Talk:Main Page

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Main Page page.
Please sign and date your posts using four tildes (~~~~). New discussion topics go at the bottom of the page; click here to start a new topic. New to Wikiquote? Welcome! Frequently asked questions. This is not a forum for general discussion about the page's subject.	Talk page guidelines Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Don't bite the newcomers!

---

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 clicking here to purge the main page cache.

Archives

#1 2003 - 2005/11 #2 2005/11 - 2007/04 #3 2007/04 - 2010 #4 2010 - 2018

This page is for discussion of the Main Page only. For general discussions or questions about Wikiquote, please go to the Village pump.

NOTE: Old discussions can be found in Talk:Main Page/Archives:

---

---

Election related quotes

Suggestion: Not using any quote that has anything to do with the elections as QOTD (no matter who said it) until February. Let's try to keep everything as neutral as possible.

Ha! Since when does Wikiquote ever bother with neutrality? Today's (18th December 2022 featured quote is pro-choice and that's not the first time it's happened. It has never featured a pro-life quote. --2001:BB6:7A76:F858:28F8:3EEE:A8A8:B94B 15:30, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikiquote aims to provide a collection of notable quotes from various perspectives, but the selection of featured quotes depends on contributions from the community of editors. If a particular viewpoint seems underrepresented, it's likely due to the nature of voluntary contributions rather than intentional bias. Anyone can suggest or add quotes, including those reflecting pro-life views, as long as they meet Wikiquote's notability and sourcing standards. !ijaz321 (talk) 12:27, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Concerning the quote for today....

It is true that the cause of envy is everything good but the result of envy is everything bad. When people strive to impress others, sometimes motivated by envy, they soon find out that nobody really cares.... Leteh (talk) 22:17, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Hey Leteh. Welcome to Wikiquote! I can't say I'm wise enough to know whether it is true for certain, but this is the kind of thinking that a good quote inspires, and I'm glad it seems to have inspired you. GMG^talk 22:36, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Cry ..... Thank you places love miss fine.... 41.114.209.104 11:39, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

"Yes, it is true that envy often arises from the good things others have, but its consequences are rarely positive. When people try to impress others, driven by envy, they eventually realize that most people are too absorbed in their own lives to care. In the end, the pursuit of approval through envy only leads to dissatisfaction and emptiness." !ijaz321 (talk) 10:56, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

In my own life I frequently come across the following kind of mindset. I display my work, wherein I put passion and love, and the outcome is great. Then, someone views my work, and they comment: wauw, you demotivate me, but motivate me at the same time.

▪ Firstly, nothing against the person for so honestly expressing their feelings; hats off to then.

▪ But secondly, what is this, is this jealousy? Why would someone be demotivated by my display of my good work; but also be motivated?

▪ How does envy relate to jealousy - is it the same thing?

▪ Why not encourage each other to do well, instead of feeling envy/jealousy when someone is better than us?

▪ Is this the product of a capitalist and individualist/introvert society as opposed to a extravert and humanist society(Ubuntu)? Maderjo (talk) 10:34, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

I don't think if its true. Jacob Opwaka (talk) 08:20, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Attention!

Please pay attention to Template:Ping and its Discussion.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 21:03, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Text/Mo Ran's time is coming late, only waiting for the cold moon to lean against the window, desk, lightly express a touch of leisure, on the note, waiting, night comes, just like waiting for a woman in destiny. Youth is fading, and the tenderness of immortality is still hidden in the context of the years. I am still waiting, waiting for the woman who leans on time. Whose piano sound messed up the rice paper, and my thoughts were stained with ink for years. The clever melody is like a lotus in a sketch. Rferf (talk) 06:15, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

This is a great speech... Taslhine (talk) 21:26, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Quote of the Day 2020-05-08 (Friedrich Hayek)

The quote by Friedrich Hayek can't be found on his Wikiquote page: Friedrich Hayek --ElfQrin (talk) 10:37, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

I think it's time for us to stop trolling & looking down on SA Artists and start supporting our brothers and sisters coz they'll take our music far if we support em. T-cloud DaRapghost S.A (talk) 22:00, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Today's QOTD is broken!

So in the main page today (13 May 2020), the QOTD is a bit broken in terms of text arrangement (blame @Kalki: for this one hehe). May I suggest deleting the image on the left (or make both of them go to the right, or be smaller) and that'll probably fix it, thankeez! dibbydib ⌐■_■ (barate me) 04:27, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Quote of the Day 2020-06-03 (image of Donald Trump and quote from the Gospel)

Today's quote with the associated image is wrong on many levels. I don't think it's Wikipedia / Wikiquote's mission to judge people's intentions, and offer personal interpretations of events and news. It's no NPOV (Neutral Point Of View, according to Wikipedia guidelines) at the very least. --ElfQrin (talk) 10:07, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@ElfQrin: From experience, Kalki makes the QOTD's from each quote and is likely the one who added the provided image, so if you want it to get sorted out, that's who you've got to ask. In my opinion, it is pretty POV to add that image alongside the quote but I won't get myself involved. dibbydib^⌐■_■ (barate me) 10:21, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

This is wikiquote and not wikipedia (so wikipedia guidelines should not be quoted here). Sometimes the quotes are a bit provocative, but this is still better than boring quotes (just IMO). --დამოკიდებულება (talk) 10:59, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Not very subtle, but it's one way to see whether anybody's actually reading the main page, I suppose. Emufarmers (talk) 00:38, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

I think that this should be discussed in Wikiquote talk:Quote of the day and/or Wikiquote talk:Image use policy Rupert Loup 01:56, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

On today's QOTD

Today's (Sep. 21) quote seems a bit biased, forgive me if my memory is incorrect, but don't we have a policy against that? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.157.127.37 (talk) 18:45, 21 September 2020

There is no rule against quotes that express a point of view. If nobody actually had anything to say, there wouldn't be anything worth quoting. ~ Ningauble (talk) 19:31, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

• Unfortunately, the editor who selects the QOTD, User:Kalki, is a self-admitted Hillary voter who consistently chooses POV-pushing anti-Trump quotes, which are not even widely quoted (case in point: this particular anti-Trump quote barely returns 2 pages of Google results!), and we can confidently predict that he will continue to use the QOTD as an anti-Trump propaganda tool ahead of the election. Even though this may not be against any written policy, I would propose we should altogether avoid having anti-Trump (or anti-Biden) quotes as the QOTD at least until after the election, otherwise we give the very improper (but currently plausible) impression that Wikiquote takes sides politically (when in fact it is Kalki, the POV-pushing editor, who is taking sides). Aren't there any more worthy (and less parochial) quotes to be displayed on the front page that actually stood the test of time? ~ DanielTom (talk) 20:30, 21 September 2020 (UTC) last edit: 22:40, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Wait is this about the RBG quote ("My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.")? That was a very timely and well-reported quote. I see nothing wrong with it as the QOTD. ~ UDScott (talk) 21:13, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

No, it's about the Stephen King quote ("What fascinates me — mesmerizes me — isn't so much Trump himself as the American government he's crafted...") at Wikiquote:Quote of the day/September 21, 2020. It was not as widely reported. ~ Ningauble (talk) 21:42, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

This page became more and more a personal page to spread the political views of the QOTD editor. --ElfQrin (talk) 12:58, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Oct 6 QOTD

Is "Don’t be afraid of Covid. Don’t let it dominate your life." really an appropriate quote to put on the front page? Is that not something incredibly dangerous to encourage? Nixinova (talk) 02:47, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Blocked Message

What is the blocked message for Wikiquote?

QotD Jan 10 2021

How many times do people need to complain about partisan contemporary US politics being pushed on QOTD? Let's just have a rule that anything political must be 15+ years old, etc. Otherwise you'll soon see wars over whose candidates get more quotespace - and it looks like all of the complaints here are alleging the same bias... HaltlosePersonalityDisorder (talk) 00:10, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

I'm not for old quotes only, but Wikiquote home page can't be QOTD editor's personal home page. --ElfQrin (talk) 12:36, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Original quote

My son Remington Fuller came up with a quote that everyone should live by. "Live simply, so that others may simply live." RTF31406 (talk) 03:59, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

This particular quote goes at least as far back as 1972, and is attributed to Elizabeth Seton by Hubert Ingram Bermont in How to Compete Successfully in Your Own Field (1979), p. 141. ~ DanielTom (talk) 07:12, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Suggesting quotes when date of birth is unknown

How can I suggest quotes for the quote of the day when date of birth/death is unknown? --ო ~ ^#SheSaid 11:47, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

y associated date to a person's birth or death, this can be stated with the suggestion, preferably with some other date that is historically associated with the person, or plausibly with the quote, but not necessarily so. ~ ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki ⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 23:15, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. There are many people (or even quotes from anonymous works) for which no date can be associated. For how many people from Ancient Greece do we know the exact date of birth? With other cultures, even in medieval or modern times, it is even worse. As another example, a quote about Shiva could be placed on the day of Shivaratri, but the Shivaratri festival falls in the western calender on a different day each year.

With the current system, a lot of very good quotes cannot be suggested.

I propose the creation of two additional pages, one page to suggest quotes for which no date can be associated with, and one page for quotes which can be associated with a date, but it varies from year to year in the Western calendar. --ო ~ ^#SheSaid 11:42, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

To clarify, quotes from these pages could be used on days where there too few quote suggestions, March 30 only has one or two quote suggestions. --ო ~ ^#SheSaid 11:31, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Missing picture on the QOTD

Today's QOTD seems to be missing a picture since it was deleted on Commons. Can a replacement be added? Pinging Kalki as the page's creator. Aranya (talk) 16:29, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

The missing image has now been replaced. ~ ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki ⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 21:29, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Only one picture? Yes. We seem to have forgotten the decision, after much discussion, that there should be only one, a consensus reached and agreed to in September 2015, and observed (mostly) until it was abandoned without discussion late last year. (Also abandoned, as seen in today's page, is the "official" policy about specific relevance, for what it's worth.) ~ Ningauble (talk) 20:48, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

new proverbs

How can new proverbs, recently published by ordinary people, be added to this database? I have a file of 300 beautiful proverbs, and they are translated into seven languages, and I have been given permission to publish them, please. ששון (talk) 22:20, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Hope helps you through the dark moments of our life.

Original works are not within our scope. You are better to publish them on other venues. Thank you for your considerations. --Aphaia (talk) 06:46, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

This could be a very nice development if attention is given Denisseo1234 (talk) 16:09, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Hausa Wikiquote

I want to open Wikiquote in my Language (Hausa) which exist on wikipedia, as there are alot of interesting quotes and proverbs in my native tongue. How can I go about it Uncle Bash007 (talk) 18:47, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi Uncle Bash007, you can start working on the project

here and propose the project at meta:Requests for new languages. It's a long process and will require collaboration from other Hausa speakers. Hope this helps, Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 13:34, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Rubbish computer Thanks for the response and ofcourse it does. I really appreciate Uncle Bash007 (talk) 13:49, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Uncle Bash007, no problem, hope you can start the project at some point. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 22:55, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Rubbish computer, Sure, I will let you know as soon S possible. Thank uUncle Bash007 (talk) 10:40, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Typo in the "New pages" image caption

Greetings and felicitations. On the homepage, in "New in Wikiquote:Xiomara Castro" there should be a space after the colon. —DocWatson42 (talk) 09:22, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Teahouse

Why isn’t there a Teahouse like Wikipedia? – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 14:02, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Why are you repeating this posting here? Why not continue the discussion you started here? ~ UDScott (talk) 14:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

@UDScott I see this discussion was started by @Ilovemydoodle on May 6, 2022 almost two weeks before they posted here. Since that discussion did not yield enough volunteers I assume @Ilovemydoodle posted here hoping to get more volunteers.

Are you suggesting they did something wrong? How would you go about starting a teahouse on wq? Ottawahitech (talk) 03:47, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Movie history

Matt Dillon in 1978. In the movie. Over the edge. Said The Only Thing in Texas Is Steers And Queers. Goanfuself1 (talk) 22:35, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Quote

Practice doesn't make your work perfect, But helps you to do better progress Yeojjamora (talk) 08:01, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

What is essential is invisible to the eye Casandra Estapia (talk) 01:48, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Happiness

1. "There is no path to happiness, happiness is the path 2. "HAppiness is the key to beauty, without happiness, beauty is nothing 3. "true happiness can be found in the tiniest things." 4. "happiness is letting go of what you think your life is supposed to look like." 5."you can find true happiness from your family." Derickrein100612 (talk) 05:44, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

8 November 2024

I'm struggling to imagine any good reason for using the main page to broadcast the congratulatory self-aggrandizement of fascistic, xenophobic authoritarians. Hydrangeans (talk) 21:33, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

I want to upload my original quote Banshailang Majaw (talk) 02:38, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm new

I'm new to Wikiquote! What do I have to do? O7Official (talk) 13:17, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Imbalances

Among the "People" named on the main page, there are 4 women and 28 men; among the "Literary works", there is 1 written by a woman and 11 by men. Are you sure you don't want to do something about it?

Also, among 32 people, there are 12 (more or less) Americans and 11 whose native language wasn't English. Among the 12 literary works, 6 belong to the American literature and 1 was not written in English. There are 2 English films and 15 American, 3 English TV shows and 14 American.

Isn't this a little bit... myopic? --Ehitaja (talk) 12:27, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Hey! I agree with you. I was going to mention something similar when I posted a while back (and only now realizing I posted in the wrong place) but I think it would be a good idea to do a refresh of the front page and get some more diversity there. Would fit with the WikiLoves campaigns too! Could maybe do something similar to the votes for quote of the day, people can make suggestions and then vote, but those stay up longer than a day. Definitely needs a refresh though so that might be more than can be easily discussed in one vote? Not sure.

Kinda wish there was a better place to discuss these things but maybe that's just my bias/inertia from being too used to reddit. I know there's all kinds of things mediawiki is capable of that I'm probably unaware of. Reddit does have chats, group chats, private subreddits, etc and a nifty voting feature with time limits you can set. I'm pretty sure at one time reddit was literally just a wiki and it somehow became what it is now lol. I've felt like it is a perfect place for a discussion of that type but haven't seen it used that way yet. Just my suggestion though, I'm just some guy who loves quotes but when I emailed AZquotes about making quotes great again I got no reply

Anyway hopefully this tags all the people I'm trying to tag here not sure how this works

@BD2412 @HouseOfChange @Koavf @UDScott @IOHANNVSVERVS @Amire80 @Kalki

Also happy belated wikibirthday @O7Official I don't know what we're supposed to do either but I figure as long as you mean well it's best to push buttons and see what happens

[A] general principle of robustness: be conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from others - Jon Postel Relevantusername2020 (talk) 06:00, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

To be clear, Reddit as we know it began as a message board with only link submissions and upvotes/down votes. It incorporated things from two different sites: Aaron Swartz's Infogami and Alexis Ohanian and Steve Huffman's idea to make an app that allowed you to order pizza via SMS or something. Anyway, if you're motivated to do some kind of mockup of the front page for community discussion, that would be great. The fact is, Kalki has been extremely dutiful about front page stuff for a very long time now and while he is not unilaterally "in charge" of it, the fact that he does the work and others typically don't give any feedback or only occasionally do to complain means that in practice, he gets to do what he wants. I can hardly blame him if everyone else is too checked out to be involved (and, to be clear, I have had issues with his decision-making before, but I also didn't put in the work myself, so my idle whining is just as much to blame). —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:04, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

I am all too familiar with the history of Reddit. I have a love/hate relationship with social media but the idea Reddit represents I can't help but support. Bluesky has a solid foundation too but I haven't quite decided yet on that one.

>Anyway, if you're motivated to do some kind of mockup of the front page for community discussion, that would be great.

Well that's not quite what I was thinking. I was thinking mostly a place to vote on the daily quote's and just a more intuitive/user friendly place to organize a chat for suggestions and questions. That could be either in a chat itself or a pinned thread. Main point was just the built in voting mostly.

As far as Kalki, I'm aware, that's why I tagged everyone in this thread. I had wrote out something the other day in the other thread basically chastising those being overly critical since, as you point out, Kalki is both the brains and brawn of the operation here. It'd be one thing if the complaints were egregious and unanimously opposed by any and all who may come across it but . . . those images and quotes are incredibly innocuous and I would honestly say in regards to the images specifically they are agnostically welcoming. The quotes and the source of the quotes can sometimes make me think twice, but as I explained in my rambling reddit notes to myself with zero organization:

>. . . even if it is a quote/person I disagree or someone I wouldn't think of as being 'wise' or whatever, I click their name and scroll through their quotes. Sure some quotes are probably wrong or slight misquotes but overall it's a good way to see past the polarization of society. Even people who I strongly disagree with usually have quotes I like and on the flipside people I strongly agree with have said things I do not like.

I have some ideas/suggestions that are pretty simple but at the same time I'm not very familiar with Wikimedia beyond basic things like this or adding citations or whatever. So maybe it is a case of unknown unknowns, idk.

That's why I tagged all the people who have been recently active. It would be a somewhat simple thing to set up and manage, but it only works if people would actually use it and there's no reason to use it if everyone prefers Wiki Relevantusername2020 (talk) 05:58, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

- 'Cause the current ranking method makes zero sense to me

Also, on the opposite end of things from the bit in the comment above about complaints being nitpicky, making trump quotes from literally less than 24 hours ago is the exact opposite of welcoming. Obviously 'quotes' being such a broad topic can touch on political topics, and not everyone agrees on things, but seriously? Is there no place safe from his ugly mug and narcissistic bullshittery? Relevantusername2020 (talk) 07:48, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Images used by Kalki

The images File:Yyjpg.svg and File:Ancient version of the Taijitu by Lai Zhi-De, sideways.svg were inserted by @Kalki to today's main page, and also to the main-space page Neil Postman.

What do these images have to do with the quote? And what do they have to do with Neil Postman?

The Image use policy says the following about relevance:

1. Images should directly support or embody the theme of the provided quotes.
2. The connection between the images used and the subject matter of the page as a whole, and individual quotes on it, should be obvious and specific. The relevance should not be so ambiguous or abstract that it could refer to anything or nothing.
3. Images are used to illustrate the subject of a page or a quote, not to express an opinion, interpretation, or commentary by, e.g., introducing metaphors, analogies, comparisons, or relationships that are not explicit in the captioning quotation, or by highlighting arbitrary, literal meanings of words used in a figurative sense.
4. Images that could connote a specific cultural meaning that differs from that of either the page or the specified quote should not be used.

These two images appear to violate all the points of this policy

1. I couldn't find any explanation about how they support or embody the theme of the provided quote.
2. The connection between the images used and the subject matter is neither obvious nor specific, and the relevance is completely abstract and refers to nothing.
3. One of the images introduces a relationship to the Chinese culture, and the other image is almost completely arbitrary.
4. One of the images has a meaning in the Chinese culture, while the author of the quote is American. The other image, withe plus sign, is vaguely based on something from the Chinese culture, but appears to be an invention of its author and something that exists outside Wikimedia sites.

If @Kalki cannot explain their relevance very quickly, these images need to be removed urgently from the main page and never put there again.

Tagging some recently-active administrators: @BD2412, @HouseOfChange, @Koavf, @UDScott. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 13:07, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

First, to me, these images are not really a problem - I do see a thematic relevance to the listed quote in both images. The images represent complementary yet opposing forces, which IMHO is something also implied by the quote from Postman. Second, just because an image comes from a certain culture does not automatically conflate that culture with the author of a quote if the image is placed beside a quote. And third, the fact that the images do not have a direct literal connection to the quote is a good thing, as it might spur one to investigate further and learn something. I do not always agree with the images selected for the QOTD, but in this case, I for one do not have an issue. ~ UDScott (talk) 13:23, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Yin-yang is a widely used and understood symbol, for example in the coat of Arms of Danish physicist Niels Bohr -HouseOfChange, 14:50, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

The yin-yang symbol originates with Chinese culture but it is now widely understood and used to imply a balance or union of things apparently opposite, as in the Postman quote. It is widely enough understood that I had no trouble recognizing the two images on the main page as variants of it, nor apparently did the complaining editor. I agree with UDScott that these images work well with this QOTD. HouseOfChange (talk) 14:49, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

This is a persistent issue or theme with Kalki's editing, depending on how you view this. I agree that the images added to entries and the main page are sometimes weirdly abstract or just busy and ugly graphics that add little to no value. That said, it's mostly an aesthetic preference more than an issue that needs resolving, so just because my personal taste may differ from his doesn't mean that there needs to be some remedy. I appreciate you bringing it up and it's maybe not what I would have done, but I don't see a policy violation here. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:18, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

I will restrain myself from further explications at this point, as I believe the use of these images have already been well defended in the above statements. I thank everyone for the rational rebuttals to the assertions made against me and the rational worth of these particular images and their relevance to general and particular ideas expressed in the quote with which they were used. ~ ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki ⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 01:51, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

@Koavf, so you agree that it's "weirdly abstract or just busy and ugly graphics that add little to no value", but you think that it doesn't violate the policy that says "The relevance should not be so ambiguous or abstract that it could refer to anything or nothing"? It doesn't make sense. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 11:56, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

It doesn't violate policy because neither image IS "so ambiguous or abstract that it could refer to anything or nothing." Each has a clear and obvious meaning that reflects and embellishes the quote. HouseOfChange (talk) 12:56, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

@HouseOfChange, what is the meaning of File:Yyjpg.svg? Are you sure that it's clear and obvious? Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 11:31, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

In isolation, its meaning would not be obvious. But in the context of the quote, and of the other variant of yin-yang shown next to it, I found the meaning clear and obvious: "Here is yet another variant of the idea that things apparently opposite may be strongly connected to each other." HouseOfChange (talk) 14:01, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

It's not clear to me at all even from the basic yin-yang symbol, and this specific symbol goes even further because it has modifications: a straight diagonal line instead of a wavy line, and a plus in the middle. The source of these modifications and their meaning are completely obscure. As far as I can tell, they were just made up by whoever uploaded the image to Commons. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 14:27, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Oftentimes, the topic of a quotation is itself abstract, so any graphic needs to be either abstract itself or possibly super concrete, which runs the risk you point out above about having very culture-bound or context-bound graphics. I'm just trying to point out how I need to separate my personal aesthetics from what is actually good or bad for the project. On balance, Kalki is certainly a good editor, but I definitely disagree with his decisions sometimes and sometimes those disagreements are enough to warrant further discussion from others. I personally don't think anything is egregious here. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:28, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

An example of an inappropriate image, in my opion. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 18:27, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

Aharoni is right and this has been an ongoing problem for years. Kalki's use of images is consistently contrary to the image use policy as pointed out by Aharoni. Many of these images are not even from reliable sources, and were just created by Wiki editors, such as the examples given above (File:Yyjpg.svg and File:Ancient version of the Taijitu by Lai Zhi-De, sideways.svg) as well as File:Anti-dictatures2.svg: a favoured image of Kalki which has been featured on the main page over a dozen times and which is present on multiple pages including Neil Postman's. This image is 1) not from a reliable or published source, 2) confusing, featuring French text for seemingly no reason, and 3) is rather ugly in my opinion. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 18:27, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

Is there a way to see what previous QOTD were and which images accompanied them? IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 18:39, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

@IOHANNVSVERVS, here's one way to see past QOTD pages: Special:PrefixIndex/Wikiquote:Quote of the day. For the near future, see Wikiquote:Quote of the day/March 2025. It's not perfectly convenient, but I cannot think of anything better at the moment. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 13:52, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 17:48, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

---

I will briefly note that all the "Ancient version of the Taijitu" images, in their various forms are literally that — the most ancient of the Taijitu symbols, prior to the more familiar ones which arose later, and I certainly do NOT believe any particular images used have to themselves be extremely famous or familiar ones, and though I myself think many images have been used by others with far too tenuous or obscure relation to the quotations used or their subjects, the long lauded assumptions of an image being "obviously" appropriate or inappropriate ignores or denies the wide ranges of what can be obvious or obscure to most people.

Skipping to what is held to be "An example of an inappropriate image" using symbols of fascist and communistic totalitarianism within a field of blood, I have long believed this image to be a very significant and indeed important indication of opposition to any and all forms of despotic dictatorships, tyranny and unjust oppressions, and continue to do so.

Over the course of many years of use this image has been objected to by a few people, for various reasons, but many of them quite often seem to have been angered with the comparisons or associations which the image implies in its implicit rejection of dictatorships and tyrannies aligned with, or claiming alignment with, either "right" and "left" ideologies and symbologies — or apparently objecting to the use of such symbologies at all, even in implicit criticism of the widely unpopular ideologies associated with them.

By the age of 5 or 6, in noticing some contentions among various political and social factions, I had begun to recognize many of the absurdities, ambiguities, malleabilities, hypocrisies and utter stupidities of partisanships simplistically labeled "left" and "right", and yet able to recognize often very limited, constrained and extremely corrupted seeds of good sense amidst what was often seas of nonsense, idiocies, delusions, falsehoods, fraudulence and outright lies.

I have often perceived the balances of sense and nonsense, justice and injustice to vary and waver wildly between various factions labeled "left" or "right", or complexly chaotic factions overtly adhering to neither label. As to the "anti-dictatorship" image simply being perceived as "ugly" — it is certainly not meant to be "attractive" or "appealing", but rather a compact and concise indication of the repugnancy of all forms of unjust and oppressive dictatorships.

I have long recognized that there are often many complex reasons or reasonings involved in ANY forms of indication or statement which any person can make through words or other symbols, and I have long restrained myself from regularly even attempting to explain many of these to those who do not easily discern such facts, or overtly deny them — especially people who seem incognizant or extremely scornful of the presence or existence of any rationales or perceptions regarding perspectives or ideas other than their own.

I've usually not had much time to do much work on attending to even the very brief daily work I usually do here nowadays, but I had just been gathering up an extensive number of quotes of James Madison as suggestions for QOTD (mostly in regard to his opposition to various forms of injustice, oppressions, and tyranny), and was just getting ready to post them, including the one I thought most appropriate for todays QOTD, when I noticed these most recent objections made to that particular image rejecting both fascistic and communistic dictatorships, and other symbolic images.

I know that I have addressed objections to this image in the past, and am willing to address such again, and to call up some of the rationales for use which I have made in the past, to the extent that such efforts might clarify why I hold the image to be a quite notable one, but I know that would take up a great deal of my own time, and would prefer not to do so, any time soon — which also is an indication of one of the reasons I simply accepted as sufficient the rationales made above in regard to the ancient and modernized forms of the yin-yang symbols, rather than extending upon them in any of the particular ways I had in mind.

I might do a little more work here other than on QOTD within the next day or so, but I now have many physical-world tasks (rather than those on the internet) to which I must attend, and actually expect to be exceptionally busy with many of these for the next week or so, especially in the next few days. ~ ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki ⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 22:29, 15 March 2025 (UTC) + tweaks

Images are not supposed to reflect one editor's own taste and understanding, even if that editor is prolific and has administrator rights. Images are supposed to directly support the theme, and the connection between them and the page as a whole, and individual quotes on it, should be obvious and specific. And this is supposed to be true for all editors and readers.

The specific connection between yin-yang and Niels Bohr in the image that was given as an example above by @HouseOfChange is pertinent because that is actually Bohr's chosen symbol, and this connection is verifiable in external sources. However, it is not nearly enough to generalize from this particular example to using yin-yang as a symbol of opposites in all world cultures and in connection with all people. Specifically, the connection between File:Yyjpg.svg and Neil Postman is not obvious. For that matter, the connection between this image and anyone or anything at all is not obvious until proof for that connection is presented.

The image File:Anti-dictatures2.svg was not a part of the original post that I wrote, but it does have a similar problem: as far as I can see, it was just put together by other Wikiquote users and as a whole it doesn't appear to be used anywhere in the world outside the English Wikiquote and a few more pages on other Wikimedia sites. It's not even clear in which language the word "NON" is written—French, English, Italian, some other one? It's neither specific nor universal, but just something confusing.

So @Kalki, if you are busy in real life, that's totally fine. I am busy in real life, too! But please don't fill the wiki with images for other people to figure out. It will be much easier for you and for everyone else if they were just removed. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 13:48, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Another example

Another example is "Ankh Rainbow Heart.svg", described as being a "rainbow hued heart with central Ankh", used on March 4 accompanying the quote "Love is the substance of all life. Everything is connectedin love, absolutely everything." by Julia Cameron.

@Kalki, can you agree to stop using such images and to try to better comply with the image use policy as outlined above? IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 00:33, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

Quote of the day

After much observations I have come to the conclusion that there is life on other planets, a planet itself is life. Ghettodachopper87 (talk) 18:21, 12 April 2025 (UTC)