Open main menu



Busy day, thank You for all the revertings! But there's something good also, found many missing datas and links.--Risto hot sir (talk) 21:56, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Busy day indeed. Always good to have a few stewards at arm's length. For my own part, I've managed to get Category:Americans from about 900 down to about 400. Figure I'll have it cleaned out in a week or two. Maybe then I can do a bit of writing. Thanks for all your help and hard work. GMGtalk 22:16, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Green means go I will take you up on the offer Ruskin (talk) 19:40, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Hey Ruskin. Thanks for working to help us improve the project! If I can ever be of any help feel free to drop by. Happy editing! GMGtalk 19:54, 28 September 2018 (UTC)


I can't understand why you deleted my "spammy" links but left the quotes I added thanks to them... Strange consistency... —This unsigned comment is by Markj2 (talkcontribs) 11:33, 14 November 2018.

Hey Markj2. From what I can tell, Kwise appears to be simply a generic website, hosting apparently user generated content, possibly taken from Wikiquote itself. It's difficult to tell very much information about them really, because they offer basically none, but it's not clear that they should be considered a reliable educational resource, of the type we typically want to favor when providing readers with external links.
If I misread your intentions then I apologize. Often when we see people who are repeatedly adding links to a particular website, it's because they are affiliated with that site, and they are trying to funnel traffic there. Of course that's not always the case, and it may just be that a user is a consumer of the site themselves, and in good faith feels that they are a useful addition. Again, if I misinterpreted your intentions I apologize. We certainly want you to continue to contribute, and help us build a better collection of verifiable high-quality quotes. If there's ever any way I can help please feel free to reach out to me. GMGtalk 11:50, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Hey GreenMeansGo I can't be dishonest with you and tell you that my intentions are absolutely pure, but I have seen many links that seemed quite the same to me (especially from shmoop), so I added them. I will also defend the project by saying that it is not absolutely generic in my opinion because it tries to go further, by giving translation information or semantic similarities as you can see here for example Jean-Jacques Rousseau quote on talking. I hope that one day Kwize will have excellent contributors like you ;-). Markj2

Well, like all Wikimedia projects, Wikiquote is a perpetual work in progress, and the way things are is not always the best indicator of the way things should be. Incidentally, as far as I can tell, every link to shmoop on Wikiquote has since been removed. GMGtalk 12:32, 14 November 2018 (UTC)


This editor reverts links to Wikiquote at Wikipedia (Married... with Children, for example). What to do?--Risto hot sir (talk) 21:06, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Hmm.. Not totally clear what the issue is. User:AldezD, you do realize the sister link template for Wikquote is transcluded some 30,000 times on the English Wikipedia. (The sister link template for Commons is transcended some 800,000 times). You do realize the use of these links is actively encouraged by Wikpedia's guidelines? GMGtalk 21:24, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

AldezD keeps on vandalizingǃ Maybe if you'll link the Married...with children articles he will stop.--Risto hot sir (talk) 11:50, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Give me a little while to get things together and I'll open a more central discussion at w:Wikipedia talk:External links. GMGtalk 12:52, 31 January 2019 (UTC)


Congratulations, GreenMeansGo. You are now an administrator on the English Wikiquote. Cheers! BD2412 T 15:33, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

A happy dayǃ--Risto hot sir (talk) 16:41, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
Thanks everybody. GMGtalk 18:58, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Links againEdit

Hi administratorǃ There's a lot more discussion behind the link above.--Risto hot sir (talk) 14:02, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Yeah. I've got it on my watchlist on English Wikipedia. I've been reading as the discussion has progressed and considering what the best approach might be. I'm just not sure I want to comment yet until I've completely settled on exactly what it is I want to say that will have the greatest rhetorical strength. Commentary sometimes has an inflationary aspect, where the greater the volume of commentary available the less each is worth. GMGtalk 14:15, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for your opinions thereǃ - The only disagreement between us as far as I can remember was the categorizing by US States. I don't object that, but Novelists from Kentucky, for example, should also be in the category American novelists. That's Wikiquote's strength compared to Wikipedia - to have them all in one place.--Risto hot sir (talk) 21:09, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
I dunno. It's hard to really tell what categories are warranted until we're done filtering down some of the highest level parent categories. GMGtalk 21:13, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Exactlyǃ--Risto hot sir (talk) 21:16, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Regular ShowEdit

Hi GreenMeansGo, The worst thing about Cartoon Network is not that they cancels Regular Show, Adventure Time and Gumball, if not the 4,000 daily infommercials of products. Thanks -- 15:00, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

I don't really deal with pop culture topics. I don't have television and I don't use social media. But I can recommend a good book or two. GMGtalk 15:01, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Well, I'm not care about the cancellation of Regular Show, Adventure Time and Gumball because at any moment the three series appears with an episode called Crossover Nexus from OK K.O.! Let's Be Heroes. -- 22:38, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

I don't have much of an opinion on the shows really. I'm pretty sure my daughter watches them on her tablet occasionally. I do have a strong opinion about edit warring, that opinion is pretty well summed up in saying that you shouldn't do it, and if you do, your liable to be blocked until you learn not to. GMGtalk 23:09, 12 February 2019 (UTC)


Hi againǃ This time I've quarrel with Hitchens at Wikipedia. A couple of editors really think that an atheism activist can be a skeptic, too. What do you think, my beloved administrator?--Risto hot sir (talk) 03:12, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

I did read some of Hitchens' books but it's probably been ten years. He was generally a skeptic, besides being basically a professional political dissident, he was also generally skeptical of anything remotely metaphysical or spiritual not necessarily confined to organized religion. He did get much of his notoriety later in life when he joined ranks with the new atheism movement and people like Dawkins, but he had a much longer career than just that. The new atheism movement didn't really start to get major traction until probably around 2010, and Hitchens started publishing in the 70s and 80s.
You also have to keep in mind that just because someone rejects the Judaeo-Christian God doesn't necessarily mean that you adhere to strict w:Materialism. You can believe in the metaphysical without believing in a god, although obviously it's difficult to define a recognizable god unless you also believe in some non-physical plane of existence. GMGtalk 11:10, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
Yes, thought skeptic to religion, but you can be skeptic to anything, governments, bankers, climate change, women etc. This category at Wikipedia doesn't tell much.--Risto hot sir (talk) 11:39, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
Well, yes, technically. No person can hold that all possible propositions are simultaneously true. That's pretty much inherent in the definition of truth, and the fact that an infinite number of mutually exclusive (even ludicrously so) propositions can be constructed. Umm... to take the most oversimplified example possible, "1 = 1" and "1 = 7" are propositions that cannot possibly be simultaneously true. Those who ascribe to the principles of "one-ness" are by definition skeptical of a literally infinite number of alternative propositions.
But that's applying a dictionary definition in an exercise of absurdist reductionism. Skepticism in the philosophical sense has a more specific meaning, in particular a deeply post-enlightenment stance that anything can in principle be doubted for which one can find reason to doubt, and that things like authority or tradition are not valid reasons to circumscribe areas where doubt is not permitted. That had obvious implications for the teaching of the church, but also for science and philosophy, and led to some of the more absurd forms of radical empiricism.
It is this post-enlightenment meaning of skepticism that is normally referred to when calling someone a skeptic, and yes, does often manifest in relation to religion or metaphysics, but also in other areas. Hitchens himself was once a fairly radical Marxist before basically entirely abandoning it, while many throughout history have held to various forms of Marxism in very much a quasi-religious faith-based way. GMGtalk 12:49, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Please see Special:Contributions/

Thanks, Vermont (talk) 01:53, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

This too. Vermont (talk) 01:55, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Hey sorry man. Looks like I was pretty afk at the time. Looks like someone else got one and the other has gone stale. But feel free to drop by any time I can help. GMGtalk 13:06, 25 February 2019 (UTC)


Hello, I have a small request. Can you delete my talk page? Thanks! Jianhui67 (talk) 17:49, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

 Y Done GMGtalk 17:51, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for deleting and protecting my talk page! Haha I wonder what the IP wrote this time. He said he would return and recreate my talk page hehe. Jianhui67 (talk) 03:56, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
No problem. It was basically just recreating the page because you didn't want them to. GMGtalk 10:01, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Range blocksEdit

This is simpler than the explanation you wiki linked to. TonyBallioni (talk) 05:31, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Ah. Thanks. There was an admin from who was trying to walk me through it on IRC. GMGtalk 11:06, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
Yeah. It’s pretty simple: the lower the number, the more addresses blocked. For IPv6, there’s no reason to block individual IPs: just block the /64 (think of an IPv6 /64 as the same as an IPv4 single IP). The lower the number, the more cautious you should be about blocking ranges. It doesn’t mean that you won’t sometimes need to block an IPv4 /16 or IPv6 /32, but those should be done with caution. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:47, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
Ideally I wouldn't need to deal with it enough to figure out how it works, but we'll see how that works out. For the time being, I'll still most likely reach out to someone on IRC any time I need to do one to double check that I've not screwed something up. GMGtalk 16:04, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
Feel free to ping me if you need help. I'm not in -en these days unless someone says they need an admin/funct there, but I'm usually in -stewards and assorted other channels. I used to hate range blocks, but you eventually get the hang of them. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:23, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Several vandals afoot...Edit

Aside from the Toy Story/Shrek vandal, we have,‎, Stopthebuyers, Wewillbuythisplace, etc. Absolute nonsense, changing certain networks to PBS without explanation.‎, Stopthebuyers, Wewillbuythisplace-- Redoing vandalism, unlawfully bullying Tegel, spamming, trying to defend other vandals, the works. I request all of these users be blocked infinitely and the pages they vandalized be protected indefinitely, as well as my talk page, your talk page, Jni's talk page, etc. WikiLubber (talk) 02:22, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
It looks like one of them is already blocked and the other has gone stale. I did a range block calculation on them a few days ago, and unfortunately we'd have to range block something like 250 million IP addresses to get them all. So that's not really feasible. GMGtalk 23:51, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "GreenMeansGo".