Welcome edit

Hi Ubiquity. Welcome to English Wikiquote.

Enjoy! ~ Jeff Q (talk) 17:08, 18 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Signing posts edit

Sorry to be a nudge, but could you be a bit more careful about signing your posts on WQ:VFD? (I've stamped two of your votes in the past two weeks.) We really tend to be fussy about that particular page because of all the mayhem that occurs when editors take exception to their articles being nominated, including forged votes and changing of other editors' posts. It's highly desirable that regular editors like yourself always make sure to sign their posts. Thanks a bunch. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 11:10, 27 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can you help save Atisha? edit

As it stands, Atisha seems like it might get axed, although no one seems particularly anxious to do so. Since you seem to be aware of the contents of A Lamp for the Path of Enlightenment (at least to know it isn't the source of the quote), could you add a quote or two from that work? This would eliminate the arguments for deletion by both asserting who this is and providing at least one sourced quote. (I'd do it myself, but the only semi-local library in which I can find any mention of Atisha is the Library of Congress, and I'm not likely to get there in the next week or so.) Thanks. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 10:02, 30 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll be glad to, but I'm still on the road, and the earliest I could get to it would be next week. --Ubiquity 12:37, 30 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's okay. I plan to extend the vote anyway. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 16:15, 30 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Question about dates and stubs edit

You wrote:

Thanks for the changes you made to my article on Jay Gould. But I have a couple of questions. I see you wikilinked the dates in the form [[Month DD]], [[YYYY]]. I can see the point of the date link, it leads to quotes of the day for the linked date, many of which come from people whose anniversary fell on that date. But the year links come out as redlinks. What is planned for this?
Also, you marked the article as a stub, presumably because it only had three unsourced quotes. It now has a sourced quote, an unsourced quote, and an (unsourced but attributed) "about" quote. When does it cease to be a stub? --Ubiquity 19:25, 1 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You bring up something that is being currently debated here -- the year links, and what to do about the growing accumulation of red links. Check out the Village pump for some conversations about it. I believe the eventual plan is to create pages for each of the years, but it is anyone's guess as to when someone will have the time and interest available to undertake this.

As for the stub designation, this is also a fuzzy area (I have seen some users liken it to the famed "definition" of pornography - I know it when I see it). But in general, the common form is to require around 4-5 sourced quotations. This is by no means a hard and fast rule, but when I look at Jay Gould, it still strikes me as a stub article.

Sorry to be so vague in my answers, but you've hit on a couple of non-definitive parts of WQ. ~ UDScott 19:36, 1 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Help with Bob Dylan edit

You wrote:

I was thinking about organizing the vast list of quotations on the Bob Dylan page, but I'm not certain it would be an improvement. One possibility is to organize by song, and list the songs alphabetically. Another is to organize by album, and possibly song within album. The latter has some problems, since some songs appear on more than one album, and since some of the albums (like "The Bootleg Series Volumes 1-3 (Rare & Unreleased) 1961-1991") were compilations made long after the song was written. So I'm leaning towards doing it by song, but that almost seems arbitrary— not shedding any real light on his work (just organization for the sake of organization). Perhaps if the songs were listed chronologically? Any ideas? Do you think it matters? Thanks in advance for your opinion. --Ubiquity 14:32, 2 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm not sure if there is a "wrong" way, but what I would do is to organize by album, then song within the album. I would use the first occurrence of a song on an album to place it in the chronological order. I think the default with any set of quotes (assuming they are sourced) is to place them in chronological order, based on the first time they appear. If you felt strongly enough about it, you could always place a note after a given song that stated that it also appears on other albums (and list those albums). But I think that if you organize it by album, then song, it would make it easier for people with an interest to find them (rather than just a list of songs) - I think having the context of the album on which a song first appears is better. ~ UDScott 14:42, 2 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You might also take a look at another similar page, like Led Zeppelin to see how song lyrics have been posted here before. ~ UDScott 19:47, 2 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wilson Mizner edit

The citation originally was included by another user in the articlePalavras.

A citação foi originalmente incluída por outro usuário no artigo Palavras.

To same citation is found in others sites, such as in

A mesma citação é encontrada em outros sites, tais como em http://www.pensador.info/autor/Wilson_Mizner/

--chico 18:55, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

;-) edit

Hi, Ubiquity. Enjoyed your remark. It was clever. Have a nice day. FloNight♥♥♥ 20:50, 30 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oops, sorry edit

I guess I jumped the gun by fixing another of User:‎'s pages. I didn't even notice it was from that user, but I had heard of the poet. It's hard to get someone to learn from their errors if I keep fixing them. But your point is still valid, despite my intervention, and I hope he/she learns soon. ~ UDScott 15:38, 18 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reverting VfD articles edit

Thanks for looking into the history of Brett Favre to find and fix the main problem. But when you revert an article under VfD to a better, earlier version, don't forget to re-add the VfD tag, too. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 15:06, 12 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Louis edit

It's sad if people can only get problems fixed by going to VfD. Please feel free to contact me any time if you want help fixing a duff article. Poetlister 22:31, 20 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hum edit

I see things marked for speedy deletion by you and have to remind myself you are not a sysop..... Is it worth your while thinking about that :) --Herby talk thyme 13:53, 23 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Welcome edit

to the Welcoming Committee  --Aphaia 00:36, 29 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sysop status edit

Congratulations, you are now an Administrator here. ~ Kalki 21:49, 30 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yay! Poetlister 22:36, 30 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yay^2! --Aphaia 06:39, 4 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Speedy stuff edit

Yes I agree with you! BUT I've got into trouble before with folks removing speedy/prod type stuff that is obviously deletable. I get told that the policy is that if a tag is removed it goes to VfD. So I guess I'd say - like it or not - if the tag gets removed (& I suspect it might) then it has to be VfD.

Hope that helps & congrats too. You know where I am if I can help, regards --Herby talk thyme 08:43, 1 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your queries on my talk page. Yes, of course I can do my own speedies, but for some reason I can't recall, in this case I felt the need of a second pair of eyes. It's the ethics of not being judge, jury and executioner. I do delete off my own bat sometimes. [1]
I'm afraid that we don't have reams and reams of policies that cover everything. (Why should I be afraid? That's a good thing.) As admins, we're trusted to have a bit of intelligence and good judgment. If you want to add something to the policy, I'm happy to help you draft it, but really it's not necessary. Hope that helps. Poetlister 22:51, 1 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I sometimes tag articles with {{delete}} too. As said, it is good to invite another to review judgment, even if it is not necessary per policy. And that was one of reasons I thought {{prod}} might be useful for the project. Of course we are trusted to handle those things, and there are more occasions I have no hesitation to speedy contributions in question. Hope that helps. --Aphaia 06:39, 4 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Stephen Sondheim edit

Great job, but shouldn't quotes from songs from shows go on the page about the shows, not on the page of the songwriter?--Cato 23:34, 11 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I can't find a policy page, but this VfD seems very relevant: Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Joseph L. Mankiewicz. Still, I'm not minded to make a fuss. Leave it be.--Cato 23:01, 12 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My criterion for people being Jewish is simple: that there are reliable sources that call them Jewish. All else is original research. For example, Stanford University is a reliable source, and I can find lots of others. I doubt that any reliable source would call Cole Porter or even Elvis Presley Jewish!--Cato 21:18, 13 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you edit

Hi. Thank you for my welcome in english wikiquote. Leave me a message at Polish wikiquotes. Link: my talk page. If you can, please write in Polish, but if you can't, use English, dude. Thank you, and nice day Prasuk historyk 21:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm asked because..I was curious. Excuse me with long answer, but I'm not active on en wikiqutoes. Prasuk talk to me 22:49, 20 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

closing VFDs edit

I'll be glad to help close them on time, but I'm not sure how to do it. Obviously I can delete the original. But how do you put the discussion into the archives, and have the nice blue background copy of it in the VFD area for a few days? --Ubiquity 23:45, 13 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, I was going to point you to the documentation for this process. But I notice that we don't seem to have updated Wikiquote:Deletion policy (which doubles as our "deletion process" page) to reflect the new VfD process. And that is because we haven't even officially ratified the new VfD system which is nearly a year old!
I blame myself for this. I've always tried to make sure our documentation reflects our practices, and I've been doing far too little of this lately. While I bump up the priority on dotting these i's and crossing these t's (the "word of the day" two days ago on Wiktionary, an interesting omen), here's the basic process:
  1. Close the discussion by editing the whole page (not just the section). Add {{vt|RESULT}} ~ ~~~~ to the top and {{vb}} to the bottom. This turns the discussion blue. (If you forget the vb tag, like I sometimes do, it'll turn the entire remainder of the VfD page blue until it's fixed.)
  2. Take the chosen action on the page.
    • For delete, don't forget to delete talk pages and remove references from articles where appropriate (e.g., remove an obvious unnotable from List of people by name, but you can leave truly famous people for future creation).
    • For keep or no-consensus, remove the VFD tag (which I frequently forget!) and add a {{vfd-kept-new|TITLE}} tag to the talk page (TITLE being the name of the discussion, usually but not always the same as the page). There's also a {{vfd-redirect-new|TITLE|REDIRECTED-TO}} template for redirects and merges without deletion.
    • There are other oddities, like "pending action", but don't worry about that. 99% are covered by the two usual classes of results, and someone else can jump in on anything weird.
  3. Archive by adding the discussion to the appropriate month page in Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Log.
    1. Cut the discussion line from WQ:VFD and paste it into the month page, placing it in reverse chronological order by date of nomination (most recently nominated at the top). Copy over or add the HTML nomination-date comment if necessary to make it easier for folks to keep them in order.
    2. Save the changes with an appropriate edit summary on both pages. (I like to include a list with each closed discussion title, to make it easier to find them in the WQ:VFD and log page histories, but most folks just say something like "archived 3 discussions".)
You don't need to archive the discussion immediately after closing. If there's been some interesting discussion or controversy, I like to leave the discussion in place on WQ:VFD for a day or two. But you can move it there right away also. I'm afraid, too, that some closers still feel uncomfortable about the archive process, which is actually much easier than it use to be. (Those docs really need to get updated!) The nice thing is that we no longer have to do both steps immediately.
Let me know if you have any questions or problems. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 00:23, 14 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

More on deletions edit

What's your take on pages with a single phrase, obviously intended to be offensive, but which might be a quote from a person or group which might be notable? For instance, User:Ubiquity/Some Obscure Rapper. No intro, no sources, no indication that the text is a quotation. But assume I recognize or get ghits for "Some Obscure Rapper" — enough to convince me he might be notable. Does this qualify for SD/nonsense, SD/vandalism, SD/no quotes, or does it require prod or vfd? Or should I assume good faith and provide an intro and format the article properly? I suppose that if it were intended as vandalism, making it a proper article might take some of the fun out of it for the perpetrator. --Ubiquity 13:32, 14 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, for musicians, if they have neither an All Music Guide nor a Wikipedia entry, I'm inclined to assume they're non-notable. With an unoriginal quote like in your example, even though it's something that a rapper might find lyrical, I think that combination would justify an SD/unremarkable subject. (It may be vandalism or a hoax, but SD/A4 puts the burden of proof in an appropriate place if someone wants to argue the point.) If they do have some arguable notoriety, and it seems like someone just pasted it in without any intention of building up a decent article, that's where I think {{prod}} is useful (i.e., careless, abandoned article). But if it seems like someone is planning to create an article about an arguably notable person with a bunch of inane "quotes", I tend to send them to WQ:VFD, as I do with wrestlers, obscure fictional characters, and other articles that collect lots of unpithy, unoriginal, and unsourced material, as they could conceivably be made useful (however unlikely). ~ Jeff Q (talk) 17:14, 14 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oscar Hammerstein edit

I think we're getting a problem with definitions here. Your first reference says explicitly that "Cole Porter was not Jewish". However, it does not say so about Hammerstein in so many words. It says that he had a non-Jewish mother and wasn't a practising Jew. You may choose to define a Jew as someone with a Jewish mother (the traditional position of course, but not the position of most American Jews), or someone who practises Judaism (however you define that). However, we have no right (at least in a Wikiquote context) to use our own definition of who is Jewish. All we can do is report what reliable sources say. If there is a source that anyone is not Jewish, that's another matter. Thus there are plenty of sources that Georg Cantor was Jewish. There are sources that he wasn't, so you have to balance their credibility.--Cato 18:20, 15 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My problem remains. By what criterion do you decide that someone is Jewish other than that reliable sources say that he is and no sources say explicitly that he isn't? To deduce that because he had a non-Jewish mother and wasn't a practising Jew, he wasn't Jewish when sources say that he was is clearly original research. And don't forget, we're not concerned with truth here, only verifiability.--Cato 20:47, 15 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Another thought - what if we define "Jewish" as someone described as Jewish, with a source, on Wikipedia? That would include Hammerstein but exclude Adam Mickiewicz.--Cato 20:55, 15 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Scream edit

You wrote:

I didn't remove your original stub tag on Scream by accident, I really thought it wasn't stubby anymore. For an average length feature, what's your ballpark threshold of quotes for destubification? --Ubiquity 18:11, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
And I did not mean to imply that you had just fixed it and run! I just thought, having seen the film, that that there were many more quotable lines to be found. Any film that only has two sets of dialogue looks to me to be still a stub - although I admit there's no hard and fast rule for how much should be there to allow removal of the stub tag. I may even return when I have a chance to add more to the page. ~ UDScott 18:18, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

You're in need of Dr. Tarr and Professor Fether. --Bill Hart 18:28, 21 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New Year's resolution edit

Happy New Year! One of my New Year's resolutions is to finish Wikiquote:Bartlett's 1919 Index - but I can't do it alone. There are 234 red links for which articles need to be created, and 275 blue links for which articles need to be checked. Although I've been trying to get one done each day, lately I have not had time to do even that! Please consider making a commitment to help me keep my resolution by creating or checking one entry on this page per week. Help public domain quotes find their home in 2008! Cheers! BD2412 T 05:00, 2 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re: Number of beast edit

It seems that Bible is only source for quotation for you! Bible says nothing about 666 except one turbid string! I've published cite from my article 666 because have received that information from prophecies but not from my thoughts! Could you please restore most clear quotation of my article?


Whats up with this: Delete Me? Tell me please!--Lolicon 18:08, 8 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your languages. edit

Hi. Do you speak polish? Prasuk talk to me 13:37, 10 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Posthumous vs. post-humus edit

Re: your recent edit... Who's to say that the two aren't mutual? I know after eating humus once I wanted to die. -- Greyed 01:46, 11 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

British Columbia edit

You posted a delete notice on this article. I have never entered to wikiquote before. Why? [[User:SriMesh|SriMesh]] | [[User talk:SriMesh|<small>talk</small>]] 03:58, 13 January 2008 (UTC) ~:Emily Carr the first few quotations are by a very internationally famous British Columbia painter, then the last quotes are by the current Premier about the Pacific Coast economic vitalisation plan, and there is the 2010 Olympics occuring in Vancouver, and Whistler B.C. which is also an international.[[User:SriMesh|SriMesh]] | [[User talk:SriMesh|<small>talk</small>]] 04:06, 13 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Judaism edit

I'm on the case!--Yehudi 22:12, 19 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Are we there yet? If you have the time, there's an excellent book on Google Books called Great Jewish Quotations By Alfred J. Kolatch, which is where I took the Lyman Abbott quote from.--Cato 13:30, 20 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Dasiy Bates" edit

I see that you were able to delete the article before I did. It turned out, by the way, to be a copyvio of this. - InvisibleSun 02:25, 24 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Proposed deletion ? edit

Hello..You've marked the page Lexmark Optra for deletion. I was wondering if you can help me understand how can I improve the page. I think it serves both as a comical and as an educational reference for a terrible error handling for electronic products. Thank you.

i would just like to say thanks edit

[[DMX Template:Rapper]] ty very much Ubiquity any help any time -- 16:42, 29 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rob Zombie edit

Hello. Would you be content with dropping the prod on Rob Zombie if I gave you my intent within the next couple weeks to flesh it out? I'm sure I can dig up a few decent quotes given his career as a musician and director. I just don't have the time at present. -- Greyed 19:27, 30 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, I guess. I certainly accept that he's notable, and that you'll do what you say. But the page as it stands is such a mess that I don't see what's gained by not just starting from scratch when you have the quotes. How about this compromise: you provide one or two decent quotes, they don't even have to be sourced, and I'll clean up the rest of the page and remove the prod. Then we can feel better about having a legitimate stub page, instead of an empty placeholder. Honestly, I would have done it myself if I had any appreciation for Zombie's music. So how about it? --Ubiquity 19:37, 30 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
True about restarting from scratch. I'll see what I can find in the next day or two. Let's leave the prod for now and if I find something prior to the expiration I'll clean up the page, get the quotes on there and remove the prod. Otherwise we can let it stand and I'll recreate later -- Greyed 19:42, 30 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the cite. I found that quote and thought it rather interesting that a guy famous for his love of B-grade horror flicks had said that. But the wife was pulling me off to do something else. I'll find a few more to flesh out the page a bit more. Hopefully something about his music as well. -- Greyed 05:37, 2 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply] & Rush edit

Uhm, has presented why he feels the quote should be removed on the Talk page. He agrees with my assessment that the quote is fundamentally not about anyone, it only uses the names to provide the humor. -- Greyed 01:22, 31 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Whoops, made my case on the talk page, won't reiterate here. However, isn't this something that BD2412's Wikiquote:Quotability proposal is supposed to address? So while it is not something that is against policy I do think there is friction here because while it is technically correct I think we all can feel that there's something amiss and we just can't quantify it. However, there seems to be a lack of willingness to discuss it which disheartens me.
Anyway, I am respecting your wishes to not do further reversions. I have tried to do the best I can in the situation, even going so far as following Aphaia's advice. I apologize for creating such a ruckus. -- Greyed 01:59, 31 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As I said, the reason the quote is not about Limbaugh is because, fundamentally, it is perfectly clear that it is an imaginary word picture, and not a statement about the man himself. When you start a statement with, “Doesn’t he remind you of…,” you have clearly gone away from fact, and on to the realm of imagination. For that reason, the quote does not belong under “Quotes about Limbaugh.” 09:04, 31 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Actually edit

some of the Black Kettle Quotes are from Dee Brown's "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee" but dunno how to site them.--Winn3317 17:51, 1 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Late KNXV/KTVK Tragedy comment edit

Here you said, 'A transcript of a tragedy is not a quotation. In fact, it's very unlikely to even include quotable quotations, because when people are in trouble they don't take the time to think up cool things to say, but instead say banal stuff like "Oh, shit!".' I know it is a bit late, I just stumbled on it, but I just have to say the following: "Oh, the humanity!"

(tongue firmly in cheek) -- Greyed 10:19, 6 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Admin edit

Hello, where is admin page? And Where is page to candidature for admin? And...DO you speak polish? Kasia1986 17:29, 9 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry,but I don't know:(Kasia1986 20:57, 9 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sledging edit

No worries, you gota do what you gota do--McNoddy 15:28, 13 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deletion of Indiana Jones and Kingdom of the Crystal Skull edit

Origanaly from User talk:WHLfan:

I appreciate your efforts in creating the page on Indiana Jones and Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, but I deleted it. Wikiquote policy does not allow quotations from forthcoming works. See Wikiquote:What Wikiquote is not, particularly the section "Wikiquote is not a crystal ball". --Ubiquity 20:51, 14 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

*The qoutes I used on that page your from the trailer, what wroung with that (in fact I have seen some pages with qoutes from trailers on Wikiquote)? WHLfan 20:56, 14 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I read Wikiquote:What Wikiquote is not, and the "Wikiquote is not a crystal ball" section says:

so quotes from and articles on these subjects are not acceptable unless there is a reliable publication previewing them.

Well there IS a reliable publication previewing them, and here it is:[2] WHLfan 21:20, 14 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

PROD policy edit

It seems you're right. I do find it rather surprising that we insist that only an admin can close a VfD keep but we allow anyone to close a PROD keep. I have apologised.--Cato 19:57, 17 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Transwiki edit

You'd do well to check my Wikipedia contribs. See this. Will {talk) 14:44, 8 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I mean, that's exactly how the page was on Wikipedia. At the time I didn't know there was a Picasso article. Will {talk) 17:06, 8 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
[Posted to both User talk:Sceptre and User talk:Ubiquity] … FYI, the process to transwiki into Wikiquote is described in detail at Help:Transwiki. It is completely appropriate for a transwikier to copy quote material from a Wikipedia article into a page called "Transwiki:name of article". (I probably would have used "Transwiki:Pablo Picasso" instead of Transwiki:Quotations by Pablo Picasso based on the likely destination page, but using the WP article title also makes perfect sense. It's a temporary page anyway and is in the Transwiki: space primarily so that the transfer process does not have to be completed by someone who may not know the policies and guidelines of the target project.) While Will did log its transfer from WP, he did not log its transfer to WQ in Transwiki per our policy (which follows Wikimedia-wide practice per m:Help:Transwiki). This informs people from both projects where articles are coming from and going to. (Some projects delete their logs after the transwiki is completed; we leave ours for future reference, as one never knows when someone might wonder what happened to their pet article.)
What is supposed to happen on the destination end is that a Wikiquotian will notice either the log entry or the new addition to Category:Move into Wikiquote. (That assumes the WP "Copy to Wikiquote" template is changed to {{Move to Wikiquote}}, which was not done here. I notice that our help page doesn't specify this step. Either I forgot to add that requirement, or WP's practice changed from using the template we still specify to using something that no longer works here. A redirect should fix that problem.) Anyway, the receiving Wikiquotian then decides whether to move, merge, or delete the incoming transwiki. Will did nothing wrong in leaving the merge to another editor.
Many editors bypass all the formalities and simply copy the material from WP to WQ. This is very bad and should be discouraged vehemently. It violates GFDL by providing no clear credit, link, or even association with the originating article. In the past year or so, we've tried to cut corners by at least mandating the inclusion of an unlabeled link back to the WP article (e.g., "w:Quotations by Pablo Picasso") in the edit summary (or on the discussion page if the copying editor forgets this step). Will did not do this, either, so there is no record on Wikiquote of where this page came from. We must have either the log or the edit-summary link as a very minimum record. NOTE, however, that if the transwikied material is an article that may be deleted, as this one was, this shortcut link is not appropriate, because the edit history will be lost to the general public when the source article is deleted. In these cases, one must provide a copy of the source article's edit history on the discussion page of the Transwiki page, which will then need to be transferred to the discussion pages of any articles that receive merged information. (If the Transwiki: page is simply deleted — and logged as deleted at Transwiki! — this is not necessary, just as it is not necessary to have a public record of contributions to any ordinary deleted article.)
It's now possible for some editors to export and import material between projects, which provides proper links and/or credits without much of the hassle of transwiki. I'm afraid I've been too distracted to investigate and document this, but Jusjih has been working on this recently.
Ubiquity says this material came from another website. That's good WQ detective work, but the misunderstading might have been avoided or lessened if he'd had the log to see that it was from WP and not this other website that Will transferred the material. However, it is not the responsibility of the transwikier to determine whether the transwikied material is acceptable to the project. We have the two-step process precisely to allow the destination project to make that determination, as Ubiquity did by finding that the WP material appears to be merely a copy of another website. (Even when the transwikier is a Wikiquotian, too, as Will is, one should consider that the transwiki process is enough of a bear not to expect them to do the full process at once. Of course, we have a serious backlog of material to finish transwikiing, but that's just one of our many backlogs.)
Ubiquity, in completing the transwiki, also failed either to log the transwiki completion or to credit the originating WP article in any edit summary, instead noting the apparent origin of the WP material. Technically, even this violates GFDL, as it fails to credit the WP editor(s) even if their work is borrowed. (One might ultimately determine they have no right to a copyright of their contributions, but it's a lot harder to work that out than just to add the article pointer or log the darn transfer and let others worry about the legal issues.)
I don't want to sound too critical about this. Most transwiki work that I've seen on Wikimedia projects, at least that done by non-bots, is horrendously improper. It's so bad that it could be used as an argument by Wikimedia copyright violators that we don't take our own licensing policies seriously, so why should they? But that won't change unless we read the instructions, improve them where needed, and follow them whenever possible.
My lack of participation in this work in the past 2 years has certainly contributed to these ongoing problems, which is one of many reasons I'm hoping to hand over some responsibilities that I think others would like to do. Meanwhile, I'd be happy to answer questions about this. Despite this critical review, I would like to thank you both for trying to get this right, which is more than most editors do. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 18:23, 8 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
By the way, I finished the formal transwiki by copying the edit history from Talk:Transwiki:Quotations by Pablo Picasso to Talk:Pablo Picasso#Wikipedia transwiki (in a slightly different format that adds WP links to the users to avoid confusion w/ possibly different WQ users), deleted the transwiki talk page, and logged the 3-part transfer (well, 2 steps with 3 pages involved) at Transwiki#Articles moved into Wikiquote. I'm afraid it's not hard to see why so many folks prefer to avoid this process. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 03:46, 9 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

German->English translation edit

Do you know anyone who is willing to translate German to English? Where can I find one? WhisperToMe 23:04, 11 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hoagy Carmichael song title edit

If that song title is such a great quote, why not add it to the Hoagy Carmichael article?

And if you have a chance, can you correct the Wikipedia article? I pulled out some songs from that article with lyrics allegedly by Carmichael himself, but several of them in fact had lyrics by others.--Poetlister 23:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re:Dziady Translations edit

Hello Ubiquity. So - I think your translation is better than me translation, so you add to Adam Mickiewicz article. Thanks:) And Happy Easter Prasuk talk to me 16:28, 20 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks edit

I'll try and remember these Ubiquity. Its a case of trial and error I suppose but I'll ttry my best to do it right from now on--McNoddy 12:38, 31 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Templates edit

Hello Ubiquity, what is Your knowledge about create templates? And can you do polish template: [3] from Polish Wikipedia? I asked you, because I can weak create templates... Kasia1986 21:03, 2 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks, and you wrote on my talk page: "I might need help with the Polish" - do you want help with Polish, with me as Your Polish teacher? If you would like help with Polish and with me as Your teacher your best bet is my e-mail adress KatLos at interia dot pl. And have you internet communicator? Kasia1986 07:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm sorry I forgot. Can you gold backcloth on my userpage? (Only backcloth will be gold) Kasia1986 07:25, 3 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Official propose. edit

Hello Ubiquity are you want become bureacruat on EN-Wikiquotes? Prasuk talk to me 07:34, 6 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks, that you answered on me question. Now I have question for you: How many editions I must have, to I become an administrator here? And what you think about me as future admin (probably long future). Prasuk talk to me 12:09, 7 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks again. And if I'd vote on Votes for deletion, can I on my userpage write "This user is an inclusjonist philosophy"? I think that it information in context votes for deletion will be very important, what you think? Prasuk talk to me 12:47, 7 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If I would step out on RFA, give you me your support? Prasuk talk to me 12:39, 12 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

VfD on Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War edit

I am closing this VfD as a keep. Would you be able to implement your excellent idea to contact those registered users who have edited it? Thanks.--Poetlister 12:14, 10 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Error on call to Template:cite web: Parameters url and title must be specified. edit

Hi, Ubiquity, hows it going. I just wanted to tell you that am unsure on how to use this {[cite web]} thing and didn't want you thinking that I just brushed your advise aside.--McNoddy 09:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

VFD edit

Hi Ubiquity, why was my VFD considered inappropriate? I would like to have that page deleted because of Googles indexing. There was no content on that page anyway. I use this account only to save it from appearing on Google. Please delete! Thank you! -- M. M. 09:05, 18 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It was inappropriate because it's not the sort of thing that requires a vote for deletion. I'm sorry that I didn't realize what you wanted though. The Speedy Deletion requests you made worked though. --Ubiquity 11:38, 18 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Once Were Warriors edit

Hello. I declined the prod because it's a known film. If you want to VfD it on the grounds of poor quotes, I might agree, but the prod didn't seem justified. Please feel free to disagree; I'm still a beginner!--Yehudi 06:39, 23 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A Request edit

Hello, Ubiquity. Have you got an global account? I'm asking because...The Polish Wikimedia would like close Polish wikiquotes, and I'd like please you about help in this sytuation. So, would you can leave your opinion in polish Village pump? Regards, Prasuk talk to me 00:23, 1 November 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikiquote interlanguage communication edit

Hi, I'm Nemo from the Italian language Wikiquote and I'm writing you (via a bot) because you're an administrator of Wikiquote in this language; please excuse me if you've received this message more than once.
The simple thing that I want you to know is that Wikiquote has an official mailing list, Wikiquote-l, which can be used to communicate and discuss matters which interest all Wikiquotes. This mailing list was last "advertised" about three or four years ago, before many of us joined Wikiquote, and is currently almost not participated at all by Wikiquote users and very low-traffic. I ask you to subscribe, to participate in discussions and to write about your Wikiquote.
I love Wikiquote, as you probably do, and I think that we should be proud of what we do here, share our experiences and good practices to make Wikiquote better and raise awareness of it.
I remind you that Meta-Wiki is the best place for Wikimedia projects coordination, and it contains several pages about Wikiquote, and specifically this talk page which can be used to discuss about Wikiquote if you don't like mailing lists.
I hope that this message has been useful for you. Cheers, Nemo (write me) 10:12, 14 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Japanese poets edit

Risto hot sir has requested that I ask the community about what should be done regarding the numerous articles listed under Category:Japanese poets. You will know what I mean after you read a few and start to see the trend. They are all a possible copyright violation, they are all of non-notable people who don't even have a Wikipedia article, they are all from one source and they all clog up this category. You can read more about this here, here, here, and here. Just A Regular New Yorker (talk) 22:54, 13 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree with you. A page based on the book would be better, and without every single one of them. Ubiquity (talk) 02:01, 14 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Even so, wouldn’t it be a copyright violation? I say we just nominate all 102 articles for speedy deletion on the basis of copyright violation and lack of information about the poet. At the very least, we should add a dated prod to them. What do you think? Just A Regular New Yorker (talk) 02:36, 14 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, copyright violation... On a per-poet basis, copying a few lines to Wikiquote seems like fair use. Copying an entire book is more onerous. Perhaps that's why Risto hot sir did it this way in the first place. We would definitely have to be more selective if we put them all in one place. But that's probably good. Ubiquity (talk) 15:55, 14 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Remove boldface from most "Last words" edit

Hello. Can you please weigh in and give your opinion at Wikiquote:Village pump#Boldface in all "last words"? There, I'm proposing to remove boldface from most quotes in Last words, Fictional last words, and their subpages. Details and reasons are given in the discussion itself. Thanks in advance. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 17:49, 18 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply] edit (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log). This anonymous user has added multiple articles that contain only advertising spam with no actual quotes. Please block him. J.A.R.N.Y🗣‬ 22:34, 18 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Looks like you found someone else before I saw this. Fine with me. Ubiquity (talk) 02:23, 19 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request edit

Can you bring here on wikiquote from wikipedia? I have requirement for that template and no one created it here on this project. Harsh Rathod 11:45, 19 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll give it a try. I've never moved a template before. Ubiquity (talk) 20:46, 19 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thankyou, I don't have much knowledge about Template namespace. That's why I fear tweaking them. OTOH, I don't like my edits being undone. 😏 Harsh Rathod 07:18, 20 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

diff: That was part of the title, it wasn't like I was advertising the film. Harsh Rathod 07:52, 20 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nobody likes to have their edits undone. OTOH, I'm sure none of us like to violate Wikiquote policy by including commercial content in our work. Even if (and to me that's a really big "if") "The Bad man and his wise words. Watch him in theaters near you, book your tickets now: http://m.p-y.tm/phat Urvashi Rautela Karan Wahi Gulshan Grover Ihana Dhillon Vivan Bhathena T-Series Film" is the title, we don't provide commercial advertisement on WikiQuote, and the second part of that phrase is clearly commercial advertisement. And it's not as if this were a serious article you were referencing -- it's an advertisement from Facebook. Please see Wikiquote:Sourcing for examples of appropriate sources. Ubiquity (talk) 10:14, 20 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No other reference is available other than that. So I had to cite the facebook post. Harsh Rathod 17:01, 22 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request for comment on User:MonsterHunter32's massive censorship of sourced quotes without discussion edit

I am asking the community to comment about this problem that I have already alerted about here Talk:India#Censorship_of_sourced_quotes_by_User:MonsterHunter32 and at other places, but it didn't help. What should be done about the continued massive removal of sourced quotes by MonsterHunter32 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) when he refuses to even move the quotes to the talkpage with full reasoning for each quote as was asked by multiple users many many times? You can read more about it at the link above, and at the other discussions linked in that discussion. --Jedi3 (talk) 12:31, 24 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks, but other admins seem to be involved. Too many cooks, etc. - Ubiquity (talk) 12:41, 24 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The user User:Jedi3 is only engaged in POV-pushing and adding statements just so they agree with his view. He doesn't care if his claims are made up like he did at Sikandar Butshikan, indirectly admitting to verbatim to verbatrim copying from Wikipedia before checking the source. Or making up a false reason to remove a quote at Muslim conquest of the Indian subcontinent. Or he keeps making up his quotes eloquent, poignant, witty etc despite the "quotes" not even falling at all within the definition. He does this just to have his edits there at all costs. I've told him several times about this including here.

He falsely keeps saying I'm censoring him when all I've done is remove those quotes which arenb't notable in any manner. Not those which are notable and i've preserved many of the quotes he has added. also removed the subsection of my complaint here. He himself censors me here and here in the past.

I've warned him several times including here, here and here. He doesn't listen and has removed my comments several times from his talk page.

Not to mention this person has also insulted me by terming me annoying after another user called me so, besides also calling me a vandal, when he himself can be indicted for edit-warring and vandalism. please block this user. I've been trying to cooperate with him, but it is clear he only wants his ideology imposed here. Their is no bar on any person of any ideology, even though Wikiquote is about neutrality but he doesn't care about anything and is being unprofessional.  and it is clear he doesn't care what he does to get his edits here at all costs.

Right after his block expired, Jedi3 is back at edit-warring before even waiting for a discussion and made 3 reverts at 3 articles. See his recent reverts, here, a sly attempt to befool others in edit summary at Aurangzeb of "article under construction", at Malabar rebellion. He proceeded to make additional subtractions and additions at Aurangzeb, even though a revrt is a revrt wheter partial or complete. He is trying to fool others. And just after his block expired, he has started edit-warring again and made three reverts. It is clear he has no intention to stop disruption and edit-war. I haven't opposed any dialogue, but he should stop his edit-warring. But it is clear he won't. Please block him. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 14:06, 24 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm sorry, but didn't you yourself post to Wikiquote:Administrators' noticeboard about this? Yet in the five paragraphs you wrote above you don't mention this. As I said, other people are dealing with this, and trying to get more people involved won't help. - Ubiquity (talk) 16:01, 26 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your advanced permissions on Wikiquote edit

Hello. A policy regarding the removal of "advanced rights" (administrator, bureaucrat, interface administrator, etc.) was adopted by community consensus in 2013. According to this policy, the stewards are reviewing activity on wikis with no inactivity policy.

You meet the inactivity criteria (no edits and no logged actions for 2 years) on this wiki. Since this wiki, to the best of our knowledge, does not have its own rights review process, the global one applies.

If you want to keep your advanced permissions, you should inform the community of the wiki about the fact that the stewards have sent you this information about your inactivity. A community notice about this process has been also posted on the local Village Pump of this wiki. If the community has a discussion about it and then wants you to keep your rights, please contact the stewards at the m:Stewards' noticeboard, and link to the discussion of the local community, where they express their wish to continue to maintain the rights.

If you wish to resign your rights, please request removal of your rights on Meta.

If there is no response at all after one month, stewards will proceed to remove your administrator and/or bureaucrat rights. In ambiguous cases, stewards will evaluate the responses and will refer a decision back to the local community for their comment and review. If you have any questions, please contact the stewards.

Yours faithfully.

--Defender (talk) 18:30, 23 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, today I removed your admin flag. Einsbor (talk) 08:21, 23 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK. I can hardly say I've been using it. Ubiquity (talk) 10:30, 23 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please come back edit

Please do come back after a break, it would be devastating to lose you :-(. Wikiquote needs you. Hope you're back soon. -- ~ #SheSaid 11:53, 28 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]