User talk:Kalki/2007

Thanks!

I really appreciate the comments you left on my page: very helpful for us newbies. Thanks! Lebroyl 23:06, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Account name

Hi, I'm getting my username changed on enwiki, I have the same name registered here and would also like it changed here so there are no problems when the unified login is implemented; someone on enwiki told me I should talk to you. My current account is Petaholmes, it's moving to PDH. --Petaholmes 03:52, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I have checked up on your request for a username change, and will perform it as soon as it is confirmed as available on Wikipedia. I wouldn't want to change the name here, and then find out it couldn't be done there. I will probably be online only intermittently today and the next few days, but will get it done as soon after your request goes through on Wikipedia as I can. ~ Kalki 14:08, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

The name change has now been done. ~ Kalki 18:19, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Message for you

I would Like to take this moment to apologize for my deliverate and blatant vandalism to your and several other user's talk pages. I feel a sense of repentance for my actions and have decieded to progress to a new level of maturity. I'm sorry if you or anyone else was offended in any way by what I posted on your and many other's talk pages. I have now undergone a personal reformation and since come to recognize that what I posted on yours and other's talk pages was wrong, inappropriate and repulsive for it's extreme lack of decency. A thousand pardons and apologies for any inconvinience this may have caused you. I promise I will be a legitamate editor who contributes to building an encyclopedia and reverting exactly the type of unconstructive and disruptive edits like the ones I did to several innocent contributor's talk pages. It's a promise you can hold me accountable for. Sorry again for the offensive mess. Thank you! Regards Sincerly, 69.121.173.40 22:24, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Revert War

When I deceiede to edit Wikiquote or ANY other Wikimedia Communist projects, I WILL! And if I want to vandalize, I WILL! You remove it. I will repost it. and for the sake of your family and health, leave it be.

You THINK You know more about editing than me, so you have the NERVE to revert me. Knock it off and grow up.

You don't want visitors tonight, do you? If so just keep reverting my edits. Take this as a promise. A promise I swear to uphold. You and Your family will be safe so long as you show me some respect, otherwise I'll have to pay your household a little visit accompanied by my favorite Shotgun. 69.121.173.40 01:55, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

The IP from which this ludicrous message was delivered has been blocked for two weeks, along with User:John Michael Robinson which seemed to be associated with it in a short period of vandalization before being blocked. Any further vandalization from this IP should result in a more extensive block, and any more from this user should result in a permanent one. ~ Kalki 18:41, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I've blocked another version of this user, User:John David Robinson, after it vandalizing this page. I'll never understand why these people can't find more interesting things to do with their time. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 04:49, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

The Last Unicorn

I know you tend to be rather zealous in applying various cleanup tags, many of which are clearly appropriate, but I just noticed the {{fix citation}} notice applied to quotes on the page for The Last Unicorn, all of which have citations by chapter. I definitely feel that this is over-zealous, that further precision is not, and should not be required, and that the tag should be removed. ~ Kalki 08:18, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I do not believe that chapter numbers are adequate for verifiability, but setting that aside, the article also fails to identify the specific edition of the book being quoted. 121a0012 17:30, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

The edition being quoted can be helpful, and sometimes necessary in the case of variants, but I don't see it as absolutely necessary when there are no quotations or variants in dispute. I believe that insisting that people always need to give page citations for specific editions, unless there is actually some clear reason to dispute a quotation, is excessive. It can be good to be thorough, but it can be needlessly inhibitive to many potential editors to insist that they give page and edition citations for everything that they contribute.

Though accuracy and reliable citations should certainly be our goals, and these can be helped by thorough citations, Wikipedia had already become the biggest encyclopedia in history when it began to be dominated by policies that are so anal retentive about insisting on thorough citations for nearly every statement that is made; we are still a relatively small project with much need to grow. Unless there is clear reason to dispute a statement, such as those with a very uncharacteristic or slanderous nature, I believe we should not scare off or alienate too many potential editors with quite so extreme an insistence on meticulous citations for every quote we use, at least until we are likewise the largest and most thorough collection of quotes available, with a far greater number of regular editors, and can afford to be far more involved in the need for parring down excess and eliminating dross than in gathering new material. ~ Kalki 18:16, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

As you both know, I'm pretty anal about sourcing myself. My take is that we need to encourage specificity in sourcing, but not so much that we scare off people who are trying to do it. I definitely prefer pages numbers and editions (with a total page count that allows verifiers with different editions to interpolate), but I'm not inclined to implicitly criticize sources with only chapter information by tagging them with {{fix citation}}.

(By the way, 121a0012, thanks for bringing over fr:WQ material for our use. I'm not sure how much we should drive for this, per Kalki's concerns, but I can easily see us needing their more deliberate efforts soon if we don't get a handle on copyvio issues.)

My current thinking is that it's unreasonable to expect verifiers to read an entire book, but skimming through a chapter is tolerable, at least until we get many more regular contributors so that we can demand more of the community. Of course, this won't stop me from turning chapters into more specific citations if I happen to have a copy of the book available. As far as editions go, I don't think we need specific editions unless we have pages, as (in general) we can expect chapter numbering to stay the same between editions. Similar partial specificity may be appropriate for collections of poems, short stories, etc., where the cited source is "chapter-sized", making it a minor additional hurdle to find the quote. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 03:18, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Admin Privileges

Hi Kalki, What's it take to get admin/front-page-editing privileges? Kindly, Dbergan 19:32, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Usually it takes at least a few months of having a solid editing record, with a basic awareness of Wikimedia guidelines and rules, after which one can nominate oneself, or be nominated as an admin at the Requests for adminship page. ~ Kalki 23:33, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

User: Adi Gill

On October 30, 2006 Adi was trying to help you guys out by getting rid of that vandal. She was unfairly blocked, and Sing you're the Alpha Male here, I want you to bring her back. Please, she's innocent. She want's to come back. Grant this Wish, please. 'Taker 21:42, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

It truly is a pitiable, but hardly a convincing appeal. Stop wasting everyone's time, including your own. There must be something more enjoyable you can find to do than to be a nuisance to others. ~ Kalki 22:57, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Reduced activity here...

I have been busy with other things the last couple of days, and aside from a few bouts of intense activity I hope to be able to slip in, I intend to be much busier with other things of pressing importance for the next couple of weeks, and to devote a very limited amount of my time to Wikiquote. I am not planning on any extensive travel so there should be no days where I will be entirely absent, but a certain degree of diminished attention and responsiveness should be expected of me in this time frame, and perhaps longer. I have observed a few problems and contentions occurring at this time, but currently lack the time to become too involved in much dialog upon some of them, but will drop in at least a couple comments today. I have a few other things I need to attend to other than my work here, and I thought it proper to mention this, because I expect them to substantially reduce my activity here in coming weeks.
For now, (not that I expect my counsel to be much heeded), I would also like to note, to such vandals as are inclined to misuse and abuse the privileges that the free access to editing on WIkimedia projects allows them: try to find something actually useful and constructive to do with your time, and you might actually find there is much more joy and satisfaction in your life. Destruction, disruption, and insult is usually very easy, simple, and it can easily seem very satisfying, to those who lack in skill or will to do more, but it is ultimately rather ridiculous and pointless. While helping to create or build things of beauty and worth can be trying and frustrating, it is only through such aims and effort that there can arise the ultimate satisfactions and rewards of life. ~ Kalki 23:11, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I hope your outside activity has a measure of entertainment and pleasure, not just other responsibilities. We all can use time away from such things, and you're by far our longest, most consistent contributor. Do you need someone to cover your Quote of the Day work, or any other tasks that you typically take lead on? Let us know so we can plan for it. Thanks. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 01:17, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

My activities should allow me to remain somewhat active here daily, and I should have no problems maintaining the QOTD pages; I simply have to devote quite a bit more time to other things for at least a couple of weeks, and know I must be less actively involved here for a while. My presence has been less and less needed as time goes by, and I welcome that situation, though I have no intention of dropping out of involvement here entirely. ~ Kalki 21:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

hi, i wanna start a new wiki quote in DHIVEHI language.

hi there... i am a user in the english wikipedia and DHIVEHI wikipedia. i have a lot of dhivehi quotes and idioms etc. in dhivehi, thus i would like to start a dhivehi wiki quote. can you help me???--LeX 08:08, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

This is a response I have made earlier, to a similar inquiry: I have not personally been involved in the raw creation of Wikimedia projects, and you could probably find the most help in trying to start a Dhivehi Wikiquote with those admins already actively involved with the Dhivehi Wikipedia. ~ Kalki 21:25, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

February 14

On second thought, perhaps I should transfer the Frederick Douglass quotations to February 20, the date of his death. Since his date of birth is unknown, this might be the better choice in any case. - InvisibleSun 22:15, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree... I fear they can have little preference with me or others on Valentine's Day. You could keep my rankings as 3 and remove my comments if you move them to the 20th. ~ Kalki 22:17, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Cat:Military leaders

Just so you know, I helped you with that because I felt sorry for you doing it all alone. :) Cbrown1023 talk 02:29, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

You certainly finished it off more rapidly than I would have. I was editing Robert E. Lee (and adding an image as well) when I noticed you had proceeded beyond me. ~ Kalki 02:47, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

:) But thanks for reverting the vandalism to my talk page. :) Cbrown1023 talk 03:45, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I nominated the other category (the empty one) for speedy deletion. I'm not sure why you didn't... it's empty and shouldn't be used... if you have any reason why it be kept. Just revert me. Cbrown1023 talk 03:48, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I see you have deleted it. Cbrown1023 talk 01:19, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello!

Hello, great Kalki! I'm new here and before I just "jump into things" I wanted to ask a few questions. I'm asking you because I was told you are a great leader here at Wikiquote. Here's the Q's dog:

1.) Are there any special rules or traditions I should know of?

2.) Is there a type of hierarchy here I should know of?

3.) Any ideas of where I should start?

4.) Anyone I should stay away from or be aware of? (Trouble makers, notorious vandals etc.?)

Thanks for your help,

5 outta 7 23:37, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I can give but brief response at this time, because I must go elsewhere. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. For a quick overview of what Wikiquote is, read Wikiquote:Wikiquote, and also What Wikiquote is not for a list of common activities that Wikiquote does not support.

There are various vandals and trolls, who take on various guises, wasting other's time, but who they are is of very little importance, and their leavings are but a trail of of minor concern which are usually swiftly erased from people's attention, as bodily wastes are when they are flushed away to be processed as sewage. ~ Kalki 23:50, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Thankyou for your thoughtful response. 5 outta 7 23:55, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

One problem?

Cbrown1023 defaced my user-page, adding links to destruction he has done at Wikinews is this acceptable? 5 outta 7 00:05, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Kalki, this was an imposter. I have reverted the damage done to 5 outta's user page. It may also be of interest that the user in question created a dual account at Wikinews and vandalised there with a copy of my user page pasted on his Wikinews page. I also have reason to believe that this user was actually 5 outta 7... Cbrown1023 talk 00:27, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I had construed by the nature of the statements, and familiarity with certain traits of style that I was probably responding to someone who apparently is able to take pride in little more than being a nuisance to others — as might be construed by the tone of my answer. I was in a rush yesterday, but rather than seem totally rude, even towards someone I thought almost certainly a troll and a vandal, I made a brief response. This contrasts with the behavior of such people who seem to take up an immense amount of their time and lives in devising new ways to be rude and disruptive of others. There have been other times when out of decorum I have also not let on that I was aware that I was probably talking to such a person, but as I stated, the damages they do to the wiki are ultimately negligible, though the disruption they cause does diminish what time the responsible and contributive can engage in their constructive activities.
That such people persist in so limited a perspective as to take some kind of pathetically short-sited pride at the very easy task of being momentarily disruptive or destructive of the endeavors of others to create things permanently useful is truly tragic. Some such people might eventually come to see the pointlessness and detrimental nature of their activities, but it is not to be presumed that they will, and we must merely respond to them with what means are available to us, and occasionally point out how much better and more permanently significant their lives might be if they devoted more energies to actually helping people in some kind of worthy effort, rather than in wasting their own and others time engaged in truly infantile efforts to disrupt them. ~ Kalki 18:18, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, for the incovience. I've been made aware that the one who defaced my userpage was not the real Cbrown. 5 outta 7 22:18, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Troll warning

Hello, great Jeffq! I'm new here and before I just "jump into things" I wanted to ask a few questions. I'm asking you because I was told you are a great leader here at Wikiquote. Here's the Q's dog:

1.) Are there any special rules or traditions I should know of?

2.) Is there a type of hierarchy here I should know of?

3.) Any ideas of where I should start?

4.) Anyone I should stay away from or be aware of? (Trouble makers, notorious vandals etc.?)

Thanks for your help,

5 outta 7 23:36, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I notice that your cross-posted the same set of basic questions to three sysops, suggesting an attempt to identify a non-existent power hierarchy and draw sysops into unflattering comments about other editors. You did so after Cbrown1023 posted a welcome message that contained answers to the non-inflammatory questions. Cbrown1023 pointed this out to you:

The Welcome message I put on your user page before this post should be of some help.

Your response was not only to take offense:

I asked you four questions, responses would be appricated.

but also to accuse Cbrown1023 of rudeness:

Why are you being so rude?

and of misbehavior on Wikinews, which was executed by a vandal. A truly new user may well have made these posts, but they are far more fitting the pattern of trolling behavior associated with a pattern vandal who uses multiple accounts across projects to stir up trouble.

Because of this, I am posting a warning to you. New users should read the information in the welcome message, do their best to learn before they post, and ask politely before they accuse. Further escalation along the lines of the pattern vandal may be treated quickly with a temporary block. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 02:02, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but I'm not trolling??? I apologize If my questions casued an inconvience. Alos, I've been mad aware theat my userpage was defaced by an imperosnator of Cbrown 1023, and I'm sorry that I mistankly accused hime of being rude. 5 outta 7 22:14, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Logo variant

Hello, you would like to give license info on Image:Logo134BrackettsJUL2c-150.png? Thanks. --Aphaia 12:45, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

The logo was one that I had created for the International logo contest of 2003 : Logo entry #134, and whatever licensing is applied to it as part of the contest there would also apply here. I do not intend to use it anymore in this project, and it could now be deleted here. Any further variants of the idea which I might use in Wikimedia projects based upon its symbolism I would upload to the commons.

The design was based on symbolic images of a haloed sun I had created many years before, and had used only privately until then. It evokes many things to me, but perhaps primarily, the Radiance of Ultimate Truth or an ultimate Unity and harmony shining forth in darkness, haloed by splendors of diversity. Symbolism employed for Ultimate Truth, Justice, Unity, Liberty, and Light, Love amd Life and were all concepts bound together in its initial creation, based on dreams I had had been inspired by as a very young child, and at the time of the logo contest I thought something derived from it would make a good logo for Wikipedia. ~ Kalki 18:58, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Sonnets

Ah, thank you for deleting those. I was in the midst of trying to categorize the literary works, and I meant to return to these and determine what to do with them, but I didn't want to stop until I completed what I was doing. Thank you for taking care of this. ~ UDScott 22:18, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I was surprised they were still around and had meant to delete them after The Sonnets survived Vfd. ~ Kalki 22:25, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Name change - JThorne

To avoid policy conflictions, I would like to change my user name to "JThorne".

I hope this will work better.

--Thorne Enterprises 22:39, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. --Thorne Enterprises 22:43, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Sourcing Jefferson

Per your note on the Jefferson discussion page, I won't be working on the Jefferson article for now so as to avoid any possible cross-editing. In anticipation of tomorrow's QOTD, I'll be working on the unsourced quotes for Madison. - InvisibleSun 20:22, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Bot flag and insulting usernames

Hello,

I am requesting the botflag for my bot : DragonBot. I have started a vote (24th february). Can you please check Wikiquote:Bots and tell me if I can have the botflag or need to wait more? Thanks.

I have also found quite a few usernames insulting various well-known figures from the Wikimedia Foundation/the English Wikimedia projects community (Jimbo, people from the Board of Trustee, Essjay...). You can find them on Special:Listusers, all these usernames begin with several "!" Block-rename them?

chtit draco^talk 18:44, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

We have few bots or bot requests here, so I had not noticed your request, despite noticing the bot functioning. The same might be true of other regular editors here, and though I see no reason to withold bot status, I will wait another day or two for any further responses, and then will grant it if there are no objections. Of the names you mentioned: the most prominent of them (beginning with an "!") have already been blocked permanently, though not as yet renamed. ~ Kalki 21:07, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Kalki, what Chtit draco is been proposing has been talked about on other wikis (and some of them have been followed through). You do understand that the point of this is just so that they do not show up at the beginning, right? Not for any real reasons other than "cleanup". (Not saying that this should not be done, just saying what exactly it entails.) Cbrown1023 talk 23:10, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I was aware that bot status makes the edits invisible to the "Recent changes" page, and just thought I might wait another day or so before granting that ability. I just looked over the Requests for bot status/Bot policy template page and saw that the request is within guidelines, and will probably grant it within the next day, if no one objects, which at this point seems to be the case. ~ Kalki 23:44, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

By default, yes, but you can change it so that it shows them. You can do the same thing for your edits sometimes (because you are an administrator, see w:Wikipedia:Administrators#Keeping vandalism out of recent changes). Cbrown1023 talk 23:50, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Though there is much I can plead ignorance of in MediaWiki functions, I was aware of that also, but I never have bothered to use it. ~ Kalki 23:58, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

DragonBot now has bot status. ~ Kalki 21:21, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you :) chtit draco^talk 16:56, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

QOTD

I saw how you had to keep protecting every single QOTD page and I thought of how annoying it must have been. With the creation of Wikiquote:Quote of the day/Protect, the the current days, yesterday's, and the next two day's quotes will be protected (it is done by an activation of the cascading protection feature). Feel free to change this around however you see fit (by adding or removing some). It will help out in times that we all forget to protect it. I hope this helps. Cbrown1023 talk 23:41, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the assistance on that. That is one of the MediaWiki features I wasn't aware of, and there have been times I have been rushed and forgot to protect the page until a few hours after its activation. ~ Kalki 01:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Because you have all the quotes copied onto a master list, do you think we should delete all the old QOTD pages? Cbrown1023 talk 20:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of the obsolete Qotd pages for particular days is okay with me, and has been done in the past. I would retain the old Wikiquote:Quote of the day/Quote proposals page, though, for archival purposes, even though it too is largely obsolete. ~ Kalki 23:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Just to be clear, does that include all the pages that specify dates? (Here is a listing) Cbrown1023 talk 23:41, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Any that specify dates that have passed can be deleted, and I will begin doing some of them now, but I would generally wait a month to pass for the most recent dates, just for safety and ease of reference in compiling the "complete" listings. ~ Kalki 23:48, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Question

Kalki, I want to be sure that I did not overstep my bounds as a sysop in my recent exchange with User EHStories. This user seems to be blanking pages so that he/she may recreate them in a style different than out templates. I warned time and again, and tried to help by creating a sub-page to the User page for this user to work on their pet project. But with no return dialogue, the changes kept coming from this user. This was followed by an attack on my userpage. I've blocked EHStories for a couple of weeks, but I'm not sure that this user can be classified as a vandal as we usually see them. I'm just not sure where to go with this one once the block expires. Any advice? ~ UDScott 17:21, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

That there are so many instances of degradation of pages, and of "Replacing page with" what amounts to various forms of nonsense, leaves me doubtful as to the user's intentions of seriously contributing to the project. Temporary blocks are appropriate, at least until such a time as the user makes clear declarations of exactly what it is that is being aimed at on the various edits made to the pages, and is respectful of the work done by others. ~ Kalki 17:41, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Also, when I was looking through Recent changes, I saw that as well and thought you were do the right thing as well. Actually, I was going to block him and realized you had done it already. You did not overstep your boundaries, nor was it a real conflict of interest. Cbrown1023 talk 20:45, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Do you not have reasons

I was the first person in introduce images ¿ok? --Cme 22:31, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

You were hardly the first person to introduce images to this project, and at least some of the images you introduced were deleted as copyright violations; the image you are replacing has stated relevance, and the caption used actually rebukes the notion of an anthropomorphic God, such as is pictured with a very famous depiction by William Blake. The image you are replacing it with, though striking and probably usable in some context on the page, is provided only with technical data (and somewhat inappropriate notions of "rising" and such). I don't object to the image, I simply think it should be used at a size and position relative to the others, and with an appropriate caption. ~ Kalki 22:48, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Commons:User:Cme has already caused several problems in Commons, Spanish Wikiquote (where he's edited under quite a good amount of usernames) and Spanish Wikipedia (as w:es:Usuario:Dme). He's uploaded images created by others and given them false licenses; he's harassed other users on the basis of the ideologies he suspects on us, our suspected ages and ethnic backgrounds; he's deleted useful quotes from pages and replaced NPOV introductions with POV statements related to Jehovah's Witnesses and his personal aesthetic tastes, etc. I've seen some features typical of his style and behaviour in this new Cme user. If you think it'd be good for him to be explained something in Spanish you can ask for help in es.wikiquote, but many Wikimedia policies and conventions have already been explained to him in plain Spanish, and he's responded abusing the users who tried to help him, and has kept on violations. Currently, we in es.wikiquote are indefinitely blocking the accounts and IPs that follow his pattern of violations, and I am semiprotecting some of the pages where his attacks are more intense. Sorry for exporting you our problems. --Javierme 22:58, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Lynx removal --> Bot?

There are over 6,000 pages, I do not want to flood recent changes or my contributions. I already have a bot account created, do you think that we should use that and then flag it temporarily for this task (removing it after it was completed)? If you do not think that is a good idea, then I will just use my main account. Cbrown1023 talk 22:49, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Either way, this will take around 10-12 hours, which is a long flow of constant editing. Cbrown1023 talk 22:52, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

The bot has started running. If you get this before it has finished and agree to the addition of a bot flag, please post anything on my talk page (it will stop the bot) and do whatever you need to do. If not, you can just post here and the bot will continue to run. Cbrown1023 talk 23:16, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

User:BrownBot Cbrown1023 talk 01:29, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Name change - GordonWatts

Kalki, please rename User:GordonWattsDotCom to User:GordonWatts per this VfD discussion (it includes the user's own agreement at this change). Cbrown1023 talk 11:35, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much

Thanks for the promotion. I hope to prove myself worthy of it.--Poetlister 22:01, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Username Change - Ed Fitzgerald

Hello - I just changed my username on English Wikipedia and would like to do the same thing here. It's a little confusing, but it seems that to do so here I need to contact a bureaucrat, and that seems to be you. If that's the case, could you kindly please change my username from User:Edfitz to User:Ed Fitzgerald? I would appreciate it greatly. Ed Fitzgerald 07:38, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks very much , I appreciate the quick response. Ed Fitzgerald 09:04, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Still busy with many other things...

The last few days I have had much less time than normal to attend to matters here, and often edited only a few minutes at a time from wi-fi connections that I normally have access to (this is often the case when I am not at home). I did make one error of statement in a recent post, of minor significance — I stated "I am on wifi link and have only a few minutes." At that time I had actually rushed home and was doing a quick shutdown of my home computer in anticipation of possible power-outages, and in my typing this wasn't even thinking that at that particular time, I wasn't actually on wi-fi — though I was definitely in a rush.

I have had but little time to work here again today, but in the next week I should have at least a few days where I can spend a bit more time here. Though I anticipate being much busier on other things in months to come I still intend to have a daily presence here, though probably not engaged in monitoring things or contributing as extensively throughout the day as I have in the past.

Up until now I have usually waited until the very last minutes that my activities allowed in choosing the QOTD, just to permit any last minute rankings or suggestions to be taken into account, even though these have only rarely occurred. Often I could wait until nearly 23:59 UTC before making final selections (or occasionally even be a few minutes tardy in making them), and even on days I could not, I usually waited to nearly 22:00 or 23:00. I anticipate needing to make selections even earlier on some days now, and to avoid wide discrepancies throughout the week I think I will attempt to make QOTD selections by about 20:00 or 21:00 UTC on most days in the future, about 3 - 4 hours before the "last possible minute". Knowing myself, I will probably let this rough "deadline" pass on some occasions, and very rarely might need to make the selections even earlier, but I do intend to make an effort to keep the selection times more uniform in the future. ~ Kalki 17:55, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Peter Gabriel

Kalki, I was considering slapping a {{copyvio}} notice on Peter Gabriel, which appears to contain most or all of many songs' lyrics. Then I tried to find an earlier version I could revert it to (because I hate to waste the work, but hadn't time at the moment to weed it down). Then I noticed that you started this article long ago in its, shall we say, robust form. I thought you might want to take a shot at trimming it to something not so obviously a copyvio before someone does something more drastic to it. If you're too busy, let me know, and I see if I can squeeze in some work on this. Thanks. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 10:14, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I will probably be able to get around to paring this down a bit sometime today. ~ Kalki 11:59, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

George Bush quote

Please visit the discussion page. Lottering 10:52, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Initial response to your note to me

Thank you for taking the time to compose that note, I really do appreciate it. It's going to take me a bit to really grok it thoroughly, but let me respond quickly to some things that come to mind immediately.

• If I removed italicization from anything it was purely unintentional, a bi-product of the removal of bolding. I'll go back and take a look at where you indicated and restore the italics where I spot them missing. I apologize for that error.

• Same thing regarding the italicization of titles, quotes around essays, etc. I posted a few titles with underlines early on, but I thought I had caught them and fixed them. I think I pretty much understand the conventions here regarding those things, so if I didn't follow them it may just be simple error on my part. I'll try to check up to see what I've missed.

• Concerning the break up of pages -- I was on a different track, concentrating on consolidating pages, when I was advised that some of the entries were overwhelming the articles, which is why I reversed course a bit. Perhaps I overreacted, I don't know, but I was careful, I think, to keep the titles integrated into the structure of the author page, so that people can navigate easily to the entries which have been spun off. (In fact, I believe that I only spun-off two or three new ones, another was a restoration of a merge that I was advised wasn't a good idea.)

• About standardization, although it may seem otherwise, I really do agree that some looseness is a good thing. Different material works better using different formats.

• Regarding illustrations -- really I was just posing a question about the standards here. I don't have any objection to them, in fact I rather like the way they break up the monotony of a very long page of words. I was simple curious about how they fit into the scheme of things.

• Concerning the bolding of selected parts of quotes -- I'm going to want to re-read what you wrote a little more carefully before I respond fully, because this is an issue I feel quite strongly about, that selective bolding is inherently an alteration of the material which is being quoted. Obviously, the person selecting and posting the quote has to have a certain amount of leeway in formatting in order to present the quote to its best advantage, but my belief is that ends at the point where the material is in some significant way changed by the process, and I believe that selective bolding does indeed do that, because it emphasizes a portion of the quoted material in a way that the originator did not intend (or else they would have done that to begin with). To my mind, that does an injustice to the underlying material.
  
  But, look, I'm not trying to be doctrinaire, that's just my opinion -- and it may also be complicated by issues of taste. I happen to find the selective bolding visually annoying when looking at a page, and find that it makes it harder to find a quote I'm looking for, or to read an unbolded one, but that's a different issue from the ethical one.
  
  Enough for now, I'm about to retire, and I don't want to go too deeply into this without, as I said, first re-reading thoroughly what you wrote.

Again, thanks for your concern and your guidance, and I hope to continue this conversation soon. Ed Fitzgerald 15:16, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Order of quotes in literary works

Kalki, I am in the midst of a discussion on Talk:Cat's Cradle about how quotes should be ordered for a literary work. I maintain that they should be presented in the order in which they appear in the work, usually grouped by chapter, to help with verification of the quotes. But another user has brought up the idea that if they are grouped by character it might be more useful for the casual user. Do you have any thoughts on this? [I'll also pose this question to Jeffq for his insights] If you have any input to this, can you post it on Talk:Cat's Cradle? Thanks. ~ UDScott 13:06, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

New pages

Hello. I have recently created and expanded Marion Woodman quite a bit. Could it possibly be included in the new pages on the main page when the time comes? Samuella 23:17, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I plan to be updating it soon, but I have adhered to a strict cut off point of the most recent valid-seeming creations when I do an update so as to avoid contentions about selections, and the Woodman page has been around too long for that. You might make suggestions for the quote of the day on 15 August for her birthday, but there is no guarantee it will be selected then either. Thanks for creating the page though, and I will try to think of someplace where I could use a quote by her in the weeks ahead. ~ Kalki 00:17, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thanks anyway. :) Samuella 00:04, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Message from da Bug

Please see my response. Nanobug Locked Out! 21:05, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

The edit activity of the above user indicates the account was created entirely for impersonation, vandalism and trolling in the pattern of known vandals and has been permanently blocked. ~ Kalki 21:31, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

John Brown

I have been trying to bring the John Brown quotes page up to snuff because I am an avid fan, but I'm still making sure to be unbiased, and add both positive, and negative, quotes by and about him. It's still registered as a stub, may I ask for a more exact perammiter to fix it? So that I may move onto upgrading other pages. NerdExtrodinare 5/2/07 12:24 PM

It is always good for individual editor's to seek to balance presentations, but it is not absolutely required. Though they are in the public domain much of the material you have added to John Brown seems to be complete or nearly complete speeches, letters, or songs, which might be better added to Wikisource. Ideally one should find the most interesting or famous statements within such a works and select them for posting here. I might try to clean things up a bit on the page after I catch up on a few other things. ~ Kalki 00:38, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

David Hume

I had posted some David Hume quotes as QOTD suggestions for April 26, but I now see that this was his Old Style birthdate and that May 7 is the New Style/Gregorian date. Since it's the more common practice to use New Style rather than Old, I was thinking of transferring the Hume QOTD suggestions from April 26 to May 7. If this is acceptable, should I transfer your votes as well, or would you rather that they be deleted for now? - InvisibleSun 21:21, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

You can transfer my votes intact. If there are any changes because of the date I will alter them later. ~ Kalki 21:28, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Rename

Can you rename my account to Zachary? It is an unregistered account (check on user list), and it would match my username on other wikis (commons, meta, wikinews in many languages, and wikipedia) I am requesting to prevent sockpuppets of my user name here, as I still use my old username on this site. Thanks, Zachary ^talk 22:43, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you :) Zachary ^talk 04:20, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

TUFKAAP

Hello, this is TUFKAAP from Wikinews. Just to let you know, that was not me vandalizing and I have nothing against Wikiquote. --66.30.29.120 23:25, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Bot request

Hey Kalki, would you mind closing this Bot request? Thanks, Cbrown1023 talk 01:21, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Bot request granted. ~ Kalki 01:41, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: possible crosswiki impersonation

Hello Kalki. Jeffq suggested I contact you regarding some cross-wiki impersonation problems that went on last night. I will re-post the message that Jeffq left for me on my Wikinews talk page n:User:Jcart1534, and my request that User:Jcart1534 on q (which is currently blocked) be reassigned to me. I am posting this request on both q and n at the same time. Thanks, Jc1534 11:35, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

"Hello, Jcart1534. I am a Wikiquote sysop (User:Jeffq) and have blocked User:Jcart1534 at your request. (You can confirm both statements by checking the Wikiquote block list. If you don't know how to do this, go to Wikiquote, click on "Special pages" in the "toolbox" section in the left margin, then click on "List of blocked IP addresses and usernames". You should see my block of your hijacked name there.) If you wish, you can request that the name be reassigned to you by a Wikiquote bureaucrat. (Currently Kalki is our only one.) You might also want to register your name on any other prominent Wikimedia projects to avoid this problem in the future. I hope this helps. ~ Jeffq 01:30, 6 May 2007 (UTC)"

"Thanks, Jeffq. I will contact Kalki and ask that User:Jcart1534 be reassigned to me. I am posting this request on my Wikinews talk page at the same time as I am contacting Kalki. Thanks again for your help." n:User:Jcart1534 or, temporarily Jc1534 11:35, 6 May 2007 (UTC) on Wikiquote.

I just reassigned this username and have sent you an email with the password. ~ Kalki 12:56, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Another one: 20:34, 31 October 2006 Skenmy (Talk | contribs | block) New user has been reported to me on IRC. The user has stated that they would like re-register the account if possible. Rename. Thanks, Cbrown1023 talk 19:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

English Wikinews. Cbrown1023 talk 20:13, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Further to your message to my talk page, I have now enabled e-mail on my English Wikinews account :) (Skenmy) --82.153.135.69 21:20, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

New Movie Page

I created a page for the film, The Polar Express, but it is linking to the wikipedia Polar Express book page. Should the title have "(film)" at the end like wikipedia even if wikiquote doesn't have any quotes for the book? --Jonathan Thorne 03:34, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

I added "(film)" to the Wikipedia link. This is sufficient for now, but it would probably be best to move the page to "The Polar Express (film)" just to keep linkage between the two Wikimedia projects as simple as possible. There is no urgency on this though, as we do not yet have a page for the book. ~ Kalki 04:40, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

the source of a quote attributed to Orwell

Hello Kalki,

I've seen you've contributed the variations on Orwell's quote "During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." ([1]) Could you please indicate the source for the original attribution?

Regards, Itayb 14:55, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

The variants I added were probably found in a search for an original source, but as with many quotes, thus far no original sources or even citations of original sources have been found, though many of these phrases or slight variants of them are widely quoted. Had I found a source I would have provided it, and moved it out of the "unsourced" section. Web searches I just did indicate that there are many more secondary sources that could be found now, but no citations of original sources leap to my attention in a quick scanning of them. ~ Kalki 16:07, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Itayb 15:19, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

WelcomeBot

Thanks! :) Cbrown1023 talk 19:37, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Change in solo top-rank QotD votes

Kalki, I notice that you just removed your suggestion that folks only choose a single "4" (excellent) rank per day for quote recommendations. I thought that was a sensible restriction, pushing us to choose only one "best" quote per day, which would also reduce vote inflation. What made you change your mind? ~ Jeff Q (talk) 20:08, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I didn't so much change my mind, as simpy resigned myself to the fact that the suggestion didn't seem to be having much effect. I had noticed this for some time, but I never sought to impose it as an absolute restriction. Up until today it seemed a suggestion that kept no one other than myself reliably constrained, and I actually used two 4s today, though I currently will not likely use either of these for the QOTD. If you strongly think the suggestion should remain, I could revert my changes. ~ Kalki 21:42, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I would like you to know I've followed the suggestion strongly. It makes a great sense as JeffQ said. However sometimes it would be helpful to make it elastic, as you mentioned, Kalki. How about seeing what happens for a while? --Aphaia 21:49, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm not a regular enough participant in QotD to have much say in how it works. I was mainly just curious. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 23:29, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Mikhail Bakunin

Since there are no current suggestions for May 30, Bakunin's birthdate, perhaps we should transfer the May 20 Bakunin quote to May 30.- InvisibleSun 09:08, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out my error on the date, I did move the quotes to the 30th from the 20th. ~ Kalki 10:36, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Major vandaliser

Hello Kalki. As you may already have witnessed for yourself, Wiki-star is a major vandaliser. He keeps coming and reverting all my edits and abusing wikiquote pages which I have contributed to heavily. I know from past evidence that this person has been a major vandaliser and sockpuppeteer on wikipedia. As evidence, please see Wiki-star, Frieza-Bomber, Taracka, and General Cui, as some of his many sockpuppet names. He also posts pornography where not needed, and he is currently vandalising the Sopranos and Dragonball Z wikiquote pages simply because of my heavy contribution to them. He is also following my contributions around and reverting them as well as further abusing me by posting ridicule about my name and saying other irrelevant things on wikiquote about me. Please help me put a stop to this menace. - Zarbon 19:57, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Alright. Now he's created another sockpuppet to avoid his ban. It's user H*Bad. He keeps creating more and more accounts from different computers in order to pretend to be more people. If for any reason H*Bad posts here, you'll know it's him because all he does is follow my contribs and respond to them in order to continue vandalizing and creating sockpuppets. Pay attention to his activity as a sockpuppet. - Zarbon 19:18, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Not a sockpuppet. And it's called Recent Changes. That's how I can see what everyone's posting. Right now, though I should be making the Paul Reubens page better looking, but I am currently posting this. Well anyways, I will get back the Paul Reubens page.--H*bad 19:23, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I knew it. He just followed my activity again. Please help put an end to this sockpuppeteer. -Zarbon 19:26, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

He just created another username called H*Bad12345 and is replying to his own responses with his sockpuppet. - Zarbon 19:56, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Since you are you here, can you please straighten this out? This way I can preserve my rep?--H*bad 20:05, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

He just created another user name called Klatsh. Will somebody please permanently ban this guy, he keeps making sockpuppets. - Zarbon 20:09, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

The deceit and deceptions that people who are pathetically seeking a paltry form of attention through website disruption can use are various. Most are not "sophisticated" at all, and almost any 6 year old could employ them. That there are people in the universe beyond that age who have so little interest in more important and constructive things to do with their time is lamentable, but some of us cannot devote a great deal of our own time to sorting things out, and can only intermittently give them our attention. To call such people "menaces" as occurred earlier on this page is to vastly exaggerate their significance; "idiots", "twerps", and other such terms are quite sufficient.

I usually refrain from making blocks save where it is fairly clear that there is malicious intent involved, but during the extremely moronic episodes when people are engaged in such infantile activity, I cannot presume that anyone who is addressing me is legitimately interested in contributing to the project, nor that they are a vandal, until there is clearly and indisputably a vandalizing edit made. When I see that such is done, I block swiftly as I can. My normal response when things are not very clear is simply to observe them to what extent I can, until they become so.

Most people of even average intelligence are aware that one cannot always be absolutely certain of all that is going on amidst such confusions, claims, and counterclaims, and it is only those with extremely impaired intelligence who take a great enjoyment in causing such confusion.

I do not really expect such appeals to be much heeded, but I would request that those who have been interested in engaging in vandalism on so easy a target as a wiki-project to make a thorough examination of what they could actually do to help other people rather than irritate them, and get on to doing something actually worthwhile with their lives. ~ Kalki 20:38, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Wow.... so true. I think my IQ just went up just because it's such a smart response. I rarely see that.--H*bad 20:46, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Kalki, I agree with your statement heavily. I wouldn't be paying these degenerates much mind either. However, when their actual vandalism crosses over to our efficient workspace and our own contributions, it becomes a hefty and problematic source of anger. For one, I try my best to neglect such instances. But the fact remains that these people who are sockpuppeteers do intend to continue their daily activity, regardless of how it may impact our own insight. On this subject, I am merely trying to convey here that the main person behind this should be dispatched in order to prevent further idiocy, as you had stated earlier. I personally feel that a moronic act remains a moronic act, regardless of the potential behind it. In order to maintain control, we'd have to resolve even the slightest issues, such as these sockpuppets. Again, I concur with you fully, but this is beyond the magnitude of idiocy is why I'd even bring this up. For one, this vandaliser's main puppet master is known to be Wiki-star. Why hasn't he been permanently banned as of yet? He himself stated that he enjoys to create numerous accounts on the other user page he just recently created. I don't understand as to why this guy is being allowed to roam around with his idiocy. Whether or not we look at him as a "menace" per se is beyond the issue here. It's simply wiki policy that we get rid of people like this. I'd be more than glad to supply ample proof of his further vandalisms if necessary. - Zarbon 21:44, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Changing username.

Please change my username from User:Jeandré to User:Jeandré du Toit (available). I'd like all my WM accounts to be the same for single log in. Ta. -- Jeandré, 2007-05-27t19:19z

Working, thanks. -- Jeandré du Toit, 2007-05-28t09:18z

Another sockpuppet alert

there's another wiki-star sockpuppet running around again. It's YogaKing34. All the same types of vandalisms done by wiki-star, completely vandalising pages with curse words and nonsense. - Zarbon 23:05, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I have to point out that the puppet master is Wiki-star and these sockpuppet attempts are becoming very annoying already. - Zarbon 23:07, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice, but I had already blocked this vandal. I would also like to assert that there is really no need to presume that any vandalism spree is being caused by any particular vandal. Their activities identify them as very small-minded and foolish nuisances, and there is usually no need to identify them or attempt to identify them much beyond that, whatever usernames they might choose to abuse. ~ Kalki 23:15, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I find it an obligation to point out to you all of his sockpuppets. Two more sockpuppets he just made are Master Batour and Frieza. If I don't bring these things into attention, it's more than highly possible that nobody will take action. These are definite sockpuppets of Wiki-star. I am not one to make accusations without a solid backup. - Zarbon 02:42, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! - DangerousNerd

You helped me out today on the talk page for Ben Franklin (here). Thank you for helping a brand new user!    DangerousNerd    talk    contribs    email   21:07, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

You're an admin.?

I didn't see it 'til now. Can you move Yu Yu Hakusho to YuYu Hakusho, matching the Wikipedia's names?. From there, I can take over with other fixes and shit. I asked UDScott to do it, but he seems to be on sick leave. Link 14:09, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

After you move the page, care to explain why you deleted the Goku redirect and others? Link 15:09, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

YuYu Hakusho has now been moved. The Goku redirect page was created amidst a spree of vandalism and trolling by "User:Sweetness32". There were a couple pages this vandal created which seemed possibly legitimate redirects which I deleted among many others that plainly were not, but I was not too concerned about researching the matter at the time. There was at least one redirect vandalized that was created by someone else which I deleted because it was plainly not a legitimate redirect ("Ernst" for Ernst Kaltenbrunner.) There was also such a massive spree of vandalism by this user in a space of about 30 minutes that I also did not individually check all the edits by this vandal-troll which I reverted, but after going through a few that were plainly vandalism or trolling I reverted all of them. When people might be primarily interested in making legitimate contributions here I am usually cautious about needlessly constraining them, but when their intent to primarily vandalize or troll is plain I have few qualms about wasting as little time as possible with them. ~ Kalki 15:51, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok. Can I create the Goku and Tite Kubo articles? Goku as a redirect though. Link 20:29, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I have no objections to either page; as I said, Goku, had merely been deleted out of ignorance as to whether it was a legitimate page or not, amidst a session of quickly deleting a host of others created by the same user that plainly were not. ~ Kalki 21:09, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Sure man. Thanks. I'll do only Goku and I'll work on Kubo's layta. Link 22:04, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Link blocked

Kalki, I have indefinitely blocked User:Link as an impersonator of w:User:A Link to the Past. With all the chaos surrounding the electronic-game anime articles of late, I've wanted to try to tie up some loose ends. I noticed that the WP user never actually responded to your query, so I asked for a specific yes/no on whether they were our WQ user, and they responded "no". I don't know if our Link's edits have been good or bad, but they are clearly guilty of impersonation. This also increases my desire to get an official CheckUser on all the EG anime editors throwing accusations about, especially if Link's edits were otherwise useful. (I'm beginning to think that many of these participants are making good-faith edits, avoiding obvious blocking offenses, but still using harder-to-prove sockpuppets to further their causes. Just because Zarbon is overwrought doesn't mean he's wrong. And I would include him in the CU.) ~ Jeff Q (talk) 19:38, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Michael Moore

RE your message, please review. Ta. smb 02:13, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Endorsements of board candidates

This is just a note to confirm that I endorsed Danny, Eloquence, and Kate as candidates in the board elections. ~ Kalki 07:21, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Erratic schedule

I've not had much time to spend here today, and will be leaving for a few more hours soon, but feel I should make a note that my schedule has been very erratic the last couple of months and is likely to remain so. I expect to be doing much non-computer work for at least a week, but even after that, on days when I am likely to spend most of my time at a computer, it is likely I will be engaged with many other things that leave me checking in on Wikiquote only periodically. There are still quite a few files I've worked on that I hope to finish up on in the next week or so, but I often avoid posting many things I've worked on until I've pretty much exhausted my immediate capacities for improving them. My current situation is such that I usually should be able to wait until the last hour in making QOTD selections, and probably will normally do so. In the course of most days I expect that I often will be checking in for only a few minutes at a time, and occasionally I might have a chance to do a few hours work on some of the pages. ~ Kalki 00:38, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Orwell quote

What preceded the QOTD in its original source was only one sentence: "Dear Richard, Thanks so much for your letter, with the cuttings, which I thought gave quite a good exposition of CP policy." (The Collected Essays, Journalism and Letters of George Orwell, vol iv: In Front of Your Nose, 1945-1950, ed. Sonia Orwell and Ian Angus, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1968, ISBN 0-156-18623-3). - InvisibleSun 00:20, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Latest vandal

I have request CU on Meta but blocking the Open proxies I listed on the admin board would do no harm - one of them is the source of the earlier attack. Regards --Herby ^{talk thyme} 08:52, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I have now blocked the four IPs you listed for a year, as open proxies. ~ Kalki 09:01, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I created a WQ version of {{blocked proxy}} to post notices on the IP talk pages, so if there are any problems, potential good-faith users of these addresses have somewhere to look for more information. And Kalki, sorry about the implication in my edit summary of my WQ:AN post that I did the blocking. I was responding to Herby's earlier post by describing both your and my actions, but just before I posted, I saw you'd done your own post. I changed my text but forgot to change the summary. ☹ ~ Jeff Q (talk) 09:35, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

RfA

Hi Kalki - I'm sure you will see it by would you please consider my posting here. I imagine with Aphaia occupied with the elections that the task will fall to you to deal with. I feel rather awkward about this and will happily leave the matter in your hards. Regards --Herby ^{talk thyme} 09:36, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

My thanks, vandals I can deal with but I have a lot to learn, do let me know if I get it wrong, regards --Herby ^{talk thyme} 07:14, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks...

For clearing up that vandalism for me, muchly appreciated :) Will ^{talk) 22:13, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Trivial troll games

update on this sockpuppeteer Wiki-star and Taracka

I have just received an e-mail by another one of his sockpuppets, Prince Zarbon. He said he will keep making accounts to impersonate me. Just look at the Prince Zarbon userpage and you will see a porn site at the bottom. He told me this in the e-mail. I have deleted it. I must warn you that if one of the 24.123... ips, 149.54... ips and 219.344... ips say that they are Zarbon and Recoome please dont listen to that trash. It is clear that they are sockpuppets of Wiki-star and Taracka. I just remembered, User:Poetic Decay was mentioned in the e-mail and this sockpuppteer Wiki-star says that he has something to tell Jeffq about us three. Zarbon 03:57, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

The above post actually came from NoUcan't. You can safely ignore this troll. Whether or not he's actually Zarbon, I've indefinitely blocked him not only for sockpuppetry but also trolling and harrassment (not to mention another Zarbon-like appropriation of my name to cudgel other editors). ~ Jeff Q (talk) 14:34, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Sweet tartersauce! Please listen to me.

Okay, I will confess. Its me Zarbon. I admit to making several wiki-star sockpuppets, but only because I wanted him banned. This sock war, anime bloodbath, etc. is over. I am a person of their words and I don't fib. Please cancel all this CheckUser nonsense. I have just got an e-mail by Taracka saying he will stop. I hope it is true and not a lie. Poetic Decay is a sockpuppet of someone. Just look at his contributions. If he doesnt stop then you may ban him, ONLY HIM. Now I ask for the last time unblock User:Zarbon and User:Recoome and leave everything else blocked. Dont ban this account. Ban Poetic too for being a meatpuppet at least. There you have my confession. Jeffq if you ignore this and ban this account, I will seriously seek revenge. I have been trying to edit the sopranos and dbz pages for weeks and almost every time I get banned! Enough is enough jeffq. This is your last warning. I am using another one of my friends computers in New Zealand not New York. Get rid of the CheckUser and forget everything, or I will create 50 sockpuppets to attack you, like Taraka just told me in the email. I have had enough of you arrogating sysop actions. Now you heard my advice, take it or leave it. It is you who will suffer the consequences! Uglyguy2006 14:40, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Pathetic. ~ Kalki 16:02, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Name Change, Usurpation, etc

Hello Kalki, I need a little help with a username problem, and I figure that as a bcrat you are the person to talk to. First off, on most other WMF projects I am known as "User:Whiteknight" (i'm going to post links to my other accounts on my user page in a moment). On en.wikibooks I'm a long-time user and a bureaucrat. If you need any proof of this, let me know.

I tried to create the account "Whiteknight", but was told that it was too similar to the existing account "White Knight". The other account, which is not me, has only a single edit from 2005. This leads me to two questions:

1. Could you create the account for me to avoid the error message? or
2. Could you rename this account to be "User:Whiteknight"?

I would prefer the first option because I have this username on Wikipedia with several edits as well, and when SUL finally is installed (if it is ever installed) I will have control of both usernames. Please let me know. --Wknight8111 18:46, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I can vouch for Wknight8111 as a contributor and he is very credible. If Single User Login were to come along, he would get the account anyway. Thanks, Cbrown1023 talk 19:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I have just returned to my computer after being off of it for several hours, and am ready to do what I can. I could probably rename the account immediately, but I am not familiar with any way to create "User:Whiteknight" without hitting the "too similar" problem myself. There might be a way, but I have never used it, and will wait to see if there are any suggestions both made on how to do so, or whether a simple re-naming of this account, and then a re-creation of Wknight8111 would be acceptable to you. ~ Kalki 23:01, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi, sorry for intervening, but we have User:Whiteknight now. Sysops can create accounts without suffering the error message. I'll try to mail Wknight8111 the password for his new account. --Aphaia 06:00, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid I must exhibit a bit of my ignorance of some of the technical details of the MediaWiki software. Where can I find the procedures to create an account as an Admin without getting the error messages? It is something I have never done. ~ Kalki 06:06, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

It is tricky so not surprised you failed to find it too (I learned it from another sysop). Keeping yourself logging in, go Special:Userlogin, click "create account" aaand, voala :) Then we can make a new account. ["Remember my login on this computer" may be better to opt-out for this task]. If we have their email address, we can send them a notification through the interface directly, otherwise we have to let them thier (interim) password in other means. --Aphaia 07:24, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. I just tested it to create "K'alki" as an account. That was a variant of Kalki that I considered using years ago. I will probably just let it rest dormant, but I might conceivably use it as a bot someday. ~ Kalki 08:15, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Two things:First User:Aphaia created "User:Whitenight", not "User:Whiteknight" (the "k" is missing). I hate to be a bother about this, but could you please rename it?

Second, If you want to create a new account without getting hit by the filter you can go here while you are still logged in as a sysop, and it will let you create a new account. It's not a problem that comes up often, but it's useful every now and again.

Thanks again, and I'm sorry if i'm being a pain in the butt. --Wknight8111 16:18, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I learned a bit I hadn't known about the options available (or had never retained because I had never used it, even if I ever had heard about it). I have now emailed the password for Whiteknight to Wknight8111. ~ Kalki 16:33, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Eh, sorry for not too much help. And thank you for your recovery, Kalki. --Aphaia 16:41, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

IP range

For info that same range has been doing the same thing on en books. I'll be watching too, regards --Herby ^{talk thyme} 07:01, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Your contest logo

At Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Remaining non-free use images, I've nominated the rest of our non-free-licensed images. That currently includes your Image:Logo134BrackettsJUL2c-150.png, which I expect is the one image for which we can actually get a license. ☺ I thought you might want a heads-up on this. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 19:35, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

The deletion of this here is okay with me. It remains on file on Meta as one of the later entries to the logo contest of 2003. ~ Kalki 19:40, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Yggdrasil

You are obviously switching images that are in dispute at the commons but you have made no discussion of the matter there, that I can see, where it should have been carried out. The preference you are showing for the new file name was not justified there, and I intend to dispute it. ~ Kalki 15:33, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

See http://tools.wikimedia.de/~daniel/WikiSense/CheckUsage.php?i=Yggdrasil_axis_mundi_1.PNG&w=_100000#end and then revert...

I saw what you had clearly done in removing all incidents of the previous image, and replacing them with the new. I am aware you have energetically campaigned for some paltry reason to change what had been an unused image and file to the primarily used image and file, and to remove the identical image that had been in use since last year. But as I stated you made no discussion of the matter that I had posted arguments for at the commons, where the decisions should have been carried out. Not here. ~ Kalki 15:39, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

My objections to the replacements made have now been reduced, now that I see that the same user uploaded both images at the commons, but I was simply reacting to what was sudden, unexplained and undiscussed activity that I perceived to be occuring, after I had attempted to discuss the matter several times in recent days there, on the talk pages of the images, and of the uploader of the latest image, which I only now have become aware was the uploader of the original as well. I will probably soon revert my current reverts. ~ Kalki 17:16, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Kate Bush is featured on Wikipedia!

Hey, Kalki! Did you notice that Kate Bush made it to Wikipedia's main page as a Featured Article? Most excellent! ~ Jeff Q (talk) 00:14, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Hadn't noticed yet. Thanks for the heads up. Excellent indeed! I am trying to finish up on some work [on the Kate Bush page] I've been doing off and on the last few days, and will probably post at least something new within the next hour or two. I will probably be working on it another day or so though... ~ Kalki 00:17, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Inappropriate user names.

When changing username the first thing you do is check that the new name doesn't exist at Special:Listusers. Please rename the inappropriate top 10 names there. -- Jeandré, 2007-08-01t14:16z

I'm familiar with the user list and some of the vandal and troll names that occur on it, and will probably change many of these today. There are perhaps some auto-blocks of such names now, but for a long time there was not, and thus there seemed no strong reason to delete many names that could simply get created again. There are many somewhat similar names even now among the first few hundred at Wikipedia. ~ Kalki 15:49, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Tony Benn

I have links on the talk of this article that will lead to a I carried out yesterday. I'm looking for any help we can get over on Wikinews transcribing this, and I think there are some gems in there to add to Tony's page. Material for here, Wikinews, and Wikipedia. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 16:00, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Neo to NEO

Though I've long been an observer more than an editor here, and registered as "Neo" since 29 July 2004, I'm placing a formal notice that I would like my account "Neo" to be renamed "NEO", to indicate that I am not the same person as any of the more active users registered as Neo on any of the other Wikimedia projects. I still would like to be a NEO here, and will probably start using this account more, to occasionally add a few quotes or images, and to revert vandalism. ~ Neo 09:29, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

"Neo" has now been renamed "NEO" ~ Kalki 12:44, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the help on Algernon Sidney

Much appreciated! -- Sylvar 12:29, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

New

I am new to this wiki and i would like to know about the policy differences between wikiquote and wikipedia. Please respond to my or your talk page. thanks :)--Alextheman 00:27, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Both projects must adhere to the fundamental policies established by Wikimedia Foundation, but as we are a much smaller project there has not yet been a need for such things as committees and such. The quotes here that are not in the public domain are presented under Fair use provisions of US copyright law, and thus cannot be overly extensive, especially from such things as modern song lyrics. Wikipedia also permits fair use images, but to avoid complications the English Wikiquote has disabled the uploading of such images, and we use only public domain and free-use images available at the Wikimedia Commons. That is a very brief summary of the situation. ~ Kalki 02:02, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the info :) Alextheman 15:09, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Yet another name change request

Hey Kalki, I was wondering if you could do me the huge favor of changing my account name to Maverick Leonhart. I figured that as a bureaucrat who seems to have done this many times in the past you were the person to come to for this request. I'm currently trying to become more active in the Wiki community and I wanted my name here to match my name on Wikipedia (see my userpage). Thanks in advance for the help. Mushrambo 05:45, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

The name change has now been done. ~ Kalki 18:38, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikisource question

I think you might be the only person who can answer this question.--s:User:BirgitteSB

A full reply has been made at Talk:The Merchant of Venice (Wikisource). ~ Kalki 18:41, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

RE: External Links

Hola! How are you? On External Links...I kind of feel that they should only be to QUOTES, external links to sites without any quotes, like NNDB, could be in WikiPedia, but not on WikiQuote? Thoughts? WikiDon 05:47, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I strongly feel that most of the links to further information relating to the subject belong here just as much as the do at Wikipedia. People browsing quotes here shouldn't have to be channeled to Wikipedia to look for links to more information outside of the WIkimedia projects. ~ Kalki 08:44, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Also, though links to sites that have more information on the subject are encouraged, links to external "quote sites" are not, as most are far less reliable and concerned about accuracy than we are. They can sometimes provide material for us to further seek sources for, but most other quote sites provide little or no citations of sources. ~ Kalki 08:51, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

If this is the case then should the IMDB template be altered since it directs the end-user to IMDB's quote page instead of the main page? -- Greyed 18:11, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm just back from a few tasks and will soon be leaving again, but am jotting down a quick response. I actually do feel the IMDb template should direct to the movie or actor pages of the site, rather to the quote pages, where many of our copy-vio concerns arise because of the simple copying of all the material there. It wasn't anything I felt strongly enough about to comment on previously though. ~ Kalki 19:25, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Cyril Connolly

I have an edition of The Unquiet Grave (the one used for paging in the Connolly article) in which the quotation you recently added ends in "the mainstream" rather than "the main river" (p. 98). In the first sentence of the quote, it doesn't italicize the word "not" and does not have the words "in itself" after "dualism." In the last sentence it has "Islanded between them" rather than "Islanded between the arms." Although I see that variants appear in Google searches, the book itself doesn't have them among the results as seen hereand here. - InvisibleSun 18:04, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I do not know which variants might have arisen from which edition, and do not personally own any editions of the book to check. The only hard-copy I have containing the quote is from The International Thesaurus of Quotations (1970) compiled by Rhoda Thomas Tripp, which uses a portion of the form I added. It would probably be best to include all known variants of this in the section, ideally with notes as to the earliest sources found for each. I myself used a couple of the google searches you pointed out to add the version which I posted, but was unable to determine an exact date for the issue of American Imago which included it in that form, apparently around 1958. I had found that they themselves cited a 1957 edition of Connolly's book, and conceivably this edition, later editions, or their own usage of it might have been trimmed or altered. ~ Kalki 18:47, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I see that I had omitted to mention another discrepancy. Instead of "Truth is a river that is," my edition has "The river of truth is"; I'll make the correction on the September 10 page. - InvisibleSun 19:40, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Twain cleanup

I did a little work on it not too long ago, concentrating on trying to reduce the number of unsourced quotes -- I boought two books of Twain quotes to help me along -- but I got distracted. Besides, the thing is clearly a bear. If you do plan to tackle it, and want to share the load, I've got nothing too pressing on my agenda at the moment, and I'd be glad to jump in along with you. Perhaps dividing up the work would make it seem less of a job. Just let me know. Ed Fitzgerald 09:17, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Feel free to clean up anything to the extent you want. I am very unlikely to get around to Twain before the end of the month, and even a few other pages I have higher on my list of major cleanups to be done are unlikely to receive much attention from me for at least a week. I have been increasingly busy with many "material world" tasks rather than "cyberspace" activities and expect that I will be doing very little here beyond some minor incidental tweaks for most of the next month. ~ Kalki 17:45, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

OK, I'll see what happens -- if I get inspired, I'll plunge in. If, however, you get to working on the Twain later on... Ed Fitzgerald 21:06, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

VfD

New VfD. Feel free to vote. --QCB6 (formerly Essjay)' talk to me 09:14, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Essjay

Claim to be Essjay is dubious.

Essjay was de-sysoped by his request on all WIkimedia projects, but was never blocked from editing here. Your claim to be Essjay is therefore rather dubious, as Essjay could simply use his old account, or, more likely, given the circumstances, edit without mention of his previous username under another. Your sudden spate of actions appears to be more in line with an oppurtunistic impersonation vandal than a former admin. ~ Kalki 09:24, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

No. I am Essjay. I requested to be de-sysopped, but can I be re-sysopped again?? --QCB6 (formerly Essjay)' talk to me 09:28, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Such a request would be more convincing if made from the Essjay user account. As it stands, such a request could be made by any lame-brained fool of a vandal, and is not worthy of consideration, at all. Even if you were Essjay a re-application for sysop rights would probably be appropriate. As you are making the claim to be Essjay, unless you provide clear evidence that you actually are very soon, I will likely block your account as an impersonation attempt. ~ Kalki 09:37, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree the claim on the above seems unrational and looks like trolling. Also judging this series of access come from a proxy service aiming to anonymity [2], I give my full support for blocking. --Aphaia 13:16, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I also concur on Kalki's user block and Aphaia's underlying proxy block. I've never seen QCB6's editing pattern used by anyone but a vandal or impersonator. In fact, the real Essjay probably knows this better than most. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 15:05, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I support these blocks, also. Kalki, thanks for looking out for the community and dealing with this issue in a very polite and reasonable manner. FloNight♥♥♥ 15:14, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I support them as well. Cbrown1023 talk 15:31, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Blocked

Hi! Im confused here! my Main Page(User Saikano, which is not working, was...is...WTF is going on here?! Is that user that blocked me(Who you then blocked) the cause of my Password not working? If he is tell him "I need it back" because Im being called a vandal when Im not, or not trying to, be one! Its annoing sr! Thanks for blocking him but can you help me to? I have ALOT of useful edits!--Saikano II 12:34, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

agf

Please assume good faith. --68.81.244.142 04:04, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I am not very inclined to make unwarranted assumptions, whether good or bad, about people's motives or attitudes, but when the translation of Julius Caesar's last words, as reported by Suetonius are altered to read "This is Sparta!", I believe it is entirely warranted to assume that someone knows he or she is adding bogus nonsense to a page. ~ Kalki 04:13, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Sathya Sai Baba

The removals you have made to the Sathya Sai Baba page have been reverted several times, and I have just done so. I have not had the inclination to fully examine or work on the page, but despite your comment at one point that you were "removing part of the quotes - they are not in the least notable or important" this does not seem to be the case from anyone else's points of view. There must usually be clear reasons that most other editors can agree with for the removal of quotes. ~ Kalki 01:06, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

The true reason is that completely irrelevant non-notable quotes were given as "sourced" in order to make Sai's teachings seem stupid (read the quotes). While easily verifiable and very important quotes were given as "Attributed". Sai Baba's opponents active on Wikipedia wilfullly lied and misrepresented the truth. Best regards. Kkrystian 20:12, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

One can always add quotes one believes are relevant, but to remove long-standing quotes that are sourced because you believe them "completely irrelevant non-notable quotes" requires some clear consensus to be established that they do actually merit removal, and not the mere opinion of a single editor. I have noted that such editing has been increasing lately and has just occurred on a few other pages today, which I will attempt to deal with more fully within the next few hours. I had actually worked on the page and done much formatting and cleanup work after leaving the above note on your talk page, and any quotes you wish to add to provide balance should be added to the existing article, and past poorly-formatted versions that exist of the page not merely re-posted as a replacement of it. ~ Kalki 00:02, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Current blocks

You may want to look here, it's a cross wiki thing, regards --Herby ^{talk thyme} 11:15, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Quotes about Iran

Thanks for your message. There are two issues here:

• 1. There is nothing called Persian other than Iran. Persia is simply the English name of the word "Iran". The country, as it is called "Iran" in Persian language is several thousands years old. Persia was the official English name until 1935. 1935 belongs to modern time !
• 2. The quotes you mentioned are not appropriate because: 1. the people who said it are not notable 2. you do not probably want to take quotes from Iranian newspapers and add it to the pages about Israel and the U.S.!

Hope it is clear! Thanks again. 15:40, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

—This unsigned comment is by SouthIran (talk • contribs) .

I had just done a quick glance at the differences in the changes, and had not looked at the article itself, and saw removals that did not seem warranted. I then looked at the previous version and realized your additions were appropriate, but at first it seemed to me that so were the previous ones. One might be of a person of disputable notability, but Ali Khamenei was certainly notable, though looking at the quote I now see it's actual subject is arguably America, and only indirectly Iran, and thus probably even more disputable. I did re-added yours in standard Wikiquote format, with citations below the quote, and did a few other format tweaks. ~ Kalki 15:53, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Anonymous complaint about Anonymous dribble

Who are you to determine what is and isn't an 'anonymous' quote? Seriously, I saw some stuff that you removed (not stuff by me) that was legit, but there is some of the stupidest shit in the 'anonymous' quotes that you didn't even touch.

—This unsigned comment is by 71.61.215.197 (talk • contribs) .

I was just finishing up some editing and getting ready to catch some sleep, having been up since yesterday and in my extreme weariness, I initially fumbled with the screen buttons and inadvertently reverted your comment to my page, but undid that and went back and examined what you might be referring to.

The "Anonymous" page was created for "famous or notable quotes whose author is unknown" and not simply "anonymous" quotes, and frankly I rarely look at the dribble that often gets posted to that page. I have not even attempted to sort through it all in ages, and only occasionally have reverted edits that I happen to notice and which seemed to be pretty obscure comments or obvious vandalism. There are very few pages on the project that interest me less. I happened to see an edit by IP 147.72.94.2 posting "Suck my study guide!" to the page, and did a simple rollback of the edits of that IP. I failed to see that there were also such extremely brilliant gems of human wit and wisdom posted by the same IP such as "That's what she said" "Don't go there, girlfriend!" and "When you 'assume', you make an 'ass' out of 'u' and 'me" which I inadvertently removed, to the immense loss of all mankind, and which actually do continue to litter the minds of people on more places than that particular page. Though the worth of any of these comments is dubious, I probably would not have bothered to remove any of those had I seen them, but I was reacting to the IP's last posting of "Suck my study guide!" which pretty much seemed a vandal's edits to me. When one deal's with vandals regularly one does not bother to actually read all the edits one reverts. Checking out the phrase it doesn't show up in a google search, except for here. If it is actually a quote of some distinction I simply must apologize for my extremely pathetic over-estimation of the intelligence of the human race. ~ Kalki 19:29, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Bukharin

Hey thanks for helping me out with that page on Bukharin, I had a go at it with the template but i'm a novice at wikipedia code so it was really badly presented. Anyway, I'll expand on it soon! Thanks again. (i guess you can delete this as its not relevant to your talk page as such) -pb 18/11/07 19:54. —This unsigned comment is by 143.167.244.132 (talk • contribs) .

No problem. ~ Kalki 01:26, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for cleaning up Jimbo

Thank you for your help in spiffing up the Jimbo page edits that I had contributed. Yours were needed improvements for clarity and cleanliness. --Thekohser 20:53, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm asking for a little help Kalki, please respond

Hello Kalki. I have contributed heavily to wikiquote in the past year. I am simply annoyed that it's been about 8 months that I have been banned from using my original login name. For further history on this, please refer to my contributions. I just want to continue contributing with my original name, Zarbon. What basically happened was 8 months ago, Jeffq banned me for "arrogating sysop actions", if that makes much sense. What happened was I tried to warn the admins about a vandalizer who was constantly deleting stuff from pages and I pretty much got banned for warning them, just to refresh your memory. In any case, I have been trying to be unbanned ever since. But apparently, all the admins here have been ignoring me heavily. Recently, since I created and contributed to over 40 pages and categories, Aphaia and UDScott have bared witness to my work and Aphaia has asked me to join with a new name. Now, I don't want to create more than one name, it's hard enough keeping track as it is. I only want to be able to login with my original name, Zarbon. Please, please respond and let me know if I can continue contributing with my original user name. I seriously don't want to create another one and it's very annoying doing it with my ip address as my user page. Please respond, I have waited 8 months for a response. For more information on my contributions, feel free to look at my contribs history. Thanks again and I greatly appreciate your time. - 72.229.48.178 04:52, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

JeffQ applied an indefinite block to your user-name because he considered you to be a "pattern disrupter", and despite (or in some cases even because of) your copious contributions, I would have to agree with that assessment of your activities. I might not have blocked you permanently for them, but I have to concede that I remain puzzled about your motives, and have no strong inclination to remove the block. ~ Kalki 11:29, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Kalki, please listen to me. I have posted this in the administrator's noticeboard. I have brought this up numerous times. I have mentioned it to Aphaia, Lrdchaos, UDScott, and they have all ignored me. And I mean it, literally. The only word I can use to describe this situation is ignorance. How long do I have to be banned in order to satisfy Jeffq...I mean it's been 8 months and I have still been contributing. Wouldn't it be easier for me and moreso for all the admins if I was simply logging in as my name...I mean what's wrong with me being able to have a user page? I don't want to create another one because it wouldn't be different in any way but by name. - 72.229.48.178 19:12, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

COMPLAINT!!!

HOW DARE YOU WARN ME MY INFORMATION WAS ALL ACCURATE AND NICE AND PERFECT I WILLL NOT TOLLERATE THJIS BULL IM JUST TRYING TO CONTRIBUTE< THE CRAP I REMOVED WAS NOT SOURCED STOP BEFOREW I CONTACT AN ADMIN YOU ARE A RIGHT WINGER TRYNIG TO FURTHER AN AGENDA I WILL BE FORCED TO REPORT THIS!!!--207.197.96.125 19:55, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

This appears to be mere trolling, but I did respond to this user's similar message at the Village Pump, thusly:

Everyone is welcome to contribute whatever genuine quotes they wish. The more contributors the closer a fair balance and a "happy medium" might be approached in the articles. Very few regular editors here are pushing any definite agenda, beyond those nearly universally honored ones such as honesty and civility. Wanton blanking of pages is considered vandalism, and the tone of your comments seem more of the nature of troll-droppings than of a sincere interest in improving the project. When your block expires you, like anyone else, no matter what their opinions, will be welcome to do so. ~ Kalki 21:14, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Très intéressant

I had determined to go as far as declaring in abstruse and puzzling utterances the future causes of the "common advent", even those truly cogent ones that I have foreseen. Yet lest whatever human changes may be to come should scandalise delicate ears, the whole thing is written in nebulous form, rather than as a clear prophecy of any kind. ~ Nostradamus

Ah! Clearly I've misunderstood the nature of arcane prophecy. And here I'd thought it was to make it possible to predict anything and everything, and never have to own up to being wrong. I am suitably chastened for my unbelief. ☺ Seriously, I really like this as a QotD. It's interesting for both believers and unbelievers (for different reasons, of course). ~ Jeff Q (talk) 00:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Precisely why I thought it would be an ideal quote for Nostradamus, once I saw it was his birthday. I scanned through the quatrains, and didn't find anything all that usable as a QOTD at this time, but found a few things in the letters that were, and this I thought was best of all. ~ Kalki 01:20, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Jesus page

I have also noticed that the Jesus page contains some quotations which are enormous tracts, rather than "quotable" things. Do you agree that Wikiquote is not the place for extensive quotations (especially for text that can easily be obtained online)? --Ubiquity 17:45, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree that there are some quotations there and elsewhere that are extensive and which might be trimmed or broken up, but I am very reluctant to make any hard and fast rules about the length of quotes, especially when there are not any copyright violations involved. Though Lincoln's Gettysburg Address is available elsewhere (including Wikisource) it is often quoted in full, and I think it would be negligent of us to not quote it in full here. I much prefer quotations to be short and select, but I don't wish to make any absolute exclusions, beyond those that would clearly violate copyright laws. ~ Kalki 17:58, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Rush Limbaugh

Please weigh in on continued vandalism and BLP violation on this page, including manufactured quotes, without any verifiable attribution, that imply racist hate speech by the subject. More than one user has reverted these and known Wikipedia POV edit warrior (with multiple bans in the last three years) continues to add them back without source or discussion on the talk page. I refer you specifically to the Wikiquote and (more importantly) Wikipedia contributions, talk pages and ban history of IP user_talk:69.64.213.146/w:user_talk:69.64.213.146. There is documented proof (which was continually deleted if you check the talk page history), including a confirmation from w:user_talk:Eleemosynary, that this is indeed his IP address.

We now also have IP user_talk:69.86.228.202 that has seemingly sprung up out of nowhere (no 'quote or 'pedia history) to take up 69.64.213.146/Eleemosynary's history on this matter. Eleemosynary is well known for using TOR proxies when his shenanigans with 69.64.213.146 have been called out on Wikipedia in the past.

Please keep an eye on this as I'd hate to see Wikiquote fall prey to this user's POV edit warring in the way that Wikipedia has. No one is trying to "scrub" unflattering things Limbaugh has said from the page. In fact there is quite a bit there already that no one is disputing. However adding manufactured, racist, hate speech without any verifiable attribution is a blatant violation of BLP and puts the project at risk. Thanks fro any help you can give on this.71.247.192.30 15:34, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Adversarial editing disputes shouldn't automatically be labeled vandalism on the part of any editor, a term which should be restricted to the inserting of plainly false, irrelevant or nonsensical material into the articles. There are many pages many regular editors have come to avoid paying much attention to because they are so prone to produce interminable disputes, and are of no great interest to themselves.
I will only provide a brief assessment at this time of what I feel should be a general policy regarding some of the disputes that arise regarding quotes:
If the a quote is disputed and shows little or no evidence of being widely quoted, it should probably be removed. If it is widely quoted but without reliable source it should probably be placed in an "unsourced" section, or even a "disputed" section; and if it is widely quoted, but strong evidence indicates it is probably not genuine it should probably be placed in a "misattributed" section, or even moved to the talk page.
If a quote is genuine, with citable sources, but is of questionable relevance or significance, it can sometimes be removed with little controversy. Ultimately disputes on the relevance or accuracy of material should be resolved by debate on the talk page, and sometimes, if no resolution seems likely between adversarial editors, by consensus polling. ~ Kalki 16:37, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks so much for weighing in on this. I will attempt to gain me form of consensus under the criteria you set out above. At minimum. I also implore you and other Wikiquote admins to consider the history of this particular editor/ip address in order to avoid the bile from Wikipedia associated with her/him from spilling over to the sister project. Thanks. 71.247.192.30 01:37, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

The Limbaugh quote that the above anon editor (banned Wiki user Keetoowah/Getaway/JobsElihu) is trying to scrub is well-sourced throughout the internet, as well as at least one published book, easily pulled up through a search on Google books. Keetoowah/Getaway/JobsElihu -- apparently incensed at being found out for sockpuppetry and vandalism under three different aliases -- is apparently trying to behave as poisonously here as he did on Wikipedia. Thanks for setting him straight. --69.64.213.146 05:56, 28 December 2007 (UTC)