User Page RecommendationEdit

On your Wikipedia User Page it lists quote, I think it would be appropriate to add those here too. – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 16:10, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's a good idea, thanks. I'll probably use different ones though; I intended those to be about writing an encyclopedia, and this project is a bit different. The Marcus Aurelius applies everywhere, though, and I'm serious about what that wisest of all Roman Emperors said. Perspective is everything. As stressed-out as we can get in our little online lives, sometimes it's good to remember we're all but little bits of grit in the middle of the steppe. Oh wait, that was Samuel Beckett. Antandrus (talk) 19:20, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Also, about the sockpuppet thing I said earlier, here is what I was referring to. – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 19:34, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Mario's right, but I'm breaking my own rule in even talking about it. Ljupco (GRP) made "Antandrus" as one of his earliest accounts on the current incarnation of their site. After it got banhammered, he started making more and more, mostly named after us, i.e. Wikimedia project people. It doesn't hurt us in any way. Looked at with appropriate perspective, it's just wryly amusing. See number 49 on my list; their behavior is a perfect example. I would encourage Ljupco to make more. It might even keep him from getting arrested again for real-life harassment. Antandrus (talk) 19:41, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, I have an attack page there too. Also do you think you could explain this situation to Mario? – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 19:49, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Have you ever tried to reason with a cockroach infestation?
They exist for the purpose of hurting people. The more you ask, the more likely you are to get a page in their mainspace. "Nice" and "good faith" are not things they do. You gotta let it go. Antandrus (talk) 21:40, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Maybe you/me could ask on Wikiquote or Meta since you can’t attack someone here. – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 21:46, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Typo on WikipediaEdit

This section on Wikipedia should say "Sometimes it is desirable to make a template behave differently when substituted rather than when transcluded," could you fix this? I am blocked on Wikipedia. – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 16:53, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Ilovemydoodle, I think either wording is grammatically ok. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 17:14, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Rubbish computer: Could you change it anyway, I think it's far more clear. – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 17:16, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Ilovemydoodle, sorry but I don't think that's a good idea. It could be argued by enwiki that you're participating in the community by proxy, which would make you less likely to be unblocked. It's also ok as it is. Thanks anyway, Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 17:18, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Rubbish computer: Ok, I ran it through Grammarly and I appear to be correct. – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 17:30, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ilovemydoodle I would leave it. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 17:40, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Rubbish computer: Why? – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 17:41, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Ilovemydoodle, sorry I didn't see this sooner. It seems like an unnecessary edit, but more importantly I can't edit Wikipedia for you by proxy, and I may need to gain consensus to make such an edit. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 19:45, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Rubbish computer: Could you go ask? – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 19:47, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Ilovemydoodle, I don't think I should because of the reasons I already outlined. Sorry. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 19:48, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Rubbish computer: Also, I think I finally figured out why I was blocked, I originally made a few minor mistakes, but nothing really to get blocked for, but eventually I found a page called "Wikipedia:Village dump" (I don't remember how I found the page), the page was just a redirect to the Village Pump, but after checking the revision history, I noticed it used be a page that was actually used, I thought this was a cool idea, so I recreated it, but as it turns out this was commonly done by a group of vandals, the Admin must've thought I was one of them. – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 19:57, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your feedback matters: Share your feedback in the Administratior accountability pollEdit

  The Administratior accountability poll is open, vote here. – Ilovemydoodle (Not WMF, Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus, Not a paid editor of Shueisha) (talk / e-mail) 01:30, 18 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Good news and bad newsEdit

The good news: I was unblocked from Wikipedia.

The bad news: Now I am blocked indefinitely from Wikipedia. Edit: Unblocked again!

Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet of Antandrus) (talk / e-mail) 14:17, 28 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Could you give feedback on this? – Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 21:46, 13 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


May I nominate you for adminship? – Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 12:27, 31 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks, but not at present. Appreciate the thought though. Antandrus (talk) 13:52, 31 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Why? (I mean me nominating you) – Ilovemydoodle (Not a sockpuppet) (talk / e-mail) 14:03, 31 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

strange error messageEdit

Hi Antandrus,

I was trying to add a category key when categorizing Queen using hotcat when I got the following message:

  • "This action has been automatically identified as harmful, and it has been disallowed. In addition, as a security measure, some privileges routinely granted to established accounts have been temporarily revoked from your account. A brief description of the abuse rule which your action matched is: GRP / Wikinger"

I have no idea why or what I am expected to do, but I remember vaguely that GRP is known to you, so thought you would be interested.

BTW I have been listening with enjoyment to Hungarian Rhapsody nr 2 on youtube and was surprised that it sounded very familiar. Ottawahitech (talk) 17:44, 17 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ottawahitech, sorry about that. I've temporarily disabled that filter while I look for a solution. Try making the edit again. --Ferien (talk) 18:59, 17 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ferien: Looks like there is still a problem. Please see: Wikiquote:Village_pump#Filter_again. Thanks, Ottawahitech (talk) 13:14, 27 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks Ottawahitech for letting me know. Disabled filter 33 temporarily too. There are two GRP related filters, 33 and 34. I didn't get around to looking at 34, the one you were having problems with, so it is still disabled but it looks like 33 is causing problems now. Will be looking at them later today and reenable when I'm confident there are no false positives left. Ferien (talk) 13:38, 27 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ottawahitech - hi there! Good to see you editing again. And Ferien, thank you for answering - I can't see the filter, and looking at the edit had no idea how adding that category could possibly trigger it. Regarding the Liszt, that's a very exciting piece. I wish I could play it but I would need to practice a whole lot more than I actually do. Antandrus (talk) 20:03, 17 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yeah, not going to say too much about the filter onwiki obviously, but it's a different one to 33 that I added here in early March and it's quite new so still some things to improve. Hope you are doing well as for some reason it seems like I haven't seen you around as much recently. --Ferien (talk) 21:10, 17 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, I've been busy in that other place ("real life", "meatspace", ...), with various projects :) Antandrus (talk) 21:24, 17 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Refugees from Wikipedia's sound, fury, and political squabbles are starting to appear at other Wikimedia projects."Edit

Hi Antandrus,

I have just noticed three wikipedians with over 200k edits on enwiki who have exponentially increased their contributions on WQ in the last year or so. Don't know if I should mention their user-id? At least one is blocked on enwiki, another is an admin there. Ottawahitech (talk) 15:29, 3 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, I'm not surprised. It's hard to write there now, unless you are principally active in obscurities and arcana. I do maintenance work these days, answer questions, do copyediting, try to shield people from abusive trolls, and a few other things, but it's years since I've written an article. Here there's lots of content still to add, and at least for me that's what I initially found attractive about Wikipedia (back in 2004! Redlinks still on major topics...)
The culture here is different. I could write an essay on it, and started drafting one in my head. Wikiquote seems a lot more laissez-faire: someone can add quotes all on one side of an issue, e.g. an anti-Semite can cherry-pick the Talmud to make Jews look like perverts and creeps, and it seems no one really cares because someone else, some day, will come along and add the rest, the grand wisdom tradition that evolved from thousands of years of struggle in a hostile landscape. Maybe Wikipedia is over-managed. Different philosophies. Antandrus (talk) 15:56, 3 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Having an essay here about the culture differences between enwp and wq would be lovely. I know the essay you write will be more easily digested than w:The Sound and the Fury:-) I wish I had a clue on how to write such an essay, but I have no idea where to start. Just reading what you wrote above I can see many areas where we may not agree.
[No] Redlinks still on major topics [left on enwiki]: to my mind there are still many major areas on enwp that are not properly covered, not just obscurities and arcana. It is a shame that enwp drives away exactly the type of people who would be best at filling in those blanks IMIO. Ottawahitech (talk) 01:54, 4 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Just to add: I checked Talmud briefly and gosh it sure looks busy editing-wise, and has been viewed 4500 times in September alone. However it has “Fewer than 30 watchers’ and only one IP user is responsible for all additions since the beginning of Sept 2022.
Not helpful is the sockpuppeting-phobia at enwp. For example: w:Mosaic (magazine) which is used as a ref for a talmud quote was started on enwp in 2017 by a user who is now blocked as a sockuppet. Ottawahitech (talk) 14:51, 5 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"editing in late was free, open, welcoming, friendly"
My birthday is coming up soon and this time I would like to celebrate it. I have lasted here this long (probably thanks to you), so I hope WQ will become my permanent WMF-home.
One of the things I want to do at my WQ-birthday-party, Is compare my experience here with my experience at other WMF-sites.
For starters I stated collecting this:
1 year of usertalkpage msgs on wq end with Note
2-years of usertalkpage msgs on wq end with Whoops Ottawahitech (talk) 19:01, 4 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re: If you argue with a f...Edit

I was recently reading Meta:What is a troll? because I had been accused of being a troll on an enwq-UTP a long time ago, but let it go instead of getting into a heated exchange. I didn’t know it at the time but I was following the advice provided under back away (yey !)

Have you read this document? At the risk of being wiki-charged with contravening Meta's version of editing-by-proxism, I am bringing this paragraph to your attention so you do not get on the wrong side of wiki-law

Unlike trolls who vandalize articles, the majority of the damage caused by those misusing process is fairly indirect. Generally it is best to simply state your opposition etc etc DFTT<

(Disclosure: I am not saying you are a troll, just saying hi. Just miss talking to you :) Reply-to ability to add edit summary is gone? Ottawahitech (talk) 21:25, 15 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oh hi! - no worries, I would never infer you were suggesting I was a troll - I am secure in the knowledge that I am not (as secure as it is possible to be in any aspect of self-knowledge, I should caveat, for most people overestimate their own). You have an ability to ask bold questions, and that is something to celebrate not suppress. It's not trolling, and I say this as an enwiki admin with almost 18 years of experience. It only becomes trolling if the followup is incoherent, abusive, didn't-hear-that, etc. The ability to see beyond the confines of a habitual conformism, of the kind that developed and maintains the more rubber-stampy parts of the wiki bureaucracies, is a marker of intelligence. It is through such action that wikis -- and indeed civilization itself -- develops rather than ossifies.
Looking at that meta piece on Meta:What is a troll?, I see right away a big one missing: people who extremely destructive, in issuing threats, carrying on stalking and harassment campaigns, not because they are trolling and trying to get a reaction, but because they have mental illnesses so severe that they think what they are doing is Right and Good. The guy I revert every other day or so is one of those, as far as I can ferret out from his own writings elsewhere and from court records. He's actually not a troll, he's just ill. But he needs to be quietly shut down for the good of the project - he takes time away from good faith contributors, and maybe I'm being a bit of a w:Catcher in the Rye here, but I want to keep our enthusiastic 12-year-olds who want to help fight vandalism from colliding with a 45-year-old maniac with a prison record. Anyway. -- Also, that part you quoted seems to be missing something, right before "generally it is best to simply state your opposition..." -- it needs a context. Are we talking about someone who nominates an article for deletion, one that is almost universally considered worthy of keeping? I remember a troll from back in 2005 or so who had extraordinary run by doing this -- he'd nominate, for example, an article on a minority ethnic group in an Asian country, claiming it was "racist", and the discussion would go on and on and on and on. That's an obvious abuse of process. He'd find edge cases and then hammer away at them to get people to start fighting each other over their prejudices. Now that's a troll. Questioning a process, asking why something was done, -- that is neither wrong nor trolling, if done in good faith, and if we don't practice our own assume-good-faith policies, then what are we but hypocrites?
Anyway this is juicy stuff. :) You do good work here. Carry on. Antandrus (talk) 23:07, 15 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you so much, your confidence in me is refreshing. I sincerely hope, I will never disappoint you. Cheers, Ottawahitech (talk) 21:46, 17 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re: Music questionEdit

It's me again. Hope you are not getting tired of me flooding your talk all the time? Assuming the answer is in the negative(?) I have another question on the same topic. I have recently created Category: Women singers as a subcat of Category:Women musicians and Category:Singers. Things went on swimmingly, until I happened to post something totally unrelated on a user-talk page, where I discovered another WQuotient posting something related to the topic.

I hope I have not lost you so far? My posts always turn out so convoluted, don't know why that is. Cheers, Ottawahitech (talk) 18:54, 23 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hm. I see a comment about some musicians not being singers and some singers not being musicians, but that is odd. Is not a musician someone who makes music, in any form, and is not song - what a singer does - necessarily a form of music? I remember getting a question loosely related to this on my doctoral orals, but I don't remember it exactly, but all homing in on "what is music?" - which is non-trivial anyway. And you end up at "what is art?" And here I am, also convoluted. - I think women singers is a subcat of women musicians, and also a subcat of singers, as you have it. (I remember when I was growing up someone, like a grand-dad, would hear something awful on the radio and say "that's not music!!" - but I did not, at the time, have a doctorate in the topic, and declined to argue. It would not have gone well anyway.) Antandrus (talk) 21:18, 23 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
WQ needs you IMIO. Are there any music related quotes that can be added to
Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 14:17, 8 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Losing one's wiki-password?Edit

I am always worried about the possibility of losing my PW. In these days when everyone is urged to change their PW frequently, it is doubly important to know what to do if the inevitable happens and I lose it.

This is a topic that for some strange reason I have not yet stumbled on in my Wik-travels. Is there something you can contribute on this matter?

Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 14:24, 8 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I know you can request a password reset (for example if you can't remember your password) but you'd need to have email enabled. Other than that - well, multiple passwords just seem to be an irritating feature of modern life. I must have hundreds. We all need them for banks, shopping, newspaper subscriptions, property tax sites, or whatever. I have devised a way that works for myself, not expecting to remember every password. I wonder what percentage of each day for all of us is devoted to keeping ourselves safe from other people's dishonesty and criminal intent. "LOCK-AND-KEY, n. The distinguishing device of civilization and enlightenment." (Ambrose Bierce) Antandrus (talk) 15:17, 8 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh look, I guess I should see if a quote I remembered randomly is on WQ or not. :) Antandrus (talk) 15:18, 8 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy 2023Edit

Hi Antandrus:

Warning TLDR follows: I have a fascination not shared by others with page view statistics. I believe you can learn a lot from looking at these statistics, following trends, and asking questions about strong anomalies, I am talking about content pages of course. For example here is the pageviews for, say, immune, and here are the page views for my takpage. I was looking at one of my own wmf-talkpages and discovered to my surprise 23 pageviews on one recent particular day, when it is normally close to zero. I hardly ever participate on that wiki and cannot figure out why the audience of my talkpage increased on that day. In my experience a sudden increase in pageviews on my talkpage means I have done something for which I will be punished by the functionaries. I hope I am making sense, so far...

A question about wiki-signatures: Is there an easy way to include a clickable link to my contributions. Sorry for being lazy and asking instead of researching this myself, and along the same line of thought: I have tried to be super-transparent and give others as much information about my edits by including a link to my xtools on my homepage. The problem is I doubt many bother to look at this excellent analysis provided by the wmf-developers, not only at mine but also at others.So my question is: how can I make it more obvious that I have chosen to display my xtools analysis on all wmf-wikis where I have contributed content? One of your many wiki-admirers who hopes you will not stop visiting our banana republic?

Cheers, Ottawahitech (talk) 20:55, 3 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey, happy new year! Don't worry, I'm not going anywhere - I like this place. Still planning on adding some content in my areas of interest - ancient writers, 18th-century aphorists, 17th-century religious extremists, 16th-century heretics, 15th-century criminals, and so forth. During my holidays I read slabs of Samuel Johnson's writings thinking about what could be added. I have a question for you (I suppose it's in policy somewhere if I'd just take the time to look) - how many times can we / should we add the same quote to different pages? For example, Samuel Johnson said this thing, and it goes on his page, and then on the page for the book it's from, then on the general topic (say, slavery), then on another topic (say, colonial America), then on another topic (for example conservatism), and so forth. I'm guessing it's not really chiseled in stone how we do this.
Yes you can include a clickable link in your sig to your contributions - I have seen this multiple times on enwiki - go into Preferences, down to Signature, and then type in wikicode in the "New signature" box. I never wanted a fancy signature personally, but you could add a "contribs" to your own in any way you like. I've seen people link different pages from single letters in their name. - And yes, those page views things are interesting. I often check page views on essays I have written; when there is an anomalous spike, it's usually because someone on one of the Wiki-Hate sites somewhere on the internet is writing about how awful I am for daring to have thought the things I thought, and I experience a moment of glee as I go searching for it. Alternatively, someone just took my name in vain at a noticeboard. In those cases I pour myself a drink and close the laptop. :) Antandrus (talk) 22:42, 3 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am relieved to know you plan to stay around.

how many times can we / should we add the same quote to different pages?

Ah, repetition. A topic I have been pondering since I started listening to music again.I was listening Dvozak’s from the new world in the car and trying to count the number of repetitions. Same motif (what is the music term for it?) but executed differently: different tempo, different combinations of musical instruments, running from very soft to almost thunderous, sometimes cut short, and I am sure there are more subtle differences that my untrained ear cannot discern. I lost count early on when I realized different “motifs” were being repeated, and after hearing so many I could no longer say it they were exact repeats or different in some small way. But I digress…

I'm guessing it's not really chiseled in stone how we do this.

How many times can a quote be repeated? I think you are correct and that there are no firm rules. Wisely IMIO. A long time ago I used to think that repeating the exact same text in different locations was not a good thing, because it introduced the possiblity of mutations. I no longer think mutations are bad, at least not on WQ. I myslef have been copying & pasting quotes from one page to another. For one thing, it is an easy way to start new pages on WQ. I like to start new pages so that when I come across a quote I would like to share with others I’ll have a ready-made page to plug it in, and with my strange choice of quotes I often cannot find a page to park them unless I start it myself. You must feel the same about some of the quotes you come across, no? Ottawahitech (talk) 00:42, 6 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, thank you - precisely. Perhaps it is better never to nail this repetition thing down exactly. It will necessarily vary; some quotes are so quotable and memorable they can appear in five or six places; others are cardboard wet in last night's rain and a year from now no one will care about them anyway, so once is enough. You are perceptive in making the musical analogy. It is this very thing that makes a piece unified, whole, memorable, that gives it character, the way a personality has its character because of certain things you see over and over, with variation. Listen to Beethoven's Quartet opus 18 no 1, just the first movement, for an extreme example: it's one motif (or motive), and the entire piece consists of it, in various guises, with almost nothing else at all. I tried to count them once, but it reminded me of a time as a fourth-grader that, as a punishment for talking out of turn, I was instructed to go outside and count the bricks in the school building. The teacher was annoyed when I came back quickly with an exact number. Anyway let's not repeat quotes that much. Antandrus (talk) 01:34, 6 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

some quotes are so quotable and memorable they can appear in five or six places+let's not repeat quotes that much.

So you believe that quotable quotes are universal? Just as memorable to any human being, anywhere? I am not so sure. Off to pondering this, counting as punishment, how far back does human memory go, finding a way to listen to Beethoven's Quartet opus 18 no 1, and putting in my start of Banana republic (not ours). See how much work you create for me . I love it. Ottawahitech (talk) 16:02, 6 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Interesting. I think they can be almost universal. Almost. "Cineri gloria sera venit" (To the ashes of the dead, glory comes too late) - from Martial, Epigrams - after two thousand years, and descended through multiple cultures, that strong and humane, anti-war, anti-violence utterance seems undiminished, at least to me, and I suspect that any human being on earth who has cried over a loved one killed in a conflict will feel it as well, if it is adequately rendered in their language. And look how much is packed in just a few syllables, at least in the original Latin. Now look at any of the paragraph-long slabs of text from current opinion pieces that some people paste into Wikiquote; how memorable is most of that? Is anyone going to care about the domestic troubles of some popular culture figure in two thousand years? Or next year? These are subjective judgments of course, but I think there is a range of "universality", so to speak, in quotes. Personally I love most the ones that have grown wings and flown across time, like Martial's. They say something to us. They're made of something that lives. Cut those words, and they bleed. (Oh wait, that was Emerson on Montaigne.) Antandrus (talk) 17:40, 6 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Beethoven opus 18 no. 1 and relatedEdit

HOMEWORK REPORT: Beethoven’s Quartet opus 18 no 1:
So far I have listened to (the only) four different quartets (I think? - sorry lost my notes) performing Beethoven’s opus 18/1 in f major that I could find on YouTube videos, all perfomed by a String Quartet.
A String Quartet seems to always consist of :
  • two violins
  • a viola, which looks like and is played like a violin, but is slightly larger
  • a cello which also looks like a violin but is much larger so is held differently than a violin
I think all the versions I listened to had 4 movements, is this the correct term? (the following is copied&pasted from a comment section of one Youtube version, I added wq-links and indentation):
Ottawahitech (talk) 20:30, 13 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wow! - well, that's an impressive amount of redlinks. Maybe no one has ever said anything quotable about the violin? Ha ha. "An instrument to tickle human ears by friction of a horse's tail on the entrails of a cat." (Ambrose Bierce, but that's actually his definition of "fiddle", which is, of course, the same thing.) Elsewhere Bierce said that a violin " the revenge exacted by the intestines of a dead cat." You are correct about the sizes, and they're all members of the same fine family. I play the violin professionally, I play the viola adequately, if necessary, and I can pretend to play the cello, but no one would confuse the sounds I make with those of a competent cellist. Antandrus (talk) 22:09, 13 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Quick followup - there are a ton of "violin" quotes on the internet, just looking around, mostly in the usual quote sites, and also in inspirational pictures and memes - none of them that I found on a quick series of googles had sourcing. Particularly irritating are the Albert Einstein quotes; he played the violin beautifully, but where are searchable versions of his letters where we can get sources? A lot of those are probably spurious, or edited, or even misattributed (for example from Alfred Einstein, the great Austrian musicologist, a name unknown to many naive quote-assemblers). Imagine, to build the page one might need to go to - wait for it - take a deep breath - a library! Antandrus (talk) 23:25, 13 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


A library? What is that? there was something like that pre-covid IIRC Ottawahitech (talk) 16:36, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ha ha ha :) I love the places myself, pulling random books off the shelf in obscure areas - ooh what is this? that's old, that's arcane, I wonder when the last time was someone checked this out - oh look, it's been here on the shelf for fifty years - Antandrus (talk) 17:25, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The word library evokes fond memories in my mind too, but...
We use the word library thinking that we all mean the same thing don’t we? But what exactly is a library? Is a library in Los Angeles the same as a library in Guelf, Helsinki, or in Arusha*? Modern libraries in big cities in North America are no longer centered around books, not sure?
One thing about a library that I have not seen spelt out prominently (have not looked at enwp yet) is the fact that they can be used at no charge by anyone. I am sure this is true in most of Europe, USA and in Canada. I hope it is also true in the rest of the world, but I would have to research this, and that takes time.
I took a very brief look at library and checked its pageview stats and it appears that it is consulted more evenly and varies from the norm of legacy-enwq-pages which show a sharp incline and then a deeper decline arund 2018-2019.
Ottawahitech (talk) 17:21, 16 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ah yes. A pet peeve of mine, the non-free library. This particular institution, for reasons I cannot go into here, is a burr in my side. You can use them for a few days, but then they want money. I think this is an undesirable barrier, and to be honest, it is these kinds of barriers that first attracted me to the Wikipedia project in 2003 - free information! Information wants to be free! Dammit, I will help make it free, I said to myself, and registered an account early the next year. My local research library (University of California) also requires a card if you want to check out books, but anyone can go in and read on the premises. I usually pay for a community borrower card.
We live in the 'information age', right? Even though so much of the rubbish you get for free online is 'dis-' or 'mis-' information. Since libraries store information, and have for thousands of years, worldwide, maybe it is time to have dislibraries, and mislibraries, so we'd know. I can suggest some books and periodicals for either. Antandrus (talk) 18:47, 16 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

" I wonder if refugees from Wikipedia.. are starting to appear at other Wikimedia projects"Edit

Talking of [stalkers], amazing what unexpected treasures one finds on a leisurely stroll down the collective memory lane. I hope you don’t mind me using you as my personal filing cabinet. This may sound demeaning but I do mean this as an utmost compliment. Ottawahitech (talk) 17:48, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wow - I always wonder about people who make colorful threats like that. I read somewhere that such internet trolls are highly likely to be diagnosable with a psychopathic disorder, even if they are very young, since you really have to not care about another person's feelings or emotional state to say such things, even if you are, say, 13 years old. The internet trolls who upload naughty pictures or whatever are more likely benign, just immature. I think it was a study. I used to keep track of death threats I'd received as an enwiki admin but lost count around 2010 or so. Antandrus (talk) 18:31, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A study? On a slightly different note...
Many years ago a big controversy broke out in Ottawa when a boy in a neighboring small town was suspended from school after writing a fiction piece essay that involved violence. The local papers were flush with opinions of mental health professionals arguing either for or against the suspension. Eventually the storm died down and faded into obscurity and I never found out if this boy grew up to be an offender, someone whose life was ruined by all the unwanted attention, or just a normal person (whatever normal means).
I am not convinced that the field of human-motivation/what-makes-us-tick/psychiatry/neuroscience/whatever-you-call-it has reached the level of maturity required of a science, just yet. Thankfully we no longer attribute autism to refrigerator mothers, and being non-binary is no longer considered abnormal, but we still have a long way to go, I think? Ottawahitech (talk) 15:18, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Google's AI tool MusicLM is creating music from textEdit

I found this at Wikinews. No idea what it means or how it works, but was wondering what your thoughts are. I am still pondering how to address the libraries issue you raised, I fully agree: Information wants to be free! but as usual humans (or human systems) get in the way. Ottawahitech (talk) 00:27, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Whoa - chill of fear, - well sort of. I understand how this works, or would work, and it's not all that dissimilar from how a composer's human brain creates music, pulling from all the thousands of things they have ever heard, or created earlier themselves, a great big stew of combinations of notes melodically, harmonically, or in deep structure. There is yet some mystery in just how it all works, and how, for example, a composer creates a "masterpiece" that is different from what anyone thinks they have heard before. But don't be surprised if later generations of this AI manage to create something equally "original". I chuckle at how copyright lawyers would handle this; they already have trouble enough understanding what is derivative and what is not. Thank you for bringing this to my attention! - ha ha, sort of. Some days I just want to crawl back in bed, pull the covers over my head and forget everything I have ever known. Antandrus (talk) 01:43, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Crawling into bed is how I have been feeling the last few days. Real life is taking a toll, someone I virtually-met on wiki-news a couple of years ago pulling back involvement for ominous-real-life-sounding reasons, and more and more paywalling. This morning I saw a teaser-ad for an article I would like to read at National Geographic about covid in animals, but it is paywalled. Pretty soon WQ will only be able to get its quotes from YouTube, twitter and the like , but even twitter is partially paywalled now (meaning they want you to sign on), I think?
At least you are still here, which gives me hope. Ottawahitech (talk) 16:37, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(Oh, I realize I still haven't answered your previous - that's juicy stuff and I'm not convinced I know enough about the topic to escape Dunning-Krugerland. We might need to gather another century's-worth of knowledge about brain microstructures to understand how to treat mental illness, for example.) Antandrus (talk) 01:43, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Maybe just leave it to ChatGPT? Ottawahitech (talk) 21:47, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've taken ChatGPT for a test drive, and - well, I'm glad I'm not a classroom teacher at the moment (I used to be) - not sure I'd recognize an AI-generated essay. I just now asked it to generate a four-paragraph essay on the late 16th-century Italian madrigal, a subject area I know really well. It's pretty good, at least until it isn't. Kind of like the AI that drives your car nicely until it smacks at highway speed into a pedestrian in a Halloween costume, unrecognizable as human by a robot but obviously a child to an uninebriated driver. But this is just the first version. For the next version, both you and I will discover that we are already robots, and did not even notice the moment when we were taken over. I get a distinct Invasion of the Body Snatchers feeling about this whole episode of contemporary life. But hey, it's all evolution, right? The next step in evolution is when intelligent life creates other life, life that replaces its creators. Are you familiar with Harlan Ellison's w:I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream? Antandrus (talk) 02:06, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
re I have no mouth and I must scream: No I was not aware of the book. I will try to read it when I get a chance. Thanks!
Looks like I already missed my enwq-birthday. Wiki-time is moving faster this year than it did in 2020. I see that April 1, 2023 had already arrived at enwp. I still wiki-remember that You2 was posted at META, which was my home at that time, 3.5 months later in 2020.
you and I will discover that we are already robots
I doubt it. This will only happen when AI can replicate your EI as well as Antandrus's IQ, IMIO. Can you articulate why you mentioned no-mouth?
More on teachers later… Ottawahitech (talk) 21:07, 11 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
homework: oooh I am so exited, I heard tom&jerry today played on the radio by yevengy kisn Ottawahitech (talk) 20:33, 15 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh hi again! - that's right I was going to respond about w:I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream - it's a short story, basically about AI gone horribly wrong. In a pre-Skynet fantasy (I think the story was written in 1966) the world's several giant defense supercomputers merge into one, but find the burden of sentient existence so horrible, that they destroy the human race except for a handful they keep alive to torture as revenge for having created them. I think it's a fine cautionary tale, a sort of tech noir, a vision of an underground Hell much like one of the circles of Dante's Inferno. Harlan Ellison was a great writer (and quite an asshole - but lots of fine writers and artists are - so it goes - if you want some amusement read the talk page archives for his enwiki article, where you will find his angry letter to everyone who dared to write his biography, and his very specific suggestion for how we should all be murdered). Anyway - AI is interesting stuff and I'm not sure we know what we are getting into. There may be no turning back. Antandrus (talk) 22:15, 15 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I need a home for a quoteEdit

I was chasing a very different thought when I ran into this melodious sentence at (TC): "Mental soundness is merged in unsoundness by degrees of decadence which are so small as to be practically inappreciable." TC says the source of the quote is SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN SUPPLEMENT NO. 299.

wq does not have a quote-compendium-page for "Mental Soundness" and wp does not have an article page. Not sure what to do next.

Just saying hi. Ottawahitech (talk) 14:35, 21 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi there! :) How about Sanity? That's where I'd put it. Melodious indeed; that's quotable. Antandrus (talk) 15:47, 21 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]