User talk:UDScott/2023

Archive

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Help

Help me [1] Gremista.32 ^msg 18:21, 9 January 2023 (UTC) Gremista.32 ^msg 18:21, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

(Talk page temp watcher): I noticed Gremista.32's help request above and assessed that they had Completed stage I of WQ:Votes for deletion#Requesting deletions by adding a {{Vd-new}} tag [[:Special:Diff/3229490] a couple of days ago but had not not managed to complete stages II and III and were asking for help with that. Looking at Nigel Schroeter I believe it is reasonable that process enters a deletion process. After looking at the article which began "I am" I determined Speedy deletion request could be reasonable and have raised the same. Gremista.32, at this stage of your experience please under no circumstnances raise a speedie deletion. If you attempt to raise a WQ:PROD or WQ:VFD please immediate ask at the village pump if anything goes wrong or if you have not been able to contact the article creator. Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark_(a)^talk 20:22, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Chat

Hey UDScott what's up? 152.86.164.35 15:15, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks & My bad

That would be "Thanks" for the quick fix (on "Film director") and "My bad" for having made that extra work for you in the first place. A bit too much multi-tasking on my part, I'm afraid. With both the then-current version and that 6/21/21 prank edit open on separate screens (plus 2 Wikipedia edits elsewhere), I must've inadvertently edited the latter, thus unwittingly restoring that unnoticed bit of John Carpenter mischief even as I (thought I) was repairing the rest. Anyway, red face notwithstanding, the key thing is that when the dust cleared, the article—for what appears to be the first time in its eight-year-plus existence—has a normal-looking and perfectly functional TOC. Well done, as usual. Otherwise (esp. as I don't believe we've corresponded since well before the pandemic), I hope you've been doing well, on and off the wikis.

Thanks again. DavidESpeed (talk) 20:36, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Requests

Do you take requests? 2600:387:C:7131:0:0:0:6 15:32, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Spider-Man

Can you edit Spider-Man as the main protagonist of the Marvel Universe on English Wikipedia? 2600:387:C:7131:0:0:0:6 15:41, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Nope. I suggest you place such a request on that site, not here. ~ UDScott (talk) 15:45, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

@UDScott, this IP is an LTA. Simply as w:Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse/Bucharest_Wild_Kratts_and_horror_film_vandal. Please take a look of global contribution. Lemonaka (talk) 15:50, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Could you please block this sock-puppet?

This sock-puppet (Special:Contributions/2600:387:15:630:0:0:0:6) has just uploaded a copyrighted image of Bela Lugosi as Count Dracula. File:Bela Lugosi as Count Dracula 1931.jpg Could you please not only block him, but also delete the copyrighted image? AdamDeanHall (talk) 04:15, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

(talk page watcher): This file in question is a file from commons and needs to be dealt with there per commons:File:Bela Lugosi as Count Dracula 1931.jpg and commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bela Lugosi as Count Dracula 1931.jpg. I believe there's sufficient of a concern to make these edits Special:Diff/3247553 and Special:Diff/3247549. -- Djm-leighpark_(a)^talk 06:59, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Could you please block this user?

This user, Special:Contributions/Engiolpodua, is bugging me and has been leaving me messages on my talk box. Could you please block him right now? AdamDeanHall (talk) 14:49, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Y Done ~ UDScott (talk) 14:54, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Could you please get rid of this user?

This user is bugging me about a glitch in the Horror film page on Wikipedia. This is the user I'm talking about: Special:Contributions/2600:387:15:634:0:0:0:1 Could you please get rid of him for me? AdamDeanHall (talk) 16:31, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Looks like this one was already taken care of. ~ UDScott (talk) 17:33, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

question

please take a look at that. i added big chunk of a quote. i dont know if this suits english wikiquote polices. is it? thank you. Modern primat (talk) 17:51, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

I would agree that it is a bit long as a single quote - I've split it up into several pieces (and trimmed part of it as well). ~ UDScott (talk) 18:48, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

my main question was about copyright. not actually how long it is. for me, every sentence of that quote is valueable. but i have concerns about copyright and you didnt answered that. Modern primat (talk) 20:27, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

The length of the quote is actually about copyright - see Wikiquote:Limits on quotations for some guidance. In its original form, I believe what you had posted was a copyright issue. In this now trimmed and split out portion, I believe it is acceptable. ~ UDScott (talk) 20:40, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Susan Wojcicki

Hi, please review your good faith deletion of Susan Wojcicki as I do not believe the criteria for speedy deletion was met. I had converted the page to a valid article and would have simply expected revision deletion of the attack page and protect it from vandalism. If you prefer you might consider emailing me the content you deleted although its past my bedtime but I am currently sleep disrupted. Thankyou. -- DeirgeDel ^t_a^c 00:09, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

I was planning a DRV on this speedy deletion as you had not responded (and I fully accept everyone has RL). However events on the latest incarnation has resulting in me choosing to raise Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Susan Wojcicki and I judge it would be overkill to run a DRV disucssion in parallel with that. Obviously you may care to contribute at the VfD. Thankyou. -- DeirgeDel ^t_a^c 00:26, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I have been away for a few days and entirely missed this. It appears as this original issue is now overcome by events and I will comment in the VfD discussion as needed. ~ UDScott (talk) 15:35, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Questions

You obviously don't know what's going on the English Wikipedia website don't you? 152.86.164.35 17:56, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

If we split the 2010s-present content on the history section of the horror film article we can add a history for the 2020s content about what horror films came out recently like Scream, Nope, The Black Phone, The Menu, Last Night in Soho, and M3GAN. 152.86.164.35 18:05, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Ohh and X and Pearl. 152.86.164.35 18:07, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Last warning: why you continue to chastise people to make changes on an external site is beyond me. Please refrain form bothering folks here and take it up there if you wish. If you continue, you will be blocked yet again. ~ UDScott (talk) 18:09, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, etc.

UDScott, I've tried to send you messages & have been blocked in the past. Trying again now. For years, it has seemed to me like we have had an unspoken understanding here -in hundreds if not thousands of instances we have had harmonious collaboration without the need for a bunch of chatter. We both know corruption & ignorance are huge problems in our world.
It does seem to me that admin (was it green means go?) did not follow the rules when he first blocked me 'forever' back in the days of om777om; and the other police like admins since then have also used silly reasons to prevent me from working, a way to push their povs. So, have I ever done any vandalism or anything malicious here? Ever?!! IMO, a youngster's 'reality' that is based on corruption or lies or simply ignorance, is not reality and is often best ignored, especially if they have power they can abuse at will without being scrutinized for it.
It will be very interesting to see what the Steward has to say. Hope he/she has time to dig & reflect. It might take some time. I'm taking nothing for granted here, but hope to continue. As always constructive criticism is welcome.
So sorry for the 'trouble' surrounding my presence & all that. WTH?
Thank you for putting up with me thus far. Que Sera, Sera! :-D - All the best Okthen-trytryagain (talk) 04:21, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

PS. The toxic fears expressed (spread) by that one that's called for the removal of APL page are unbelievably ridiculous. Also, btw I know I don't own anything here. Nobody here owes me anything. It's good to see the garden grow, but those weeds are something else! Okthen-trytryagain (talk) 06:07, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Gary Lineker

I am contesting your good faith PROD of Gary Lineker for the purpose of having that article undeleted and upgrading it to a properly sourced article. From an American Citizen viewpoint w:en:Gary Lineker may seem unnotably but from a English Soccer viewpoint is is perhaps in some ways an equivalent of say w:en:Troy Aikman in the American NFL. The deletion rationale was unsourced and while that may be true it may well contain a significant quote that I wish to try to source. I would expect this to be restored within 48 hours after which I will take it to WP:DRV. That is not to say that we do not have RL. things. It is almost always my practice to build from a previous incarnation rather than to w:en:P:TNT and start a new incarnation. I have abolutely no issue if you immediately convert that restored contested PROD to a VFD with immediate effect. Thnakyou. -- DeirgeDel ^t_a^c 12:36, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

While I am here I also wish to express my disappointment at the failure to restore WQ:DRV:The Biggest Little Railway in the World. The requests reflects the fact you initially seem to have PROD'd the article with no notification to the creator (under by now abandoned account Djm-leighpark) and failed to answer their queries about that undiscussed PROD; which was effectively an unanswered contestation. My understanding is any reasonable request to dePROD should be honoured in a reasonable timescale but immediately converted to a VFD on restore if necessary. This is a case where admins should be facilitating editors to make good faith content contributions rather than making them feel frustrated and begging and being made to beg and wait which is simply frustrating for everyone. I cannot remember the exact content of that article now but your actions at the time certainly created on me a very poor impression on Wikiquote. And I certainly wish to review that especially in the light of unsourced dialogues that are created unchallenged here some of whom simply seem to glorify death and profanities and allow the creator to make their own grisly interpretations of death. Thankyou. -- DeirgeDel ^t_a^c 12:36, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

I have no issue restoring the Gary Lineker page if you are prepared to correct the issue that got it deleted on the first place. Note that I was not the person that tagged it for deletion, but was simply closing out PROD nominees that had exhausted their review time period. Also, note that this deletion had nothing to do with notability. As for the other page, yes I probably failed to notice this request, but even in looking at it again, I fail to see a rationale for restoring it, as the problem identified in the PROD nomination was not even addressed. And again, I was not the person who nominated it for deletion, but rather just the one who happened to be cleaning out the backlog of PROD that day. To be honest, until you started bring these up, we have never really seen anyone requesting the restoration of PROD'd pages - if there was a need, the pages have simply been recreated. I get what you are saying that you prefer to resurrect rather than start from scratch, but be aware that it has rarely if ever happened in the past. I will restore both pages, but please take action on both to rectify the issues with them. Thanks. ~ UDScott (talk) 13:41, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Anti-Defamation League: Judaism category?

Hi UDScott/2023:

May I ask why you added Category:Judaism to Anti-Defamation League? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 16:13, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Because it is a Jewish organization - an organization with a well-known connection to the Jewish religion. As it stood, the only two categories do not incorporate the fact that it is a Jewish entity. If you believe there is a more suitable category that encompasses this, feel free to change it. ~ UDScott (talk) 16:50, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Is asking for someone on Wikiquote to be unblocked inherently sockpuppeting?

I've noticed that Ottawahitech seems to do this a lot, although I don't think that the inverse, asking for another user to be blocked is ever considered sockpuppeting. I have no interest in lobbying for anyone other than myself, and I know that Wikiquote is not the place to ask for help on Wikipedia or for a Wikiquote administrator's recommendation to the arbitration committee. If what Ottawahitech is doing is in fact against the rules, than they need to be reprimanded with a block, however brief, the next time they ask about reversing the block for Risto hot sir, should you want them to stop. I've been blocked for less and it helped me become the editor I am today. CensoredScribe (talk) 19:47, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Charlieandlolafan2023

Hello,

I have tagged several articles as candidates for speedy deletion that were created by a user named Charlielolafan2023, who appears to be nothing more than a vandal. Perhaps should the user be blocked? 2601:5C7:4100:3600:C4C5:D46B:BFDE:58FA 20:52, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Perhaps - but for the moment, I was giving them the benefit of the doubt. I already deleted the pages and wanted to see what (if anything) that user will post next. Thanks. ~ UDScott (talk) 20:53, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Question

Hello @UDScott,

During my small wikis patrol I saw this edit : Special:Diff/3284315, I reverted it for vandalism. I think that the inserted words come from the series, which made me doubt during my patrol by their natures. I would like to know if these types of words are acceptable in case of a quote ?

Thank you in advance, ShifaYT (talk) 15:05, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

The simple answer is that we do not censor any material as it is presented in a TV show or film. So, profanity is OK, but it must be as it was in the work from which the quote is taken. In this case, I would assume that while the characters were probably saying those words, what was shown on TV was likely bleeped out. So I would not include the profane words as that is not what viewers heard. ~ UDScott (talk) 15:13, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Good to know. Thank you for your quick answer @UDScott ! ShifaYT (talk) 15:22, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Couple of articles

• I think we both agree Who United the Western Front During World War I? is a horrible title. About an hour before (UTC) noon I hit upon the idea of moving it to Western Front (World War I) as this would match a relevant enWP article. I can't do that without leaving a redirect so I usually simply use {{Wikipedia}} to whatever and you usually come along and do the move and we seem to work well together on that and I'm happy with the sitelinking from Wikidata. Unfortunately you've introduced a link to an (empty) merge discussion first which has merits but would leave the name Who United the Western Front During World War I? hanging about which I think is a little ugly. Anyway I'll leave thoughts to you. -- DeirgeDel ^t_a^c 14:02, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
• You may have noticed, or not noticed, Special:Diff/3287677. That left the article with no quotes and I intend to CSD it later. I am good faith convinced the article as presented was a QLP violation; and I will challenge any a'as-is' re-instatement. Given recent events on enWP with the enWP admin who blocked me I remain convinced an inappropriate challenge may be ill-advised. Thankyou. -- DeirgeDel ^t_a^c 14:02, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Y Done: I've followed or am following the above through formal processes. For the first I will be following W:en:WP:Merging in the absence of a specific guidance here. Thankyou. -- DeirgeDel ^t_a^c 16:37, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Category:2015

Hello. I noticed that you deleted this category in 2015 as "Housekeeping: No need for such a category". But since a reasonable amount of time has passed since this deletion, I think now we can have year categories like this, just like other projects including other versions of Wikiquote. What would you think about this? If I should not make categories like this, what should we do with other year categories that we already have? I'm looking forward to hear from you. MathXplore (talk) 06:04, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

I don't recall the exact circumstances of this deletion, but if there is a need for it now, feel free. ~ UDScott (talk) 12:31, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Article cleanup clarification question

Dear UDScott, you marked Music of Grim Fandango as needing cleanup. I thought I had properly written the article, so it would be helpful if you pointed what in the article needs improvement. Thank you. Al83tito (talk) 16:16, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

I really didn't even remember tagging this, but I performed some minimal cleanup on the page and removed the tag - I removed the footnotes and rearranged the quotes a bit. ~ UDScott (talk) 16:31, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

I want to help!

Hello@UDScott I want to commend you for your contributions on en.wikiquote and how you improve articles that has just been created. I want to also help in improving articles that needs cleanup but most time fear i'd be blocked. I would love to help improve articles that needs improvement. Also, i'm requesting for your guidance so i improve and not vandalize the articles, if my request is approved.

Thank you for your good work.

Best regards. Ebubechukwu1 (talk) 18:45, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

@Ebubechukwu1:: (Talk page watcher): I have seen clear evidence you have the ability to help improve articles. It is likely you will make some good faith mistakes when doing so. I myself only have learned to do anything right by doing it wrong. Your chance of being blocked is near zero, unless you have a meltdown or something, and you seem fairly level headed ... certainly compared to me! I'm pretty time crunched today and in "Grumpy ***" mode which means I probably shouldn't be editing but its the last day of Africa Day campaign so there could be surge of new articles and I like to keep on top of the sitelinking. I'm an inclusionist softie at heart though. Help here is greatly appreciated. Thankyou. -- (Grumpy ***) DeirgeDel ^t_a^c 09:06, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Hello@DeirgeDel thank you for your kind reply. I truly appreciate. Ebubechukwu1 (talk) 15:01, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Mailing list

Hello, could you email me using Special:EmailUser/Ferien for me to confirm your email is you on the mailing list? Thanks, Ferien (talk) 19:13, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Can you protect an article?

The article for South Park/Season 5 is repeatedly vandalized by various IP addresses, and I've been repeatedly reverting the vandalism. I am not an administrator, so I can't protect the article; could you protect it from further vandalism? 03isrflo62410 (talk) 18:14, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Y Done ~ UDScott (talk) 00:29, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Can you also protect the South Park/Season 16 article? For the past few days, some IP addresses have been removing all the content from the page and marking it for speedy deletion. 03isrflo62410 (talk) 14:36, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Y Done ~ UDScott (talk) 20:42, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Linked article

What I refer to as a linked article is one where pressing on a link on the Wikiquote article leads to the same subject on the English Wikipedia. Can be achieved by {{Wikipedia}}, [[:w:XXX|YYY]] at the state of the lead section or even be linking via wikidata though that usually requires wikidata which can be a pain. My view is the onus is on the creator to make this link and I will verify it. If I make the link then I've taken responsibility for ensuring the two match; and I sometimes chose not to do this especially if their appears to be a lack of collaboration. Bear in mind I'm smarting from personal attacks on this wiki. While I'm here well spotted on one particular user misquoting from sources. If you hadn;t spotted that I might not bothered to check the 20/30+ articles they created. -- DeirgeDel ^t_a^c 17:51, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Can you provide some context? Sorry, I'm not sure what you are referring to with this post. ~ UDScott (talk) 18:06, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Sorry: Context is in regards to Special:Diff/3329627. Personal attacks/outing attempts refer to this VfD which are a continuation of attacks on on my talk page. Hope that helps. Thankyou. DeirgeDel ^t_a^c 10:25, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

OK, but if I read this right, you are suggesting that since the creator of the page didn't place a WP link on the page (either in the lead or in the External links section) that is the reason for the VFD nomination? I don't agree that this is a reason to nominate it for deletion. In this case, as I wrote on the VFD page, I believe this page should be deleted anyway due to less than memorable quotes, but the notability question does not seem to apply (as there is a WP page for this TV show). In the end, I agree that it should be deleted, but for a different reason than cited in the VFD nom. And I wanted to note that so that the cited reason is not seen as a precedent for other pages to be nominated. ~ UDScott (talk) 16:36, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

That's the general gist of it. It immediately means a lack of demonstrated notability. If the community determines its a worthy article and takes responsibility that the two articles can be linked then I'll ensure the sitelink is placed at the conclusion of the VfD; and my intention is I will organise that on the conclusion of any VfD (there might be an exception). I will continue to nominate when an article has a lack of demonstrated notabililty. In cases where where I am happy to take responsibility to certify a wikiquote article can be linked to an English Wikipedia or Wikidata item I will usually assist. When the contributor is trying to collaborate I usually go out of my way to provide assistance. I believe in this case the was a contested PROD with no summary so a VfD was likely the inevitable outcome. Thankyou. -- DeirgeDel ^t_a^c 19:46, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

But in this case, there was an associated WP page. The user who left the PROD tag was mistaken in their assessment that notability was not present. If better quotes had been presented, I would say that the page did not need to be deleted. But by this rationale, it would be deleted due to an erroneous presumption of lack of notability. This is a bad example case, but I am concerned about other pages that may have good quotes, but the author either neglected to link it to a WP page or someone thinks there is no WP page. It just feels like being a bit hasty to jump immediately to a VFD. ~ UDScott (talk) 12:05, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

I'd prefer to PROD rather than VFD but from memory, (and the family have had a roughish RL time since yesterday evening), the advice is to VFD rather than PROD if the PROD is likely to be summarily contested without addressing issues. I'll also raise a VFD in some cases where I'm unsure the decision of the case any quite often in these cases I will defer from voting initially. This may be in some cases where there is not wikidata item and I am unwilling to create one for the article off my own bat. However if it survives VFD then then creation of Wikidata Item call (at least almost always) defended by the rationale a Wikiquote Community deletion discussion has determined the article is fit to remain which is sufficient for its retention. I'm more concerned at the moment by possible needs request to suppress some content and edit summary and suggest admins here have a private discussion on the email group of users blocked today and about their conduct on a VFD. I am almost certain they or a sock make an extremely offensive racial comment on an admin but that's been 16 hours ago. -- DeirgeDel ^t_a^c 22:46, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, you've lost me again...and it wasn't a discussion on whether it should have been a VFD or PROD - in my mind, the reason of 'lack of notability' did not apply to the page in question no matter which deletion path was chosen. ~ UDScott (talk) 11:40, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

This discussion has unfortunately ceased to be productive for either of us. -- DeirgeDel ^t_a^c 12:15, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

The Vandal Returns on The Mummy Returns

I just checked on The Mummy Returns and the page was vandalized on 3 September 2023 and 4 September 2023 by an anonymous user, which I documented on the page's Talk page. Given that the vandalism is exactly the same as it had been last year, it is safe to assume it's the same person back again. Funny thing is, despite it being readily available that the page was only protected until June 2023, they took until 3 months later to notice! I would like to request that the page be protected again, and I can help to keep an eye on it as well. Another registered user assisted already, reverting the vandalism from 3 September. AC9016 (talk) 14:11, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I saw this - and have already protected the page for another 6 months. ~ UDScott (talk) 14:21, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Scarface (1983 film)

Scarface is a extremely revered cult film within the criminal underworld. It would be insanity (are you insane?) to disregard the passion of people who are literally bloodthirsty cold blooded murderers. Jaiquiero (talk) 02:59, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Meaning what, exactly? I appreciate the film as well, but we need to be judicious in our selection of quotes for any film. Quoting entire long sections of the film is not permitted as it brings up copyright concerns. As well, we are a site of the most memorable quotes - not just transcripts. Please consider trimming the page to only the essential quotes and shorter stretches of dialogue. ~ UDScott (talk) 12:30, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for helping clean up and reorganize a page I created

Thanks for helping clean up and reorganize the Robert H. Meneilly wikiquote page. I wasn't sure how to organize it, but the way you did it is *much* better than I had it. I have more to come for that page, but I will follow that pattern that you put in place. Thanks! TDinKS (talk) 23:16, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Sure, no problem! Thanks for your contributions. ~ UDScott (talk) 00:41, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

It looks like my user page and talk page were deleted. Any idea why? Was it missing something it needed? TDinKS (talk) 15:43, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Nevermind ... I was confusing my Wikipedia User page and my Wikiquote User page. TDinKS (talk) 15:52, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Your talk page was deleted when I mass deleted oages created by a vandal (your talk page had been created by that user with vandalism as its only content). It can easily be created by someone else if they wish to talk to you. I don't see a history of a user page for you - had you created it before? ~ UDScott (talk) 15:53, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Yikes! No, I hadn't added anything to my Wikiquote user page ... but I'll do so now. Thanks! TDinKS (talk) 16:07, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

intro sections

Hey, seems like I should check in with you about wording for intro sections. When you decide to change what I put could you note the reasoning too? I've been trying to make them more neutral than what they usually have on wikipedia, the most common adjustments I've been making is to deemphasize nationalism so it's more equal with other identity characteristics like religion, political alignment, sexual orientation, etc, depending on what their writing focused on. I've been doing that by writing "from the USA" or "lived in the USA" instead of "American" for example. Also I've been adding some pages for women from Jewish families and notice that is often excluded from wikipedia intros currently even though it was central to many peoples lives no matter the country they lived in ~ A23423413 (talk) 12:49, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

In general, I try to use the intro from Wikipedia so that we have a consistent approach to our pages - and tends to remove personal biases that people may have. But I didn't realize you were intentionally trying to be more neutral than WP, so I apologize. I do feel that a person's nationality is something notable about them and something that is a bit more elevated than some other identity characteristics as you've listed. I'm also not sure that saying something like "lived in the USA" really tells much about their nationality - after all people from many countries may live in the USA at some time. But I will try to respect your writing of the intros a bit more in the future.

As long as we're chatting, I have a couple of notes for you as well - when you create new pages, please try to add categories (at least ones that exist here that appear on their Wikipedia page). Also, when using the DEFAULTSORT tag, please remove the parenthesis around the person's name so that the template will work properly. Thanks! ~ UDScott (talk) 13:49, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for this feedback, will do ~ A23423413 (talk) 14:24, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

@A23423413: I hope no one minds my butting in here? I just wanted to make a comment about women from Jewish families not identified as Jewish on enwp.

If I remember correctly the practice at enwp is only to identify a person as a jew when this person actively promotes this. Apparently being Jewish is not something someone chooses, or even have their parents choose. You are born Jewish whether you like it or not.

During the Holocaust Jews were exterminated, whether they actively practiced Judaism or not. Understandably many do not want to be publicly identified as Jews. Ottawahitech (talk) 22:25, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

If you have comments for another user, you're much more likely to reach them if you put the comments on their talk page rather than jumping into a conversation on another's talk page. Or even Village pump. ~ UDScott (talk) 23:07, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Why my edits is being deleted please 😔

I just Find that the heading for what I want to add were being removed by you. Please can you tell me my mistakes. Muktar H Abdullahi (talk) 22:43, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

It was not clear what you were trying to add - but it was not quotes and did not seem to add any formatting value either. Perhaps you could explain what you are trying to do? ~ UDScott (talk) 23:46, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

then please can you guides me on how to edits more on wikiqoute. Please if yes, then drop me your WhatsApp contact sir. Muktar H Abdullahi (talk) 05:59, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

@Muktar H Abdullahi No, asking personal information is strongly discouraged on Wikimedia projects, refrain from doing it again. Lemonaka (talk) 06:43, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

ok. Can i have a document that can guide me on how to edit or any relevant material Muktar H Abdullahi (talk) 08:50, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

You may want to read Wikiquote:How to edit a page and the guide link on your talk page. Lemonaka (talk) 09:08, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your edits in new articles

		The Original Barnstar
		Мит Сколов (talk) 13:53, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

If you've got a moment, I've always wondered about how sock puppet investigations are done.

Having accounts attributed to you as sock puppets that you didn't make undermines one's faith in the accuracy of the process. I don't know if sock puppet investigations differ substantially from Wikiquote to Wikipedia. I'm just a little bit curious about how it all works and why it doesn't immediately detect sock puppets if it does. CensoredScribe (talk) 22:30, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

I honestly don't know how the process works - I've never been a Checkuser and have not been involved in any sockpuppet investigations. Sorry. ~ UDScott (talk) 00:57, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

@CensoredScribe, from what I understand sock puppet investigations are more art than science. Unfortunately, goodfaith admins don't like to explain to "regular users" how they determine who is a sock puppet, because when they do they feel they are helping the "bad guys". IMIO, this thinking keeps the "good guys" ignorant and the "bad guys" just learn how to get around the rules and cause havoc and unnecessary waste of time for everyone.

Just my $.02 Ottawahitech (talk) 03:19, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Actually UDScott I wanted to ask the opinion of an administrator who hasn't been involved in the process and doesn't claim to understand it, I know asking people questions about their beliefs can be obtrusive, so if you don't want to answer I understand, but I was wondering whether it's a process that you have faith in and if so, why you have faith in it? I spent a little time with the skeptic community on RationalWiki, so it seems a bit odd for me to see almost universal belief being shared across a Wiki in something that most editors will admit they do not really understand. All I know about sock puppet investigations from having created sock puppets on Wikipedia, is that it is not a fast or reliable process. It didn't instantly catch me, and it misidentified several other accounts that I know for a fact I did not create. I don't expect anyone to take my word on the unreliability of sock puppet investigations or Check User, and I would discourage anyone from creating a sock puppet account, however as far an unethical scientific experiment, it is easy enough for anyone to test the process for themselves if they are willing to lose their account. CensoredScribe (talk) 20:39, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

@CensoredScribe I will work out for a preliminary draft for checkuser reintroduction to this project as soon as possible when I got better. The lacking of CU on this project seemed cause a bit of concern how to work against sockpuppetry.
It's not the first time when someone brought up this issue, however, CU reintroduction needs at least 25 common user on this project to vote for support for at least two trusted users. Another alternative process is rebuild the sockpuppets invistigation process that also needs a ton of work.
Anyway, I will do my best to work on them once I got better. Lemonaka (talk) 23:24, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

A small comment regarding my previous posting

Hi UDScott/2023,

On November 23 I posted a comment under: If you've got a moment, I've always wondered about how sock puppet investigations are done which you chose to reformat. I just wanted to tell you that I usually use the reply tool, and that my original posting was formatted correctly and did not require reformatting. Ottawahitech (talk) 22:34, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Be that as it may, I chose to reformat it because it was indented to the same level as my comment, and thus was not easily distinguishable as a new comment. I formatted it to make it clear that there was another comment there ans not a continuation of my comment. Sorry if that offends you. ~ UDScott (talk) 23:04, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Question regarding template on Rebecca Lave

Hello,

Thank you for your feedback and notice that the page I made for Rebecca Lave needs cleanup. This was my first attempt at making a page on Wikiquote, and I tried to use the template/relevant information, as well as examples from a few other big pages, to get it right. As I hope to make more in the future, could you give me a bit more direction on what needs to be fixed to standardize it? I don't know their birthdate, which is a possible problem, and see that the reference section might be out of line with the template. I hope if I can get this ONE page correct, I can use it as my template moving forward, as I hope to contribute more in the future without making a mess. Thank you for your time and patience! GeogSage (talk) 06:08, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

It appears that most of the needed cleanup was already performed. I tweaked it a little bit as well - the page looks much better now and I have removed the cleanup tag. It was mostly about the use of a ref section, using quote marks, and some formatting. All minor issues, but now it is a cleaner page. ~ UDScott (talk) 13:11, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Question

May I kindly ask you why exactly was Grand Theft Auto VI deleted? According to WQ:CRYSTAL, “(…) a reliable publication previewing them”. Does that mean I have to source the quotes I add ([2], [3], or even the trailer itself) or a reliable publication must have played the game (which is completely unlikely to happen until its release)? Regards, RodRabelo7 (talk) 02:03, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes, that would do it - having a secondary source in which the quotes appear is what was needed. Fel free to recreate the page, with the sources for the quotes added. Thanks. ~ UDScott (talk) 03:23, 7 December 2023 (UTC)