Wikiquote:Village pump

Community portal Welcome

Reference desk Request an article

Village pump Archives

Administrators' noticeboard Report vandalism • Votes for deletion

Wikiquote discussion pages (edit) see also: requests
Village pump comment | history | archive General policy discussions and proposals, requests for permissions and major announcements.	Reference desk comment | history | archive Questions and discussions about specific quotes.

Archives

Welcome, newcomers and baffled oldtimers! This is the place if you (a) have a question about Wikiquote and how it works or (b) a suggestion for improving Wikiquote. Just click the link above "create a new topic", and then you can place your submission at the bottom of the list, and someone will attempt to answer it for you. (If you have a question about who said what, go to the reference desk instead.)

Before asking a question, check if it's answered by the Wikiquote:FAQ or other pages linked from Wikiquote:Help. Latest news on the project would be available at Wikiquote:Community portal and Wikiquote:Announcements.

Before answering a newcomer's question abruptly, consider rereading Please do not bite the newcomers.

Questions and answers will not remain on this page indefinitely (otherwise it would very soon become too long to be editable). After a period of time with no further activity, information will be moved to other relevant sections of Wikiquote, (such as the FAQ pages) or placed in one of the village pump archives if it is of general interest, or deleted. Please consider dating and titling your discussions so as to facilitate this.

---

Wikiquote:Wiki-sisters

What is up with this page, it seems like it doesn't meet notability guidelines. CensoredScribe (talk) 17:05, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

It's in the Wikiquote namespace and shouldn't be categorized with standard entries. Thanks for mentioning it here. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:10, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Why do we even have a page for it at all though? It says the page is humorous, but it has an about section and normally having to explain jokes means they aren't very funny. CensoredScribe (talk) 18:21, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Frankly, I agree. There's no reason for this page to exist. — FPTI (talk) 23:02, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Is wheel reverting really just as simple as three strikes in 24 hours and you're out?

These are survey questions about an informal policy and there is no wrong or right answer. I would appreciate anyone's answer but particularly those of administrators who have implemented blocks for this reason.
How many times do you think an editor can revert someone before a block is justified? Is the answer different depending on what the page is and who the editors involved are? Is this something an administrator has ever been blocked for doing, if so, I would like to see some links. Does it matter how spaced out the reversions are? I've heard somewhere before that 3 revisions in 24 hours is too many, but what about just 1 revision every day, endlessly? I don't think endlessly undoing edits on your own is a particularly good use of anyone's time, because you could at least make it a team effort to try to demonstrate you are on the right side of the community's consensus, however I'd like to know what is allowed and what isn't and whether it's any more complicated than three strikes and you're out. CensoredScribe (talk) 15:26, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm inclined to no more than 3RR in a page, unless you are reverting vandalism. While in fact, I'm even oppose edit warring with vandals, since your time is priceless. -‎Lemonaka‎ 13:23, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Introducing Let’s Connect

Hello Wikiquote editors,

I hope that you are in good spirits. My name is Anthony Diaz and I am a part of the Let’s Connect working group - a team of movement contributors/organizers and liaisons for 7 regions : MENA | South Asia | East, South East Asia, Pacific | Sub-Saharan Africa | Central & Eastern Europe | Northern & Western | Latina America.

Why are we outreaching to you?

Wikimedia has 18 projects, and 17 that are solely run by the community, other than the Wikimedia Foundation. We want to hear from sister projects that some of us in the movement are not too familiar with and would like to know more about. We always want to hear from Wikipedia, but we also want to meet and hear from the community members in other sister projects too. We would like to hear your story and learn about the work you and your community do. You can review our past learning clinics here.

We want to invite community members who are:

• Part of an organized group, official or not
• A formally recognized affiliate or not
• An individual who will bring their knowledge back to their community
• An individual who wants to train others in their community on the learnings they received from the learning clinics.

To participate as a sharer and become a member of the Let’s Connect community you can sign up through this registration form.

Once you have registered, if you are interested, you can get to know the team via google meets or zoom to brainstorm an idea for a potential learning clinic about Wikiquote or just say hello and meet the team. Please email us at letsconnect@wikimedia.org . We look forward to hearing from you :)

Best,

Anthony Diaz

Let’s Connect Working Group Member

Kunokuno (talk) 01:48, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

How about a more compact section for linking to other projects?

See: Wikisource:Author:Edgar Allan Poe for compact links to the other projects that have entries on Poe. If you scroll to the bottom at Wikisource you can see it has the "Authority control" template "Authority control|wikidata=######" will allow Wikidata to automatically link to Wikiquote. Here at Wikiquote Edgar_Allan_Poe, the links to other projects take up a lot of room at the bottom, they would be better and be more compact at the top like at Wikisource. What do you think? RAN (talk) 23:08, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

Now this is contrary to the spirit of Wikipedia.

In 2012, an anonymous user recreated the page Russian proverbs. The tiny problem is that while doing so, he used a significant portion of an earlier revision of that page which (the page, that is) was seemingly deleted at an earlier time, to which many other people (including yours truly) have previously contributed; but in the process of such recreation, the names of these participants were lost to the void, so now it looks like the entirety of that page was created by that user, although for example they include see some things that I personally added, like, in 2006. Such destruction of the edit history, and thus erasure of contributor's names, is contrary to the spirit of Wikipedia. Let's discuss this matter. -- Wesha (talk) 00:17, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

There are, in fact, over 1,000 deleted edits. @UDScott: deleted the page in 2011 because it was unsourced. UD, since this page is now sourced, would you object to undeleting these revs?

As a secondary issue, it seems like this is all sourced to a single source. While it may not be obvious, you can have a copyright on the arrangement and collection of quotations from others, so as someone who has not seen the source material, is this page infringing on that copyright? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:24, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

It's not like I claim "copyright" of these edits, as we all obviouly leave any "copy" rights it at the door when we edit Wikipedia, but I am just saying that it is a very least not good manners to take creaion of somebody else and put it under one's own name — without the actual creator's name associated with it: it's colloquially known as "plagiarsm". -- Wesha (talk) 06:57, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

So, what do you want us to do? -‎Lemonaka‎ 13:22, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

I'm not suggesting that you are claiming someone else's copyright. What I'm saying is, we cannot break a copyright here and the arrangement, translation, etc. of quotations can itself be copyrighted. I'm no legal expert, nor have I seen the original source, so it's not obvious to me that it's inappropriate, but it could be. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 14:33, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

@Wesha:

How would you feel if the page was recreated from scratch instead of using its previous content? I am asking because I am frequently faced with this dilemma when I try to add a new page and am told that I (paraphrasing) should think carefully about recreating a page that was previously deleted.

What would you do if you were in my shoes? I realize this does not answer your question, but I feel that an answer to your question must address problems inherent at several levels of the operation of this site. For example: why have the previous responders to your question after more than 3 days on the village pump been administrators only? Is this discussion forum meant for the community at large or are admins the only ones permitted to post their opinions?

The deletion log of Russian proverbs says this:

• 01:43, 28 December 2011 UDScott talk contribs deleted page Russian proverbs (Proposed deletion: No sourced quotes)

so why was this page deleted without a VFD discussion?

That is all I have to say on this matter, since I do not wish to be considered "disruptive". I hope I (together with my autocomplete) am/are making sense. Cheers, Ottawahitech (talk) 19:36, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Regarding this comment by @Ottawahitech, perhaps you should read the Wikiquote:Proposed deletion page to better understand the proposed deletion process. Not every page needs a VFD prior to its deletion. A PROD tag is placed on a page when it has an issue (there is a list of possible reasons for this, outlined on the policy page) and other users may correct the problem or even dispute it and remove the tag (after which it could then proceed to the VFD process, if the problem still exists). ~ UDScott (talk) 00:41, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

I don't really know how to solve this connundrum, but I can tell with an absolute certainty that on the current (or at least the current as of the moment of me writing the original comment) version of the page are certain centences that I personally typed back in 2002'ish, that are no longer attributed to me, but to some anonymous user. If I know a thing or two, taking somebody else's brainchild verbatim (to the letter) and putting one's name on it is called "plagiarism" and is generally frowned upon. I don't have a good idea of solution at this moment -- but that's precisely why I am here: so we all can have a discussion. -- Wesha (talk) 19:45, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Now that I think about it, given that the page was competely deleted and then re-created, it would be fair to undelete all the old revisions, so the original edits (from which the anonimous user made the newly re-created page) along with their authors' information would be visible to the public again. That way, both the edit history and original authorship information are preserved, and the current look of the page remains exactly the way it is right now. I think it's a good middle ground. -- Wesha (talk) 07:29, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Y Done —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:46, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

question about content removal at the English wikiquote

Since I joined enwq in 2020 I have contributed over 20,000 "edits" to the project according to xtools. Almost 17,000 have been to content, but I have also participated in various talk spaces (VP, AN, VFD, UTP, and more). However, I still have not figured out whose "edits" I am permitted to undo. Am I permitted to undo edits of enwq-admins? Ottawahitech (talk) 23:55, 27 December 2024 (UTC)