we tend to give the preference to "[[Society|social]] [[peace]]," though it be only [[Appearance|apparent]], because our lives and possessions seem then secure. Actually, [[human]] beings acquiesce too easily in [[evil]] conditions; they [[Rebellion|rebel]] far too little and too seldom. There is nothing [[nobility|noble]] about acquiescence in a cramped [[life]] or mere submission to superior [[force]].
| author = A. J. Muste
}}

These quotes at [[Wikiquote talk:Quote of the day/January 7, 2013]] & [[Wikiquote talk:Quote of the day/January 8, 2013]] will have to be placed on the project pages [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/January 7, 2013]] & [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/January 8, 2013]] rather than the talk pages by an admin. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 18:18, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 00:55, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

== CU request for HomerHorn ==

* {{user|HomerHorn}}
Please consider investigating this spambot and sharing the results with the stewards. I think this one might be related to [[Special:CentralAuth/SallyIMHV|SallyIMHV]] at the English Wikiversity, for which I'll request a CU as well ([[:m:SRCU|here]]). Kind regards, [[User:Mathonius|Mathonius]] ([[User talk:Mathonius|talk]]) 04:35, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
:All the accounts mentioned here are now locked. If anyone's interested, see [[:m:User:Mathonius/Reports/Ntsamr]] for more information. [[User:Mathonius|Mathonius]] ([[User talk:Mathonius|talk]]) 04:32, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

== Archive editing query ==

I think when I was an admin here I would have reverted this without a second thought however I am not now so I'll leave it to the community. The archive in question and edit history is [https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Reference_desk/Archive/4&curid=119735&action=history here]. Thanks --[[User:Herbythyme|Herby]] [[User talk:Herbythyme|talk thyme]] 13:11, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
: One does not need to be an administrator to undo inappropriate edits. It is always inappropriate to carry on a discussion in an archive page like this; but I usually turn a blind eye if it looks harmless – not from principle, but from laziness. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:34, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

== [[User:Collingwood|Collingwood's]] sysop flag ==

Hello, recently Collingwood's account was globally locked as a sockpuppet of ‎Poetlister by stewards (see [[m:Steward_requests/Checkuser#Collingwood.40en.wikiversity|this]] checkuser request). Since Poetlister is banned from all WMF projects, and Collingwood is now locked, his sysop flags should be removed. [[User:Techman224|Techman224]] ([[User talk:Techman224|talk]]) 18:36, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
:And ''of course'', local bureaucrats can't remove the sysop flag. I'll ask a steward at Meta. (also: holy shit, that is really disappointing) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 21:12, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

:{{done}} at [[m:Steward requests/Permissions#Collingwood@enwikiquote]]. I also removed his admin userbox. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 21:25, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

== I CAN'T log in, because I am blocked, maybe ==

This may be entirely the wrong place for this, but I am really at a loss about who to contact about this. The fact that I can't log in reduces my access to some options.

In any case, I have used the Wiki's for a long time, like most people. As time went on, and I started noticing more and more minor yet annoying, small errors in some articles, I decided to join to make corrections, and possibly sometime to create an article in a subject of my specialty. My attempts were thwarted right after joining Wikipedia. Attempts to make a global identity were blocked by information about sock puppets, some person named "Kalki", and "multiple counts of abuse".

The username I have almost always used was "Abraxas". Never before the recent couple months have I ever joined any Wiki sites. Never once have I yet edited anything in any Wiki's. And because I use and respect these sites, never have I ever "abused" anything related to this site.

So, are there 2 Abraxases? Am I punished for the sins of the other?

I have no idea who to contact, so if this is the wrong place, I am hoping that one of you may be able to direct me further into the opaque sanctum so that I can resolve this without myself having to open multiple accounts which is already getting confusing with just the few I have joined, being told in each that my previous name was already used, but not allowing log-in with that name anyway.

Can this username be rehabilitated? As with colonic bacteria, the best way to get rid of a bad guy is not just to eliminate him, but to fill his place with a good guy so he can't come back.

Thank you.
Contact: almondan(at)gmail.com
—The preceding [[Wikiquote:Sign your posts on talk pages|manually signed]] comment was added by [[Special:Contributions/67.142.172.27|67.142.172.27]] ([[User talk:67.142.172.27|talk]]) 06:36, 6 February 2013‎

:Hello. I'm not an admin, just for the record, but you are right that the account "[[User:Abraxas|Abraxas]]" was blocked (indefinitely), in May 2011, after accusations of [[w:Sockpuppet (Internet)|sockpuppetry]] (so account creation was disabled). As for your request, you may want to check the guide to making [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Guide_to_appealing_blocks unblock requests]. Good luck. ~ [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 07:47, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
:: The the currently blocked {{user|Abraxas}} account here at Wikiquote IS mine, and I had SUL claim on it, but from what I can determine with the SUL account tools available there are still MANY other UNATTACHED Abraxas accounts on other wikimedia wikis, which are NOT mine, but all of them with less use than that I made of the account before it was blocked by Cirt some years ago, in what I continue to assert was the rampage of IMPROPER account blocking and page defacement based upon many FALSE ASSUMPTIONS and accusations of misuse or abuse of my accounts. I have not yet bothered to respond to all that has occurred with the thoroughness such circumstances merit, but I expect to make some revelations in coming months which I hope will clarify MANY of the issues, from some of my perspectives, and perhaps put an end to much of the confusion that I know still exists related to past occurences and present situations. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 10:53, 6 February 2013 (UTC) + tweaks

* You should be able to create an account and log in if you choose another name. When the [http://toolserver.org/~quentinv57/tools/sulinfo.php?username=Abraxas&showinactivity=1 "SUL" query] indicates that a name has already been used, it is generally best to just pick a different one. The formal "sanctum" for your request is at [[Wikiquote:Changing username/Usurpation]], but the SUL query indicates that none of the other "Abraxas" accounts, some of which may have been yours, have been used extensively or recently, so it is probably best to just start fresh with a new name. You can rename your old "Abraxas" accounts to a new name that nobody has already taken, at the appropriate sanctum of each local wiki. I appreciate that the situation is annoying, but "[[Romeo and Juliet|a rose by any other name would smell as sweet]]". It is unfortunate that the above mentioned Kalki person reserved so many names to him/herself before being stopped, but we are now stuck with the adverse consequences of this arrogant misappropriation. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:43, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
:: '''There are many ways to view the fortunes and misfortunes of past and present events.''' I will concede my appropriation of names was ''extensive'', and ''quite'' naturally and ''properly'' would and should produce ''suspicions'' of extensively improper or even malicious behavior to those who lack clear understandings of what I was actually doing and many of the reasons why, but I will politely insist that I beleive it was NOT an act of deplorable arrogance, though I can concede also that it can easily ''seem'' that to others, within this range of time and circumstances, within which we are presently operating. Time will eventually tell where those who have made the most unfortunate errors lie, and who was most adamantly motivated to promote awareness, appreciation and profound respect for proper and sometimes vitally important freedoms, justice, liberty, life and love of ALL. '''I continue to wish others well, and will probably begin attending to some significant aspects of the VERY complex issues raised here more noticably and extensively within a few weeks.''' ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 15:22, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

*From the OP
Thanks to all who responded. This is a lot more complex than I had thought. It still doesn't explain why I can't use the same name for different Wikis, but it may somehow be involved. To note: the account names I tried to use that said they were used, but would not let me log in due to incorrect passwords, nor open an account in that name (though one already existed in Pedia), was not "Abraxas", so should not have been subject to any unusual restrictions that I know of. It looks like a "bug" to me.

Only one "Abraxas" was used by me (that I know of - I can't claim perfect, years-long recall) in Wikipedia. That name was used by me on over 5000 other internet accounts that exist in my LastPass list, and probably more, but not on any other Wikis here.

Thanks and have a good day.
[[Special:Contributions/67.142.172.23|67.142.172.23]] 21:45, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

== [[Wikiquote: Limits on quotations]] ==

Anyone care to comment on the discussion at [[Wikiquote:Village_pump#Wikiquote:_Limits_on_quotations|the Village pump]]? Thanks. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 16:38, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

== Block request for 74.131.177.233 ==

* {{user|74.131.177.233}}
Please block this IP address and [[Special:Nuke/74.131.177.233|nuke]] its vandalism. Thanks, [[User:Mathonius|Mathonius]] ([[User talk:Mathonius|talk]]) 23:37, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 02:08, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

== [[User:Whaledad]] ==

Hereby I want to file a complain against [[User:Whaledad]] for making the unfounded accusation against me by stating "''Mdd's articles violating copyright rules by indiscriminatingly copy large chunks of text to do so (he actually quoted other encyclopedias in his wikiquote articles''." [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote%3ARequests_for_adminship%2FMdd&diff=1540953&oldid=1540892]

After asking for clarification on [[User talk:Whaledad#Copyright|his talk page]], Whaledad was unable to deliver proof or even an example (present in the Internet Wayback), and he is unwilling to take back the accusation.

I think these kind of accusations go beyond the realm of criticism, and should be considered a [[WQ:NPA|personal attack]]. I request appropriate action to be taken. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:35, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

:It seems Wikipedia:No personal attacks is quite clear [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_personal_attacks#What_is_considered_to_be_a_personal_attack.3F here]: ''Accusations about personal behavior that lack evidence. Serious accusations require serious evidence. Evidence often takes the form of diffs and links presented on wiki.'' counts as PA. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:47, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

:*It's unclear what - short of a law suit - Mdd would consider proof/evidence for my statement. This situation was extensively discussed at the [http://nl.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wikiquote:De_kantine/archief_2#Hier_moet_gewoon_alles_rechtenvrij_zijn.3F nl.wikiquote Village Pump ("de Kantine")]. After that discussion about 84 articles written by Mdd were submitted to Vote for Deletion based on copyright violations ([http://nl.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wikiquote:Te_verwijderen_pagina%27s/archief_5#Nominaties_8_april_2012 VfD page from that time frame] use <Ctrl-F copyvio> to find the relevant nominations), and were deleted as such by a local Admin. With that I rest my case. [[User:Whaledad|<big>W</big><big>\|/</big><big>hale</big>'''dad''']] ([[User_talk:Whaledad#Top|Talk to me]]) 22:55, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

:*OK, I feel I need to "reopen the case" and add a link to [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive_33#Wikihounding_by_User:Whaledad a somewhat similar case on Commons], where an Admin (Jameslwoodward) among other things had the following to say: "''In this particular case -- as with all the other Mdd images that I have looked at that Whaledad has nominated -- unless we receive credible permission through OTRS, the DR should close with the deletion of the image. I note that until Whaledad came along and fixed it, Mdd was claiming copyright in File:Geert van de Camp.jpg, which is a simple crop of an image provided by another user. As similar correction was required at <follow links to 6 image>. I have tagged the following uploads of Mdd with <nowiki>{{delete}}</nowiki>: <follow list of 8 images, 6 of them now red links>. Some of them appear to be FOP problems, while others are claims of "Own Work" that do not appear to be correct. There are many other images which are web size with no EXIF which I suspect, but cannot prove, are problems.
::''So, we have here a user, Mdd, who has, through inexperience and lack knowledge, or perhaps, deliberately:''
::*''Uploaded a wide variety of images that have been deleted as copyvio''
::*''Has marked other people's work as "Own Work" a number of times''
::*''Has failed to properly attribute the photographer on images where he has made a simple crop''
::*''Has not paid attention to the underlying copyright of various artists in places where FOP does not apply''
::*''Has come here complaining of Wikihounding, when the work done by Whaledad appears to have been entirely correct, although his description of Mdd's errors may have been a little too harsh''
::''Under the circumstances, I would advise Mdd to withdraw this complaint before a similar complaint is made against him. Bringing people who are simply doing their job to ANb is a nuisance for all of us.''"
::After some more back and forth (in which Mdd even had the audacity to ask a Dutch Admin to take over his part of the discussion), Mdd conceded and withdrew his (false) accusation of Wikihounding. [[User:Whaledad|<big>W</big><big>\|/</big><big>hale</big>'''dad''']] ([[User_talk:Whaledad#Top|Talk to me]]) 23:34, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
::: I would like to briefly comment here. I have certainly witnessed or endured some attitudes and remarks I regard as severely mistaken or even slanderous in regard to many things in my life, and have on some occasions passionately defended others or myself in such ways as I have believed to be proper, and I am not unfamiliar with the bitter sorrows and anger that can be manifest in both intellectual and emotional conflicts which can occur in openly and overt or very subtle and covert ways.  '''Though I certainly sympathize and agree with him in many regards, I actually disagree with Mdd that there is any need for admin action here''', and though I might be prone to side with him in respect to so much as I can discern regarding his previous disputes and reactions to them, I do not recommend demanding any apologies of others, who have generraly done what they actually believed to be right, even if it might be wrong from the perspectives of others, and certainly do not advise seeking for any needless punishments or censures of anyone, nor to expect any beyond those that might ultimately come to some, as true necessities of remorse, with recognition of their own errors. '''I truly hope the matters in dispute can be more amiably discerned in the future, and a greater respect for all and among all can flourish.''' Blessings to all. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 01:51, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

:::: Regarding the quotation from [[w:WP:NPA|WP:NPA]], in idiomatic English the phrase "personal behavior" refers to the ''manner'' of conducting oneself, such as rudeness, disruption, dishonesty, etc. The allegation about copyright, whether it is true or not, is an objective statement about a person's actions, not a criticism of ''personal behavior''. Therefore, I do not believe this request for administrative intervention against personal attacks is well grounded. In order to suggest how this could have been handled better, I will comment to Mdd about a couple statements in the discussion at Whaledad's talk page that led up to filing this complaint:
::::* "I think I am within my rights to demand you to prove here and now the accusation you made here today."[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Whaledad&diff=1541123]
::::*:— More properly, in making your case to the community at [[Wikiquote:Requests for adminship/Mdd]], you are within your rights to say you believe the accusation is unfounded and not supported by evidence. Your demand is counterproductive: you don't ''want'' Whaledad to successfully prove it, you want the community to decide he has ''not'' proved it.
::::* "you can't deliver that proof because there isn't any. Therefor I ask you take it back, to rectifier and apologize."[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Whaledad&diff=1541221]
::::*:— You can simply make your case to the community that there isn't any proof, and let the community decide. Whether Whaledad changes his mind, and what he does about it, is up to him.
:::: I think it was a mistake to confront Whaledad about this on his talk page. Instead of telling ''him'' on his talk page to prove it or take it back, it would be better to simply tell ''us'' in the community discussion that you think we should ignore it because it is unproven. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:34, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Ok, so be it. I thank you both for sharing your insides, which does open some new perspectives I do appreciate. I admit in the heat of moment I might not used the proper tone both on the talk page, and in formulating this request. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 01:36, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
:For the record, I followed Ningauble's advice and added a footnote in the RfA discussion, [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote%3ARequests_for_adminship%2FMdd&diff=1542055&oldid=1542040 here] -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 00:08, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

== Template:Official policy ==

Just wondering if someone could update [[Template:Official policy]].
It contains two <code><nowiki></nowiki></code> tags that should be updated to <code><nowiki> </nowiki></code> tags since <code><nowiki></nowiki></code> is not a valid html tag. Thanks. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 21:35, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Also, if someone could move [[Template:WQ BW21]] to [[User:Blackwatch21/WQ BW21]] without leaving a redirect, that would be good as well. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 21:40, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

== [[Wikiquote: Limits on quotations]] ==

Once again, I have asked for further discussion on this topic at [[Wikiquote:Village_pump#Wikiquote:_Limits_on_quotations|the VP]]. Can anyone else please join the discussion? I would so love to move this further along, as it appears that we are increasingly facing edit wars and related skirmishes all related to this topic. Thanks! ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 17:16, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

== BarkingFish and sockpuppets ==

*{{checkuser|BarkingFish}}

# {{checkuser|1=Tmalmjursson}}
# {{checkuser|1=Cat in the Hat}}
# {{checkuser|1=Humblesnore}}
Per [[w:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BarkingFish/Archive]], these have all been {{confirmed}} as longtime socks of {{user|BarkingFish}}.

What do other admins think should be done about this, with regards to the main account? -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 00:14, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

:I'm not an admin, but in my opinion this user's main account should not be blocked here because he never made any disruptive edits at Wikiquote. For me it's as simple as that. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 01:18, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
::Okay, thanks for the input, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 01:23, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
: This person is evidently troubled, but I don't see what it has to do with Wikiquote. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 11:21, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
::Alright, thanks for the comment, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 21:41, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

:::There seems to be an agreement, that this sockpuppetry doesn't effect Wikiquote, yet after Cirt's latest comment a [[:Category:Wikiquote sockpuppets of BarkingFish]] was created. This kind of overhead seems against this agreement, so I started a VFD for this category.

:::This also makes me wonder, why those three sub-(puppet)-accounts are blocked? None of them have made any edit here, and there is no global block. Blocking these accounts and adding a note made them active here, which seems useless. Couldn't we avoid this next time? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:52, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
::::Well, they're certainly all technically {{confirmed}} as sockpuppets, however in this case I'll respectfully defer to the judgment expressed by the community, (which is, by the way, the reason I brought this notice, here, for discussion.) Cheers, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 06:54, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

:::::Is there something I am missing here? If I am not mistaken:
:::::* The English Wikipedia policy on Sockpuppetry is, that sockpuppetry is strongly discouraged but not forbidden. The use of sockpuppets is no reason for any blockade, just the misuse, and
:::::* Wikipedia and Wikiquote operated independently. Users cannot be blocked on Wikiquote for things they have done on Wikipedia, and vice versa, unless there misuse on multiple projects and reason for global blockade.
:::::Yet, Cirt has blocked three accounts, which were not even active here. There was no sockpuppetry use, let alone misuse here on Wikiquote. Just BarkingFish made only one (very) constructive edit here.

:::::So is there an (exceptional) rule that (sockpuppet)accounts once "technically confirmed as sockpuppets on Wikipedia" automatically get blocked on other projects? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 14:07, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
::::::Generally, yes, there are exceptions, for example, when they are part of non-acknowledged sockfarms being built up surreptitiously over time. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 16:13, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
:::::::[http://xkcd.com/285/ "Citation needed"] ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 17:00, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
::::::::''[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/BarkingFish&diff=550236211&oldid=550234304 " I've proxied into wikipedia through holes you'll never find, I've committed very tiny pieces of vandalism over a period of quite a long time, most of it before the Abuse filter was active on here, so a lot of it was missed, and had more than 20 throwaway accounts from multiple ISPs. I think i've covered everything. Smell ya later." - BarkingFish.]'' -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 17:56, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
::::::::: Please cite the ''policy'' that allows you to block accounts on projects independent of Wikipedia, where said accounts have not engaged in vandalism or any sort of malicious behavior (in this case, the accounts you blocked had zero edits here). You, Cirt, are in an awkward position if you can't cite such a policy. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:51, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
:::::: No, there is no official policy that Wikiquote should block accounts here that are blocked elsewhere (nor that Wikiquote should de-sysop accounts here that are de-sysoped elsewhere). However, [[Wikiquote:Username policy#Using multiple user accounts|"It is recommended that users not edit under multiple usernames, unless they have a very good reason"]], and it is not uncommon to block duplicate accounts as a preventative measure when the very good reason is not evident or, especially, when evidence on another wiki is suggestive of a bad reason. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 19:54, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

{{quote of the day
| quote = He that would [[live]] in [[peace]] and at ease, Must not speak all he [[knows]], nor [[judge]] all he sees.
| author = Benjamin Franklin
}}

I do not wish to personally confront what might be some of the oversights or under-sightedness of Cirt on many matters, and am willing to be forgiving of the errors of anyone, and to pardon them from even what might pass for just punishments if malice and will to do harm are rejected and abandoned.

I know that others who seek to level and constrain the language and ideas of others in ways I find appalling do not always approve of my honest commentaries or bold assessments regarding many things, but I will make a few here, which I believe can be generally helpful and beneficial.

Extremely [[nihilistic]] or opinionated vandals of very low intellectual or moral integrity and those who seek to establish or maintain what might be described as [[authoritarian]] control or habits, customs or rules developed or devised with strong infusions of such dark [[cynicism]] and cleverness as all too often passes for [[wisdom]] among the intellectually weak and naïve and the immorally or morally oppressed, have this much in common: '''they seek to promote [[fears]], suspicions, discord and drive others into forms of panic and cowardice and the embracing of a frightened and easily manipulated will to suppress and oppress all those who differ with them, dissent from them, or are effective at presenting ideas and opinions they dislike or have no affinity for, and consider rivals, opponents or enemies.''' Throughout history, at all levels of clearly or obscurely social, unsocial and antisocial engagement amidst all formal and informal alliances or groups of people, there have been MANY complex forms of influences at work, which MANY like to find ways to simplify in very deficient and flawed ways into an "US vs THEM" mentality and framework.

Throughout the ages the wisest and most healthy of minds of all political, religious and social traditions have always resisted and opposed such tendencies to the extent they believed they effectively could, knowing always that there are limitations upon themselves, their times and resources, and those of others far less discerning and far more prone to being dupes to those who regularly engage in such tropes with maliciously or callously deceitful intentions.

I have little doubt, from what little I have payed attention to this particular matter, that Barking Fish is a pathetically disturbed individual — and I have little doubt that increasing the fame and fear of such pathetically disturbed individuals serves many of their interests and desires as much as it does those who are most habitually prone to promoting such fame and fears for what they might perhaps believe to be the "good" of everyone. '''There are pathetically disturbed people in the world, ALWAYS, and to the extent they cannot be easily helped, or refuse help, and even seek to vilify and denigrate others most capable of providing help, and yet do not actively engage in unjust forms of destruction or oppression of others, they should generally be left to gradually develop or stagnate and pass away, as their own inclinations impel them, or only occasionally and gently offered such help as they might accept.''' Some might consider me harsh and cold in making such assessments, but I believe that this is preferable to being either soft-minded or hotly passionate about doing such injurious or dangerous things as need not actually be done against anyone, to the service of greater forms or aspects of the good of [[Humanity]], its proper [[rights]] everywhere and anywhere and the [[Liberty]] to assert and indicate these.

When I was an admin here, I was very swiftly reactive to clear vandalism, and squelched it rather rapidly, and was widely recognized as being extraordinarily effective at that, and battling it across MANY wikis, which led to me being "active" on many — but though there were many incidents of suspicious or distressing behavior that were not clear vandalism, I did not go about seeking people or puppet accounts of people to vent my wrath or frustrations upon others in childish and even infantile ways, which might EASILY be misdirected and applied in ERROR. '''I simply remained alert and confident that IF and WHEN many very clear abuses occurred they could rapidly be dealt with by myself and others.'''

A problem far more endemic and pervasive and dangerous to the health of many projects which I saw developing was the rather obscured or even approved abuse of many forms of privilege to suppress dissent or divergence from such will as some wished to declare "OFFICIAL" and implicitly sacred or sound, and I made some rather pointed statements to that effect, just prior to having the resources and wills of a few others directed in many ways against what long-standing good reputation as a conscientious and admirable worker as I believe I had earned by my actions, up to that point. Others later sought to use such apparent disgrace or disfavor as had developed here, to snowball that into a "generally negative" impression of me and my intentions wherever they could among the WIkimedia projects, in rather appalling ways, which I will decline to elaborate upon, at this point, as I have no intentions of belaboring many past errors and mistaken assumptions beyond such points as I believe necessary for the development of more aware and appreciative and healthy attitudes towards those who DO and MUST differ with oneself, for various reasons.

I wish to again assert that I have no personal animosity to those who fall into errors of various kinds, but I generally DO seek ways to help others out of errors — and know that others can be helpful to me, in rising out of whatever forms of error or ignorance I might seem to be in, and am usually quite grateful for what help others can and do provide me, even if sometimes unwittingly.

'''Those are just a few of my thoughts on this matter, and I congratulate others for recently showing and demonstrating capacities for far more reserved and circumspect reactions to circumstances than many are inclined to encourage or even acknowledge as either necessary or proper.''' It is evidence of a growing conscientiousness that there ALWAYS are aspects of things which are beyond one's direct observation, and though many actual or potential aspects of these CANNOT or should not ever rule one's own reactions, prior to being KNOWN, to maintain a healthy skepticism to ANY claims is ALWAYS an important procedure in maintaining healthy forms of Awareness, Life, and Love, and developing truly fair and genuinely cohesive societies, alliances and presentational projects such as this WIki. '''[[Blessings]] to all.''' ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 19:29, 24 April 2013 (UTC) + tweaks
:I agree with [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=1566471&oldid=1566469 this above comment by admin Ningauble]. Cheers, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 02:30, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
::Two things keep bothering me. First so far I have seen no indication, that this Wikipedia sockpuppetry has affected Wikiquote in the past or could possibly affect Wikiquote in the future. There seem to be no reason for preventative measure. And second, we don't automatically block all confirmed Wikipedia sockpuppets. Why would we make exceptions? It seems to me the only reason to make exceptions is, if there are indications that it might negatively affect Wikiquote.
::Just as [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wikiquote:Votes_for_deletion/Category:Wikiquote_sockpuppets_of_BarkingFish here] proposed, I like to propose to stop importing Wikipedia sockpuppet investigations and results here, when there is no indication that it might negatively affect Wikiquote. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 13:39, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
:::Best to keep it on a case-by-case basis, seeking out input from other admins and the community. In cases of obvious vandals and cross-wiki-spammers, blocks on sight for accounts on all wikis are routine. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 15:41, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

== Martha Washington ==

There was once a [[Martha Washington]] page on the wiki, deleted because of lack of source quotes, which I would like restored so that I can work on it as a base, sourcing whatever I can of what there was upon it — and adding whatever I can beyond that, in the next week or so. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 03:15, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}}, now at [[User:Kalki/Martha Washington]]. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 03:37, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
:: Thanks. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 03:39, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
:::You're most welcome, {{user|Kalki}}, have a great day! :) Cheers, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 05:11, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

== [[“You will never be able to escape from your heart. So it's better to listen to what it has to say.”]] ==

Can someone delete [[“You will never be able to escape from your heart. So it's better to listen to what it has to say.”]], it's nonsense/vandalism?[[User:King jakob c 2|King jakob c 2]] ([[User talk:King jakob c 2|talk]]) 12:15, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

:{{done}}. Next time please just tag the articles with {{Tl|Delete}} or {{Tl|Db}} ("delete because"). Then they get automatically listed in this [[:Category:Candidates for speedy deletion]] and will be deleted afterwards. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:30, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

== Spambot or other vandalism on Woodrow Wilson talk page ==

[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Woodrow_Wilson&action=history Since the 13th of April] the talk page of [[Woodrow Wilson]] has been repeatedly vandalized by what might be some persistent vandal or defective spambot of some kind, and should probably be given at least some short-term protection from anonymous edits. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 05:17, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
: {{done}} Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 02:49, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

== [[George Washington]] ==

[[George Washington]] is attracting a lot of vandalism from IPs. Can someone semi-protect it? Thanks, [[User:King jakob c 2|King jakob c 2]] ([[User talk:King jakob c 2|talk]]) 22:02, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
* {{done}} Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 23:46, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

== Personal attack by DanielTom ==

DanielTom: ''[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ADanielTom&diff=1569366&oldid=1569048 "I think you are in serious need of psychiatric help. Please seek it. ~ DanielTom"]''.

In response to my request for the user to cease posting to my talkpage, he gave a personal attack.

I would appreciate it if an admin can please warn {{user|DanielTom}} that this is inappropriate behavior.

Thank you, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 16:48, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
:While I do not wish to wade into the specifics of what the two of you are arguing about, my initial reaction to his request is that you would be wise to grow a thicker skin. Sure, you may be offended by the language DanielTom used, but I hardly find it to be behavior requiring intervention in the form of any punitive action against him. I've been subject to plenty of denigrative attacks throughout my years here - it's not entirely unexpected when there are disagreements. I also note that this is at least the second time that you have been involved in an exercise of escalating rhetoric with another user, causing what should have been a fairly minor issue at the beginning to metamorphose into something much larger. Again, yes it would be nice if we all addressed each other in the most civil manner, but that's not always realistic in an online community such as this. As a more visible member of said community in the role of an admin, I would expect you to let a bit more slide and not be so reactive to attacks. My advice: let it go (see similar advice from BD2412: [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:BD2412&diff=1568998&oldid=1568983#Request_for_advice_about_DanielTom], where he advised you "to stay calm and remain above the fray."). ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 17:43, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

* Let's say I know someone who I think is (for example) considering suicide. What [[User:Cirt|Cirt]] is saying is that, basically, if I tell that person to contact a mental health professional immediately, that would be a "personal attack". But it isn't. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:19, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
::My point is that whether or not he feels it is a personal attack is something subjective that neither I nor anyone else can decide. But surely it does not rise to the level where some action against you as the author of the comment is needed. I am saying that I believe that both sides of this dispute are overreacting a bit and I would advise both to dial it down a bit. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 18:28, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

::Thank you, [[User:UDScott|UDScott]]. In any case, [[User:Cirt|Cirt]] already got what he wanted: he put this giant and bogus title "Personal attack by DanielTom" not just here, but in every admin's Talk page. As if admins needed to be reminded to read the ''Administrators' noticeboard''. Jesus Christ. I genuinely think [[User:Cirt|Cirt]] needs mental help, all the more now. If that is a "personal attack", block me and get it over with. This is absolutely ridiculous. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:41, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

*...seriously? ''This'' is what you consider a personal attack? [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 18:59, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
**'''Reply by Cirt:''' Understood, {{user|EVula}} and {{user|UDScott}}. Thank you for your comments. No further action required. I'll take the suggested input by these two admins under advisement. I appreciate it. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 19:50, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
*** [[User:Cirt|Cirt]], you truly are an embarrassment. You harass people. You are the the most petty, childish and vindictive person I have ever come across on Wikiquote. I have less than zero respect for you. I hope that's clear enough. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 10:27, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
:::P.S. A sensible admin should now block me. I propose a one-week block. Thanks. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 10:41, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

== Mary Tyler Moore ==

There was once a [[Mary Tyler Moore]] page on the wiki, which was deleted among the various overwhelming number of deletions of prods that have been created for the relatively few active editors here. I would like that restored so that I can work on it as a base within the next week or so, sourcing what quotes I can, and adding some, perhaps. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 22:22, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} good luck. [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:52, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

== subtle vandal ==

I recently have reverted two edits where an ostensibly plausible citation was given for an implausible statement by an anon IP. Just now it was the [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Albert_Einstein&curid=2&diff=1569829&oldid=1565305 Einstein page] where it seems a citation of another actual quote was copied to make the addition seem plausible. In the previous case (though I do not immediately recall on which page I encountered it) the citation itself was a bit more implausible, but rather subtly so to anyone just giving it a casual glance, and in both cases I actually did an internet search to confirm my suspicions, before reverting the additions. I am just noting this as a heads-up on the situation, because this might indicate the currently active presence of a subtly malicious vandal at work, and as I do not monitor things anywhere near as much as I once did, there might be other incidents I failed to catch. Blessings. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 04:34, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

== DivesGreatestMan and sockpuppets ==

*{{checkuser|DivesGreatestMan‎}}

# {{checkuser|1=SonPhanGreat}}
# {{checkuser|1=WickyLicky}}
# {{checkuser|1=Sonphan1}}

I like to ask attention for this user:
* DivesGreatestMan‎ created a userpage today here on Wikiquote, claiming he is born September 13, 2003
* On April 27 April 2013‎ he created the User:SonPhanGreat page on Wikicommons with the same info, see http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:SonPhanGreat
* On 14:49, 27 April 2013 the {{w|User:SonPhanGreat}} is being blocked on Wikipedia after being idetified as sockpop of {{w|user:WickyLicky}}
* The userpage {{w|User:SonPhanGreat}} made 23:41, 24 April 2013 with the same info as User:DivesGreatestMan‎ here, is made invisible on Wikipedia
* The sock puppeteer User:WickyLicky made his first edit 21:21, 1 November 2012

Now what drew my attention in the first place was the day of birth. It seems like a very bad idea that we allow children on Wikiquote to mention there full name, and day of birth. This is why I deleted the user page this afternoon. In the meantime a new userpage with the same info is created, and an userpage with a cryptic remark.

This made me start further investigation with the above mentioned. Now it seems he has shifted his attention from Wikipedia to Wikiquote after being his block on Wikipedia. Now I would like to request feedback on how to further respond here? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:22, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

:In the meantime I blocked him (for one month) after he started vandalizing multiple (new) pages, and afterwards also blocked his talk-page for making threads. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:35, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

::Because of this pattern of cross Wiki vandalism, I would propose to block this user, and his known sockpuppets indefinitely, and have the text of his use page removed. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:49, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
:::Sorry to butt in, but is there any reason to believe that this date of birth is correct? He could be trolling.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 16:56, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
::::I simply don't know. I do know he added (almost) the same info on Wikipedia, on Wikicommons and here on Wikiquote. And this info is suppressed on the English Wikipedia, but I also do not know why (yet). I do think we should not allow this kind of info on userpages, true or false. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 17:17, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

:: I deleted the user and talk pages due to impersonating an administrator. I would have used an indefinite block for this ''vandalism only account'', rather than one month, because ''harassment & impersonation'' is a special [[w:Aggravation (law)|aggravating circumstance]] that merits swift and final expulsion. Regarding self-identified children generally, it would be appropriate to remove any personally identifying information. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:00, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} Thanks Ningauble, I have changed the block to indefinite. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 10:42, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

== Contributions 99.90.197.87 ==

*{{checkuser|99.90.197.87}}

I could be mistaken, but I don't see the anom user 99.90.197.87 making any constructive edits. Edits like today [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Olympic_Games&diff=prev&oldid=1579997], [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Apartheid&oldid=1579998] could be deleted as test-edits, but this anom user is going on for quite some time, making similar edits. Should there be some more structural action here? [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 09:13, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
: I have sent the user a warning. As Runningonbrains remarked in the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&page=User%3A99.90.197.87 Wikipedia block log,] whether this is a [[w:WP:TROLL|WP:TROLL]] or a [[w:WP:COMPETENCE|WP:COMPETENCE]] problem, either way it's disruptive. I would not hesitate to block if the behavior continues. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:59, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

==Chip Berlet Quotes Page==
Over four years ago I complained that the page about me is primarily composed of negative critical material and very unbalanced. It was originally set up as part of a series of political attacks on me and my work that spread across several Wikimedia projects and discussions. I am not allowed to edit my own page, and no one has stepped forward to remedy the problem. All of the quotes About me contain nasty personal attacks. Most of the cites and links are to more nasty personal attacks. All I am asking is that someone here in this discussion forum take on the responsibility for fixing what is clearly a biased page. --[[User:Cberlet|Cberlet]] ([[User talk:Cberlet|talk]]) 02:38, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
: Relevant discussion: [[Wikiquote:Village pump archive 21#Using Wikiquote for a vendetta]]. While we cannot delete quotes ''just because'' they contain harsh criticisms, it is indeed desirable that our articles be balanced. To this end, I have just added three (more positive) quotes to the article, including two written by yourself. See [https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Chip_Berlet&diff=1584600&oldid=1545263]. Regards, [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 09:24, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

== About the quotes of Kedar Joshi ==

Kedar Joshi is not a notable person. User [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/User_talk:RogDel RogDel] seems Kedar Joshi himself or other but he is constantly adding material to wikiquote. I request action about his behavior of this. [[User:Kedaaar Jo Sheee|Kedaaar Jo Sheee]] ([[User talk:Kedaaar Jo Sheee|talk]]) 18:14, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
:The discussion concerning Kedar Joshi's notability (or lack thereof) is still ongoing (at [[Wikiquote:Village_pump#Kedar Joshi quote farming]]), as already explained elsewhere, so, needless to say, [[User:RogDel|RogDel]]'s "behavior" was perfectly fine and legitimate. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:50, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
:: I note that this editor seems to have very strong feelings about Kedar Joshi; I have just reverted a page blank he/she made on [http://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=Kedar_Joshi&diff=prev&oldid=2535437 Wikibooks].--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 19:54, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
::: I note that user "Kedaaar Jo Sheee" has posted duplicate copies of this missive on multiple project and discussion pages, in a manner that might be considered disruptive. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 23:20, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

== Request for closure ==

* [[Wikiquote:Village pump#Kedar Joshi quote farming]]
* [[Wikiquote:Deletion review#Kedar Joshi]]
These two discussions have had ample time and participation to reach consensus, if any. I would be grateful if someone a little less heavily involved than myself would assess the results and close them. Thanks. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:10, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
: A month has passed with no further comments on these discussions.... ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 21:53, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
:: {{done}} Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 03:49, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
::: 1. If [[User:RogDel/Quotes added to WQ|these quotes]] can be included (and I see no reason why they should not be included), I see no reason why quotes by Kedar Joshi should be excluded. 2. ''“Among more experienced editors, the vast majority support removal” – [[User:BD2412|BD2412]]''
::::Since WQ is not a democracy, this seems to be an invalid argument for removal. There does not seem to have been any stronger argument countering all the [[User:RogDel/Notability as a source of quotes|simple and logical arguments]] I have made in support of inclusion of such quotations. ~ [[User:RogDel|RogDel]] ([[User talk:RogDel|talk]]) 10:50, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
::RogDel, with all due respect, I seriously doubt that we should create such explicit regulations about such exceptional situations. As to Kedar Joshi, after years of discussion we should draw a line, and not keep bringing it up. As to the regulation even for me it is confusion, trying to make a difference between quotability and notability, let alone outsiders. There are so much ins and out about, and regularly there seem to be a good understanding. Don't try to make regulations for those handful of cases we don't all agree on. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:35, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
::: <edit conflict> Regarding RogDel's first point, [[w:WP:OTHERSTUFF|other stuff]] is not always good precedent, particularly when the addition of that stuff gives the appearance of [[w:WP:POINT|making a point]] about a minority view from these discussions. Now that these discussions have been closed, there may be further action to deal with this stuff that was added while the discussions were ongoing. Regarding the second point, discussions are assessed based on a variety of factors, including (besides the votes) policies, practices, precedents, arguments, & etc. As expressly indicated in the closing remarks, from which you selectively quote, anonymous single-purpose accounts that are not cognizant of or do not address those factors have little or no weight in assessing the arguments. Regarding the essay linked above, it directly contradicts the established guideline at [[Wikiquote:Quotability]], which makes it relatively unpersuasive as an argument in these cases. If you think the guideline is wrong then it might be better to propose changing it rather than try an end-run around it. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 12:42, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
* RogDel, I think maybe only one or two people have read your (rather long and repetitive) essay. Perhaps, for their benefit, one could condense it into one sentence: "If a quote is cited in a 'highly reliable' secondary source (even if just once) then it is notable enough to be on Wikiquote." Would you accept that as a fair summary? ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 13:16, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

== new pattern-vandal ==

A new pattern-vandal has been vandalizing the [[Jimbo Wales]] page and user pages. The latest account activity has been as {{User|Technoquatic Quoticals}}, and this account and other associated accounts seem appropriate for blockage as clearly vandal accounts. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 22:22, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
: He keeps making new accounts to vandalize the same pages. {{User|Froonkfurterich‎}} seems to be his latest incarnation. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 09:16, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
::I put a short-term block on this user, but if current behavior continues, I'm sure a long-term one will be necessary. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 11:29, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
:::See also [[w:WP:Sockpuppet_investigations/Technoquat/Archive]] [[User:Vanischenu|Vanischenu]] ([[User talk:Vanischenu|talk]]) 23:17, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

== Feuding between DanielTom and Cirt ==

Per the discussion ongoing at [[User talk:UDScott#Query for help]] (and on my talk page), I am setting forth the following interaction ban in response to the incessant and disruptive feuding, baiting, and forum shopping between DanielTom and Cirt.

DanielTom could properly be blocked for incivility at this point (he has said as much). If DanielTom attempts to bait or otherwise interact with Cirt, talks to him, talks about him, or reverts or otherwise contests any of his actions, I will block DanielTom for a minimum of thirty days.

If Cirt attempts to interact with DanielTom, talks to him, talks about him, or reverts or otherwise contests any of his actions, I will move to desysop Cirt on this project. Reacting to baiting is not the trait of an administrator.

To the extent that either Cirt or DanielTom thinks the other is making improper edits or otherwise misbehaving, do nothing about and say nothing about it. The other administrators on this project are observant, and we will see and will handle any violations of policy.

I hope that my fellow administrators agree with my determination with respect to this matter. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 01:27, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

----

;Reply by Cirt to BD2412
:''Originally posted on another page: [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:UDScott&diff=1594538&oldid=1594501 diff].''

This is my reply to [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AUDScott&diff=1594501&oldid=1594445 comment by BD2412].

'''Comment:''' @{{user|BD2412}}, understood. I will take your advice to heart. I will do my best to not react to the baiting. I will do my best to only engage in a polite and constructive manner from here on out. I am sorry for troubling you with this. I will do my best to rise above this matter. Thank you for your advice and your input. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 02:44, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

;Statement by Ningauble about the ban
I endorse the interaction ban imposed by BD2412. The misconduct of both parties has been extensive and disruptive. Note that the ban as stated is indefinite in duration. I would not want to entertain an application to lift an indefinite ban in less than six months or a year.
 Regarding stipulated consequences for violating the ban by DanielTom:  I approve of handling this in a progressive manner, as has been done, rather than imposing a 30 day block on the first infraction. I think any further infractions should be met with ''steep'' progression.
 Regarding stipulated consequences for violating the ban by Cirt:  This is not really an administrative sanction. A [[WQ:VOC|vote of confidence]] may be called any time that three users concur. Administrative sanctions may still be imposed for misconduct even if it is not stipulated in this ban. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:15, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

=== Cirt has ''already'' breached the interaction ban ===

BD2412 made the terms of the interaction ban clear:
:[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=1594507&oldid=1591220 ''If Cirt attempts to interact with DanielTom, talks to him, talks about him, or reverts or otherwise contests any of his actions, I will move to desysop Cirt on this project.'']
Yet, Cirt has already completely disrespected the interaction ban: ''just one hour later'', he decided to come to my talk page, uninvited, and posted [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DanielTom&curid=139176&diff=1594537&oldid=1594424 this baiting comment].
I am tempted to reply to his baiting comment, <s>but I won't</s>, as I don't think I would particularly enjoy being unable to edit WQ for 30 days. However, after Cirt's ''direct'' breach of the interaction ban cited above, I would like to see BD keeping his word and actually "[moving] to desysop Cirt on this project". ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 08:52, 26 June 2013 (UTC) last edit: 19:07, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
: Firstly, I have blocked you for 24 hours to be sure that you understand that I am serious about this interaction ban. As I said above, if either of you thinks the other is making improper edits or otherwise misbehaving, do nothing about and say nothing about it. That includes accusing one another of violations of this interaction ban. Please do not imagine for a moment that other administrators on this site are unaware of any action that either of you is taking.
: Secondly, I hope that you agree that fair warning of a penalty to be imposed is necessary before imposition of that penalty. I saw the post Cirt made on your talk page last night, shortly after I set forth this interaction ban. Based on Cirt's edits, there is no reason to believe that he was aware of this interaction ban at the time that he made the talk page post of which you complain. You, on the other hand, were clearly aware of it before you posted this complaint.
: In case I need to make this any clearer, both of you are to carry on as if the other does not exist.
: Finally, I hope that the community approves of my determination with respect to this problem, but if any uninvolved administrator feels that I have overstepped the bounds of my authority in my actions with respect to this matter, please feel free to unblock DanielTom. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 12:05, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
::I, for one, fully endorse both the ban and your action here. Thanks. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 19:11, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
::@BD2412: thanks for blocking me, I appreciate it. Alas, I have a hard time learning from punitive blocks, so I shall make another comment here, and be blocked for it again. I must point out that your contrived naïveté ("there is no reason to believe that [Cirt] was aware of this interaction ban at the time that he made the talk page post of which you complain") is quite breathtaking. Cirt edited several different pages after you set forth this interaction ban, including yours, UDSCott's, and Ningauble's talk pages (not just mine), so he must have seen the Recent Changes page, or at least his Watchlist. To say that he somehow missed the section you had opened an hour earlier in the Administrator's Noticeboard, with his name in it, is simply absurd. In any case, as you can see, I have mentioned Cirt in this very comment, so you should block me once again, this time for "at least 30 days." Won't that be fun for you? I ''will'' miss editing articles, but I understand that I need to be blocked, as I pose such a great danger to Wikiquote. Knock yourself out. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 12:47, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
::: Since you have now specifically requested to be blocked for 30 days, I will accommodate your request. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 12:56, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
:::: I suppose if I asked you to [insert any fantasy] me, you would also "accommodate" my request? I did not request to be blocked. Sorry that you don't understand irony. (It's not a new concept, it's been around for at least a couple of years now.) In any case, you decided to abuse your tools and block me for 30 days, as a '''smokescreen''', so that you wouldn't have to properly reply to the clarification/explanation in my comment, above, but even a child can see through that. (Nice try, though.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:17, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

=== Request for reconsideration ===
DanielTom has sent me an email stating that he has learned his lesson, and will abide by the interaction ban, and therefore seeks reconsideration of the period of the block. He seems to have gotten the message, and I am inclined to unblock, if there is general support from my fellow administrators for so doing. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 02:50, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
: I have no objection.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 11:34, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:If we can have another productive editor ''and'' not have anymore back-and-forth between them, I'd say that's the best possible scenario. Thumbs up. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 14:15, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:No objections from me, assuming the dispute is not continued. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 15:22, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
::Thanks, the three of you. And thanks to Ningauble and BD as well, even though I ''am'' disappointed by their recent actions. (Anyway, time to move on.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:35, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
: Although I received a snarky email when I extended the scope of the block,[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DanielTom&diff=1595942] I do not object to giving the benefit of the doubt if others are persuaded that he is now earnest about reform. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:41, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
::: My email to you was not "snarky", and as no person reading this here has access to it, other than the two of us, it is very ungentlemanly of you to say it was. However, I should say, the message ''you'' left at my talk page after revoking my talk page access for 30 days ''was'' "snarky", as I've just briefly explained there. Finally, I cannot believe that it was in Wikiquote's best interest to have me blocked an unable to edit articles (but, then again, maybe that's me being too egocentric.) Sincerely, [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:30, 10 July 2013 (UTC) P.S. Ningauble, if you think you can revoke my talk page access ''for 30 days'' and then not hear any criticism from me, think again. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:39, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:: As the community is in agreement, the block of [[User:DanielTom]] is lifted. The interaction ban remains is place indefinitely. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 17:02, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:DanielTom had (before asking to be unblocked) sent both BD and Ningauble more than a couple emails with diffs and links to articles that could have been easily fixed in less than 10 seconds, but he was simply ignored. Given this, I (speaking in the first person now) did request to be unblocked early so that I could edit said articles again myself [as well as others, and I quote from the email: ''I just want to go back to edit[ing] articles. (Plans include adding a few quotes to the [[Bertrand Russell]] article, [[Virgil]], and then fixing the [[Death Note]] page as promised [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Death_Note&diff=1566835&oldid=1566828])'']. I should say that the original block itself was ridiculous (in my opinion, at any rate; admittedly, it is always amusing for me to be treated like a vandal — though, oddly enough, even deliberate vandals, whose only contributions have been wrecking articles, are usually only blocked for 2 days, while I found myself blocked for 30 days, but I digress), and as I had already been blocked for about two weeks, that was indeed long enough time for me to admit "lesson learnt" [where the lesson is: 1) some people apparently do not ''really'' care about article quality, and 2) punitive blocks are considered acceptable here]). I will indeed "abide by the interaction ban" from now on. Time to focus on articles again. Thanks guys for getting me unblocked, and see you 'round. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 17:41, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:: The original block was for 24 hours, this was your ''second'' block. Persistent disruption is indeed treated differently than drive-by vandalism, and blocking to "deter the continuation of present, disruptive behavior" is [[w:WP:BLOCK#PREVENTATIVE|preventative, not punitive]]. I do recognize the distinction may not be easy to appreciate when one is on the receiving end of it, but it really is not the same thing. Regarding article fixes not done: you would not believe the length of my list of things needing to be fixed. One of the coping mechanisms I employ for problems arising faster than I can address them is to [[Procrastination|defer action]] when it appears that someone else will probably handle it. Still, the list grows daily, even without distractions like this, and the priorities I choose are mostly inexplicable even to myself. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 20:53, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
::: Maybe someday someone will explain to me ''exactly'' how blocking me for 30 days for [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=1595314&oldid=1594947 this edit] was "preventive", and not punitive. Anyway, I agree with you, this really is a "distraction", and a waste of time.~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 21:21, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

== Block request for SantiagoG ==

Hi there,

{{user|SantiagoG}} is a spambot using a non-sul account, so unfortunately it can't be locked. Please consider blocking it instead. :)

Thanks, [[User:Mathonius|Mathonius]] ([[User talk:Mathonius|talk]]) 04:43, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} Spam bots like this are pretty routine, you can usually just tag the userpage and they get deleted and blocked pretty quickly. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 06:39, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
:: Alas, this particular pattern of userpage spam has become ''very'' routine lately. They will eventually realize they are wasting their time, but it can take a while because they are remarkably stupid. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:02, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
:::Back when I still had the CheckUser bit, I'd run the occasional check to see if I could catch a bunch of accounts at one time, but alas, there was never any connection between them. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 05:15, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
::::Let us just nominate and choose a second CheckUser here, and then you get your bit backs. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 18:20, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
::::: Here, here! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 03:54, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::BD2412, if you are interested you got my vote. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 10:08, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::: I appreciate the support, but since my last bid for CU status I have come around to the view that it is probably better for the project for power to be diffused rather than concentrated. As I am already a 'crat, I would feel uncomfortable also serving as a CU at this point. However, I do think we need more CUs. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 00:44, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
::::Ningauble, in the light the diffusion of power, would you be interested in the CheckUser bit? If so you got my vote. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:45, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
::::: For my own peace of mind, I prefer not to delve into the activities of bad actors more deeply than I already do with my administrative work. I don't want to be involved in researching personally identifying information about them. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:40, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::: I'd say the chances of us having a new CheckUser on Wikiquote are about 0%. Where would the candidates get the (minimum) 25 supporting votes to be "promoted", when we don't even have 10 active contributors on this wiki? ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 14:54, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::: Not necessarily. You would be surprised by who shows up for CU elections. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:13, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::: No Wikiquote CheckUser has ever been ''legitimately'' elected here, as anyone looking at the archives can now confirm. It's not just that people with almost no local contributions show up; we've also had more than one sockpuppet voting in such elections. (And, no, I wouldn't be surprised because I've seen them.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 15:34, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::::: Well, [[m:Wikimedia Forum/On disbanding Wikiquote|it has been argued]] that sock voting makes the ''entire project'' illegitimate, but I don't think we need to go there. I am satisfied by the level of participation in past CU elections that the outcomes were not influenced by the quantity of puppet votes. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:30, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::: (Where? The discussion you linked only refers to possible copyright infringements, not to "sock voting".) The outcomes were certainly influenced by puppet votes (who helped the support votes reach the minimum of 25). While I too am "satisfied", I still feel that the current minimum (a relic blindly and rigidly imposed by meta policy) is too high, and unrealistic, for Wikiquote. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 16:58, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::No legitimate CheckUser election? [[Wikiquote:Requests for checkuser/EVula|O rly]]? [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 17:33, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::Yep. Some users there had (and still do) literally ''zero'' edits on Wikiquote, other than showing up at your election to vote support (namely, and strikingly, [[Special:Contributions/Nifky%3F|User:Nifky?]], [[Special:Contributions/Razorflame|User:Razorflame]], and [[Special:Contributions/Jake Wartenberg|User:Jake Wartenberg]]). (Incidentally, there were also other users, namely [[Special:Contributions/Juliancolton|User:Juliancolton]] and [[Special:Contributions/Counterpower|User:Counterpower]], who also had zero or just a couple of edits to articles before voting there.) None of that was your fault; nay, it was pretty much ''a must'', given that we simply don't have, ''and never had'', 25 active contributors on Wikiquote. (See the larger picture?) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:03, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::: We have more active contributors (usually defined as at least 5 article edits per month) than that. See [http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikiquote/EN/TablesWikipediaEN.htm#editor_activity_levels editor activity levels] at Wikistats. Getting them to participate in community affairs is another matter. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:27, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::: @DanielTom: (Within that lengthy discussion there were strong words alleging incompetent governance in dealing with the Poetlister socks, claiming that was sufficient grounds to disband the project.) The elections were typically called as soon as they reach 25, and results would not likely have been different had they run a little longer. This is really moot unless you want to challenge [http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests/Permissions&diff=5458382 EVula's standing] for reinstatement in the event a second CU is elected. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:43, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::: No, I don't want to challenge EVula's standing. (We need more CUs, not less. But, ain't gonna happen.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:08, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::@Ningauble, thanks. Still that particular pattern of userpage spam also worries me, and I think we should search for more structural solutions. Getting the CheckUser bit back, and (let EVula) keep running occasional checks, seems the least we could/should do. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 14:56, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::: The global Stewards are well aware of this pattern, which occurs across all wikis. Unfortunately, the IP addresses used by these spambots are highly variable by design, so blocking them, even ranges of them, is ineffective. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:10, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::Yeah, any time that I would run a check on the spam IPs, I'd get nothing. It's really annoying. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 15:41, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::: Someone might investigate whether Wikipedia has developed an Abuse filter for this pattern. However, the text changes so much that keeping up with the filter might be a game of [[w:Whac-A-Mole|Whac-A-Mole]]. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 12:56, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

== Edit filter maybe ==

I don't hang out at Wikiquote, so I'm not sure how much of a problem this is. But I just ran across [//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=ANTman&oldid=1600515 an edit] that may have been able to be stopped by an [[Special:AbuseFilter|edit filter]] similar to [[w:en:Special:AbuseFilter/135]]. Perhaps somebody could copy that filter over to here. [[Special:Contributions/64.40.54.47|64.40.54.47]] 04:13, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

== Talk page spam ==

Yesterday and today I noticed a (for me) new type of spam on the talk page: an unrelated text (size about 4k) from a rotating ip address (see for example [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Great_Mouse_Detective&diff=prev&oldid=1606173 here]). Now I noticed that 7 of 9 originated ip addresses originated from one ownerid in Venezuela. If this continues, can we than block his range of IP addresses all at once? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 10:21, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
: Thus far I count 25 IP addresses used by this spambot, ranging from 60.24.11.41 to 221.10.40.232. This is too wide a range to block without blacking out entire continents. If the problem persists then someone could try using the [[Special:AbuseFilter|Abuse filter]] to mitigate it. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 12:41, 24 July 2013 (UTC)–Updated 13:43, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

== Unblock request [[User:Diogotome]] ==

::''The following unblock request is copy/paste here (partly trimmed) from [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ABD2412&diff=1609829&oldid=1608714 here] by [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 09:16, 7 August 2013 (UTC)''
*{{checkuser|Diogotome}}
As you know, my brother was blocked some time ago in many wikis where he has zero edits... He was recently unblocked at Commons, where admin asked him to write on his user page that he is my brother. (He did so [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Diogotome]...) He was also unblocked at Wikisource [http://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3ADiogotome] on the grounds that he had no edits there. (He also has no edits here.)
:Other than the strong evidence presented by email that he is my brother (including citizen card, ID), there are other things which you included can check. 1) he created his account in 2009 (I myself didn't even know about accounts till late 2012); 2) the email with which he registered his account is diofact@hotmail.com (confirm that); 3) he still uses that email, even on his Facebook account, where you can find him (Diogo Tomé). I think it is obvious that the account is his.
Also worth noting, he, just like me, registered with his real name, which is not what socks do (...). Although I know he doesn't want to edit Wikiquote, I still don't think he should be blocked here on sock grounds.
... ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 21:47, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
:: I have lifted the block. It is my understanding that [[User:Diogotome]] has no interest in editing here. I am sure you are aware that it would raise some eyebrows (on all of the above mentioned projects) if this editor suddenly began making edits that seemed as if they are made as a proxy for you, so please take care. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 12:20, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:::Thanks (your understanding is correct). ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 12:42, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:: I don't have any problem with this unblocking, but I would like to rectify some incorrect assumptions. (1) The email with which he registered his account cannot be confirmed by any technical means available to administrators here. It is confidential information that only the account holder is at liberty to disclose. (2) Registering with a real name most definitely ''is'' something that socks do. Some of the most notorious abusers are known to impersonate real people. Finally, BD's eyebrow raising admonition cuts both ways: both accounts should avoid involvement in each other's affairs. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:39, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:::"The email with which he registered his account cannot be confirmed by any technical means available to administrators here." Where can it be confirmed? ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 17:44, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:::: I assume that it could be extracted by a developer. However, it is easy enough to change the e-mail associated with an account; we have no way of knowing whether it is the original address.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 18:06, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
::::: "It is confidential information that only the account holder is at liberty to disclose." The [[foundation:Privacy policy|Privacy policy]] identifies one way he can confirm the email address currently linked to his account (using "email this user"), and indicates conditions under which the Foundation would disclose it without his consent (e.g. subpoena). ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:09, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::: I suppose even the original email ("e-mail address confirmation") could be changed if forwarded. As to the real names question, of course socks use real names, but not ''their'' real names (any name you can choose is someone else's real name). My point is that no sock has its name so close to the sockmaster's (in this case, Diogo being a Portuguese name, and our family names being the same). Maybe if I get blocked indefinitely on Wikiquote, and unable to edit, my brother may come along to return my favor here, and ask that I be unblocked, although that is exceedingly unlikely (not the block part, but the returning of the favor part from him). ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:25, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

== Semi-protection request for Mean Girls ==

Could an administrator semi-protect [[Mean Girls]]? Too much IP vandalism going on as of lately (especially {{User|65.175.216.98}}). Thanks in advance. [[User:SnapSnap|SnapSnap]] ([[User talk:SnapSnap|talk]]) 18:26, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} - but I also trimmed this very bloated page first. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 19:02, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

== QOTD for 10 & 12 August 2013 ==

The QOTD layout at [[Wikiquote talk:Quote of the day/August 10, 2013]] will have to be placed into [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/August 10, 2013]] by an admin. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 21:36, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 23:16, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

I am once again a bit late with a selection and the QOTD layout at [[Wikiquote talk:Quote of the day/August 12, 2013]] will have to be placed into [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/August 12, 2013]] by an admin. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 14:53, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 15:04, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

== [[Talk: Main Page]] ==
Can someone semi-protect this again? It's getting vandalized a lot. [[User:King jakob c 2|'''Kjc2''']] [[User talk:King jakob c 2|jabber]] 15:47, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
: I am reluctant to protect the talk page or our main public-facing portal, where newcomers and visitors should be welcome to make pertinent inquiries and comments, unless the situation becomes unmanageable. I think the current frequency of unconstructive edits on this widely watched page is being handled well enough by folks who notice and revert in a fairly timely manner. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:07, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
::It seems in the past year only one comment was made by an anom visitors, while the page is vandalized 50+ times. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:36, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
::: You are not counting registered accounts without enough local edits to be autoconfirmed, but it is true that unconstructive edits significantly outnumber constructive ones. I just don't think a handful of reverts per month is too great a price to pay for keeping the front door open. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:22, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

== Blocking question ==

Just wanted to gauge the opinions of the admins: I noticed that {{user|Mdd}} recently blocked a user indefinitely for a single instance of what I would characterize as moderate and fairly harmless spamming (linking to a site for their poetry on their user page). If it were me, I would have likely let them off with a <nowiki>{{spam}}</nowiki> warning - which is what I did earlier in the day for someone who posted a link to their blog on their user page. I'm not saying my inclination is correct or that {{user|Mdd}} is wrong, but in the spirit of consistency, what is the feeling out there? I'm just curious. Thanks. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 18:35, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
:Assuming you're talking about {{User|MelissaHg}}, I'd say it was a reasonable assumption; the page itself matches the same pattern for all the spam that we've been getting for months (right down to the double tags before the link). Plus, I'm not sure why someone from Switzerland would have a Spanish poetry site... [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 18:55, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

::In the past 4 months I have blocked about 200 new users, which where I presume all made by spam bots. The links which are presented by those spam bots differ greatly from hardporn to... indeed poetry. Does UDScott suggest, that we make go make a difference in what type of site the spambot is referring to? If indeed there are just spam-bots, it seems to me adding warnings on the talk page is a waist of time. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 19:08, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
:::In the end, I'm not really asking whether or not a block was warranted (in most cases I agree it is) - I'm just asking if it is the first step in all cases. I just want to be consistent in our treatment of spam. If it is the case that we automatically block anyone who posts spam, fine - but our [[Wikiquote:Blocking policy|blocking policy]] does not reflect this and should be updated. The only current mention of spam is that if a block is given for spamming, it should not be less than a month. And if we are going this way, then what is the purpose of the two spam warnings we have? Again, I'm not trying to criticize what anyone else has done - I'm just asking the question on how we would like to generally treat these circumstances. Thanks. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 19:12, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
::::I'd say that we need to update our blocking policy, then. I don't think warning spam accounts will do anything; it's just drive-by vandalism, but if we just delete the spam and leave the account, there's a much better chance that they'll swing right back around and spam again, increasing the amount of administrative work (not by a substantial margin, of course; but it ''is'' one more time that we have to delete their spam). [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 19:21, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
::::: Before we became inundated, as Mdd notes, with a consistent pattern userpage spam, I routinely responded as UDScott describes. Since then I have been blocking them on sight, when they appear to be using the same pattern, without investigating whether the link itself is commercial or otherwise execrable. I would not be quite so hasty with things that do not appear to match the pattern. I do not regard this as drive-by spamming: the consistency of the pattern leads me to believe we are dealing with an SEO spammer who is hired by people who want to promote their web pages. If the nature of the linked content makes no difference to the spammer, I am not sure it should make any difference to us. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 19:39, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
::::@UDScott: our regular visitors, the spambots, follow an easily-distinguishable pattern, and I think those can just be blocked with no prior warning (they aren't here to contribute to articles anyway). But when it comes to ''human'' editors who, say, post unwarranted links in "External links" article sections, then the <nowiki>{{spam}}</nowiki> templates can and should be used, as they offer useful information to the user, and serve as warnings. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:47, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::OK, understood - this pretty much matches to my understanding. I guess it's my fault that I've been spending more time on other parts of the project and I don't know that I would automatically recognize someone as a spambot, which spawned my question (I fight them when I see them, but I usually see more traditional vandals than spammers in my time here). Thanks all. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 15:58, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::: In recent months this pattern of spam has been a large proportion, even a majority, of newly created user pages. Therefore, I have been screening [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ANewPages&namespace=2 all new user pages] daily. Since becoming an administrator, Mdd has been catching most of them while my time zone is sleeping. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:29, 15 August 2013 (UTC)/16:47, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::: Question: if a spambot starts posting here, and we block them for just a month, do we have any reason to think that they will start spamming again once the month is up? I honestly don't know. It seems to me that spambots, once blocked for any reasonable length of time, just go away forever even if the block expires. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 20:48, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::::: Yes, the spambot will be back after a month. He has ''already'' been using the same pattern for several months running. This might quite possibly be the ''same'' SEO spammer that started [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive/019#Checkuser_request:_serial_one-shot_spam_accounts two years ago,] though the pattern now uses less verbose boilerplate. Prior to that time userpage spamming was rare and was not systematic; but since then we have only infrequently been without extended campaigns of systematic userpage spam. The named throwaway accounts are seldom re-used, except in an immediate timeframe. The reason I block them is not to prevent re-using the names, but to autoblock the underlying IPs. This does not stop him, but it is my impression that blocking enough of them slows him down a bit, at least until he gets a fresh set of addresses to exploit. Perhaps resistance is futile. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 19:37, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::: Can we file a complaint with his ISP? [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 19:59, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::Back when I had my CU flag, I would run a check on the occasional userpage vandal like these, but I could never find a pattern between them. I'm not sure that there would be a single IP to file a complaint with. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 21:14, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikiquote:Administrators' noticeboard

2013-08-14T19:21:07Z

EVula: /* Blocking question */ let's update the blocking policy

[[de:Wikiquote:Administratoren/Notizen]]
[[fa:ویکی‌گفتاورد:تابلوی اعلانات مدیران]]
[[nl:Wikiquote:Verzoekpagina aan conciërges]]
{{Wikiquote:Administrators' noticeboard/Header}}
[[Category:Wikiquote|{{PAGENAME}}]]
= Discussions =

== QOTDs for 7 & 8 January 2013 ==

{{quote of the day
| quote = The whole [[country]] is full of enterprise. Our common [[schools]] are diffusing [[intelligence]] among the [[people]] and our [[work|industry]] is fast accumulating the [[comfort|comforts]] and [[luxury|luxuries]] of [[life]]. ... It is not [[strangeness|strange]], however much it may be regretted, that such an exuberance of enterprise should cause some [[individualism|individuals]] to mistake [[change]] for [[progress]] and the invasion of the [[rights]] of others for [[nations|national]] [[Power|prowess]] and [[glory]].
| author = Millard Fillmore
}}

{{quote of the day
| quote = There is a certain [[Laziness|indolence]] in us, a [[Wishes|wish]] not to be disturbed, which [[Temptation|tempts]] us to [[Thought|think]] that when things are [[quiet]], all is well. Subconsciously, we tend to give the preference to "[[Society|social]] [[peace]]," though it be only [[Appearance|apparent]], because our lives and possessions seem then secure. Actually, [[human]] beings acquiesce too easily in [[evil]] conditions; they [[Rebellion|rebel]] far too little and too seldom. There is nothing [[nobility|noble]] about acquiescence in a cramped [[life]] or mere submission to superior [[force]].
| author = A. J. Muste
}}

These quotes at [[Wikiquote talk:Quote of the day/January 7, 2013]] & [[Wikiquote talk:Quote of the day/January 8, 2013]] will have to be placed on the project pages [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/January 7, 2013]] & [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/January 8, 2013]] rather than the talk pages by an admin. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 18:18, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 00:55, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

== CU request for HomerHorn ==

* {{user|HomerHorn}}
Please consider investigating this spambot and sharing the results with the stewards. I think this one might be related to [[Special:CentralAuth/SallyIMHV|SallyIMHV]] at the English Wikiversity, for which I'll request a CU as well ([[:m:SRCU|here]]). Kind regards, [[User:Mathonius|Mathonius]] ([[User talk:Mathonius|talk]]) 04:35, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
:All the accounts mentioned here are now locked. If anyone's interested, see [[:m:User:Mathonius/Reports/Ntsamr]] for more information. [[User:Mathonius|Mathonius]] ([[User talk:Mathonius|talk]]) 04:32, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

== Archive editing query ==

I think when I was an admin here I would have reverted this without a second thought however I am not now so I'll leave it to the community. The archive in question and edit history is [https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Reference_desk/Archive/4&curid=119735&action=history here]. Thanks --[[User:Herbythyme|Herby]] [[User talk:Herbythyme|talk thyme]] 13:11, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
: One does not need to be an administrator to undo inappropriate edits. It is always inappropriate to carry on a discussion in an archive page like this; but I usually turn a blind eye if it looks harmless – not from principle, but from laziness. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:34, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

== [[User:Collingwood|Collingwood's]] sysop flag ==

Hello, recently Collingwood's account was globally locked as a sockpuppet of ‎Poetlister by stewards (see [[m:Steward_requests/Checkuser#Collingwood.40en.wikiversity|this]] checkuser request). Since Poetlister is banned from all WMF projects, and Collingwood is now locked, his sysop flags should be removed. [[User:Techman224|Techman224]] ([[User talk:Techman224|talk]]) 18:36, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
:And ''of course'', local bureaucrats can't remove the sysop flag. I'll ask a steward at Meta. (also: holy shit, that is really disappointing) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 21:12, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

:{{done}} at [[m:Steward requests/Permissions#Collingwood@enwikiquote]]. I also removed his admin userbox. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 21:25, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

== I CAN'T log in, because I am blocked, maybe ==

This may be entirely the wrong place for this, but I am really at a loss about who to contact about this. The fact that I can't log in reduces my access to some options.

In any case, I have used the Wiki's for a long time, like most people. As time went on, and I started noticing more and more minor yet annoying, small errors in some articles, I decided to join to make corrections, and possibly sometime to create an article in a subject of my specialty. My attempts were thwarted right after joining Wikipedia. Attempts to make a global identity were blocked by information about sock puppets, some person named "Kalki", and "multiple counts of abuse".

The username I have almost always used was "Abraxas". Never before the recent couple months have I ever joined any Wiki sites. Never once have I yet edited anything in any Wiki's. And because I use and respect these sites, never have I ever "abused" anything related to this site.

So, are there 2 Abraxases? Am I punished for the sins of the other?

I have no idea who to contact, so if this is the wrong place, I am hoping that one of you may be able to direct me further into the opaque sanctum so that I can resolve this without myself having to open multiple accounts which is already getting confusing with just the few I have joined, being told in each that my previous name was already used, but not allowing log-in with that name anyway.

Can this username be rehabilitated? As with colonic bacteria, the best way to get rid of a bad guy is not just to eliminate him, but to fill his place with a good guy so he can't come back.

Thank you.
Contact: almondan(at)gmail.com
—The preceding [[Wikiquote:Sign your posts on talk pages|manually signed]] comment was added by [[Special:Contributions/67.142.172.27|67.142.172.27]] ([[User talk:67.142.172.27|talk]]) 06:36, 6 February 2013‎

:Hello. I'm not an admin, just for the record, but you are right that the account "[[User:Abraxas|Abraxas]]" was blocked (indefinitely), in May 2011, after accusations of [[w:Sockpuppet (Internet)|sockpuppetry]] (so account creation was disabled). As for your request, you may want to check the guide to making [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Guide_to_appealing_blocks unblock requests]. Good luck. ~ [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 07:47, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
:: The the currently blocked {{user|Abraxas}} account here at Wikiquote IS mine, and I had SUL claim on it, but from what I can determine with the SUL account tools available there are still MANY other UNATTACHED Abraxas accounts on other wikimedia wikis, which are NOT mine, but all of them with less use than that I made of the account before it was blocked by Cirt some years ago, in what I continue to assert was the rampage of IMPROPER account blocking and page defacement based upon many FALSE ASSUMPTIONS and accusations of misuse or abuse of my accounts. I have not yet bothered to respond to all that has occurred with the thoroughness such circumstances merit, but I expect to make some revelations in coming months which I hope will clarify MANY of the issues, from some of my perspectives, and perhaps put an end to much of the confusion that I know still exists related to past occurences and present situations. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 10:53, 6 February 2013 (UTC) + tweaks

* You should be able to create an account and log in if you choose another name. When the [http://toolserver.org/~quentinv57/tools/sulinfo.php?username=Abraxas&showinactivity=1 "SUL" query] indicates that a name has already been used, it is generally best to just pick a different one. The formal "sanctum" for your request is at [[Wikiquote:Changing username/Usurpation]], but the SUL query indicates that none of the other "Abraxas" accounts, some of which may have been yours, have been used extensively or recently, so it is probably best to just start fresh with a new name. You can rename your old "Abraxas" accounts to a new name that nobody has already taken, at the appropriate sanctum of each local wiki. I appreciate that the situation is annoying, but "[[Romeo and Juliet|a rose by any other name would smell as sweet]]". It is unfortunate that the above mentioned Kalki person reserved so many names to him/herself before being stopped, but we are now stuck with the adverse consequences of this arrogant misappropriation. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:43, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
:: '''There are many ways to view the fortunes and misfortunes of past and present events.''' I will concede my appropriation of names was ''extensive'', and ''quite'' naturally and ''properly'' would and should produce ''suspicions'' of extensively improper or even malicious behavior to those who lack clear understandings of what I was actually doing and many of the reasons why, but I will politely insist that I beleive it was NOT an act of deplorable arrogance, though I can concede also that it can easily ''seem'' that to others, within this range of time and circumstances, within which we are presently operating. Time will eventually tell where those who have made the most unfortunate errors lie, and who was most adamantly motivated to promote awareness, appreciation and profound respect for proper and sometimes vitally important freedoms, justice, liberty, life and love of ALL. '''I continue to wish others well, and will probably begin attending to some significant aspects of the VERY complex issues raised here more noticably and extensively within a few weeks.''' ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 15:22, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

*From the OP
Thanks to all who responded. This is a lot more complex than I had thought. It still doesn't explain why I can't use the same name for different Wikis, but it may somehow be involved. To note: the account names I tried to use that said they were used, but would not let me log in due to incorrect passwords, nor open an account in that name (though one already existed in Pedia), was not "Abraxas", so should not have been subject to any unusual restrictions that I know of. It looks like a "bug" to me.

Only one "Abraxas" was used by me (that I know of - I can't claim perfect, years-long recall) in Wikipedia. That name was used by me on over 5000 other internet accounts that exist in my LastPass list, and probably more, but not on any other Wikis here.

Thanks and have a good day.
[[Special:Contributions/67.142.172.23|67.142.172.23]] 21:45, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

== [[Wikiquote: Limits on quotations]] ==

Anyone care to comment on the discussion at [[Wikiquote:Village_pump#Wikiquote:_Limits_on_quotations|the Village pump]]? Thanks. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 16:38, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

== Block request for 74.131.177.233 ==

* {{user|74.131.177.233}}
Please block this IP address and [[Special:Nuke/74.131.177.233|nuke]] its vandalism. Thanks, [[User:Mathonius|Mathonius]] ([[User talk:Mathonius|talk]]) 23:37, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 02:08, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

== [[User:Whaledad]] ==

Hereby I want to file a complain against [[User:Whaledad]] for making the unfounded accusation against me by stating "''Mdd's articles violating copyright rules by indiscriminatingly copy large chunks of text to do so (he actually quoted other encyclopedias in his wikiquote articles''." [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote%3ARequests_for_adminship%2FMdd&diff=1540953&oldid=1540892]

After asking for clarification on [[User talk:Whaledad#Copyright|his talk page]], Whaledad was unable to deliver proof or even an example (present in the Internet Wayback), and he is unwilling to take back the accusation.

I think these kind of accusations go beyond the realm of criticism, and should be considered a [[WQ:NPA|personal attack]]. I request appropriate action to be taken. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:35, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

:It seems Wikipedia:No personal attacks is quite clear [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_personal_attacks#What_is_considered_to_be_a_personal_attack.3F here]: ''Accusations about personal behavior that lack evidence. Serious accusations require serious evidence. Evidence often takes the form of diffs and links presented on wiki.'' counts as PA. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:47, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

:*It's unclear what - short of a law suit - Mdd would consider proof/evidence for my statement. This situation was extensively discussed at the [http://nl.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wikiquote:De_kantine/archief_2#Hier_moet_gewoon_alles_rechtenvrij_zijn.3F nl.wikiquote Village Pump ("de Kantine")]. After that discussion about 84 articles written by Mdd were submitted to Vote for Deletion based on copyright violations ([http://nl.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wikiquote:Te_verwijderen_pagina%27s/archief_5#Nominaties_8_april_2012 VfD page from that time frame] use <Ctrl-F copyvio> to find the relevant nominations), and were deleted as such by a local Admin. With that I rest my case. [[User:Whaledad|<big>W</big><big>\|/</big><big>hale</big>'''dad''']] ([[User_talk:Whaledad#Top|Talk to me]]) 22:55, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

:*OK, I feel I need to "reopen the case" and add a link to [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive_33#Wikihounding_by_User:Whaledad a somewhat similar case on Commons], where an Admin (Jameslwoodward) among other things had the following to say: "''In this particular case -- as with all the other Mdd images that I have looked at that Whaledad has nominated -- unless we receive credible permission through OTRS, the DR should close with the deletion of the image. I note that until Whaledad came along and fixed it, Mdd was claiming copyright in File:Geert van de Camp.jpg, which is a simple crop of an image provided by another user. As similar correction was required at <follow links to 6 image>. I have tagged the following uploads of Mdd with <nowiki>{{delete}}</nowiki>: <follow list of 8 images, 6 of them now red links>. Some of them appear to be FOP problems, while others are claims of "Own Work" that do not appear to be correct. There are many other images which are web size with no EXIF which I suspect, but cannot prove, are problems.
::''So, we have here a user, Mdd, who has, through inexperience and lack knowledge, or perhaps, deliberately:''
::*''Uploaded a wide variety of images that have been deleted as copyvio''
::*''Has marked other people's work as "Own Work" a number of times''
::*''Has failed to properly attribute the photographer on images where he has made a simple crop''
::*''Has not paid attention to the underlying copyright of various artists in places where FOP does not apply''
::*''Has come here complaining of Wikihounding, when the work done by Whaledad appears to have been entirely correct, although his description of Mdd's errors may have been a little too harsh''
::''Under the circumstances, I would advise Mdd to withdraw this complaint before a similar complaint is made against him. Bringing people who are simply doing their job to ANb is a nuisance for all of us.''"
::After some more back and forth (in which Mdd even had the audacity to ask a Dutch Admin to take over his part of the discussion), Mdd conceded and withdrew his (false) accusation of Wikihounding. [[User:Whaledad|<big>W</big><big>\|/</big><big>hale</big>'''dad''']] ([[User_talk:Whaledad#Top|Talk to me]]) 23:34, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
::: I would like to briefly comment here. I have certainly witnessed or endured some attitudes and remarks I regard as severely mistaken or even slanderous in regard to many things in my life, and have on some occasions passionately defended others or myself in such ways as I have believed to be proper, and I am not unfamiliar with the bitter sorrows and anger that can be manifest in both intellectual and emotional conflicts which can occur in openly and overt or very subtle and covert ways.  '''Though I certainly sympathize and agree with him in many regards, I actually disagree with Mdd that there is any need for admin action here''', and though I might be prone to side with him in respect to so much as I can discern regarding his previous disputes and reactions to them, I do not recommend demanding any apologies of others, who have generraly done what they actually believed to be right, even if it might be wrong from the perspectives of others, and certainly do not advise seeking for any needless punishments or censures of anyone, nor to expect any beyond those that might ultimately come to some, as true necessities of remorse, with recognition of their own errors. '''I truly hope the matters in dispute can be more amiably discerned in the future, and a greater respect for all and among all can flourish.''' Blessings to all. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 01:51, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

:::: Regarding the quotation from [[w:WP:NPA|WP:NPA]], in idiomatic English the phrase "personal behavior" refers to the ''manner'' of conducting oneself, such as rudeness, disruption, dishonesty, etc. The allegation about copyright, whether it is true or not, is an objective statement about a person's actions, not a criticism of ''personal behavior''. Therefore, I do not believe this request for administrative intervention against personal attacks is well grounded. In order to suggest how this could have been handled better, I will comment to Mdd about a couple statements in the discussion at Whaledad's talk page that led up to filing this complaint:
::::* "I think I am within my rights to demand you to prove here and now the accusation you made here today."[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Whaledad&diff=1541123]
::::*:— More properly, in making your case to the community at [[Wikiquote:Requests for adminship/Mdd]], you are within your rights to say you believe the accusation is unfounded and not supported by evidence. Your demand is counterproductive: you don't ''want'' Whaledad to successfully prove it, you want the community to decide he has ''not'' proved it.
::::* "you can't deliver that proof because there isn't any. Therefor I ask you take it back, to rectifier and apologize."[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Whaledad&diff=1541221]
::::*:— You can simply make your case to the community that there isn't any proof, and let the community decide. Whether Whaledad changes his mind, and what he does about it, is up to him.
:::: I think it was a mistake to confront Whaledad about this on his talk page. Instead of telling ''him'' on his talk page to prove it or take it back, it would be better to simply tell ''us'' in the community discussion that you think we should ignore it because it is unproven. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:34, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Ok, so be it. I thank you both for sharing your insides, which does open some new perspectives I do appreciate. I admit in the heat of moment I might not used the proper tone both on the talk page, and in formulating this request. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 01:36, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
:For the record, I followed Ningauble's advice and added a footnote in the RfA discussion, [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote%3ARequests_for_adminship%2FMdd&diff=1542055&oldid=1542040 here] -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 00:08, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

== Template:Official policy ==

Just wondering if someone could update [[Template:Official policy]].
It contains two <code><nowiki></nowiki></code> tags that should be updated to <code><nowiki> </nowiki></code> tags since <code><nowiki></nowiki></code> is not a valid html tag. Thanks. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 21:35, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Also, if someone could move [[Template:WQ BW21]] to [[User:Blackwatch21/WQ BW21]] without leaving a redirect, that would be good as well. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 21:40, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

== [[Wikiquote: Limits on quotations]] ==

Once again, I have asked for further discussion on this topic at [[Wikiquote:Village_pump#Wikiquote:_Limits_on_quotations|the VP]]. Can anyone else please join the discussion? I would so love to move this further along, as it appears that we are increasingly facing edit wars and related skirmishes all related to this topic. Thanks! ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 17:16, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

== BarkingFish and sockpuppets ==

*{{checkuser|BarkingFish}}

# {{checkuser|1=Tmalmjursson}}
# {{checkuser|1=Cat in the Hat}}
# {{checkuser|1=Humblesnore}}
Per [[w:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BarkingFish/Archive]], these have all been {{confirmed}} as longtime socks of {{user|BarkingFish}}.

What do other admins think should be done about this, with regards to the main account? -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 00:14, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

:I'm not an admin, but in my opinion this user's main account should not be blocked here because he never made any disruptive edits at Wikiquote. For me it's as simple as that. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 01:18, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
::Okay, thanks for the input, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 01:23, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
: This person is evidently troubled, but I don't see what it has to do with Wikiquote. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 11:21, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
::Alright, thanks for the comment, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 21:41, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

:::There seems to be an agreement, that this sockpuppetry doesn't effect Wikiquote, yet after Cirt's latest comment a [[:Category:Wikiquote sockpuppets of BarkingFish]] was created. This kind of overhead seems against this agreement, so I started a VFD for this category.

:::This also makes me wonder, why those three sub-(puppet)-accounts are blocked? None of them have made any edit here, and there is no global block. Blocking these accounts and adding a note made them active here, which seems useless. Couldn't we avoid this next time? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:52, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
::::Well, they're certainly all technically {{confirmed}} as sockpuppets, however in this case I'll respectfully defer to the judgment expressed by the community, (which is, by the way, the reason I brought this notice, here, for discussion.) Cheers, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 06:54, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

:::::Is there something I am missing here? If I am not mistaken:
:::::* The English Wikipedia policy on Sockpuppetry is, that sockpuppetry is strongly discouraged but not forbidden. The use of sockpuppets is no reason for any blockade, just the misuse, and
:::::* Wikipedia and Wikiquote operated independently. Users cannot be blocked on Wikiquote for things they have done on Wikipedia, and vice versa, unless there misuse on multiple projects and reason for global blockade.
:::::Yet, Cirt has blocked three accounts, which were not even active here. There was no sockpuppetry use, let alone misuse here on Wikiquote. Just BarkingFish made only one (very) constructive edit here.

:::::So is there an (exceptional) rule that (sockpuppet)accounts once "technically confirmed as sockpuppets on Wikipedia" automatically get blocked on other projects? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 14:07, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
::::::Generally, yes, there are exceptions, for example, when they are part of non-acknowledged sockfarms being built up surreptitiously over time. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 16:13, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
:::::::[http://xkcd.com/285/ "Citation needed"] ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 17:00, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
::::::::''[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/BarkingFish&diff=550236211&oldid=550234304 " I've proxied into wikipedia through holes you'll never find, I've committed very tiny pieces of vandalism over a period of quite a long time, most of it before the Abuse filter was active on here, so a lot of it was missed, and had more than 20 throwaway accounts from multiple ISPs. I think i've covered everything. Smell ya later." - BarkingFish.]'' -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 17:56, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
::::::::: Please cite the ''policy'' that allows you to block accounts on projects independent of Wikipedia, where said accounts have not engaged in vandalism or any sort of malicious behavior (in this case, the accounts you blocked had zero edits here). You, Cirt, are in an awkward position if you can't cite such a policy. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:51, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
:::::: No, there is no official policy that Wikiquote should block accounts here that are blocked elsewhere (nor that Wikiquote should de-sysop accounts here that are de-sysoped elsewhere). However, [[Wikiquote:Username policy#Using multiple user accounts|"It is recommended that users not edit under multiple usernames, unless they have a very good reason"]], and it is not uncommon to block duplicate accounts as a preventative measure when the very good reason is not evident or, especially, when evidence on another wiki is suggestive of a bad reason. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 19:54, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

{{quote of the day
| quote = He that would [[live]] in [[peace]] and at ease, Must not speak all he [[knows]], nor [[judge]] all he sees.
| author = Benjamin Franklin
}}

I do not wish to personally confront what might be some of the oversights or under-sightedness of Cirt on many matters, and am willing to be forgiving of the errors of anyone, and to pardon them from even what might pass for just punishments if malice and will to do harm are rejected and abandoned.

I know that others who seek to level and constrain the language and ideas of others in ways I find appalling do not always approve of my honest commentaries or bold assessments regarding many things, but I will make a few here, which I believe can be generally helpful and beneficial.

Extremely [[nihilistic]] or opinionated vandals of very low intellectual or moral integrity and those who seek to establish or maintain what might be described as [[authoritarian]] control or habits, customs or rules developed or devised with strong infusions of such dark [[cynicism]] and cleverness as all too often passes for [[wisdom]] among the intellectually weak and naïve and the immorally or morally oppressed, have this much in common: '''they seek to promote [[fears]], suspicions, discord and drive others into forms of panic and cowardice and the embracing of a frightened and easily manipulated will to suppress and oppress all those who differ with them, dissent from them, or are effective at presenting ideas and opinions they dislike or have no affinity for, and consider rivals, opponents or enemies.''' Throughout history, at all levels of clearly or obscurely social, unsocial and antisocial engagement amidst all formal and informal alliances or groups of people, there have been MANY complex forms of influences at work, which MANY like to find ways to simplify in very deficient and flawed ways into an "US vs THEM" mentality and framework.

Throughout the ages the wisest and most healthy of minds of all political, religious and social traditions have always resisted and opposed such tendencies to the extent they believed they effectively could, knowing always that there are limitations upon themselves, their times and resources, and those of others far less discerning and far more prone to being dupes to those who regularly engage in such tropes with maliciously or callously deceitful intentions.

I have little doubt, from what little I have payed attention to this particular matter, that Barking Fish is a pathetically disturbed individual — and I have little doubt that increasing the fame and fear of such pathetically disturbed individuals serves many of their interests and desires as much as it does those who are most habitually prone to promoting such fame and fears for what they might perhaps believe to be the "good" of everyone. '''There are pathetically disturbed people in the world, ALWAYS, and to the extent they cannot be easily helped, or refuse help, and even seek to vilify and denigrate others most capable of providing help, and yet do not actively engage in unjust forms of destruction or oppression of others, they should generally be left to gradually develop or stagnate and pass away, as their own inclinations impel them, or only occasionally and gently offered such help as they might accept.''' Some might consider me harsh and cold in making such assessments, but I believe that this is preferable to being either soft-minded or hotly passionate about doing such injurious or dangerous things as need not actually be done against anyone, to the service of greater forms or aspects of the good of [[Humanity]], its proper [[rights]] everywhere and anywhere and the [[Liberty]] to assert and indicate these.

When I was an admin here, I was very swiftly reactive to clear vandalism, and squelched it rather rapidly, and was widely recognized as being extraordinarily effective at that, and battling it across MANY wikis, which led to me being "active" on many — but though there were many incidents of suspicious or distressing behavior that were not clear vandalism, I did not go about seeking people or puppet accounts of people to vent my wrath or frustrations upon others in childish and even infantile ways, which might EASILY be misdirected and applied in ERROR. '''I simply remained alert and confident that IF and WHEN many very clear abuses occurred they could rapidly be dealt with by myself and others.'''

A problem far more endemic and pervasive and dangerous to the health of many projects which I saw developing was the rather obscured or even approved abuse of many forms of privilege to suppress dissent or divergence from such will as some wished to declare "OFFICIAL" and implicitly sacred or sound, and I made some rather pointed statements to that effect, just prior to having the resources and wills of a few others directed in many ways against what long-standing good reputation as a conscientious and admirable worker as I believe I had earned by my actions, up to that point. Others later sought to use such apparent disgrace or disfavor as had developed here, to snowball that into a "generally negative" impression of me and my intentions wherever they could among the WIkimedia projects, in rather appalling ways, which I will decline to elaborate upon, at this point, as I have no intentions of belaboring many past errors and mistaken assumptions beyond such points as I believe necessary for the development of more aware and appreciative and healthy attitudes towards those who DO and MUST differ with oneself, for various reasons.

I wish to again assert that I have no personal animosity to those who fall into errors of various kinds, but I generally DO seek ways to help others out of errors — and know that others can be helpful to me, in rising out of whatever forms of error or ignorance I might seem to be in, and am usually quite grateful for what help others can and do provide me, even if sometimes unwittingly.

'''Those are just a few of my thoughts on this matter, and I congratulate others for recently showing and demonstrating capacities for far more reserved and circumspect reactions to circumstances than many are inclined to encourage or even acknowledge as either necessary or proper.''' It is evidence of a growing conscientiousness that there ALWAYS are aspects of things which are beyond one's direct observation, and though many actual or potential aspects of these CANNOT or should not ever rule one's own reactions, prior to being KNOWN, to maintain a healthy skepticism to ANY claims is ALWAYS an important procedure in maintaining healthy forms of Awareness, Life, and Love, and developing truly fair and genuinely cohesive societies, alliances and presentational projects such as this WIki. '''[[Blessings]] to all.''' ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 19:29, 24 April 2013 (UTC) + tweaks
:I agree with [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=1566471&oldid=1566469 this above comment by admin Ningauble]. Cheers, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 02:30, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
::Two things keep bothering me. First so far I have seen no indication, that this Wikipedia sockpuppetry has affected Wikiquote in the past or could possibly affect Wikiquote in the future. There seem to be no reason for preventative measure. And second, we don't automatically block all confirmed Wikipedia sockpuppets. Why would we make exceptions? It seems to me the only reason to make exceptions is, if there are indications that it might negatively affect Wikiquote.
::Just as [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wikiquote:Votes_for_deletion/Category:Wikiquote_sockpuppets_of_BarkingFish here] proposed, I like to propose to stop importing Wikipedia sockpuppet investigations and results here, when there is no indication that it might negatively affect Wikiquote. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 13:39, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
:::Best to keep it on a case-by-case basis, seeking out input from other admins and the community. In cases of obvious vandals and cross-wiki-spammers, blocks on sight for accounts on all wikis are routine. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 15:41, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

== Martha Washington ==

There was once a [[Martha Washington]] page on the wiki, deleted because of lack of source quotes, which I would like restored so that I can work on it as a base, sourcing whatever I can of what there was upon it — and adding whatever I can beyond that, in the next week or so. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 03:15, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}}, now at [[User:Kalki/Martha Washington]]. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 03:37, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
:: Thanks. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 03:39, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
:::You're most welcome, {{user|Kalki}}, have a great day! :) Cheers, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 05:11, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

== [[“You will never be able to escape from your heart. So it's better to listen to what it has to say.”]] ==

Can someone delete [[“You will never be able to escape from your heart. So it's better to listen to what it has to say.”]], it's nonsense/vandalism?[[User:King jakob c 2|King jakob c 2]] ([[User talk:King jakob c 2|talk]]) 12:15, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

:{{done}}. Next time please just tag the articles with {{Tl|Delete}} or {{Tl|Db}} ("delete because"). Then they get automatically listed in this [[:Category:Candidates for speedy deletion]] and will be deleted afterwards. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:30, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

== Spambot or other vandalism on Woodrow Wilson talk page ==

[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Woodrow_Wilson&action=history Since the 13th of April] the talk page of [[Woodrow Wilson]] has been repeatedly vandalized by what might be some persistent vandal or defective spambot of some kind, and should probably be given at least some short-term protection from anonymous edits. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 05:17, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
: {{done}} Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 02:49, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

== [[George Washington]] ==

[[George Washington]] is attracting a lot of vandalism from IPs. Can someone semi-protect it? Thanks, [[User:King jakob c 2|King jakob c 2]] ([[User talk:King jakob c 2|talk]]) 22:02, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
* {{done}} Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 23:46, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

== Personal attack by DanielTom ==

DanielTom: ''[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ADanielTom&diff=1569366&oldid=1569048 "I think you are in serious need of psychiatric help. Please seek it. ~ DanielTom"]''.

In response to my request for the user to cease posting to my talkpage, he gave a personal attack.

I would appreciate it if an admin can please warn {{user|DanielTom}} that this is inappropriate behavior.

Thank you, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 16:48, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
:While I do not wish to wade into the specifics of what the two of you are arguing about, my initial reaction to his request is that you would be wise to grow a thicker skin. Sure, you may be offended by the language DanielTom used, but I hardly find it to be behavior requiring intervention in the form of any punitive action against him. I've been subject to plenty of denigrative attacks throughout my years here - it's not entirely unexpected when there are disagreements. I also note that this is at least the second time that you have been involved in an exercise of escalating rhetoric with another user, causing what should have been a fairly minor issue at the beginning to metamorphose into something much larger. Again, yes it would be nice if we all addressed each other in the most civil manner, but that's not always realistic in an online community such as this. As a more visible member of said community in the role of an admin, I would expect you to let a bit more slide and not be so reactive to attacks. My advice: let it go (see similar advice from BD2412: [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:BD2412&diff=1568998&oldid=1568983#Request_for_advice_about_DanielTom], where he advised you "to stay calm and remain above the fray."). ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 17:43, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

* Let's say I know someone who I think is (for example) considering suicide. What [[User:Cirt|Cirt]] is saying is that, basically, if I tell that person to contact a mental health professional immediately, that would be a "personal attack". But it isn't. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:19, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
::My point is that whether or not he feels it is a personal attack is something subjective that neither I nor anyone else can decide. But surely it does not rise to the level where some action against you as the author of the comment is needed. I am saying that I believe that both sides of this dispute are overreacting a bit and I would advise both to dial it down a bit. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 18:28, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

::Thank you, [[User:UDScott|UDScott]]. In any case, [[User:Cirt|Cirt]] already got what he wanted: he put this giant and bogus title "Personal attack by DanielTom" not just here, but in every admin's Talk page. As if admins needed to be reminded to read the ''Administrators' noticeboard''. Jesus Christ. I genuinely think [[User:Cirt|Cirt]] needs mental help, all the more now. If that is a "personal attack", block me and get it over with. This is absolutely ridiculous. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:41, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

*...seriously? ''This'' is what you consider a personal attack? [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 18:59, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
**'''Reply by Cirt:''' Understood, {{user|EVula}} and {{user|UDScott}}. Thank you for your comments. No further action required. I'll take the suggested input by these two admins under advisement. I appreciate it. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 19:50, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
*** [[User:Cirt|Cirt]], you truly are an embarrassment. You harass people. You are the the most petty, childish and vindictive person I have ever come across on Wikiquote. I have less than zero respect for you. I hope that's clear enough. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 10:27, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
:::P.S. A sensible admin should now block me. I propose a one-week block. Thanks. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 10:41, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

== Mary Tyler Moore ==

There was once a [[Mary Tyler Moore]] page on the wiki, which was deleted among the various overwhelming number of deletions of prods that have been created for the relatively few active editors here. I would like that restored so that I can work on it as a base within the next week or so, sourcing what quotes I can, and adding some, perhaps. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 22:22, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} good luck. [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:52, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

== subtle vandal ==

I recently have reverted two edits where an ostensibly plausible citation was given for an implausible statement by an anon IP. Just now it was the [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Albert_Einstein&curid=2&diff=1569829&oldid=1565305 Einstein page] where it seems a citation of another actual quote was copied to make the addition seem plausible. In the previous case (though I do not immediately recall on which page I encountered it) the citation itself was a bit more implausible, but rather subtly so to anyone just giving it a casual glance, and in both cases I actually did an internet search to confirm my suspicions, before reverting the additions. I am just noting this as a heads-up on the situation, because this might indicate the currently active presence of a subtly malicious vandal at work, and as I do not monitor things anywhere near as much as I once did, there might be other incidents I failed to catch. Blessings. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 04:34, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

== DivesGreatestMan and sockpuppets ==

*{{checkuser|DivesGreatestMan‎}}

# {{checkuser|1=SonPhanGreat}}
# {{checkuser|1=WickyLicky}}
# {{checkuser|1=Sonphan1}}

I like to ask attention for this user:
* DivesGreatestMan‎ created a userpage today here on Wikiquote, claiming he is born September 13, 2003
* On April 27 April 2013‎ he created the User:SonPhanGreat page on Wikicommons with the same info, see http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:SonPhanGreat
* On 14:49, 27 April 2013 the {{w|User:SonPhanGreat}} is being blocked on Wikipedia after being idetified as sockpop of {{w|user:WickyLicky}}
* The userpage {{w|User:SonPhanGreat}} made 23:41, 24 April 2013 with the same info as User:DivesGreatestMan‎ here, is made invisible on Wikipedia
* The sock puppeteer User:WickyLicky made his first edit 21:21, 1 November 2012

Now what drew my attention in the first place was the day of birth. It seems like a very bad idea that we allow children on Wikiquote to mention there full name, and day of birth. This is why I deleted the user page this afternoon. In the meantime a new userpage with the same info is created, and an userpage with a cryptic remark.

This made me start further investigation with the above mentioned. Now it seems he has shifted his attention from Wikipedia to Wikiquote after being his block on Wikipedia. Now I would like to request feedback on how to further respond here? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:22, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

:In the meantime I blocked him (for one month) after he started vandalizing multiple (new) pages, and afterwards also blocked his talk-page for making threads. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:35, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

::Because of this pattern of cross Wiki vandalism, I would propose to block this user, and his known sockpuppets indefinitely, and have the text of his use page removed. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:49, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
:::Sorry to butt in, but is there any reason to believe that this date of birth is correct? He could be trolling.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 16:56, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
::::I simply don't know. I do know he added (almost) the same info on Wikipedia, on Wikicommons and here on Wikiquote. And this info is suppressed on the English Wikipedia, but I also do not know why (yet). I do think we should not allow this kind of info on userpages, true or false. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 17:17, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

:: I deleted the user and talk pages due to impersonating an administrator. I would have used an indefinite block for this ''vandalism only account'', rather than one month, because ''harassment & impersonation'' is a special [[w:Aggravation (law)|aggravating circumstance]] that merits swift and final expulsion. Regarding self-identified children generally, it would be appropriate to remove any personally identifying information. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:00, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} Thanks Ningauble, I have changed the block to indefinite. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 10:42, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

== Contributions 99.90.197.87 ==

*{{checkuser|99.90.197.87}}

I could be mistaken, but I don't see the anom user 99.90.197.87 making any constructive edits. Edits like today [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Olympic_Games&diff=prev&oldid=1579997], [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Apartheid&oldid=1579998] could be deleted as test-edits, but this anom user is going on for quite some time, making similar edits. Should there be some more structural action here? [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 09:13, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
: I have sent the user a warning. As Runningonbrains remarked in the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&page=User%3A99.90.197.87 Wikipedia block log,] whether this is a [[w:WP:TROLL|WP:TROLL]] or a [[w:WP:COMPETENCE|WP:COMPETENCE]] problem, either way it's disruptive. I would not hesitate to block if the behavior continues. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:59, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

==Chip Berlet Quotes Page==
Over four years ago I complained that the page about me is primarily composed of negative critical material and very unbalanced. It was originally set up as part of a series of political attacks on me and my work that spread across several Wikimedia projects and discussions. I am not allowed to edit my own page, and no one has stepped forward to remedy the problem. All of the quotes About me contain nasty personal attacks. Most of the cites and links are to more nasty personal attacks. All I am asking is that someone here in this discussion forum take on the responsibility for fixing what is clearly a biased page. --[[User:Cberlet|Cberlet]] ([[User talk:Cberlet|talk]]) 02:38, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
: Relevant discussion: [[Wikiquote:Village pump archive 21#Using Wikiquote for a vendetta]]. While we cannot delete quotes ''just because'' they contain harsh criticisms, it is indeed desirable that our articles be balanced. To this end, I have just added three (more positive) quotes to the article, including two written by yourself. See [https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Chip_Berlet&diff=1584600&oldid=1545263]. Regards, [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 09:24, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

== About the quotes of Kedar Joshi ==

Kedar Joshi is not a notable person. User [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/User_talk:RogDel RogDel] seems Kedar Joshi himself or other but he is constantly adding material to wikiquote. I request action about his behavior of this. [[User:Kedaaar Jo Sheee|Kedaaar Jo Sheee]] ([[User talk:Kedaaar Jo Sheee|talk]]) 18:14, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
:The discussion concerning Kedar Joshi's notability (or lack thereof) is still ongoing (at [[Wikiquote:Village_pump#Kedar Joshi quote farming]]), as already explained elsewhere, so, needless to say, [[User:RogDel|RogDel]]'s "behavior" was perfectly fine and legitimate. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:50, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
:: I note that this editor seems to have very strong feelings about Kedar Joshi; I have just reverted a page blank he/she made on [http://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=Kedar_Joshi&diff=prev&oldid=2535437 Wikibooks].--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 19:54, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
::: I note that user "Kedaaar Jo Sheee" has posted duplicate copies of this missive on multiple project and discussion pages, in a manner that might be considered disruptive. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 23:20, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

== Request for closure ==

* [[Wikiquote:Village pump#Kedar Joshi quote farming]]
* [[Wikiquote:Deletion review#Kedar Joshi]]
These two discussions have had ample time and participation to reach consensus, if any. I would be grateful if someone a little less heavily involved than myself would assess the results and close them. Thanks. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:10, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
: A month has passed with no further comments on these discussions.... ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 21:53, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
:: {{done}} Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 03:49, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
::: 1. If [[User:RogDel/Quotes added to WQ|these quotes]] can be included (and I see no reason why they should not be included), I see no reason why quotes by Kedar Joshi should be excluded. 2. ''“Among more experienced editors, the vast majority support removal” – [[User:BD2412|BD2412]]''
::::Since WQ is not a democracy, this seems to be an invalid argument for removal. There does not seem to have been any stronger argument countering all the [[User:RogDel/Notability as a source of quotes|simple and logical arguments]] I have made in support of inclusion of such quotations. ~ [[User:RogDel|RogDel]] ([[User talk:RogDel|talk]]) 10:50, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
::RogDel, with all due respect, I seriously doubt that we should create such explicit regulations about such exceptional situations. As to Kedar Joshi, after years of discussion we should draw a line, and not keep bringing it up. As to the regulation even for me it is confusion, trying to make a difference between quotability and notability, let alone outsiders. There are so much ins and out about, and regularly there seem to be a good understanding. Don't try to make regulations for those handful of cases we don't all agree on. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:35, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
::: <edit conflict> Regarding RogDel's first point, [[w:WP:OTHERSTUFF|other stuff]] is not always good precedent, particularly when the addition of that stuff gives the appearance of [[w:WP:POINT|making a point]] about a minority view from these discussions. Now that these discussions have been closed, there may be further action to deal with this stuff that was added while the discussions were ongoing. Regarding the second point, discussions are assessed based on a variety of factors, including (besides the votes) policies, practices, precedents, arguments, & etc. As expressly indicated in the closing remarks, from which you selectively quote, anonymous single-purpose accounts that are not cognizant of or do not address those factors have little or no weight in assessing the arguments. Regarding the essay linked above, it directly contradicts the established guideline at [[Wikiquote:Quotability]], which makes it relatively unpersuasive as an argument in these cases. If you think the guideline is wrong then it might be better to propose changing it rather than try an end-run around it. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 12:42, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
* RogDel, I think maybe only one or two people have read your (rather long and repetitive) essay. Perhaps, for their benefit, one could condense it into one sentence: "If a quote is cited in a 'highly reliable' secondary source (even if just once) then it is notable enough to be on Wikiquote." Would you accept that as a fair summary? ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 13:16, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

== new pattern-vandal ==

A new pattern-vandal has been vandalizing the [[Jimbo Wales]] page and user pages. The latest account activity has been as {{User|Technoquatic Quoticals}}, and this account and other associated accounts seem appropriate for blockage as clearly vandal accounts. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 22:22, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
: He keeps making new accounts to vandalize the same pages. {{User|Froonkfurterich‎}} seems to be his latest incarnation. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 09:16, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
::I put a short-term block on this user, but if current behavior continues, I'm sure a long-term one will be necessary. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 11:29, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
:::See also [[w:WP:Sockpuppet_investigations/Technoquat/Archive]] [[User:Vanischenu|Vanischenu]] ([[User talk:Vanischenu|talk]]) 23:17, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

== Feuding between DanielTom and Cirt ==

Per the discussion ongoing at [[User talk:UDScott#Query for help]] (and on my talk page), I am setting forth the following interaction ban in response to the incessant and disruptive feuding, baiting, and forum shopping between DanielTom and Cirt.

DanielTom could properly be blocked for incivility at this point (he has said as much). If DanielTom attempts to bait or otherwise interact with Cirt, talks to him, talks about him, or reverts or otherwise contests any of his actions, I will block DanielTom for a minimum of thirty days.

If Cirt attempts to interact with DanielTom, talks to him, talks about him, or reverts or otherwise contests any of his actions, I will move to desysop Cirt on this project. Reacting to baiting is not the trait of an administrator.

To the extent that either Cirt or DanielTom thinks the other is making improper edits or otherwise misbehaving, do nothing about and say nothing about it. The other administrators on this project are observant, and we will see and will handle any violations of policy.

I hope that my fellow administrators agree with my determination with respect to this matter. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 01:27, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

----

;Reply by Cirt to BD2412
:''Originally posted on another page: [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:UDScott&diff=1594538&oldid=1594501 diff].''

This is my reply to [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AUDScott&diff=1594501&oldid=1594445 comment by BD2412].

'''Comment:''' @{{user|BD2412}}, understood. I will take your advice to heart. I will do my best to not react to the baiting. I will do my best to only engage in a polite and constructive manner from here on out. I am sorry for troubling you with this. I will do my best to rise above this matter. Thank you for your advice and your input. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 02:44, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

;Statement by Ningauble about the ban
I endorse the interaction ban imposed by BD2412. The misconduct of both parties has been extensive and disruptive. Note that the ban as stated is indefinite in duration. I would not want to entertain an application to lift an indefinite ban in less than six months or a year.
 Regarding stipulated consequences for violating the ban by DanielTom:  I approve of handling this in a progressive manner, as has been done, rather than imposing a 30 day block on the first infraction. I think any further infractions should be met with ''steep'' progression.
 Regarding stipulated consequences for violating the ban by Cirt:  This is not really an administrative sanction. A [[WQ:VOC|vote of confidence]] may be called any time that three users concur. Administrative sanctions may still be imposed for misconduct even if it is not stipulated in this ban. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:15, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

=== Cirt has ''already'' breached the interaction ban ===

BD2412 made the terms of the interaction ban clear:
:[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=1594507&oldid=1591220 ''If Cirt attempts to interact with DanielTom, talks to him, talks about him, or reverts or otherwise contests any of his actions, I will move to desysop Cirt on this project.'']
Yet, Cirt has already completely disrespected the interaction ban: ''just one hour later'', he decided to come to my talk page, uninvited, and posted [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DanielTom&curid=139176&diff=1594537&oldid=1594424 this baiting comment].
I am tempted to reply to his baiting comment, <s>but I won't</s>, as I don't think I would particularly enjoy being unable to edit WQ for 30 days. However, after Cirt's ''direct'' breach of the interaction ban cited above, I would like to see BD keeping his word and actually "[moving] to desysop Cirt on this project". ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 08:52, 26 June 2013 (UTC) last edit: 19:07, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
: Firstly, I have blocked you for 24 hours to be sure that you understand that I am serious about this interaction ban. As I said above, if either of you thinks the other is making improper edits or otherwise misbehaving, do nothing about and say nothing about it. That includes accusing one another of violations of this interaction ban. Please do not imagine for a moment that other administrators on this site are unaware of any action that either of you is taking.
: Secondly, I hope that you agree that fair warning of a penalty to be imposed is necessary before imposition of that penalty. I saw the post Cirt made on your talk page last night, shortly after I set forth this interaction ban. Based on Cirt's edits, there is no reason to believe that he was aware of this interaction ban at the time that he made the talk page post of which you complain. You, on the other hand, were clearly aware of it before you posted this complaint.
: In case I need to make this any clearer, both of you are to carry on as if the other does not exist.
: Finally, I hope that the community approves of my determination with respect to this problem, but if any uninvolved administrator feels that I have overstepped the bounds of my authority in my actions with respect to this matter, please feel free to unblock DanielTom. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 12:05, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
::I, for one, fully endorse both the ban and your action here. Thanks. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 19:11, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
::@BD2412: thanks for blocking me, I appreciate it. Alas, I have a hard time learning from punitive blocks, so I shall make another comment here, and be blocked for it again. I must point out that your contrived naïveté ("there is no reason to believe that [Cirt] was aware of this interaction ban at the time that he made the talk page post of which you complain") is quite breathtaking. Cirt edited several different pages after you set forth this interaction ban, including yours, UDSCott's, and Ningauble's talk pages (not just mine), so he must have seen the Recent Changes page, or at least his Watchlist. To say that he somehow missed the section you had opened an hour earlier in the Administrator's Noticeboard, with his name in it, is simply absurd. In any case, as you can see, I have mentioned Cirt in this very comment, so you should block me once again, this time for "at least 30 days." Won't that be fun for you? I ''will'' miss editing articles, but I understand that I need to be blocked, as I pose such a great danger to Wikiquote. Knock yourself out. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 12:47, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
::: Since you have now specifically requested to be blocked for 30 days, I will accommodate your request. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 12:56, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
:::: I suppose if I asked you to [insert any fantasy] me, you would also "accommodate" my request? I did not request to be blocked. Sorry that you don't understand irony. (It's not a new concept, it's been around for at least a couple of years now.) In any case, you decided to abuse your tools and block me for 30 days, as a '''smokescreen''', so that you wouldn't have to properly reply to the clarification/explanation in my comment, above, but even a child can see through that. (Nice try, though.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:17, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

=== Request for reconsideration ===
DanielTom has sent me an email stating that he has learned his lesson, and will abide by the interaction ban, and therefore seeks reconsideration of the period of the block. He seems to have gotten the message, and I am inclined to unblock, if there is general support from my fellow administrators for so doing. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 02:50, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
: I have no objection.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 11:34, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:If we can have another productive editor ''and'' not have anymore back-and-forth between them, I'd say that's the best possible scenario. Thumbs up. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 14:15, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:No objections from me, assuming the dispute is not continued. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 15:22, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
::Thanks, the three of you. And thanks to Ningauble and BD as well, even though I ''am'' disappointed by their recent actions. (Anyway, time to move on.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:35, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
: Although I received a snarky email when I extended the scope of the block,[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DanielTom&diff=1595942] I do not object to giving the benefit of the doubt if others are persuaded that he is now earnest about reform. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:41, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
::: My email to you was not "snarky", and as no person reading this here has access to it, other than the two of us, it is very ungentlemanly of you to say it was. However, I should say, the message ''you'' left at my talk page after revoking my talk page access for 30 days ''was'' "snarky", as I've just briefly explained there. Finally, I cannot believe that it was in Wikiquote's best interest to have me blocked an unable to edit articles (but, then again, maybe that's me being too egocentric.) Sincerely, [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:30, 10 July 2013 (UTC) P.S. Ningauble, if you think you can revoke my talk page access ''for 30 days'' and then not hear any criticism from me, think again. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:39, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:: As the community is in agreement, the block of [[User:DanielTom]] is lifted. The interaction ban remains is place indefinitely. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 17:02, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:DanielTom had (before asking to be unblocked) sent both BD and Ningauble more than a couple emails with diffs and links to articles that could have been easily fixed in less than 10 seconds, but he was simply ignored. Given this, I (speaking in the first person now) did request to be unblocked early so that I could edit said articles again myself [as well as others, and I quote from the email: ''I just want to go back to edit[ing] articles. (Plans include adding a few quotes to the [[Bertrand Russell]] article, [[Virgil]], and then fixing the [[Death Note]] page as promised [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Death_Note&diff=1566835&oldid=1566828])'']. I should say that the original block itself was ridiculous (in my opinion, at any rate; admittedly, it is always amusing for me to be treated like a vandal — though, oddly enough, even deliberate vandals, whose only contributions have been wrecking articles, are usually only blocked for 2 days, while I found myself blocked for 30 days, but I digress), and as I had already been blocked for about two weeks, that was indeed long enough time for me to admit "lesson learnt" [where the lesson is: 1) some people apparently do not ''really'' care about article quality, and 2) punitive blocks are considered acceptable here]). I will indeed "abide by the interaction ban" from now on. Time to focus on articles again. Thanks guys for getting me unblocked, and see you 'round. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 17:41, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:: The original block was for 24 hours, this was your ''second'' block. Persistent disruption is indeed treated differently than drive-by vandalism, and blocking to "deter the continuation of present, disruptive behavior" is [[w:WP:BLOCK#PREVENTATIVE|preventative, not punitive]]. I do recognize the distinction may not be easy to appreciate when one is on the receiving end of it, but it really is not the same thing. Regarding article fixes not done: you would not believe the length of my list of things needing to be fixed. One of the coping mechanisms I employ for problems arising faster than I can address them is to [[Procrastination|defer action]] when it appears that someone else will probably handle it. Still, the list grows daily, even without distractions like this, and the priorities I choose are mostly inexplicable even to myself. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 20:53, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
::: Maybe someday someone will explain to me ''exactly'' how blocking me for 30 days for [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=1595314&oldid=1594947 this edit] was "preventive", and not punitive. Anyway, I agree with you, this really is a "distraction", and a waste of time.~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 21:21, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

== Block request for SantiagoG ==

Hi there,

{{user|SantiagoG}} is a spambot using a non-sul account, so unfortunately it can't be locked. Please consider blocking it instead. :)

Thanks, [[User:Mathonius|Mathonius]] ([[User talk:Mathonius|talk]]) 04:43, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} Spam bots like this are pretty routine, you can usually just tag the userpage and they get deleted and blocked pretty quickly. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 06:39, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
:: Alas, this particular pattern of userpage spam has become ''very'' routine lately. They will eventually realize they are wasting their time, but it can take a while because they are remarkably stupid. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:02, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
:::Back when I still had the CheckUser bit, I'd run the occasional check to see if I could catch a bunch of accounts at one time, but alas, there was never any connection between them. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 05:15, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
::::Let us just nominate and choose a second CheckUser here, and then you get your bit backs. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 18:20, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
::::: Here, here! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 03:54, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::BD2412, if you are interested you got my vote. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 10:08, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::: I appreciate the support, but since my last bid for CU status I have come around to the view that it is probably better for the project for power to be diffused rather than concentrated. As I am already a 'crat, I would feel uncomfortable also serving as a CU at this point. However, I do think we need more CUs. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 00:44, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
::::Ningauble, in the light the diffusion of power, would you be interested in the CheckUser bit? If so you got my vote. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:45, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
::::: For my own peace of mind, I prefer not to delve into the activities of bad actors more deeply than I already do with my administrative work. I don't want to be involved in researching personally identifying information about them. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:40, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::: I'd say the chances of us having a new CheckUser on Wikiquote are about 0%. Where would the candidates get the (minimum) 25 supporting votes to be "promoted", when we don't even have 10 active contributors on this wiki? ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 14:54, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::: Not necessarily. You would be surprised by who shows up for CU elections. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:13, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::: No Wikiquote CheckUser has ever been ''legitimately'' elected here, as anyone looking at the archives can now confirm. It's not just that people with almost no local contributions show up; we've also had more than one sockpuppet voting in such elections. (And, no, I wouldn't be surprised because I've seen them.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 15:34, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::::: Well, [[m:Wikimedia Forum/On disbanding Wikiquote|it has been argued]] that sock voting makes the ''entire project'' illegitimate, but I don't think we need to go there. I am satisfied by the level of participation in past CU elections that the outcomes were not influenced by the quantity of puppet votes. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:30, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::: (Where? The discussion you linked only refers to possible copyright infringements, not to "sock voting".) The outcomes were certainly influenced by puppet votes (who helped the support votes reach the minimum of 25). While I too am "satisfied", I still feel that the current minimum (a relic blindly and rigidly imposed by meta policy) is too high, and unrealistic, for Wikiquote. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 16:58, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::No legitimate CheckUser election? [[Wikiquote:Requests for checkuser/EVula|O rly]]? [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 17:33, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::Yep. Some users there had (and still do) literally ''zero'' edits on Wikiquote, other than showing up at your election to vote support (namely, and strikingly, [[Special:Contributions/Nifky%3F|User:Nifky?]], [[Special:Contributions/Razorflame|User:Razorflame]], and [[Special:Contributions/Jake Wartenberg|User:Jake Wartenberg]]). (Incidentally, there were also other users, namely [[Special:Contributions/Juliancolton|User:Juliancolton]] and [[Special:Contributions/Counterpower|User:Counterpower]], who also had zero or just a couple of edits to articles before voting there.) None of that was your fault; nay, it was pretty much ''a must'', given that we simply don't have, ''and never had'', 25 active contributors on Wikiquote. (See the larger picture?) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:03, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::: We have more active contributors (usually defined as at least 5 article edits per month) than that. See [http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikiquote/EN/TablesWikipediaEN.htm#editor_activity_levels editor activity levels] at Wikistats. Getting them to participate in community affairs is another matter. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:27, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::: @DanielTom: (Within that lengthy discussion there were strong words alleging incompetent governance in dealing with the Poetlister socks, claiming that was sufficient grounds to disband the project.) The elections were typically called as soon as they reach 25, and results would not likely have been different had they run a little longer. This is really moot unless you want to challenge [http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests/Permissions&diff=5458382 EVula's standing] for reinstatement in the event a second CU is elected. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:43, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::: No, I don't want to challenge EVula's standing. (We need more CUs, not less. But, ain't gonna happen.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:08, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::@Ningauble, thanks. Still that particular pattern of userpage spam also worries me, and I think we should search for more structural solutions. Getting the CheckUser bit back, and (let EVula) keep running occasional checks, seems the least we could/should do. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 14:56, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::: The global Stewards are well aware of this pattern, which occurs across all wikis. Unfortunately, the IP addresses used by these spambots are highly variable by design, so blocking them, even ranges of them, is ineffective. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:10, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::Yeah, any time that I would run a check on the spam IPs, I'd get nothing. It's really annoying. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 15:41, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::: Someone might investigate whether Wikipedia has developed an Abuse filter for this pattern. However, the text changes so much that keeping up with the filter might be a game of [[w:Whac-A-Mole|Whac-A-Mole]]. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 12:56, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

== Edit filter maybe ==

I don't hang out at Wikiquote, so I'm not sure how much of a problem this is. But I just ran across [//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=ANTman&oldid=1600515 an edit] that may have been able to be stopped by an [[Special:AbuseFilter|edit filter]] similar to [[w:en:Special:AbuseFilter/135]]. Perhaps somebody could copy that filter over to here. [[Special:Contributions/64.40.54.47|64.40.54.47]] 04:13, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

== Talk page spam ==

Yesterday and today I noticed a (for me) new type of spam on the talk page: an unrelated text (size about 4k) from a rotating ip address (see for example [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Great_Mouse_Detective&diff=prev&oldid=1606173 here]). Now I noticed that 7 of 9 originated ip addresses originated from one ownerid in Venezuela. If this continues, can we than block his range of IP addresses all at once? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 10:21, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
: Thus far I count 25 IP addresses used by this spambot, ranging from 60.24.11.41 to 221.10.40.232. This is too wide a range to block without blacking out entire continents. If the problem persists then someone could try using the [[Special:AbuseFilter|Abuse filter]] to mitigate it. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 12:41, 24 July 2013 (UTC)–Updated 13:43, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

== Unblock request [[User:Diogotome]] ==

::''The following unblock request is copy/paste here (partly trimmed) from [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ABD2412&diff=1609829&oldid=1608714 here] by [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 09:16, 7 August 2013 (UTC)''
*{{checkuser|Diogotome}}
As you know, my brother was blocked some time ago in many wikis where he has zero edits... He was recently unblocked at Commons, where admin asked him to write on his user page that he is my brother. (He did so [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Diogotome]...) He was also unblocked at Wikisource [http://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3ADiogotome] on the grounds that he had no edits there. (He also has no edits here.)
:Other than the strong evidence presented by email that he is my brother (including citizen card, ID), there are other things which you included can check. 1) he created his account in 2009 (I myself didn't even know about accounts till late 2012); 2) the email with which he registered his account is diofact@hotmail.com (confirm that); 3) he still uses that email, even on his Facebook account, where you can find him (Diogo Tomé). I think it is obvious that the account is his.
Also worth noting, he, just like me, registered with his real name, which is not what socks do (...). Although I know he doesn't want to edit Wikiquote, I still don't think he should be blocked here on sock grounds.
... ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 21:47, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
:: I have lifted the block. It is my understanding that [[User:Diogotome]] has no interest in editing here. I am sure you are aware that it would raise some eyebrows (on all of the above mentioned projects) if this editor suddenly began making edits that seemed as if they are made as a proxy for you, so please take care. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 12:20, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:::Thanks (your understanding is correct). ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 12:42, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:: I don't have any problem with this unblocking, but I would like to rectify some incorrect assumptions. (1) The email with which he registered his account cannot be confirmed by any technical means available to administrators here. It is confidential information that only the account holder is at liberty to disclose. (2) Registering with a real name most definitely ''is'' something that socks do. Some of the most notorious abusers are known to impersonate real people. Finally, BD's eyebrow raising admonition cuts both ways: both accounts should avoid involvement in each other's affairs. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:39, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:::"The email with which he registered his account cannot be confirmed by any technical means available to administrators here." Where can it be confirmed? ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 17:44, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:::: I assume that it could be extracted by a developer. However, it is easy enough to change the e-mail associated with an account; we have no way of knowing whether it is the original address.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 18:06, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
::::: "It is confidential information that only the account holder is at liberty to disclose." The [[foundation:Privacy policy|Privacy policy]] identifies one way he can confirm the email address currently linked to his account (using "email this user"), and indicates conditions under which the Foundation would disclose it without his consent (e.g. subpoena). ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:09, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::: I suppose even the original email ("e-mail address confirmation") could be changed if forwarded. As to the real names question, of course socks use real names, but not ''their'' real names (any name you can choose is someone else's real name). My point is that no sock has its name so close to the sockmaster's (in this case, Diogo being a Portuguese name, and our family names being the same). Maybe if I get blocked indefinitely on Wikiquote, and unable to edit, my brother may come along to return my favor here, and ask that I be unblocked, although that is exceedingly unlikely (not the block part, but the returning of the favor part from him). ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:25, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

== Semi-protection request for Mean Girls ==

Could an administrator semi-protect [[Mean Girls]]? Too much IP vandalism going on as of lately (especially {{User|65.175.216.98}}). Thanks in advance. [[User:SnapSnap|SnapSnap]] ([[User talk:SnapSnap|talk]]) 18:26, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} - but I also trimmed this very bloated page first. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 19:02, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

== QOTD for 10 & 12 August 2013 ==

The QOTD layout at [[Wikiquote talk:Quote of the day/August 10, 2013]] will have to be placed into [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/August 10, 2013]] by an admin. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 21:36, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 23:16, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

I am once again a bit late with a selection and the QOTD layout at [[Wikiquote talk:Quote of the day/August 12, 2013]] will have to be placed into [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/August 12, 2013]] by an admin. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 14:53, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 15:04, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

== [[Talk: Main Page]] ==
Can someone semi-protect this again? It's getting vandalized a lot. [[User:King jakob c 2|'''Kjc2''']] [[User talk:King jakob c 2|jabber]] 15:47, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
: I am reluctant to protect the talk page or our main public-facing portal, where newcomers and visitors should be welcome to make pertinent inquiries and comments, unless the situation becomes unmanageable. I think the current frequency of unconstructive edits on this widely watched page is being handled well enough by folks who notice and revert in a fairly timely manner. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:07, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
::It seems in the past year only one comment was made by an anom visitors, while the page is vandalized 50+ times. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:36, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
::: You are not counting registered accounts without enough local edits to be autoconfirmed, but it is true that unconstructive edits significantly outnumber constructive ones. I just don't think a handful of reverts per month is too great a price to pay for keeping the front door open. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:22, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

== Blocking question ==

Just wanted to gauge the opinions of the admins: I noticed that {{user|Mdd}} recently blocked a user indefinitely for a single instance of what I would characterize as moderate and fairly harmless spamming (linking to a site for their poetry on their user page). If it were me, I would have likely let them off with a <nowiki>{{spam}}</nowiki> warning - which is what I did earlier in the day for someone who posted a link to their blog on their user page. I'm not saying my inclination is correct or that {{user|Mdd}} is wrong, but in the spirit of consistency, what is the feeling out there? I'm just curious. Thanks. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 18:35, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
:Assuming you're talking about {{User|MelissaHg}}, I'd say it was a reasonable assumption; the page itself matches the same pattern for all the spam that we've been getting for months (right down to the double tags before the link). Plus, I'm not sure why someone from Switzerland would have a Spanish poetry site... [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 18:55, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

::In the past 4 months I have blocked about 200 new users, which where I presume all made by spam bots. The links which are presented by those spam bots differ greatly from hardporn to... indeed poetry. Does UDScott suggest, that we make go make a difference in what type of site the spambot is referring to? If indeed there are just spam-bots, it seems to me adding warnings on the talk page is a waist of time. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 19:08, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
:::In the end, I'm not really asking whether or not a block was warranted (in most cases I agree it is) - I'm just asking if it is the first step in all cases. I just want to be consistent in our treatment of spam. If it is the case that we automatically block anyone who posts spam, fine - but our [[Wikiquote:Blocking policy|blocking policy]] does not reflect this and should be updated. The only current mention of spam is that if a block is given for spamming, it should not be less than a month. And if we are going this way, then what is the purpose of the two spam warnings we have? Again, I'm not trying to criticize what anyone else has done - I'm just asking the question on how we would like to generally treat these circumstances. Thanks. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 19:12, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
::::I'd say that we need to update our blocking policy, then. I don't think warning spam accounts will do anything; it's just drive-by vandalism, but if we just delete the spam and leave the account, there's a much better chance that they'll swing right back around and spam again, increasing the amount of administrative work (not by a substantial margin, of course; but it ''is'' one more time that we have to delete their spam). [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 19:21, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

::Ok, you are asking how we would like to generally treat these circumstances? Let me tell you that I would prefer not to block at all, but I would prefer more advanced solution if possible against these {{w|spambots}}. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 19:19, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikiquote:Administrators' noticeboard

2013-08-14T18:55:37Z

EVula: /* Blocking question */ looks like a valid block to me

[[de:Wikiquote:Administratoren/Notizen]]
[[fa:ویکی‌گفتاورد:تابلوی اعلانات مدیران]]
[[nl:Wikiquote:Verzoekpagina aan conciërges]]
{{Wikiquote:Administrators' noticeboard/Header}}
[[Category:Wikiquote|{{PAGENAME}}]]
= Discussions =

== QOTDs for 7 & 8 January 2013 ==

{{quote of the day
| quote = The whole [[country]] is full of enterprise. Our common [[schools]] are diffusing [[intelligence]] among the [[people]] and our [[work|industry]] is fast accumulating the [[comfort|comforts]] and [[luxury|luxuries]] of [[life]]. ... It is not [[strangeness|strange]], however much it may be regretted, that such an exuberance of enterprise should cause some [[individualism|individuals]] to mistake [[change]] for [[progress]] and the invasion of the [[rights]] of others for [[nations|national]] [[Power|prowess]] and [[glory]].
| author = Millard Fillmore
}}

{{quote of the day
| quote = There is a certain [[Laziness|indolence]] in us, a [[Wishes|wish]] not to be disturbed, which [[Temptation|tempts]] us to [[Thought|think]] that when things are [[quiet]], all is well. Subconsciously, we tend to give the preference to "[[Society|social]] [[peace]]," though it be only [[Appearance|apparent]], because our lives and possessions seem then secure. Actually, [[human]] beings acquiesce too easily in [[evil]] conditions; they [[Rebellion|rebel]] far too little and too seldom. There is nothing [[nobility|noble]] about acquiescence in a cramped [[life]] or mere submission to superior [[force]].
| author = A. J. Muste
}}

These quotes at [[Wikiquote talk:Quote of the day/January 7, 2013]] & [[Wikiquote talk:Quote of the day/January 8, 2013]] will have to be placed on the project pages [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/January 7, 2013]] & [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/January 8, 2013]] rather than the talk pages by an admin. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 18:18, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 00:55, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

== CU request for HomerHorn ==

* {{user|HomerHorn}}
Please consider investigating this spambot and sharing the results with the stewards. I think this one might be related to [[Special:CentralAuth/SallyIMHV|SallyIMHV]] at the English Wikiversity, for which I'll request a CU as well ([[:m:SRCU|here]]). Kind regards, [[User:Mathonius|Mathonius]] ([[User talk:Mathonius|talk]]) 04:35, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
:All the accounts mentioned here are now locked. If anyone's interested, see [[:m:User:Mathonius/Reports/Ntsamr]] for more information. [[User:Mathonius|Mathonius]] ([[User talk:Mathonius|talk]]) 04:32, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

== Archive editing query ==

I think when I was an admin here I would have reverted this without a second thought however I am not now so I'll leave it to the community. The archive in question and edit history is [https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Reference_desk/Archive/4&curid=119735&action=history here]. Thanks --[[User:Herbythyme|Herby]] [[User talk:Herbythyme|talk thyme]] 13:11, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
: One does not need to be an administrator to undo inappropriate edits. It is always inappropriate to carry on a discussion in an archive page like this; but I usually turn a blind eye if it looks harmless – not from principle, but from laziness. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:34, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

== [[User:Collingwood|Collingwood's]] sysop flag ==

Hello, recently Collingwood's account was globally locked as a sockpuppet of ‎Poetlister by stewards (see [[m:Steward_requests/Checkuser#Collingwood.40en.wikiversity|this]] checkuser request). Since Poetlister is banned from all WMF projects, and Collingwood is now locked, his sysop flags should be removed. [[User:Techman224|Techman224]] ([[User talk:Techman224|talk]]) 18:36, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
:And ''of course'', local bureaucrats can't remove the sysop flag. I'll ask a steward at Meta. (also: holy shit, that is really disappointing) [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 21:12, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

:{{done}} at [[m:Steward requests/Permissions#Collingwood@enwikiquote]]. I also removed his admin userbox. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 21:25, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

== I CAN'T log in, because I am blocked, maybe ==

This may be entirely the wrong place for this, but I am really at a loss about who to contact about this. The fact that I can't log in reduces my access to some options.

In any case, I have used the Wiki's for a long time, like most people. As time went on, and I started noticing more and more minor yet annoying, small errors in some articles, I decided to join to make corrections, and possibly sometime to create an article in a subject of my specialty. My attempts were thwarted right after joining Wikipedia. Attempts to make a global identity were blocked by information about sock puppets, some person named "Kalki", and "multiple counts of abuse".

The username I have almost always used was "Abraxas". Never before the recent couple months have I ever joined any Wiki sites. Never once have I yet edited anything in any Wiki's. And because I use and respect these sites, never have I ever "abused" anything related to this site.

So, are there 2 Abraxases? Am I punished for the sins of the other?

I have no idea who to contact, so if this is the wrong place, I am hoping that one of you may be able to direct me further into the opaque sanctum so that I can resolve this without myself having to open multiple accounts which is already getting confusing with just the few I have joined, being told in each that my previous name was already used, but not allowing log-in with that name anyway.

Can this username be rehabilitated? As with colonic bacteria, the best way to get rid of a bad guy is not just to eliminate him, but to fill his place with a good guy so he can't come back.

Thank you.
Contact: almondan(at)gmail.com
—The preceding [[Wikiquote:Sign your posts on talk pages|manually signed]] comment was added by [[Special:Contributions/67.142.172.27|67.142.172.27]] ([[User talk:67.142.172.27|talk]]) 06:36, 6 February 2013‎

:Hello. I'm not an admin, just for the record, but you are right that the account "[[User:Abraxas|Abraxas]]" was blocked (indefinitely), in May 2011, after accusations of [[w:Sockpuppet (Internet)|sockpuppetry]] (so account creation was disabled). As for your request, you may want to check the guide to making [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Guide_to_appealing_blocks unblock requests]. Good luck. ~ [[User:Daniel Tomé|Daniel Tomé]] ([[User talk:Daniel Tomé|talk]]) 07:47, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
:: The the currently blocked {{user|Abraxas}} account here at Wikiquote IS mine, and I had SUL claim on it, but from what I can determine with the SUL account tools available there are still MANY other UNATTACHED Abraxas accounts on other wikimedia wikis, which are NOT mine, but all of them with less use than that I made of the account before it was blocked by Cirt some years ago, in what I continue to assert was the rampage of IMPROPER account blocking and page defacement based upon many FALSE ASSUMPTIONS and accusations of misuse or abuse of my accounts. I have not yet bothered to respond to all that has occurred with the thoroughness such circumstances merit, but I expect to make some revelations in coming months which I hope will clarify MANY of the issues, from some of my perspectives, and perhaps put an end to much of the confusion that I know still exists related to past occurences and present situations. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 10:53, 6 February 2013 (UTC) + tweaks

* You should be able to create an account and log in if you choose another name. When the [http://toolserver.org/~quentinv57/tools/sulinfo.php?username=Abraxas&showinactivity=1 "SUL" query] indicates that a name has already been used, it is generally best to just pick a different one. The formal "sanctum" for your request is at [[Wikiquote:Changing username/Usurpation]], but the SUL query indicates that none of the other "Abraxas" accounts, some of which may have been yours, have been used extensively or recently, so it is probably best to just start fresh with a new name. You can rename your old "Abraxas" accounts to a new name that nobody has already taken, at the appropriate sanctum of each local wiki. I appreciate that the situation is annoying, but "[[Romeo and Juliet|a rose by any other name would smell as sweet]]". It is unfortunate that the above mentioned Kalki person reserved so many names to him/herself before being stopped, but we are now stuck with the adverse consequences of this arrogant misappropriation. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:43, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
:: '''There are many ways to view the fortunes and misfortunes of past and present events.''' I will concede my appropriation of names was ''extensive'', and ''quite'' naturally and ''properly'' would and should produce ''suspicions'' of extensively improper or even malicious behavior to those who lack clear understandings of what I was actually doing and many of the reasons why, but I will politely insist that I beleive it was NOT an act of deplorable arrogance, though I can concede also that it can easily ''seem'' that to others, within this range of time and circumstances, within which we are presently operating. Time will eventually tell where those who have made the most unfortunate errors lie, and who was most adamantly motivated to promote awareness, appreciation and profound respect for proper and sometimes vitally important freedoms, justice, liberty, life and love of ALL. '''I continue to wish others well, and will probably begin attending to some significant aspects of the VERY complex issues raised here more noticably and extensively within a few weeks.''' ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 15:22, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

*From the OP
Thanks to all who responded. This is a lot more complex than I had thought. It still doesn't explain why I can't use the same name for different Wikis, but it may somehow be involved. To note: the account names I tried to use that said they were used, but would not let me log in due to incorrect passwords, nor open an account in that name (though one already existed in Pedia), was not "Abraxas", so should not have been subject to any unusual restrictions that I know of. It looks like a "bug" to me.

Only one "Abraxas" was used by me (that I know of - I can't claim perfect, years-long recall) in Wikipedia. That name was used by me on over 5000 other internet accounts that exist in my LastPass list, and probably more, but not on any other Wikis here.

Thanks and have a good day.
[[Special:Contributions/67.142.172.23|67.142.172.23]] 21:45, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

== [[Wikiquote: Limits on quotations]] ==

Anyone care to comment on the discussion at [[Wikiquote:Village_pump#Wikiquote:_Limits_on_quotations|the Village pump]]? Thanks. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 16:38, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

== Block request for 74.131.177.233 ==

* {{user|74.131.177.233}}
Please block this IP address and [[Special:Nuke/74.131.177.233|nuke]] its vandalism. Thanks, [[User:Mathonius|Mathonius]] ([[User talk:Mathonius|talk]]) 23:37, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 02:08, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

== [[User:Whaledad]] ==

Hereby I want to file a complain against [[User:Whaledad]] for making the unfounded accusation against me by stating "''Mdd's articles violating copyright rules by indiscriminatingly copy large chunks of text to do so (he actually quoted other encyclopedias in his wikiquote articles''." [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote%3ARequests_for_adminship%2FMdd&diff=1540953&oldid=1540892]

After asking for clarification on [[User talk:Whaledad#Copyright|his talk page]], Whaledad was unable to deliver proof or even an example (present in the Internet Wayback), and he is unwilling to take back the accusation.

I think these kind of accusations go beyond the realm of criticism, and should be considered a [[WQ:NPA|personal attack]]. I request appropriate action to be taken. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:35, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

:It seems Wikipedia:No personal attacks is quite clear [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_personal_attacks#What_is_considered_to_be_a_personal_attack.3F here]: ''Accusations about personal behavior that lack evidence. Serious accusations require serious evidence. Evidence often takes the form of diffs and links presented on wiki.'' counts as PA. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:47, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

:*It's unclear what - short of a law suit - Mdd would consider proof/evidence for my statement. This situation was extensively discussed at the [http://nl.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wikiquote:De_kantine/archief_2#Hier_moet_gewoon_alles_rechtenvrij_zijn.3F nl.wikiquote Village Pump ("de Kantine")]. After that discussion about 84 articles written by Mdd were submitted to Vote for Deletion based on copyright violations ([http://nl.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wikiquote:Te_verwijderen_pagina%27s/archief_5#Nominaties_8_april_2012 VfD page from that time frame] use <Ctrl-F copyvio> to find the relevant nominations), and were deleted as such by a local Admin. With that I rest my case. [[User:Whaledad|<big>W</big><big>\|/</big><big>hale</big>'''dad''']] ([[User_talk:Whaledad#Top|Talk to me]]) 22:55, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

:*OK, I feel I need to "reopen the case" and add a link to [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive_33#Wikihounding_by_User:Whaledad a somewhat similar case on Commons], where an Admin (Jameslwoodward) among other things had the following to say: "''In this particular case -- as with all the other Mdd images that I have looked at that Whaledad has nominated -- unless we receive credible permission through OTRS, the DR should close with the deletion of the image. I note that until Whaledad came along and fixed it, Mdd was claiming copyright in File:Geert van de Camp.jpg, which is a simple crop of an image provided by another user. As similar correction was required at <follow links to 6 image>. I have tagged the following uploads of Mdd with <nowiki>{{delete}}</nowiki>: <follow list of 8 images, 6 of them now red links>. Some of them appear to be FOP problems, while others are claims of "Own Work" that do not appear to be correct. There are many other images which are web size with no EXIF which I suspect, but cannot prove, are problems.
::''So, we have here a user, Mdd, who has, through inexperience and lack knowledge, or perhaps, deliberately:''
::*''Uploaded a wide variety of images that have been deleted as copyvio''
::*''Has marked other people's work as "Own Work" a number of times''
::*''Has failed to properly attribute the photographer on images where he has made a simple crop''
::*''Has not paid attention to the underlying copyright of various artists in places where FOP does not apply''
::*''Has come here complaining of Wikihounding, when the work done by Whaledad appears to have been entirely correct, although his description of Mdd's errors may have been a little too harsh''
::''Under the circumstances, I would advise Mdd to withdraw this complaint before a similar complaint is made against him. Bringing people who are simply doing their job to ANb is a nuisance for all of us.''"
::After some more back and forth (in which Mdd even had the audacity to ask a Dutch Admin to take over his part of the discussion), Mdd conceded and withdrew his (false) accusation of Wikihounding. [[User:Whaledad|<big>W</big><big>\|/</big><big>hale</big>'''dad''']] ([[User_talk:Whaledad#Top|Talk to me]]) 23:34, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
::: I would like to briefly comment here. I have certainly witnessed or endured some attitudes and remarks I regard as severely mistaken or even slanderous in regard to many things in my life, and have on some occasions passionately defended others or myself in such ways as I have believed to be proper, and I am not unfamiliar with the bitter sorrows and anger that can be manifest in both intellectual and emotional conflicts which can occur in openly and overt or very subtle and covert ways.  '''Though I certainly sympathize and agree with him in many regards, I actually disagree with Mdd that there is any need for admin action here''', and though I might be prone to side with him in respect to so much as I can discern regarding his previous disputes and reactions to them, I do not recommend demanding any apologies of others, who have generraly done what they actually believed to be right, even if it might be wrong from the perspectives of others, and certainly do not advise seeking for any needless punishments or censures of anyone, nor to expect any beyond those that might ultimately come to some, as true necessities of remorse, with recognition of their own errors. '''I truly hope the matters in dispute can be more amiably discerned in the future, and a greater respect for all and among all can flourish.''' Blessings to all. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 01:51, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

:::: Regarding the quotation from [[w:WP:NPA|WP:NPA]], in idiomatic English the phrase "personal behavior" refers to the ''manner'' of conducting oneself, such as rudeness, disruption, dishonesty, etc. The allegation about copyright, whether it is true or not, is an objective statement about a person's actions, not a criticism of ''personal behavior''. Therefore, I do not believe this request for administrative intervention against personal attacks is well grounded. In order to suggest how this could have been handled better, I will comment to Mdd about a couple statements in the discussion at Whaledad's talk page that led up to filing this complaint:
::::* "I think I am within my rights to demand you to prove here and now the accusation you made here today."[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Whaledad&diff=1541123]
::::*:— More properly, in making your case to the community at [[Wikiquote:Requests for adminship/Mdd]], you are within your rights to say you believe the accusation is unfounded and not supported by evidence. Your demand is counterproductive: you don't ''want'' Whaledad to successfully prove it, you want the community to decide he has ''not'' proved it.
::::* "you can't deliver that proof because there isn't any. Therefor I ask you take it back, to rectifier and apologize."[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Whaledad&diff=1541221]
::::*:— You can simply make your case to the community that there isn't any proof, and let the community decide. Whether Whaledad changes his mind, and what he does about it, is up to him.
:::: I think it was a mistake to confront Whaledad about this on his talk page. Instead of telling ''him'' on his talk page to prove it or take it back, it would be better to simply tell ''us'' in the community discussion that you think we should ignore it because it is unproven. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:34, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Ok, so be it. I thank you both for sharing your insides, which does open some new perspectives I do appreciate. I admit in the heat of moment I might not used the proper tone both on the talk page, and in formulating this request. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 01:36, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
:For the record, I followed Ningauble's advice and added a footnote in the RfA discussion, [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote%3ARequests_for_adminship%2FMdd&diff=1542055&oldid=1542040 here] -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 00:08, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

== Template:Official policy ==

Just wondering if someone could update [[Template:Official policy]].
It contains two <code><nowiki></nowiki></code> tags that should be updated to <code><nowiki> </nowiki></code> tags since <code><nowiki></nowiki></code> is not a valid html tag. Thanks. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 21:35, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Also, if someone could move [[Template:WQ BW21]] to [[User:Blackwatch21/WQ BW21]] without leaving a redirect, that would be good as well. -- [[User:WOSlinker|WOSlinker]] ([[User talk:WOSlinker|talk]]) 21:40, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

== [[Wikiquote: Limits on quotations]] ==

Once again, I have asked for further discussion on this topic at [[Wikiquote:Village_pump#Wikiquote:_Limits_on_quotations|the VP]]. Can anyone else please join the discussion? I would so love to move this further along, as it appears that we are increasingly facing edit wars and related skirmishes all related to this topic. Thanks! ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 17:16, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

== BarkingFish and sockpuppets ==

*{{checkuser|BarkingFish}}

# {{checkuser|1=Tmalmjursson}}
# {{checkuser|1=Cat in the Hat}}
# {{checkuser|1=Humblesnore}}
Per [[w:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BarkingFish/Archive]], these have all been {{confirmed}} as longtime socks of {{user|BarkingFish}}.

What do other admins think should be done about this, with regards to the main account? -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 00:14, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

:I'm not an admin, but in my opinion this user's main account should not be blocked here because he never made any disruptive edits at Wikiquote. For me it's as simple as that. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 01:18, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
::Okay, thanks for the input, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 01:23, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
: This person is evidently troubled, but I don't see what it has to do with Wikiquote. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 11:21, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
::Alright, thanks for the comment, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 21:41, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

:::There seems to be an agreement, that this sockpuppetry doesn't effect Wikiquote, yet after Cirt's latest comment a [[:Category:Wikiquote sockpuppets of BarkingFish]] was created. This kind of overhead seems against this agreement, so I started a VFD for this category.

:::This also makes me wonder, why those three sub-(puppet)-accounts are blocked? None of them have made any edit here, and there is no global block. Blocking these accounts and adding a note made them active here, which seems useless. Couldn't we avoid this next time? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:52, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
::::Well, they're certainly all technically {{confirmed}} as sockpuppets, however in this case I'll respectfully defer to the judgment expressed by the community, (which is, by the way, the reason I brought this notice, here, for discussion.) Cheers, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 06:54, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

:::::Is there something I am missing here? If I am not mistaken:
:::::* The English Wikipedia policy on Sockpuppetry is, that sockpuppetry is strongly discouraged but not forbidden. The use of sockpuppets is no reason for any blockade, just the misuse, and
:::::* Wikipedia and Wikiquote operated independently. Users cannot be blocked on Wikiquote for things they have done on Wikipedia, and vice versa, unless there misuse on multiple projects and reason for global blockade.
:::::Yet, Cirt has blocked three accounts, which were not even active here. There was no sockpuppetry use, let alone misuse here on Wikiquote. Just BarkingFish made only one (very) constructive edit here.

:::::So is there an (exceptional) rule that (sockpuppet)accounts once "technically confirmed as sockpuppets on Wikipedia" automatically get blocked on other projects? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 14:07, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
::::::Generally, yes, there are exceptions, for example, when they are part of non-acknowledged sockfarms being built up surreptitiously over time. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 16:13, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
:::::::[http://xkcd.com/285/ "Citation needed"] ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 17:00, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
::::::::''[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/BarkingFish&diff=550236211&oldid=550234304 " I've proxied into wikipedia through holes you'll never find, I've committed very tiny pieces of vandalism over a period of quite a long time, most of it before the Abuse filter was active on here, so a lot of it was missed, and had more than 20 throwaway accounts from multiple ISPs. I think i've covered everything. Smell ya later." - BarkingFish.]'' -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 17:56, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
::::::::: Please cite the ''policy'' that allows you to block accounts on projects independent of Wikipedia, where said accounts have not engaged in vandalism or any sort of malicious behavior (in this case, the accounts you blocked had zero edits here). You, Cirt, are in an awkward position if you can't cite such a policy. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:51, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
:::::: No, there is no official policy that Wikiquote should block accounts here that are blocked elsewhere (nor that Wikiquote should de-sysop accounts here that are de-sysoped elsewhere). However, [[Wikiquote:Username policy#Using multiple user accounts|"It is recommended that users not edit under multiple usernames, unless they have a very good reason"]], and it is not uncommon to block duplicate accounts as a preventative measure when the very good reason is not evident or, especially, when evidence on another wiki is suggestive of a bad reason. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 19:54, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

{{quote of the day
| quote = He that would [[live]] in [[peace]] and at ease, Must not speak all he [[knows]], nor [[judge]] all he sees.
| author = Benjamin Franklin
}}

I do not wish to personally confront what might be some of the oversights or under-sightedness of Cirt on many matters, and am willing to be forgiving of the errors of anyone, and to pardon them from even what might pass for just punishments if malice and will to do harm are rejected and abandoned.

I know that others who seek to level and constrain the language and ideas of others in ways I find appalling do not always approve of my honest commentaries or bold assessments regarding many things, but I will make a few here, which I believe can be generally helpful and beneficial.

Extremely [[nihilistic]] or opinionated vandals of very low intellectual or moral integrity and those who seek to establish or maintain what might be described as [[authoritarian]] control or habits, customs or rules developed or devised with strong infusions of such dark [[cynicism]] and cleverness as all too often passes for [[wisdom]] among the intellectually weak and naïve and the immorally or morally oppressed, have this much in common: '''they seek to promote [[fears]], suspicions, discord and drive others into forms of panic and cowardice and the embracing of a frightened and easily manipulated will to suppress and oppress all those who differ with them, dissent from them, or are effective at presenting ideas and opinions they dislike or have no affinity for, and consider rivals, opponents or enemies.''' Throughout history, at all levels of clearly or obscurely social, unsocial and antisocial engagement amidst all formal and informal alliances or groups of people, there have been MANY complex forms of influences at work, which MANY like to find ways to simplify in very deficient and flawed ways into an "US vs THEM" mentality and framework.

Throughout the ages the wisest and most healthy of minds of all political, religious and social traditions have always resisted and opposed such tendencies to the extent they believed they effectively could, knowing always that there are limitations upon themselves, their times and resources, and those of others far less discerning and far more prone to being dupes to those who regularly engage in such tropes with maliciously or callously deceitful intentions.

I have little doubt, from what little I have payed attention to this particular matter, that Barking Fish is a pathetically disturbed individual — and I have little doubt that increasing the fame and fear of such pathetically disturbed individuals serves many of their interests and desires as much as it does those who are most habitually prone to promoting such fame and fears for what they might perhaps believe to be the "good" of everyone. '''There are pathetically disturbed people in the world, ALWAYS, and to the extent they cannot be easily helped, or refuse help, and even seek to vilify and denigrate others most capable of providing help, and yet do not actively engage in unjust forms of destruction or oppression of others, they should generally be left to gradually develop or stagnate and pass away, as their own inclinations impel them, or only occasionally and gently offered such help as they might accept.''' Some might consider me harsh and cold in making such assessments, but I believe that this is preferable to being either soft-minded or hotly passionate about doing such injurious or dangerous things as need not actually be done against anyone, to the service of greater forms or aspects of the good of [[Humanity]], its proper [[rights]] everywhere and anywhere and the [[Liberty]] to assert and indicate these.

When I was an admin here, I was very swiftly reactive to clear vandalism, and squelched it rather rapidly, and was widely recognized as being extraordinarily effective at that, and battling it across MANY wikis, which led to me being "active" on many — but though there were many incidents of suspicious or distressing behavior that were not clear vandalism, I did not go about seeking people or puppet accounts of people to vent my wrath or frustrations upon others in childish and even infantile ways, which might EASILY be misdirected and applied in ERROR. '''I simply remained alert and confident that IF and WHEN many very clear abuses occurred they could rapidly be dealt with by myself and others.'''

A problem far more endemic and pervasive and dangerous to the health of many projects which I saw developing was the rather obscured or even approved abuse of many forms of privilege to suppress dissent or divergence from such will as some wished to declare "OFFICIAL" and implicitly sacred or sound, and I made some rather pointed statements to that effect, just prior to having the resources and wills of a few others directed in many ways against what long-standing good reputation as a conscientious and admirable worker as I believe I had earned by my actions, up to that point. Others later sought to use such apparent disgrace or disfavor as had developed here, to snowball that into a "generally negative" impression of me and my intentions wherever they could among the WIkimedia projects, in rather appalling ways, which I will decline to elaborate upon, at this point, as I have no intentions of belaboring many past errors and mistaken assumptions beyond such points as I believe necessary for the development of more aware and appreciative and healthy attitudes towards those who DO and MUST differ with oneself, for various reasons.

I wish to again assert that I have no personal animosity to those who fall into errors of various kinds, but I generally DO seek ways to help others out of errors — and know that others can be helpful to me, in rising out of whatever forms of error or ignorance I might seem to be in, and am usually quite grateful for what help others can and do provide me, even if sometimes unwittingly.

'''Those are just a few of my thoughts on this matter, and I congratulate others for recently showing and demonstrating capacities for far more reserved and circumspect reactions to circumstances than many are inclined to encourage or even acknowledge as either necessary or proper.''' It is evidence of a growing conscientiousness that there ALWAYS are aspects of things which are beyond one's direct observation, and though many actual or potential aspects of these CANNOT or should not ever rule one's own reactions, prior to being KNOWN, to maintain a healthy skepticism to ANY claims is ALWAYS an important procedure in maintaining healthy forms of Awareness, Life, and Love, and developing truly fair and genuinely cohesive societies, alliances and presentational projects such as this WIki. '''[[Blessings]] to all.''' ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 19:29, 24 April 2013 (UTC) + tweaks
:I agree with [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=1566471&oldid=1566469 this above comment by admin Ningauble]. Cheers, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 02:30, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
::Two things keep bothering me. First so far I have seen no indication, that this Wikipedia sockpuppetry has affected Wikiquote in the past or could possibly affect Wikiquote in the future. There seem to be no reason for preventative measure. And second, we don't automatically block all confirmed Wikipedia sockpuppets. Why would we make exceptions? It seems to me the only reason to make exceptions is, if there are indications that it might negatively affect Wikiquote.
::Just as [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wikiquote:Votes_for_deletion/Category:Wikiquote_sockpuppets_of_BarkingFish here] proposed, I like to propose to stop importing Wikipedia sockpuppet investigations and results here, when there is no indication that it might negatively affect Wikiquote. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 13:39, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
:::Best to keep it on a case-by-case basis, seeking out input from other admins and the community. In cases of obvious vandals and cross-wiki-spammers, blocks on sight for accounts on all wikis are routine. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 15:41, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

== Martha Washington ==

There was once a [[Martha Washington]] page on the wiki, deleted because of lack of source quotes, which I would like restored so that I can work on it as a base, sourcing whatever I can of what there was upon it — and adding whatever I can beyond that, in the next week or so. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 03:15, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}}, now at [[User:Kalki/Martha Washington]]. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 03:37, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
:: Thanks. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 03:39, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
:::You're most welcome, {{user|Kalki}}, have a great day! :) Cheers, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 05:11, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

== [[“You will never be able to escape from your heart. So it's better to listen to what it has to say.”]] ==

Can someone delete [[“You will never be able to escape from your heart. So it's better to listen to what it has to say.”]], it's nonsense/vandalism?[[User:King jakob c 2|King jakob c 2]] ([[User talk:King jakob c 2|talk]]) 12:15, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

:{{done}}. Next time please just tag the articles with {{Tl|Delete}} or {{Tl|Db}} ("delete because"). Then they get automatically listed in this [[:Category:Candidates for speedy deletion]] and will be deleted afterwards. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:30, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

== Spambot or other vandalism on Woodrow Wilson talk page ==

[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Woodrow_Wilson&action=history Since the 13th of April] the talk page of [[Woodrow Wilson]] has been repeatedly vandalized by what might be some persistent vandal or defective spambot of some kind, and should probably be given at least some short-term protection from anonymous edits. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 05:17, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
: {{done}} Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 02:49, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

== [[George Washington]] ==

[[George Washington]] is attracting a lot of vandalism from IPs. Can someone semi-protect it? Thanks, [[User:King jakob c 2|King jakob c 2]] ([[User talk:King jakob c 2|talk]]) 22:02, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
* {{done}} Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 23:46, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

== Personal attack by DanielTom ==

DanielTom: ''[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ADanielTom&diff=1569366&oldid=1569048 "I think you are in serious need of psychiatric help. Please seek it. ~ DanielTom"]''.

In response to my request for the user to cease posting to my talkpage, he gave a personal attack.

I would appreciate it if an admin can please warn {{user|DanielTom}} that this is inappropriate behavior.

Thank you, -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 16:48, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
:While I do not wish to wade into the specifics of what the two of you are arguing about, my initial reaction to his request is that you would be wise to grow a thicker skin. Sure, you may be offended by the language DanielTom used, but I hardly find it to be behavior requiring intervention in the form of any punitive action against him. I've been subject to plenty of denigrative attacks throughout my years here - it's not entirely unexpected when there are disagreements. I also note that this is at least the second time that you have been involved in an exercise of escalating rhetoric with another user, causing what should have been a fairly minor issue at the beginning to metamorphose into something much larger. Again, yes it would be nice if we all addressed each other in the most civil manner, but that's not always realistic in an online community such as this. As a more visible member of said community in the role of an admin, I would expect you to let a bit more slide and not be so reactive to attacks. My advice: let it go (see similar advice from BD2412: [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:BD2412&diff=1568998&oldid=1568983#Request_for_advice_about_DanielTom], where he advised you "to stay calm and remain above the fray."). ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 17:43, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

* Let's say I know someone who I think is (for example) considering suicide. What [[User:Cirt|Cirt]] is saying is that, basically, if I tell that person to contact a mental health professional immediately, that would be a "personal attack". But it isn't. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:19, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
::My point is that whether or not he feels it is a personal attack is something subjective that neither I nor anyone else can decide. But surely it does not rise to the level where some action against you as the author of the comment is needed. I am saying that I believe that both sides of this dispute are overreacting a bit and I would advise both to dial it down a bit. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 18:28, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

::Thank you, [[User:UDScott|UDScott]]. In any case, [[User:Cirt|Cirt]] already got what he wanted: he put this giant and bogus title "Personal attack by DanielTom" not just here, but in every admin's Talk page. As if admins needed to be reminded to read the ''Administrators' noticeboard''. Jesus Christ. I genuinely think [[User:Cirt|Cirt]] needs mental help, all the more now. If that is a "personal attack", block me and get it over with. This is absolutely ridiculous. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:41, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

*...seriously? ''This'' is what you consider a personal attack? [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 18:59, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
**'''Reply by Cirt:''' Understood, {{user|EVula}} and {{user|UDScott}}. Thank you for your comments. No further action required. I'll take the suggested input by these two admins under advisement. I appreciate it. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 19:50, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
*** [[User:Cirt|Cirt]], you truly are an embarrassment. You harass people. You are the the most petty, childish and vindictive person I have ever come across on Wikiquote. I have less than zero respect for you. I hope that's clear enough. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 10:27, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
:::P.S. A sensible admin should now block me. I propose a one-week block. Thanks. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 10:41, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

== Mary Tyler Moore ==

There was once a [[Mary Tyler Moore]] page on the wiki, which was deleted among the various overwhelming number of deletions of prods that have been created for the relatively few active editors here. I would like that restored so that I can work on it as a base within the next week or so, sourcing what quotes I can, and adding some, perhaps. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 22:22, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} good luck. [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:52, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

== subtle vandal ==

I recently have reverted two edits where an ostensibly plausible citation was given for an implausible statement by an anon IP. Just now it was the [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Albert_Einstein&curid=2&diff=1569829&oldid=1565305 Einstein page] where it seems a citation of another actual quote was copied to make the addition seem plausible. In the previous case (though I do not immediately recall on which page I encountered it) the citation itself was a bit more implausible, but rather subtly so to anyone just giving it a casual glance, and in both cases I actually did an internet search to confirm my suspicions, before reverting the additions. I am just noting this as a heads-up on the situation, because this might indicate the currently active presence of a subtly malicious vandal at work, and as I do not monitor things anywhere near as much as I once did, there might be other incidents I failed to catch. Blessings. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 04:34, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

== DivesGreatestMan and sockpuppets ==

*{{checkuser|DivesGreatestMan‎}}

# {{checkuser|1=SonPhanGreat}}
# {{checkuser|1=WickyLicky}}
# {{checkuser|1=Sonphan1}}

I like to ask attention for this user:
* DivesGreatestMan‎ created a userpage today here on Wikiquote, claiming he is born September 13, 2003
* On April 27 April 2013‎ he created the User:SonPhanGreat page on Wikicommons with the same info, see http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:SonPhanGreat
* On 14:49, 27 April 2013 the {{w|User:SonPhanGreat}} is being blocked on Wikipedia after being idetified as sockpop of {{w|user:WickyLicky}}
* The userpage {{w|User:SonPhanGreat}} made 23:41, 24 April 2013 with the same info as User:DivesGreatestMan‎ here, is made invisible on Wikipedia
* The sock puppeteer User:WickyLicky made his first edit 21:21, 1 November 2012

Now what drew my attention in the first place was the day of birth. It seems like a very bad idea that we allow children on Wikiquote to mention there full name, and day of birth. This is why I deleted the user page this afternoon. In the meantime a new userpage with the same info is created, and an userpage with a cryptic remark.

This made me start further investigation with the above mentioned. Now it seems he has shifted his attention from Wikipedia to Wikiquote after being his block on Wikipedia. Now I would like to request feedback on how to further respond here? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:22, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

:In the meantime I blocked him (for one month) after he started vandalizing multiple (new) pages, and afterwards also blocked his talk-page for making threads. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:35, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

::Because of this pattern of cross Wiki vandalism, I would propose to block this user, and his known sockpuppets indefinitely, and have the text of his use page removed. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:49, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
:::Sorry to butt in, but is there any reason to believe that this date of birth is correct? He could be trolling.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 16:56, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
::::I simply don't know. I do know he added (almost) the same info on Wikipedia, on Wikicommons and here on Wikiquote. And this info is suppressed on the English Wikipedia, but I also do not know why (yet). I do think we should not allow this kind of info on userpages, true or false. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 17:17, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

:: I deleted the user and talk pages due to impersonating an administrator. I would have used an indefinite block for this ''vandalism only account'', rather than one month, because ''harassment & impersonation'' is a special [[w:Aggravation (law)|aggravating circumstance]] that merits swift and final expulsion. Regarding self-identified children generally, it would be appropriate to remove any personally identifying information. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:00, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} Thanks Ningauble, I have changed the block to indefinite. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 10:42, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

== Contributions 99.90.197.87 ==

*{{checkuser|99.90.197.87}}

I could be mistaken, but I don't see the anom user 99.90.197.87 making any constructive edits. Edits like today [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Olympic_Games&diff=prev&oldid=1579997], [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Apartheid&oldid=1579998] could be deleted as test-edits, but this anom user is going on for quite some time, making similar edits. Should there be some more structural action here? [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 09:13, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
: I have sent the user a warning. As Runningonbrains remarked in the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&page=User%3A99.90.197.87 Wikipedia block log,] whether this is a [[w:WP:TROLL|WP:TROLL]] or a [[w:WP:COMPETENCE|WP:COMPETENCE]] problem, either way it's disruptive. I would not hesitate to block if the behavior continues. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:59, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

==Chip Berlet Quotes Page==
Over four years ago I complained that the page about me is primarily composed of negative critical material and very unbalanced. It was originally set up as part of a series of political attacks on me and my work that spread across several Wikimedia projects and discussions. I am not allowed to edit my own page, and no one has stepped forward to remedy the problem. All of the quotes About me contain nasty personal attacks. Most of the cites and links are to more nasty personal attacks. All I am asking is that someone here in this discussion forum take on the responsibility for fixing what is clearly a biased page. --[[User:Cberlet|Cberlet]] ([[User talk:Cberlet|talk]]) 02:38, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
: Relevant discussion: [[Wikiquote:Village pump archive 21#Using Wikiquote for a vendetta]]. While we cannot delete quotes ''just because'' they contain harsh criticisms, it is indeed desirable that our articles be balanced. To this end, I have just added three (more positive) quotes to the article, including two written by yourself. See [https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Chip_Berlet&diff=1584600&oldid=1545263]. Regards, [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 09:24, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

== About the quotes of Kedar Joshi ==

Kedar Joshi is not a notable person. User [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/User_talk:RogDel RogDel] seems Kedar Joshi himself or other but he is constantly adding material to wikiquote. I request action about his behavior of this. [[User:Kedaaar Jo Sheee|Kedaaar Jo Sheee]] ([[User talk:Kedaaar Jo Sheee|talk]]) 18:14, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
:The discussion concerning Kedar Joshi's notability (or lack thereof) is still ongoing (at [[Wikiquote:Village_pump#Kedar Joshi quote farming]]), as already explained elsewhere, so, needless to say, [[User:RogDel|RogDel]]'s "behavior" was perfectly fine and legitimate. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:50, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
:: I note that this editor seems to have very strong feelings about Kedar Joshi; I have just reverted a page blank he/she made on [http://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=Kedar_Joshi&diff=prev&oldid=2535437 Wikibooks].--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 19:54, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
::: I note that user "Kedaaar Jo Sheee" has posted duplicate copies of this missive on multiple project and discussion pages, in a manner that might be considered disruptive. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 23:20, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

== Request for closure ==

* [[Wikiquote:Village pump#Kedar Joshi quote farming]]
* [[Wikiquote:Deletion review#Kedar Joshi]]
These two discussions have had ample time and participation to reach consensus, if any. I would be grateful if someone a little less heavily involved than myself would assess the results and close them. Thanks. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:10, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
: A month has passed with no further comments on these discussions.... ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 21:53, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
:: {{done}} Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 03:49, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
::: 1. If [[User:RogDel/Quotes added to WQ|these quotes]] can be included (and I see no reason why they should not be included), I see no reason why quotes by Kedar Joshi should be excluded. 2. ''“Among more experienced editors, the vast majority support removal” – [[User:BD2412|BD2412]]''
::::Since WQ is not a democracy, this seems to be an invalid argument for removal. There does not seem to have been any stronger argument countering all the [[User:RogDel/Notability as a source of quotes|simple and logical arguments]] I have made in support of inclusion of such quotations. ~ [[User:RogDel|RogDel]] ([[User talk:RogDel|talk]]) 10:50, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
::RogDel, with all due respect, I seriously doubt that we should create such explicit regulations about such exceptional situations. As to Kedar Joshi, after years of discussion we should draw a line, and not keep bringing it up. As to the regulation even for me it is confusion, trying to make a difference between quotability and notability, let alone outsiders. There are so much ins and out about, and regularly there seem to be a good understanding. Don't try to make regulations for those handful of cases we don't all agree on. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:35, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
::: <edit conflict> Regarding RogDel's first point, [[w:WP:OTHERSTUFF|other stuff]] is not always good precedent, particularly when the addition of that stuff gives the appearance of [[w:WP:POINT|making a point]] about a minority view from these discussions. Now that these discussions have been closed, there may be further action to deal with this stuff that was added while the discussions were ongoing. Regarding the second point, discussions are assessed based on a variety of factors, including (besides the votes) policies, practices, precedents, arguments, & etc. As expressly indicated in the closing remarks, from which you selectively quote, anonymous single-purpose accounts that are not cognizant of or do not address those factors have little or no weight in assessing the arguments. Regarding the essay linked above, it directly contradicts the established guideline at [[Wikiquote:Quotability]], which makes it relatively unpersuasive as an argument in these cases. If you think the guideline is wrong then it might be better to propose changing it rather than try an end-run around it. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 12:42, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
* RogDel, I think maybe only one or two people have read your (rather long and repetitive) essay. Perhaps, for their benefit, one could condense it into one sentence: "If a quote is cited in a 'highly reliable' secondary source (even if just once) then it is notable enough to be on Wikiquote." Would you accept that as a fair summary? ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 13:16, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

== new pattern-vandal ==

A new pattern-vandal has been vandalizing the [[Jimbo Wales]] page and user pages. The latest account activity has been as {{User|Technoquatic Quoticals}}, and this account and other associated accounts seem appropriate for blockage as clearly vandal accounts. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 22:22, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
: He keeps making new accounts to vandalize the same pages. {{User|Froonkfurterich‎}} seems to be his latest incarnation. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 09:16, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
::I put a short-term block on this user, but if current behavior continues, I'm sure a long-term one will be necessary. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 11:29, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
:::See also [[w:WP:Sockpuppet_investigations/Technoquat/Archive]] [[User:Vanischenu|Vanischenu]] ([[User talk:Vanischenu|talk]]) 23:17, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

== Feuding between DanielTom and Cirt ==

Per the discussion ongoing at [[User talk:UDScott#Query for help]] (and on my talk page), I am setting forth the following interaction ban in response to the incessant and disruptive feuding, baiting, and forum shopping between DanielTom and Cirt.

DanielTom could properly be blocked for incivility at this point (he has said as much). If DanielTom attempts to bait or otherwise interact with Cirt, talks to him, talks about him, or reverts or otherwise contests any of his actions, I will block DanielTom for a minimum of thirty days.

If Cirt attempts to interact with DanielTom, talks to him, talks about him, or reverts or otherwise contests any of his actions, I will move to desysop Cirt on this project. Reacting to baiting is not the trait of an administrator.

To the extent that either Cirt or DanielTom thinks the other is making improper edits or otherwise misbehaving, do nothing about and say nothing about it. The other administrators on this project are observant, and we will see and will handle any violations of policy.

I hope that my fellow administrators agree with my determination with respect to this matter. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 01:27, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

----

;Reply by Cirt to BD2412
:''Originally posted on another page: [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:UDScott&diff=1594538&oldid=1594501 diff].''

This is my reply to [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AUDScott&diff=1594501&oldid=1594445 comment by BD2412].

'''Comment:''' @{{user|BD2412}}, understood. I will take your advice to heart. I will do my best to not react to the baiting. I will do my best to only engage in a polite and constructive manner from here on out. I am sorry for troubling you with this. I will do my best to rise above this matter. Thank you for your advice and your input. -- '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 02:44, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

;Statement by Ningauble about the ban
I endorse the interaction ban imposed by BD2412. The misconduct of both parties has been extensive and disruptive. Note that the ban as stated is indefinite in duration. I would not want to entertain an application to lift an indefinite ban in less than six months or a year.
 Regarding stipulated consequences for violating the ban by DanielTom:  I approve of handling this in a progressive manner, as has been done, rather than imposing a 30 day block on the first infraction. I think any further infractions should be met with ''steep'' progression.
 Regarding stipulated consequences for violating the ban by Cirt:  This is not really an administrative sanction. A [[WQ:VOC|vote of confidence]] may be called any time that three users concur. Administrative sanctions may still be imposed for misconduct even if it is not stipulated in this ban. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:15, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

=== Cirt has ''already'' breached the interaction ban ===

BD2412 made the terms of the interaction ban clear:
:[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=1594507&oldid=1591220 ''If Cirt attempts to interact with DanielTom, talks to him, talks about him, or reverts or otherwise contests any of his actions, I will move to desysop Cirt on this project.'']
Yet, Cirt has already completely disrespected the interaction ban: ''just one hour later'', he decided to come to my talk page, uninvited, and posted [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DanielTom&curid=139176&diff=1594537&oldid=1594424 this baiting comment].
I am tempted to reply to his baiting comment, <s>but I won't</s>, as I don't think I would particularly enjoy being unable to edit WQ for 30 days. However, after Cirt's ''direct'' breach of the interaction ban cited above, I would like to see BD keeping his word and actually "[moving] to desysop Cirt on this project". ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 08:52, 26 June 2013 (UTC) last edit: 19:07, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
: Firstly, I have blocked you for 24 hours to be sure that you understand that I am serious about this interaction ban. As I said above, if either of you thinks the other is making improper edits or otherwise misbehaving, do nothing about and say nothing about it. That includes accusing one another of violations of this interaction ban. Please do not imagine for a moment that other administrators on this site are unaware of any action that either of you is taking.
: Secondly, I hope that you agree that fair warning of a penalty to be imposed is necessary before imposition of that penalty. I saw the post Cirt made on your talk page last night, shortly after I set forth this interaction ban. Based on Cirt's edits, there is no reason to believe that he was aware of this interaction ban at the time that he made the talk page post of which you complain. You, on the other hand, were clearly aware of it before you posted this complaint.
: In case I need to make this any clearer, both of you are to carry on as if the other does not exist.
: Finally, I hope that the community approves of my determination with respect to this problem, but if any uninvolved administrator feels that I have overstepped the bounds of my authority in my actions with respect to this matter, please feel free to unblock DanielTom. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 12:05, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
::I, for one, fully endorse both the ban and your action here. Thanks. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 19:11, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
::@BD2412: thanks for blocking me, I appreciate it. Alas, I have a hard time learning from punitive blocks, so I shall make another comment here, and be blocked for it again. I must point out that your contrived naïveté ("there is no reason to believe that [Cirt] was aware of this interaction ban at the time that he made the talk page post of which you complain") is quite breathtaking. Cirt edited several different pages after you set forth this interaction ban, including yours, UDSCott's, and Ningauble's talk pages (not just mine), so he must have seen the Recent Changes page, or at least his Watchlist. To say that he somehow missed the section you had opened an hour earlier in the Administrator's Noticeboard, with his name in it, is simply absurd. In any case, as you can see, I have mentioned Cirt in this very comment, so you should block me once again, this time for "at least 30 days." Won't that be fun for you? I ''will'' miss editing articles, but I understand that I need to be blocked, as I pose such a great danger to Wikiquote. Knock yourself out. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 12:47, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
::: Since you have now specifically requested to be blocked for 30 days, I will accommodate your request. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 12:56, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
:::: I suppose if I asked you to [insert any fantasy] me, you would also "accommodate" my request? I did not request to be blocked. Sorry that you don't understand irony. (It's not a new concept, it's been around for at least a couple of years now.) In any case, you decided to abuse your tools and block me for 30 days, as a '''smokescreen''', so that you wouldn't have to properly reply to the clarification/explanation in my comment, above, but even a child can see through that. (Nice try, though.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:17, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

=== Request for reconsideration ===
DanielTom has sent me an email stating that he has learned his lesson, and will abide by the interaction ban, and therefore seeks reconsideration of the period of the block. He seems to have gotten the message, and I am inclined to unblock, if there is general support from my fellow administrators for so doing. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 02:50, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
: I have no objection.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 11:34, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:If we can have another productive editor ''and'' not have anymore back-and-forth between them, I'd say that's the best possible scenario. Thumbs up. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 14:15, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:No objections from me, assuming the dispute is not continued. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 15:22, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
::Thanks, the three of you. And thanks to Ningauble and BD as well, even though I ''am'' disappointed by their recent actions. (Anyway, time to move on.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:35, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
: Although I received a snarky email when I extended the scope of the block,[http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DanielTom&diff=1595942] I do not object to giving the benefit of the doubt if others are persuaded that he is now earnest about reform. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:41, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
::: My email to you was not "snarky", and as no person reading this here has access to it, other than the two of us, it is very ungentlemanly of you to say it was. However, I should say, the message ''you'' left at my talk page after revoking my talk page access for 30 days ''was'' "snarky", as I've just briefly explained there. Finally, I cannot believe that it was in Wikiquote's best interest to have me blocked an unable to edit articles (but, then again, maybe that's me being too egocentric.) Sincerely, [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:30, 10 July 2013 (UTC) P.S. Ningauble, if you think you can revoke my talk page access ''for 30 days'' and then not hear any criticism from me, think again. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 19:39, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:: As the community is in agreement, the block of [[User:DanielTom]] is lifted. The interaction ban remains is place indefinitely. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 17:02, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:DanielTom had (before asking to be unblocked) sent both BD and Ningauble more than a couple emails with diffs and links to articles that could have been easily fixed in less than 10 seconds, but he was simply ignored. Given this, I (speaking in the first person now) did request to be unblocked early so that I could edit said articles again myself [as well as others, and I quote from the email: ''I just want to go back to edit[ing] articles. (Plans include adding a few quotes to the [[Bertrand Russell]] article, [[Virgil]], and then fixing the [[Death Note]] page as promised [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Death_Note&diff=1566835&oldid=1566828])'']. I should say that the original block itself was ridiculous (in my opinion, at any rate; admittedly, it is always amusing for me to be treated like a vandal — though, oddly enough, even deliberate vandals, whose only contributions have been wrecking articles, are usually only blocked for 2 days, while I found myself blocked for 30 days, but I digress), and as I had already been blocked for about two weeks, that was indeed long enough time for me to admit "lesson learnt" [where the lesson is: 1) some people apparently do not ''really'' care about article quality, and 2) punitive blocks are considered acceptable here]). I will indeed "abide by the interaction ban" from now on. Time to focus on articles again. Thanks guys for getting me unblocked, and see you 'round. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 17:41, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
:: The original block was for 24 hours, this was your ''second'' block. Persistent disruption is indeed treated differently than drive-by vandalism, and blocking to "deter the continuation of present, disruptive behavior" is [[w:WP:BLOCK#PREVENTATIVE|preventative, not punitive]]. I do recognize the distinction may not be easy to appreciate when one is on the receiving end of it, but it really is not the same thing. Regarding article fixes not done: you would not believe the length of my list of things needing to be fixed. One of the coping mechanisms I employ for problems arising faster than I can address them is to [[Procrastination|defer action]] when it appears that someone else will probably handle it. Still, the list grows daily, even without distractions like this, and the priorities I choose are mostly inexplicable even to myself. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 20:53, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
::: Maybe someday someone will explain to me ''exactly'' how blocking me for 30 days for [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=1595314&oldid=1594947 this edit] was "preventive", and not punitive. Anyway, I agree with you, this really is a "distraction", and a waste of time.~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 21:21, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

== Block request for SantiagoG ==

Hi there,

{{user|SantiagoG}} is a spambot using a non-sul account, so unfortunately it can't be locked. Please consider blocking it instead. :)

Thanks, [[User:Mathonius|Mathonius]] ([[User talk:Mathonius|talk]]) 04:43, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} Spam bots like this are pretty routine, you can usually just tag the userpage and they get deleted and blocked pretty quickly. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 06:39, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
:: Alas, this particular pattern of userpage spam has become ''very'' routine lately. They will eventually realize they are wasting their time, but it can take a while because they are remarkably stupid. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:02, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
:::Back when I still had the CheckUser bit, I'd run the occasional check to see if I could catch a bunch of accounts at one time, but alas, there was never any connection between them. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 05:15, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
::::Let us just nominate and choose a second CheckUser here, and then you get your bit backs. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 18:20, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
::::: Here, here! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 03:54, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::BD2412, if you are interested you got my vote. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 10:08, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::: I appreciate the support, but since my last bid for CU status I have come around to the view that it is probably better for the project for power to be diffused rather than concentrated. As I am already a 'crat, I would feel uncomfortable also serving as a CU at this point. However, I do think we need more CUs. [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 00:44, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
::::Ningauble, in the light the diffusion of power, would you be interested in the CheckUser bit? If so you got my vote. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 12:45, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
::::: For my own peace of mind, I prefer not to delve into the activities of bad actors more deeply than I already do with my administrative work. I don't want to be involved in researching personally identifying information about them. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 14:40, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::: I'd say the chances of us having a new CheckUser on Wikiquote are about 0%. Where would the candidates get the (minimum) 25 supporting votes to be "promoted", when we don't even have 10 active contributors on this wiki? ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 14:54, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::: Not necessarily. You would be surprised by who shows up for CU elections. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:13, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::: No Wikiquote CheckUser has ever been ''legitimately'' elected here, as anyone looking at the archives can now confirm. It's not just that people with almost no local contributions show up; we've also had more than one sockpuppet voting in such elections. (And, no, I wouldn't be surprised because I've seen them.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 15:34, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::::: Well, [[m:Wikimedia Forum/On disbanding Wikiquote|it has been argued]] that sock voting makes the ''entire project'' illegitimate, but I don't think we need to go there. I am satisfied by the level of participation in past CU elections that the outcomes were not influenced by the quantity of puppet votes. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:30, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::: (Where? The discussion you linked only refers to possible copyright infringements, not to "sock voting".) The outcomes were certainly influenced by puppet votes (who helped the support votes reach the minimum of 25). While I too am "satisfied", I still feel that the current minimum (a relic blindly and rigidly imposed by meta policy) is too high, and unrealistic, for Wikiquote. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 16:58, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::No legitimate CheckUser election? [[Wikiquote:Requests for checkuser/EVula|O rly]]? [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 17:33, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::Yep. Some users there had (and still do) literally ''zero'' edits on Wikiquote, other than showing up at your election to vote support (namely, and strikingly, [[Special:Contributions/Nifky%3F|User:Nifky?]], [[Special:Contributions/Razorflame|User:Razorflame]], and [[Special:Contributions/Jake Wartenberg|User:Jake Wartenberg]]). (Incidentally, there were also other users, namely [[Special:Contributions/Juliancolton|User:Juliancolton]] and [[Special:Contributions/Counterpower|User:Counterpower]], who also had zero or just a couple of edits to articles before voting there.) None of that was your fault; nay, it was pretty much ''a must'', given that we simply don't have, ''and never had'', 25 active contributors on Wikiquote. (See the larger picture?) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:03, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::: We have more active contributors (usually defined as at least 5 article edits per month) than that. See [http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikiquote/EN/TablesWikipediaEN.htm#editor_activity_levels editor activity levels] at Wikistats. Getting them to participate in community affairs is another matter. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:27, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::: @DanielTom: (Within that lengthy discussion there were strong words alleging incompetent governance in dealing with the Poetlister socks, claiming that was sufficient grounds to disband the project.) The elections were typically called as soon as they reach 25, and results would not likely have been different had they run a little longer. This is really moot unless you want to challenge [http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests/Permissions&diff=5458382 EVula's standing] for reinstatement in the event a second CU is elected. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:43, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::: No, I don't want to challenge EVula's standing. (We need more CUs, not less. But, ain't gonna happen.) ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:08, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::@Ningauble, thanks. Still that particular pattern of userpage spam also worries me, and I think we should search for more structural solutions. Getting the CheckUser bit back, and (let EVula) keep running occasional checks, seems the least we could/should do. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 14:56, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::: The global Stewards are well aware of this pattern, which occurs across all wikis. Unfortunately, the IP addresses used by these spambots are highly variable by design, so blocking them, even ranges of them, is ineffective. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:10, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::Yeah, any time that I would run a check on the spam IPs, I'd get nothing. It's really annoying. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 15:41, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
::::::: Someone might investigate whether Wikipedia has developed an Abuse filter for this pattern. However, the text changes so much that keeping up with the filter might be a game of [[w:Whac-A-Mole|Whac-A-Mole]]. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 12:56, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

== Edit filter maybe ==

I don't hang out at Wikiquote, so I'm not sure how much of a problem this is. But I just ran across [//en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=ANTman&oldid=1600515 an edit] that may have been able to be stopped by an [[Special:AbuseFilter|edit filter]] similar to [[w:en:Special:AbuseFilter/135]]. Perhaps somebody could copy that filter over to here. [[Special:Contributions/64.40.54.47|64.40.54.47]] 04:13, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

== Talk page spam ==

Yesterday and today I noticed a (for me) new type of spam on the talk page: an unrelated text (size about 4k) from a rotating ip address (see for example [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Great_Mouse_Detective&diff=prev&oldid=1606173 here]). Now I noticed that 7 of 9 originated ip addresses originated from one ownerid in Venezuela. If this continues, can we than block his range of IP addresses all at once? -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 10:21, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
: Thus far I count 25 IP addresses used by this spambot, ranging from 60.24.11.41 to 221.10.40.232. This is too wide a range to block without blacking out entire continents. If the problem persists then someone could try using the [[Special:AbuseFilter|Abuse filter]] to mitigate it. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 12:41, 24 July 2013 (UTC)–Updated 13:43, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

== Unblock request [[User:Diogotome]] ==

::''The following unblock request is copy/paste here (partly trimmed) from [http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ABD2412&diff=1609829&oldid=1608714 here] by [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 09:16, 7 August 2013 (UTC)''
*{{checkuser|Diogotome}}
As you know, my brother was blocked some time ago in many wikis where he has zero edits... He was recently unblocked at Commons, where admin asked him to write on his user page that he is my brother. (He did so [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Diogotome]...) He was also unblocked at Wikisource [http://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3ADiogotome] on the grounds that he had no edits there. (He also has no edits here.)
:Other than the strong evidence presented by email that he is my brother (including citizen card, ID), there are other things which you included can check. 1) he created his account in 2009 (I myself didn't even know about accounts till late 2012); 2) the email with which he registered his account is diofact@hotmail.com (confirm that); 3) he still uses that email, even on his Facebook account, where you can find him (Diogo Tomé). I think it is obvious that the account is his.
Also worth noting, he, just like me, registered with his real name, which is not what socks do (...). Although I know he doesn't want to edit Wikiquote, I still don't think he should be blocked here on sock grounds.
... ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 21:47, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
:: I have lifted the block. It is my understanding that [[User:Diogotome]] has no interest in editing here. I am sure you are aware that it would raise some eyebrows (on all of the above mentioned projects) if this editor suddenly began making edits that seemed as if they are made as a proxy for you, so please take care. Cheers! [[User:BD2412|''BD2412'']] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 12:20, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:::Thanks (your understanding is correct). ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 12:42, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:: I don't have any problem with this unblocking, but I would like to rectify some incorrect assumptions. (1) The email with which he registered his account cannot be confirmed by any technical means available to administrators here. It is confidential information that only the account holder is at liberty to disclose. (2) Registering with a real name most definitely ''is'' something that socks do. Some of the most notorious abusers are known to impersonate real people. Finally, BD's eyebrow raising admonition cuts both ways: both accounts should avoid involvement in each other's affairs. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 17:39, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:::"The email with which he registered his account cannot be confirmed by any technical means available to administrators here." Where can it be confirmed? ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 17:44, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:::: I assume that it could be extracted by a developer. However, it is easy enough to change the e-mail associated with an account; we have no way of knowing whether it is the original address.--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 18:06, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
::::: "It is confidential information that only the account holder is at liberty to disclose." The [[foundation:Privacy policy|Privacy policy]] identifies one way he can confirm the email address currently linked to his account (using "email this user"), and indicates conditions under which the Foundation would disclose it without his consent (e.g. subpoena). ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:09, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
:::::: I suppose even the original email ("e-mail address confirmation") could be changed if forwarded. As to the real names question, of course socks use real names, but not ''their'' real names (any name you can choose is someone else's real name). My point is that no sock has its name so close to the sockmaster's (in this case, Diogo being a Portuguese name, and our family names being the same). Maybe if I get blocked indefinitely on Wikiquote, and unable to edit, my brother may come along to return my favor here, and ask that I be unblocked, although that is exceedingly unlikely (not the block part, but the returning of the favor part from him). ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 18:25, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

== Semi-protection request for Mean Girls ==

Could an administrator semi-protect [[Mean Girls]]? Too much IP vandalism going on as of lately (especially {{User|65.175.216.98}}). Thanks in advance. [[User:SnapSnap|SnapSnap]] ([[User talk:SnapSnap|talk]]) 18:26, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} - but I also trimmed this very bloated page first. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 19:02, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

== QOTD for 10 & 12 August 2013 ==

The QOTD layout at [[Wikiquote talk:Quote of the day/August 10, 2013]] will have to be placed into [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/August 10, 2013]] by an admin. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 21:36, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 23:16, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

I am once again a bit late with a selection and the QOTD layout at [[Wikiquote talk:Quote of the day/August 12, 2013]] will have to be placed into [[Wikiquote:Quote of the day/August 12, 2013]] by an admin. ~ ♞[[User:Kalki/Kalkiswords|☤]][[User:Kalki/Magic|☮]]♌[[User:Kalki|Kalki]]·[[User talk:Kalki|†]]·[[User:Kalki/index|⚓]]⊙[[User:Kalki/Chronology|☳]][[User:Kalki/Vox Box|☶]]⚡ 14:53, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}} ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 15:04, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

== [[Talk: Main Page]] ==
Can someone semi-protect this again? It's getting vandalized a lot. [[User:King jakob c 2|'''Kjc2''']] [[User talk:King jakob c 2|jabber]] 15:47, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
: I am reluctant to protect the talk page or our main public-facing portal, where newcomers and visitors should be welcome to make pertinent inquiries and comments, unless the situation becomes unmanageable. I think the current frequency of unconstructive edits on this widely watched page is being handled well enough by folks who notice and revert in a fairly timely manner. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:07, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
::It seems in the past year only one comment was made by an anom visitors, while the page is vandalized 50+ times. -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 22:36, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
::: You are not counting registered accounts without enough local edits to be autoconfirmed, but it is true that unconstructive edits significantly outnumber constructive ones. I just don't think a handful of reverts per month is too great a price to pay for keeping the front door open. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:22, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

== Blocking question ==

Just wanted to gauge the opinions of the admins: I noticed that {{user|Mdd}} recently blocked a user indefinitely for a single instance of what I would characterize as moderate and fairly harmless spamming (linking to a site for their poetry on their user page). If it were me, I would have likely let them off with a <nowiki>{{spam}}</nowiki> warning - which is what I did earlier in the day for someone who posted a link to their blog on their user page. I'm not saying my inclination is correct or that {{user|Mdd}} is wrong, but in the spirit of consistency, what is the feeling out there? I'm just curious. Thanks. ~ [[User:UDScott|UDScott]] ([[User talk:UDScott|talk]]) 18:35, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
:Assuming you're talking about {{User|MelissaHg}}, I'd say it was a reasonable assumption; the page itself matches the same pattern for all the spam that we've been getting for months (right down to the double tags before the link). Plus, I'm not sure why someone from Switzerland would have a Spanish poetry site... [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 18:55, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Harmon Leon

2013-08-14T17:28:53Z

EVula: this is dripping with sarcasm

{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Wikiquote| |{{error:not substituted|vfd-new2}}<div style="display:none;">}}
== [[:Harmon Leon]] ==

Subject does not appear to be sufficiently notable. A Wikipedia article about him [[w:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harmon Leon|has been deleted]]. — [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 13:50, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
*'''Vote closes''': 14:00, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

*'''Delete''' as nom. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 13:50, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Non-notable. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 13:54, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
*'''Weak keep''' I tend to agree with Orange Mike's assessment. However, he did publish 6 books, some of them published by notable publishers such as {{w|Prometheus Books}}, {{w|Nation Books}} -- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 14:06, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. The quotes were copied from some website, but both books appear in GoogleBooks, so I have replaced them with the original ones. The page has now been improved and is looking good. ~ [[User:DanielTom|DanielTom]] ([[User talk:DanielTom|talk]]) 14:57, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
*'''Comment''': [[w:WP:AUTHOR|Not everyone who is published is considered notable.]] I have looked, but I don't find any evidence that he has produced a significant or well-known work, or met any other criteria for notability. (''The Guardian'' gave the featured book only one paragraph,[http://www.theguardian.com/books/2008/oct/25/society-travel-american-dream] concluding that it is "amusing but lacking in analysis". ''Baltimore City Paper'' gave it the longest treatment I found,[http://www2.citypaper.com/arts/review.asp?rid=14239] under a subtitle beginning "Humorist Forgets To Bring The Funny...") Unless there is some evidence that this dabbler in gonzo satire is widely or notably quoted, I don't think having published a few books (topping out at ''#1,524,959'' on Amazon) is enough to show quotability. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 18:24, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' One quote of his is notable according to The Guardian: ""Bush and Hitler - same shit, different asshole!" his hippy persona says memorably."--[[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] ([[User talk:Abramsky|talk]]) 09:41, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
:: It is a memorable quip, but it is not original to Leon's 2008 book:
:::* It is described in an [http://www.revleft.com/vb/bush-compares-bin-t50655/index.html?s=497a76dfb6f2577b42e031eee0418262& August 2006 forum comment] as ''something seen on a poster''. [http://www.barrypopik.com/index.php/new_york_city/entry/same_shit_different_asshole_political_adage/ Barry Popik] reports that the posters became popularized in 2004, and discusses other instances of the "same shit, different asshole" trope dating back to at least 1998.
:::* Michelle Malkin (''Unhinged: Exposing Liberals Gone Wild'' (2005), p. 143) reports that Ozzy Osbourne opened a concert (date unspecified) with the song "War Pigs" featuring a video montage of Bush and Hitler with the caption "Same shit, different assholes". This may not have been the origin of the Bush-Hitler analogy, but certainly led to spreading it around: [http://www.theguardian.com/film/2005/may/23/cannes2005.cannesfilmfestival ''The Guardian'' (22 May 2005)] notes that Osbourne's caption was particularly notorious among "right-thinkers" who undertook to boycott him.
:: My impression is that Leon likes to describe (or in this case, quote) interestingly weird things but doesn't really have anything interestingly original to say about them, which may explain why he has not (yet?) become notable. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:52, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

*'''Keep''' I’m pretty sure that most of you here don’t know what notability is. I mean, honestly. It seems you haven’t taken pains to study and understand what notability truly is. First of all, just because a person is not notable on WP does not mean they are not notable on WQ. WP & WQ are about different things and thus may obviously have different notability standards; even different WPs have different notability standards. There is absolutely no reason to believe that [http://www.theguardian.com/books/2008/oct/25/society-travel-american-dream the quote] [[User:Abramsky|Abramsky]] mentioned is non-notable. (just as there is absolutely no reason to believe that 3 of [[User:RogDel/Notability_as_a_source_of_quotes#Kedar_Joshi_.28Moderately_notable.29.5Bfn_39.5D|the quotes]], the ones mentioned as notable, are non-notable; and the same goes with the author of the quotes.) WQ is about quotes, not biographies of people. Unlike WP, notability on WQ would require neither “significant coverage” nor “coverage in multiple sources”. ([[w:Wikipedia:Notability#Why we have these requirements|Wikipedia requires]] "significant coverage" in reliable sources so that it can actually write a whole article, rather than half a paragraph or a [[w:Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary|definition]] of that topic. However, [[Wikiquote:What Wikiquote is not#Wikiquote is not an encyclopedia|Wikiquote is not an encyclopedia]] covering biographies of people. [[Wikiquote:Wikiquote|Wikiquote is a collection of quotations.]] Also, [[w:Wikipedia:Notability#Why we have these requirements|Wikipedia requires]] "multiple sources" so that it can write a reasonably balanced article that complies with [[w:Wikipedia:Neutral point of view|Wikipedia:Neutral point of view]], rather than representing only one author's point of view. However, quotations included in Wikiquote [[Wikiquote:Neutral point of view|do not need to conform to NPOV]], as they are reflections of the point-of-view of the quoted individual.) In fact, Wikipedia should and does have the lowest standards of notability among all serious encyclopedias. (For two reasons: 1. It can financially afford to have the lowest standards of notability. 2. It is the premise of Wikipedia: "Imagine a world in which every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge. That's what we're doing." — Jimmy Wales, founder of Wikipedia) Similarly, Wikiquote should have the lowest standards of notability among all serious compendia of quotations. Ignorance & prejudice appear to be quite strong here. Truly pathetic! ~ [[User:RogDel|RogDel]] ([[User talk:RogDel|talk]]) 16:41, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
::<edit conflict> I noted above that there is reason to believe that the quote Abramsky mentioned is not Harmon Leon's. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 16:58, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
:::I appreciate your effort, but not the way you ''normally'' determine notability on WQ. Sorry, but it seems you need to do some thorough & fundamental research on that. I still might consider ''The American Dream (2008)'' notable on WQ, in view of [http://www.theguardian.com/books/2008/oct/25/society-travel-american-dream the coverage] it has in ''[[w:The Guardian|The Guardian]]''. Cheers! ~ [[User:RogDel|RogDel]] ([[User talk:RogDel|talk]]) 17:24, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
::Nothing sways my opinion quite like being vaguely insulted. I'm practically scrambling to change me !vote. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 17:28, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Harmon Leon

2013-08-09T13:54:34Z

EVula: delete

The Castle

2013-08-07T05:03:35Z

EVula: Reverted edit by 153.107.97.165 (talk • contributions) to last version by 120.151.10.223

'''''[[w:The Castle (film)|The Castle]]''''' is a [[w:1997 in film|1997]] [[w:Australia|Australian]] [[w:comedy|comedy]] film about an "ordinary" Australian family threatened by eviction by way of [[w:compulsory acquisition|compulsory acquisition]] when the nearby airport announces its plans to expand. Unwilling to abandon their home - their "castle" - so easily, the Kerrigans take the matter to the courts.
:''Directed by [[w:Rob Sitch|Rob Sitch]]. Written by [[w:Santo Cilauro|Santo Cilauro]], [[w:Tom Gleisner|Tom Gleisner]], [[w:Jane Kennedy|Jane Kennedy]] and [[w:Rob Sitch|Rob Sitch]]''
<center>'''It's not just a house... it's a home!''' ([[#taglines|taglines]])</center>

== Dale Kerrigan ==
* My name's Dale Kerrigan, and this is my story.

* As the real estate agent said, "Location, location, location", and we're right next door to the airport. It will be very convenient if we ever have to fly one day.

* Our crescent was going to be the heart of a major housing development, but it never got up. They reckon the planes put people off, them and the power lines. Not Dad. He reckons power lines are a reminder of man's ability to generate electricity. He's always saying great things like that.

* Pity my oldest brother couldn't be there. His name's Wayne. He's in jail. Eight years for armed robbery. Many people would call him the black sheep of the family, but not Mum and Dad. He got caught up with the wrong crowd - he didn't mean to rob the petrol station! Now he's sorry.

* Dad? I dug another hole. It's filling with water.

* If there's one thing dad loved more than serenity, it's a two-stroke motor at full throttle!

* Dad reckons fishing is 10% brains and 95% muscle, the rest is just good luck.

* Mum said it was funny how one day you're not famous, and the next day you are. Famous. And then you're not again.

== Darryl Kerrigan ==
* Shot, Dale!

* It's not a house, it's a home.

* ''This'' is going straight to the pool room.

* Tell 'em they're dreamin'!

* ''[singing]'' We're going to Bonnie Doon!

* How's the serenity?

* Hey. Bad luck. ''[pause]'' Ya dickhead.

* [to opposing court counsel after winning the case] Suffer in your jocks!

== Others ==
* '''Dennis Denuto:''' It's just... the vibe... of the thing.

* '''Farouk:''' He say plane fly overhead, drop value. I no care. In Beirut, plane fly over head, drop bomb. I like these planes better.

* '''Farouk:''' I say you have friend, I have friend. My friend go to your house, put bomb under your car and blow you to fucking sky!

* '''Steve Kerrigan:''' Dad, you haven't let anyone down. I don't know what the opposite of lettin' someone down is... but you done the opposite.

* '''Darryl Kerrigan:''' Fuck off! '''Steve Kerrigan:''' You heard my dad, now fuck off!

== Dialogue ==
:'''Dale:''' ''[narration]'' Steve is also an ideas man. That's why Dad calls him the Ideas Man. He has lots of ideas.
:'''Steve:''' It's a motorcycle helmet with a built-in brake light.
:'''Darryl:''' ''[shaking his head]'' You are an ideas man, Steve.

<hr width="50%"/>

:'''Wayne:''' How's Mum?
:'''Dale:''' Good.
:'''Wayne:''' How's Dad?
:'''Dale:''' Good.
:'''Wayne:''' How's Trace?
:'''Dale:''' Good.
:'''Wayne:''' How're you?
:'''Dale:''' Good.
:'''Wayne:''' How's Steve?
:'''Dale:''' He's alright.
:'''Wayne:''' Good.
:'''Dale:''' ''[narration]'' Even though he's the oldest and I'm the youngest, we get on great. We can just chat for hours.
:'''Wayne:''' Thanks for coming, Dale.
:'''Dale:''' You want some chewy?
:'''Wayne:''' Nah.

<hr width="50%"/>

:'''Darryl:''' ''[pointing at the verandah]'' See that lattice up there?
:'''Valuer:''' Yeah?
:'''Darryl:''' Fake. Plastic. Gives the place a Victoriana feel. Chimney? Fake too.
:'''Valuer:''' Why's it there?
:'''Darryl:''' Charm. Adds a bit of charm.

<hr width="50%"/>

:'''Darryl:''' Now, here back? Landfill. Not allowed to build there.
:'''Valuer:''' Has the soil been tested?
:'''Darryl:''' Oh yeah. Nothing too serious in there. ''[pause]'' What do you know about lead?

<hr width="50%"/>

:'''Darryl:''' I'll be interested to see this fella's valuation.
:'''Dale:''' You thinking of selling, Dad?
:'''Darryl:''' Oh, no, mate, no, but it'd be nice to know what we're sitting on.
:'''Dale:''' ''[nodding]'' Clay.

<hr width="50%"/>

:'''Federal Court judge:''' And what law are you basing this argument on?
:'''Darryl Kerrigan:''' The law of bloody common sense!

<hr width="50%"/>

:'''Darryl Kerrigan:''' Ay Steve, can you move the Camira? I need to get the Torana out to get to the Commodore.
:'''Steve Kerrigan:''' Sure thing Dad, but I'll have to get the keys to the Cortina if I'm gunna move that Camira.
:'''Darryl Kerrigan:''' Alright mate, just watch the boat

== Taglines ==
* Ordinary family. Extraordinary story.
* It's every Australian family's dream. A quarter acre block. A Pool Room. A barbie. And an airport over the back fence.
* They want to extend the airport... But the Kerrigans won't belt up.
* It's not just a house... it's our home!

== Cast ==
* [[w:Michael Caton|Michael Caton]] as Darryl Kerrigan
* [[w:Anne Tenney|Anne Tenney]] as Sal Kerrigan
* [[w:Stephen Curry|Stephen Curry]] as Dale Kerrigan
* [[w:Anthony Simcoe|Anthony Simcoe]] as Steve Kerrigan
* [[w:Sophie Lee|Sophie Lee]] as Tracey Petropoulous (nee Kerrigan)
* [[w:Wayne Hope|Wayne Hope]] as Wayne Kerrigan
* [[w:Tiriel Mora|Tiriel Mora]] as Dennis Denuto
* [[w:Eric Bana|Eric Bana]] as Con Petropoulous
* [[w:Charles Tingwell|Charles "Bud" Tingwell]] as Lawrence Hammill

== External links ==
{{wikipedia}}
* {{imdb title|id=0118826|title=The Castle}}
* {{rotten-tomatoes|id=1087272|title=The Castle}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Castle, The}}
[[Category:1997 films]]
[[Category:Australian films]]
[[Category:Comedy films]]

Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/User:Tesfan/Dawn of War

2013-08-05T16:02:44Z

EVula: Delete

{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Wikiquote| |{{error:not substituted|vfd-new2}}<div style="display:none;">}}
== [[:User:Tesfan/Dawn of War]] ==

This stale user draft for the [[Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War]] article is far in excess of [[Wikiquote:Limits on quotations]]. See [[Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War]] (September 2007) and [[Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War (2nd)]] (November 2007) and [[Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War 3rd]] (March 2008). This [[w:WP:FAKEARTICLE|"fakearticle"]] was created shortly after the September 2007 vote, in an apparent attempt to circumvent trimming of the article. — [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:45, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
*'''Vote closes''': 16:00, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

*'''Delete''' as nom. ~ [[User:Ningauble|Ningauble]] ([[User talk:Ningauble|talk]]) 15:45, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom. Copyvio as it currently stands, and Tesfan hasn't edited in nearly 6 years. [[User:EVula|EVula]] // [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|☯]] // 16:02, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

User talk:EVula

2013-08-01T01:57:35Z

EVula: /* Beast Wars‎ */ response

User talk:EVula

2013-07-31T14:21:32Z

EVula: /* Beast Wars‎ */ huh, well how 'bout that