Wikiquote

Wikiquote:Village pump archive 63

Archive
Archives

Congratulations!

edit

“Wikiquote by now has become a reputable source - at least the English version.” (Originally: „Wikiquote ist inzwischen eine seriöse Quelle geworden – jedenfalls die englische Version, ...“) w:de:Gerald Krieghofer in Der Spiegel (This article is for subscribers only; however, I can provide gift links to the first three people asking for it.) SebastianHelm (talk) 21:35, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, nice find, Sebastian! Good work on all us. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:57, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Creation of new templates

edit

I don't think it's very controversial, but I wanted to give a heads up to the community that I've been creating a new kind of navigational templates that act as headers to navigate at the top of sequences of articles, such as {{South Park header}}, {{SpongeBob header}}, and {{The Simpsons header}}. This replaces text that was copied and pasted repeatedly in articles and I think it's nice if we keep the formatting consistent across these. I don't care that much how it looks as such, but if they look similar, I think that's preferable. Any feedback is welcome. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:45, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating the new navigational templates. Consistency in formatting is a good idea. I've checked them out and they look good to me. Let's keep up the collaborative effort! Saroj (talk) 17:29, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Danielle Jahnke

edit

I don't think Danielle Jahnke is notable. Alextejthompson (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 20:00, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed - I've proposed it for deletion. ~ UDScott (talk) 20:48, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Rfa, if you want to participate

edit

Ottawahitech recently suggested announcing any new Request for Adminship here, so that more people have a chance for input. I have been active here for a few years, creating some content and doing some cleanup. We are a small wiki, so I am offering to pick up a mop to help out with the admin chores. If you want to ask questions or voice opinions, here is the page: Wikiquote:Requests_for_adminship/HouseOfChange. Thanks for being part of this great project. HouseOfChange (talk) 16:22, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Last days to vote on the Charter for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee

edit
You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Hello all,

I am reaching out to you today to remind you that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) charter will close on 2 February 2024. Community members may cast their vote and provide comments about the charter via SecurePoll. Those of you who voiced your opinions during the development of the UCoC Enforcement Guidelines will find this process familiar.

The current version of the U4C charter is on Meta-wiki with translations available.

Read the charter, go vote and share this note with others in your community. I can confidently say the U4C Building Committee looks forward to your participation.

On behalf of the UCoC Project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 17:00, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IMPORTANT: Admin activity review

edit

Hello. A policy regarding the removal of "advanced rights" (administrator, bureaucrat, interface administrator, etc.) was adopted by global community consensus in 2013. According to this policy, the stewards are reviewing administrators' activity on all Wikimedia Foundation wikis with no inactivity policy. To the best of our knowledge, your wiki does not have a formal process for removing "advanced rights" from inactive accounts. This means that the stewards will take care of this according to the admin activity review.

We have determined that the following users meet the inactivity criteria (no edits and no logged actions for more than 2 years):

  1. Pmlineditor (administrator)

These users will receive a notification soon, asking them to start a community discussion if they want to retain some or all of their rights. If the users do not respond, then their advanced rights will be removed by the stewards.

However, if you as a community would like to create your own activity review process superseding the global one, want to make another decision about these inactive rights holders, or already have a policy that we missed, then please notify the stewards on Meta-Wiki so that we know not to proceed with the rights review on your wiki.

Thanks, Superpes15 (talk) 15:57, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Announcing the results of the UCoC Coordinating Committee Charter ratification vote

edit
You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Dear all,

Thank you everyone for following the progress of the Universal Code of Conduct. I am writing to you today to announce the outcome of the ratification vote on the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee Charter. 1746 contributors voted in this ratification vote with 1249 voters supporting the Charter and 420 voters not. The ratification vote process allowed for voters to provide comments about the Charter.

A report of voting statistics and a summary of voter comments will be published on Meta-wiki in the coming weeks.

Please look forward to hearing about the next steps soon.

On behalf of the UCoC Project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 18:24, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Flood flag

edit

I propose the creation of a new user group, "flood flag," on English Wikiquote to prevent repetitive changes from flooding the RecentChanges feed. This will streamline the feed and enhance the user experience for contributors. Saroj (talk) 03:20, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The group can be added by sysops and removed by sysops and the users themselves. --Saroj (talk) 17:47, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Saroj, There is no consensus for Fabricator Task T351250 which you started merely two days after posting here. Can you please cancel it until such time that there is proper wq:consensus.
Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 03:31, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Tracked in Phabricator
Task T351250

Comments

edit

According to fabricator this proposal has received community consensus?

edit
Tracked in Phabricator
Task T351250

According to today's version of the Phabricator (see link to the right), there is consensus by this community to add a flood gate:

  • "The English Wikiquote community has discussed enabling a flood flag user group. Here is the consensus of the community. The group can be added by sysops and removed by sysops and the users themselves."

How can this be true when I can clearly see 2 Opposes? Where is consensus defined?


Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 21:17, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would share your concern that this topic is really not yet decided. But in reading further on the page, I see that the ticket is not currently closed, but rather has been moved from Stalled back to Open, so I believe the discussion can continue. ~ UDScott (talk) 12:15, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Report of the U4C Charter ratification and U4C Call for Candidates now available

edit
You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Hello all,

I am writing to you today with two important pieces of information. First, the report of the comments from the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) Charter ratification is now available. Secondly, the call for candidates for the U4C is open now through April 1, 2024.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members are invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Per the charter, there are 16 seats on the U4C: eight community-at-large seats and eight regional seats to ensure the U4C represents the diversity of the movement.

Read more and submit your application on Meta-wiki.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 16:25, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Canada survey

edit

Hi! Wikimedia Canada invites contributors living in Canada to take part in our 2024 Community Survey. The survey takes approximately five minutes to complete and closes on March 31, 2024. It is available in both French and English. To learn more, please visit the survey project page on Meta. Chelsea Chiovelli (WMCA) (talk) 00:16, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are song lyrics allowed?

edit

Hey folks, new guy here ... I looked through "What Wikiquote is/is not" and didn't see it mentioned, so I'm asking here: May song lyrics be included as quotations? I hope so; I just added a few lines from Pink Floyd's song "Time" to this Category article. If it's not OK, please just revert, no hard feelings. Also, I wrestled with the formatting without much success ... if anyone can fix/improve the way this entry appears, please do, and if necessary, tell me how it should be done. Thanks! Yesthatbruce (talk) 03:59, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, song lyrics are the same in principle as other material that is likely to be copyrighted, so please just make sure that you're sticking to actually quotable lyrics and not just copy/pasting everything from the Internet indiscriminately. Happy to have you, B. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:15, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply. Will do re copyright; it's important. And I now realize that I was looking at a Category page, as opposed to a page about a person, such as Bob Dylan, whose page includes trillions of lyrics. Duh. Yesthatbruce (talk) 12:47, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hindsight is 20/20. I appreciate anyone brave enough to ask a good faith question on the Internet. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 13:30, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees 2024 Selection

edit
You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.
More languages • Please help translate to your language

Dear all,

This year, the term of 4 (four) Community- and Affiliate-selected Trustees on the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees will come to an end [1]. The Board invites the whole movement to participate in this year’s selection process and vote to fill those seats.

The Elections Committee will oversee this process with support from Foundation staff [2]. The Board Governance Committee created a Board Selection Working Group from Trustees who cannot be candidates in the 2024 community- and affiliate-selected trustee selection process composed of Dariusz Jemielniak, Nataliia Tymkiv, Esra'a Al Shafei, Kathy Collins, and Shani Evenstein Sigalov [3]. The group is tasked with providing Board oversight for the 2024 trustee selection process, and for keeping the Board informed. More details on the roles of the Elections Committee, Board, and staff are here [4].

Here are the key planned dates:

  • May 2024: Call for candidates and call for questions
  • June 2024: Affiliates vote to shortlist 12 candidates (no shortlisting if 15 or less candidates apply) [5]
  • June-August 2024: Campaign period
  • End of August / beginning of September 2024: Two-week community voting period
  • October–November 2024: Background check of selected candidates
  • Board's Meeting in December 2024: New trustees seated

Learn more about the 2024 selection process - including the detailed timeline, the candidacy process, the campaign rules, and the voter eligibility criteria - on this Meta-wiki page, and make your plan.

Election Volunteers

Another way to be involved with the 2024 selection process is to be an Election Volunteer. Election Volunteers are a bridge between the Elections Committee and their respective community. They help ensure their community is represented and mobilize them to vote. Learn more about the program and how to join on this Meta-wiki page.

Best regards,

Dariusz Jemielniak (Governance Committee Chair, Board Selection Working Group)

[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2021/Results#Elected

[2] https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Committee:Elections_Committee_Charter

[3] https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Minutes:2023-08-15#Governance_Committee

[4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections_committee/Roles

[5] Even though the ideal number is 12 candidates for 4 open seats, the shortlisting process will be triggered if there are more than 15 candidates because the 1-3 candidates that are removed might feel ostracized and it would be a lot of work for affiliates to carry out the shortlisting process to only eliminate 1-3 candidates from the candidate list.

MPossoupe_(WMF)19:57, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Include a Quote

edit

Good afternoon,

A former teacher of mine, Ramon A. Qeuevedo, that worked at Bebensee Elementary in Arlington, TX would say, "Of course you don't know it, it is called learning. if you knew it, it would be called review.". or "of course you don't know it, it is called learning. if you already knew it, it would be called review." I see that one version of this quote is listed in Quotepark.com and the quote is attributed to him. What can I do to include the quote here?

Thank you, Gabby Estrada 1gabbyestrada (talk) 20:30, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Global ban proposal for Slowking4

edit

Hello. This is to notify the community that there is an ongoing global ban proposal for User:Slowking4 who has been active on this wiki. You are invited to participate at m:Requests for comment/Global ban for Slowking4 (2). Thank you. Seawolf35 (talk) 19:42, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your wiki will be in read-only soon

edit

Read this message in another language • Please help translate to your language

The Wikimedia Foundation will switch the traffic between its data centers. This will make sure that Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia wikis can stay online even after a disaster.

All traffic will switch on 20 March. The test will start at 14:00 UTC.

Unfortunately, because of some limitations in MediaWiki, all editing must stop while the switch is made. We apologize for this disruption, and we are working to minimize it in the future.

You will be able to read, but not edit, all wikis for a short period of time.

  • You will not be able to edit for up to an hour on Wednesday 20 March 2024.
  • If you try to edit or save during these times, you will see an error message. We hope that no edits will be lost during these minutes, but we can't guarantee it. If you see the error message, then please wait until everything is back to normal. Then you should be able to save your edit. But, we recommend that you make a copy of your changes first, just in case.

Other effects:

  • Background jobs will be slower and some may be dropped. Red links might not be updated as quickly as normal. If you create an article that is already linked somewhere else, the link will stay red longer than usual. Some long-running scripts will have to be stopped.
  • We expect the code deployments to happen as any other week. However, some case-by-case code freezes could punctually happen if the operation require them afterwards.
  • GitLab will be unavailable for about 90 minutes.
This project may be postponed if necessary. You can read the schedule at wikitech.wikimedia.org. Any changes will be announced in the schedule. There will be more notifications about this. A banner will be displayed on all wikis 30 minutes before this operation happens. Please share this information with your community.

Trizek (WMF), 00:00, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Caption text is small compared to text in rest of article

edit

Any idea how I can fix that? On the page Victor L Berger.

Thanks, IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 06:35, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The caption on the image is the standard size. It can be modified with CSS, but why is that necessary? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:52, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just seems much too small,[1] no? IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 08:31, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is a little tiny. Is it smaller than (e.g.) en.wp? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:00, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Paid editing is something I would like to know the definition of and how it differs from receiving financial benefit. For example, if you make residuals from having worked on a film, would it be paid editing to make changes to the wikiquote page for that film? If you work for a corporation isn't it a conflict of interest if you added nothing but negative quotes to the page for that corporation's main competitor? What if you're the mayor of a city, can you make edits to the page for that city? What if a family member benefits financially from your edits, like a mayor that benefits from the work of their child editing about their city, it seems pretty extreme to forbid people from editing certain topics because of circumstances beyond their control. Does being imprisoned for your edits count as a form of payment, it does result in food and shelter you might not otherwise have? If jail somehow counts as a form of payment than wouldn't being a slave count as paid editing?
From my present, largely uninformed, point of view a strict definition of paid editing would effectively prevent scientists from writing about their areas of expertise and it would prevent most government employees from writing about pretty much anything, because it seems like pretty much everything has become politicized at this point. Is Wikiquote supposed to be like how the Olympics used to be, where only amateur athletes but not professional athletes were allowed to compete?
Also doesn't reporting someone getting paid for editing require evidence of their identity, which means by reporting them you are doxing them? I thought that was against the rules here as well. CensoredScribe (talk) 15:08, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WQ inherits its "paid editing" guideline from Wikipedia, so reading that will answer some of your questions. Doxxing is indeed a much bigger violation of policy than "conflict of interest" editing. HouseOfChange (talk) 01:01, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's hard to see how anyone could engage in a fruitful degree of paid editing on this particular project. I suppose a wealthy and widely-quoted person might want a page (low-visibility as it may be), or may want to control contents of their pre-existing page. BD2412 T 02:28, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's a much bigger likelihood of COI editing in a negative way -- for example, the George Galloway article. HouseOfChange (talk) 02:57, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The idea of the MO for paid editing being limited to self-portraiture or character assassination is a very limited way of looking at this issue, however the unlikeliness of this rule actually being effectively enforced unless someone self incriminates by posting a photograph onto Wikiquote of themselves being handed money by their financial benefactor (who is also on camera), while publishing an edit with their other hand, makes my concern for this issue laughable. It's a serious issue, but the enforcement of it is essentially nonsensical if it depends entirely on confessions. It also doesn't account for being paid not to edit, like if you work for someone famous that would prefer you not be talking about them on social media, or if you work in the government and your boss doesn't like your politics because it makes your organization look bad. CensoredScribe (talk) 22:43, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiquote as homework

edit

Would it be against the rules here for a teacher to assign contributing quotations to Wikiquote as homework for their class? Would it make a difference whether the teacher themselves was a contributor? Does the age of the students make a difference? I personally think this would be a bad idea, however that's different than being against the rules. CensoredScribe (talk) 16:58, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Episode Quote Limit

edit

I have taken issue with the “only two quotes per episode” rule, especially since there are so many pages that have already broken this rule and nobody has done anything about them. Can we raise the limit to something like twenty? As long as we’re not posting the entire script, it should be fine. 2603:7000:1200:825A:4511:238F:3F2C:426A 22:23, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can we please lift the “only two quotes per episode” rule. Two episodes per quote is too few in my opinion, and what if there’s a memorable quote someone wants to post but can’t because there’s already two quotes for the episode? People told me that it’s because there’s risk of the site being shut down if too much copyrighted material is posted, but that’s never happened as far as I can tell. Besides, there’s people who treat the Family Guy Seasons 8 and 9 pages very seriously with this rule, but every other page for the show is ignored. Either we enforce this rule consistently, or we significantly relax, if not out right abolish it. Which one is it? —This unsigned comment is by 2600:1017:b835:be2:c889:d83f:2bb:361a (talk • contribs) 13:39, 20 April 2024.

Template:Wikiquotelang

edit

Hi, is it possible to add Bengali Wikiquote (বাংলা) in there? We recently crossed 1K mark. Thanks. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 20:57, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@আফতাবুজ্জামান: শুকরিয়া/মারহাবা! —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:15, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Koavf, The code is wrong, should be "bn" (not bg), you can add something like this. Thanks. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 00:55, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
D'oh. Thanks again. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:56, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Two quotes per episode is too few.

edit

Can we please lift the “only two quotes per episode” rule. Two episodes per quote is too few in my opinion, and what if there’s a memorable quote someone wants to post but can’t because there’s already two quotes for the episode? People told me that it’s because there’s risk of the site being shut down if too much copyrighted material is posted, but that’s never happened as far as I can tell. Besides, there’s people who treat the Family Guy Seasons 8 and 9 pages very seriously with this rule, but every other page for the show is ignored. Either we enforce this rule consistently, or we significantly relax, if not out right abolish it. Which one is it? Playland1998 (talk) 15:58, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that we need to avoid violating copyright, but where in policy or elsewhere is there a "two quotes per episode" rule? HouseOfChange (talk) 02:21, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please refer to WQ:LOQ (and the associated talk page). There have also been numerous discussions on this topic elsewhere (see here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, Wikiquote:Quality and Quantity, and I am sure there are more in the archives - I will keep looking and update if I find others). Much of this discussion originated when a sister project in France was threatened with complete shutdown.
There had been discussion about relaxing this restriction (I believe 5 per 1/2 hour episode and 10 per hour episode had been put forward), but we never got consensus. The Limits on Quotations page is a proposed guideline - it never got enough traction to become official policy. But that being said, the community consensus seemed to be that we need some limits so that we can maintain reasonable pages - there was also discussion that even if limits did not prevent bloat that appears on many TV show pages, that the criterion of quotability should also be applied and would likely limit some of the additions by applying that lens. The idea of this site is to post a selection of notable quotes - not full scripts of films or TV shows. Despite the seemingly arbitrary nature of selecting a numerical limit for quotes, it does seem to have benefitted our film and TV show pages in particular, keeping them to a manageable length and level of quality. I do feel there is some leeway we should have for film pages (especially established classics like Casablanca), but for TV shows (that have so many hours or material), it seems like it would be a bit absurd to allow an unlimited amount of quotes per episode. ~ UDScott (talk) 14:29, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My problem is that the people in this website aren’t truly practicing what they preach, and it’s just not fair. It’s only those two specific Family Guy pages that have the most restrictions from other people, while everything else is just left alone. Long ago, I anonymously added the entire story of how Debbie Grund was killed to the page on King of the Hill's fourth season, and last I checked, no one has deleted it. Playland1998 (talk) 14:41, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vote now to select members of the first U4C

edit
You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Dear all,

I am writing to you to let you know the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is open now through May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 20:20, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Nixon and Category:Richard Nixon

edit

At d:Special:Diff/2134319560, I was alerted that Category:Anti-Semites is added to these pages. The main article was made first, and I made the category by copying all categories from the main article (I didn't notice about Category:Anti-Semites until the message). I'm not sure if the enwiki article supports this categorization. Should we remove Category:Anti-Semites from these pages? MathXplore (talk) 05:55, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is dating someone just because they edit Wikiquote paid editing?

edit

I was wondering if I could go out on a date with someone without it being a violation of the rule against paid editing. I'm assuming not everyone here is single and that those who are in a relationship currently wouldn't be willing to break up with their partner just so they'd be allowed to continue to edit Wikiquote. I mean, how am I even supposed to know if the only reason someone is dating me is because I edit Wikiquote? I would prefer to date someone who sees enough value in this website that they themselves would like to contribute, but I wouldn't want to make it a necessary condition for them having a relationship with me. I would be pretty heartbroken to find out I was being objectified in a relationship just because of one of my attributes, or that someone was getting paid to date me, but there's no guarantee I'd be able to figure it out if they were.
As a follow up question, would mandatory celibacy even be a rule we could officially implement? What about a new rule that excludes editors based off their gender, religion, sexual orientation, ethnicity or some other status that is typically protected against harassment; is that something Wikiquote could technically do, or would Wikimedia object to us promoting blatantly discriminatory values that are contrary to theirs? People often mention that we are not Wikipedia, but just how different from them are we allowed to be? I can't imagine something like that going very well with the media, and although Wikiquote might not get mentioned in the news, Wikimedia is, and it receives a lot of donations that it might not otherwise receive if one of the websites it operates starts discriminating against people. I'm just trying to follow the rules and maybe introduce someone to this cool hobby of mine that everyone here shares, but when the rules are vaguely worded and no one responds to my questions it can be kind of difficult to know what is and isn't allowed. CensoredScribe (talk) 14:01, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is this a joke? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 14:08, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's fear, but I'd settle on Black comedy. Wikiquote may not be very popular, however as several of the pages I've created for the abortion category contain more references than the corresponding Wikipedia pages, it is arguably one of the most comprehensive learning resources available for abortion on the internet as it combines text from both PubMed and Google Books. As such, it is a particularly well curated data set for an LLM. Given this is a civil rights issue and civil rights advocates have a history of being unjustly targeted by both criminal and law enforcement elements, I believe my increased concern is at least somewhat plausible. I'd make for a pretty terrible civil rights activist, but I'm a halfway decent scholar if you'd like to test my knowledge of the subject, not that civil rights has ever really come down to correctly answering test questions. I like editing Wikiquote and would like to continue to do so, I'm aware that what most people consider payment is financial transactions that have to be reported to the IRS as taxable income or gifts, not the amount of food you eat during a sleepover. I've been a bit on edge recently because it's an election year. CensoredScribe (talk) 23:15, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My interpretation is that "Paid editing" involves getting money or whatever (a promotion, a date, etc.) in exchange for something you are being asked to do in a wiki project. If you already did some work here because you thought it improved the project, that is not "paid editing," even if some third party decides to reward you for what you have already done. That said, WQ articles are not set up to be a source of balanced or reliable information about Beauty, Truth, Abortion, etc. That's Wikipedia's goal, not something we could easily achieve. Creating a reliable guide to some topic entirely by cobbling together a lot of sourced quotable quotes would be like trying to build the Eiffel Tower out of matchsticks. HouseOfChange (talk) 14:50, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that we have to have personal interpretations indicates that the rule is ambiguously worded. I wonder whether that is a communicative error on the part of the editor/editors who wrote that rule, or whether it's intentional to provide enough flexibility that essentially anything can be construed as paid editing. Is paid editing really dependent on the formation of a verbal contract? Isn't dropping a roll of cash in front of a cop as they go to arrest you still considered a bribe even if you didn't say anything? I said that most people wouldn't consider the food you eat while visiting a friend to constitute a bribe, but I don't think that most of the people here have read A Woman in Berlin either, even though the editors of Wikiquote are a particularly well-read group of people and a lot of them present themselves as being deeply concerned for civil rights and social justice. The formation of a verbal contract isn't necessarily a defining feature of bribery and the payment doesn't have to be taxable, it can be a perishable item such as food rations, or like you've mentioned HouseOfChange, a promotion, a date or some other service.
Paid editing is using the carrot, but what about using the stick? We can be blocked for using threatening language in a conversation with other editors on site, Kalki has done it to me before, but what about using threatening language off site? Isn't mentioning offsite activity that reveals details of an editor's identity usually considered doxing them? It's kind of hard to enforce a rule regarding off site behavior when our most important rule is respecting everyone's privacy. It doesn't really matter if offsite harassment is against the rules or not if talking about it is considered the worse offense. Should we be going to the police or journalists instead if that ever happens to us? It would be shameful if that was Wikiquote's first time being talked about in the news. Threats can, and usually are, vaguely worded; similarly, you can imply a bribe without specifically spelling it out for people, it doesn't have to be as obvious as "If you do X I will give you Y".
As for Wikiquote being less balanced than Wikipedia and more cobbled together, Wikipedia attempts to have a neutral point of view while Wikquote is made up of people's points of view, but they are both cobbled together from references to sources that a teacher would consider acceptable to include in a term paper, unlike Wikipedia which is not, and for good reason. Wikipedia summarizes references in much the same way that a streaming service summarizes episodes of a TV show or films. A lot of the nuance of language is lost in creating a brief synopsis of the works of others and in the case of entertainment most of the plot points are simply glossed over. There aren't a lot of Wikipedia pages that are edited solely by one person, but there are several Wikiquote pages with only one editor, I know this from personal experience being one of those lone editors. It seems that not a whole lot of people here seem to be interested in spending their time creating or improving articles about abortion, for whatever reasons those might be.
Keep in mind that Wikipedia does not actually adhere to the Fairness doctrine which stipulated giving equal airtime to both sides of an issue, Wikipedia emphasizes facts, which is a point of view, whereas following the Fairness doctrine means giving equal weight to the words of a NASA astronaut and a moon landing denier. If you look at the Wikipedia page for the moon landing you will see that is not the case. The page for Treatment and management of COVID-19 mentions Ivermectin, but it does so in a section labeled ineffective treatments. If you believe in facts, then you are biased, NPOV may not be the ideal that you think it is, it's not very well defined. CensoredScribe (talk) 21:52, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Since Poetlister case, wikiquote has engaged in enough off-wiki issues that has effect on wiki. You can date with someone, nobody disallows you to do so. However, trying to make promotion about the one you date is COI.
As for BIAS and POV, just take a look on Israel -Hamas related content, Russia -Ukraine related articles. There's something more serious always just happening on this project. -‎Lemonaka‎ 22:06, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Koavf, HouseOfChange, Lemonaka; as the three of you are administrators, tell me what you would think of the following scenario which is neither complex nor hypothetical. I show some of my contributions to someone who believes in reproductive rights and in social media such as Wikiquote as an effective means of education and outreach, they are impressed enough by what I've done that they decide to let me stay at their house and continue to create pages about reproductive rights because they share my concerns for the future. Is that paid editing, yes or no? If you have different answers to this question, than why is there that little consensus among the Wikiquote administrators as to what paid editing even means? Anyone else can free to state their "interpretation" as well, although unless they are also administrators who are tasked with enforcing the rules here when they are broken, there opinion will not mean much to me, even if it's Jimmy Wales. CensoredScribe (talk) 02:18, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The answer to your original question is no. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:14, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Koavf by original question do you mean, "I show some of my contributions to someone who believes in reproductive rights and in social media such as Wikiquote as an effective means of education and outreach, they are impressed enough by what I've done that they decide to let me stay at their house and continue to create pages about reproductive rights because they share my concerns for the future. Is that paid editing, yes or no?" I'm still a bit confused why if someone gave me three thousand dollars to pay the rent for a New York City apartment so I can edit Wikiquote fulltime it's paid editing, but if they own their own New York City apartment and let me stay there rent free so I can edit Wikiquote fulltime, it's not paid editing. They both sound like a gift of three thousand dollars that is being given in exchange for edits that haven't happened yet, the only difference is that I don't have to report the second one to the IRS, but as HouseOfChange has made clear, they interpret paid editing to include services that lack any financial value whatsoever, like going on the world's cheapest date. I hope that HouseOfChange isn't in charge of interpreting and enforcing the legal definition of prostitution. CensoredScribe (talk) 14:18, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Justin, no. HouseOfChange (talk) 14:42, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Resolved
—Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:21, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sign up for the language community meeting on May 31st, 16:00 UTC

edit

Hello all,

The next language community meeting is scheduled in a few weeks - May 31st at 16:00 UTC. If you're interested, you can sign up on this wiki page.

This is a participant-driven meeting, where we share language-specific updates related to various projects, collectively discuss technical issues related to language wikis, and work together to find possible solutions. For example, in the last meeting, the topics included the machine translation service (MinT) and the languages and models it currently supports, localization efforts from the Kiwix team, and technical challenges with numerical sorting in files used on Bengali Wikisource.

Do you have any ideas for topics to share technical updates related to your project? Any problems that you would like to bring for discussion during the meeting? Do you need interpretation support from English to another language? Please reach out to me at ssethi(__AT__)wikimedia.org and add agenda items to the document here.

We look forward to your participation!


MediaWiki message delivery 21:22, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio?

edit

Aren't this copyvio? আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 21:04, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, the original source is The History of India, as Told by Its Own Historians. The History of India, as Told by Its Own Historians is a set of eight volumes published between 1867–1877 in London. Any book published in the 19th century is not a copyvio. It would be better to first ask on the talkpage of the article. However, some copyediting is still needed and is work in progress. --ᘙ (talk) 21:09, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Not copyvio then but quotes should not be that long, it's very hard to follow. You know Wikisource exist for this type of book. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 00:46, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The India they saw: Foreign accounts is a compendium of quotes on India, in which the same extract is quoted in full. This means that at least another published editor found this particular episode interesting, quotable and coherent enough to quote in full. Smaller parts of the episode have of course been quoted often elsewhere. But the extract could be split into smaller quotes and perhaps trimmed, to make it more readable. As I said in my last reply the article still needs copyediting and is work in progress. I will have a few more tries at the article when I find the time. Thanks for reminding me. --ᘙ (talk) 09:58, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback invited on Procedure for Sibling Project Lifecycle

edit
You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language
 

Dear community members,

The Community Affairs Committee (CAC) of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees invites you to give feedback on a draft Procedure for Sibling Project Lifecycle. This draft Procedure outlines proposed steps and requirements for opening and closing Wikimedia Sibling Projects, and aims to ensure any newly approved projects are set up for success. This is separate from the procedures for opening or closing language versions of projects, which is handled by the Language Committee or closing projects policy.

You can find the details on this page, as well as the ways to give your feedback from today until the end of the day on June 23, 2024, anywhere on Earth.

You can also share information about this with the interested project communities you work with or support, and you can also help us translate the procedure into more languages, so people can join the discussions in their own language.

On behalf of the CAC,

RamzyM (WMF) 02:25, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Senator:RamonRevillaSr.@JoseBautistaSr.com

edit

The Senaator is Planning to run for President at 2028 Presidential Election.As the headline of [{PDPLaban/com})Mb.com 124.106.110.221 04:05, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Policy change proposal: More quotes per episode

edit

I’ve been trying to add more quotes to the pages for Family Guy's eighth and ninth seasons, but people kept preaching to me that there should only be two quotes per half-hour episode, or else they will get a copyright claim. Anonymous user 100.8.243.246 said to me on UDScott’s talk page that the event it never happens is “unlikely”, but cannot disagree with him more. The page for Season 18 for example has 14 quotes for the episode The Movement, and not a single copyright claim has happened to that. I also added the entire story of Debbie Grund’s death to King of the Hill’s fourth season, and guess what people did about it? Nothing! Besides, why would anyone copyright claim this website anyway, when there are so many other quote websites that are just left alone?

So I’m coming up with a new proposal to raise the maximum number of quotes per episode, since not a single copyright claim has happened to Family Guy Season 18 or King of the Hill Season 4. The maximum number of quotes should be: five quotes for a show less than a half-hour long; 15 quotes for a half-hour; 20 quotes for an hour; 25 quotes for an hour and a half; 30 quotes for two hours; and 40 quotes for 3 hours. Because since no one is copyright claiming those pages, then why should we even care?

P.S. I expect a satisfactory response as soon as possible. I don’t like it when people ignore my words. Playland1998 (talk) 02:33, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A slight increase might be OK but fifteen quotes per half hour seems much too high. HouseOfChange (talk) 03:16, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How about ten? Playland1998 (talk) 16:47, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikiquote doesn't have all that many active users, but this is an issue people might realistically vote on in mass, given how much activity on this website concerns television shows. This is just my assessment, but we seem to favor movies over TV, and video games and comic books are largely dismissed despite modern video games being comparable in length to novels in their word count and a large portion of the movies coming out being based on comics. If you think we can normally interest a group of twelve people for a vote on anything than you are sorely mistaken, but raising this issue might actually accomplish that. CensoredScribe (talk) 23:39, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It may not have that many active users, but my complaint is that whatever users are active only focus on those two specific Family Guy pages, while leaving everything else I edited unchanged. Either ALL pages follow these quote limit rules or none of them do, and I am definitely in favor of the latter option. Playland1998 (talk) 17:58, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There’s nothing wrong with providing context. Just don’t post the entire script. Playland1998 (talk) 22:02, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started

edit

Hi. I've been editing the English Wikipedia for a while now and decided to check out Wikiquote. Is there anything like the Task Center where I can find things to do? Thanks. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 08:02, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikiquote. We are a small project, without a Task Center as far as I know. Most people work on pages about things/people where they already have some knowledge and some interest. Another source of inspiration can be news stories that contain quotable quotes from notable people. I hope you will find areas you enjoy working on and decide to stay. HouseOfChange (talk) 17:57, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Announcing the first Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee

edit
You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Hello,

The scrutineers have finished reviewing the vote results. We are following up with the results of the first Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) election.

We are pleased to announce the following individuals as regional members of the U4C, who will fulfill a two-year term:

  • North America (USA and Canada)
    • –
  • Northern and Western Europe
  • Latin America and Caribbean
    • –
  • Central and East Europe (CEE)
    • —
  • Sub-Saharan Africa
    • –
  • Middle East and North Africa
  • East, South East Asia and Pacific (ESEAP)
  • South Asia
    • –

The following individuals are elected to be community-at-large members of the U4C, fulfilling a one-year term:

Thank you again to everyone who participated in this process and much appreciation to the candidates for your leadership and dedication to the Wikimedia movement and community.

Over the next few weeks, the U4C will begin meeting and planning the 2024-25 year in supporting the implementation and review of the UCoC and Enforcement Guidelines. Follow their work on Meta-wiki.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 08:15, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The final text of the Wikimedia Movement Charter is now on Meta

edit
You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Hi everyone,

The final text of the Wikimedia Movement Charter is now up on Meta in more than 20 languages for your reading.

What is the Wikimedia Movement Charter?

The Wikimedia Movement Charter is a proposed document to define roles and responsibilities for all the members and entities of the Wikimedia movement, including the creation of a new body – the Global Council – for movement governance.

Join the Wikimedia Movement Charter “Launch Party”

Join the “Launch Party” on June 20, 2024 at 14.00-15.00 UTC (your local time). During this call, we will celebrate the release of the final Charter and present the content of the Charter. Join and learn about the Charter before casting your vote.

Movement Charter ratification vote

Voting will commence on SecurePoll on June 25, 2024 at 00:01 UTC and will conclude on July 9, 2024 at 23:59 UTC. You can read more about the voting process, eligibility criteria, and other details on Meta.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment on the Meta talk page or email the MCDC at mcdc@wikimedia.org.

On behalf of the MCDC,

RamzyM (WMF) 08:45, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notable Wikipedia people and research on Wikipedia usage

edit

I noticed that the category Wikipedia people only has only four people in it: Sue Gardner, Andrew Lih, Steven Pruitt and Jimmy Wales. Is that it, or are there other Wikipedia people that would meet the standards of notability and quotability for inclusion on Wikiquote? I very rarely see Wikipedia editors give interviews and when they do it seems to be more often than not to be attributed to their username, with the editor citing concerns for their safety should they lose their anonymity. I was hoping one of the Wikipedia editors who has done interviews might have gone into detail about why they have those safety concerns, because if Wikipedia is truly as dangerous as some of the editors make it sound, than it's bizarre that that it's accessed by so many school age children and no one seems to care they could be in danger were they to become editors. The Surgeon General didn't specifically mention Wikipedia when discussing the health effects of childhood social media usage, but it is still a form of social media, so I'm wondering what research is there concerning Wikipedia in particular in connection to issues like cyberbullying or addictive behavior. My hypothesis is that the well-known Wikipedia gender gap might have something to do with a casual acceptance of cyberbullying, or alternatively that there is for some reason a pervasive false impression of dangerousness that scares away many potential new editors, seeing as there is much less of a gender difference in either academia or in publishing. Other more popular social media websites do not seem to have this problem, Youtube doesn't have a noticeable gender difference and you have much less privacy being on camera than writing, and people post photos of themselves and discuss politically sensitive topics on Facebook but they don't have a noticeable gender difference. CensoredScribe (talk) 15:07, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Responding to your first sentence, there are lots of notable people who have no WQ article. I created the WQ article for Steven Pruitt after I stumbled on some interesting quotes by him. HouseOfChange (talk) 20:22, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It seems all of the Wikipedia people with pages go by their real names; introductory text is hard to write for anonymous pseudonyms, take the page for Banksy for example. CensoredScribe (talk) 00:25, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Voting to ratify the Wikimedia Movement Charter is now open – cast your vote

edit
You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Hello everyone,

The voting to ratify the Wikimedia Movement Charter is now open. The Wikimedia Movement Charter is a document to define roles and responsibilities for all the members and entities of the Wikimedia movement, including the creation of a new body – the Global Council – for movement governance.

The final version of the Wikimedia Movement Charter is available on Meta in different languages and attached here in PDF format for your reading.

Voting commenced on SecurePoll on June 25, 2024 at 00:01 UTC and will conclude on July 9, 2024 at 23:59 UTC. Please read more on the voter information and eligibility details.

After reading the Charter, please vote here and share this note further.

If you have any questions about the ratification vote, please contact the Charter Electoral Commission at cec@wikimedia.org.

On behalf of the CEC,

RamzyM (WMF) 10:52, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and dating websites

edit

I was wondering if anyone here has ever mentioned their editing of Wikis when using dating websites and their reasoning as to why or why not. If no one here uses dating websites that would also be an interesting fact to know about our community as to how we feel about other online communities. It may seem like it's a question that has nothing to do with improving the Wiki, but considering the low number of active users and the importance of membership drives I think it's a valid maintenance question, and not just one of research and criticism. CensoredScribe (talk) 03:29, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that most people here do not edit under their real names and that doxing is taken very seriously, which is one of the things that differentiates Wikis from other forms of social media where it is often an expectation that people post pictures of themselves. Bragging about how good you are at your job or your hobby isn't particularly attractive behavior on a first date, however secrecy and a refusal to answer any questions someone might have about how you spend your time is also very disconcerting. Not everyone uses dating websites, however enough people do that even in a fairly small group of people you would expect at least a quarter of the population to have some experience using them, so if nobody who edits Wikis uses dating websites than that suggests a unique trend which may be connected to Wikipedia's noticeable gender gap. Not a lot of people use social media in the hopes of obtaining greater levels of social isolation, it's one thing not to make any new friends on a website but it's another when it actively interferes with making them anywhere else as well. In my case I don't think many people are interested in talking about abortion activism on a first date, but if they ask what you do as a job or hobby they are not going to like being told that they ask too many questions or being answered with riddles. What we all do here may feel inconsequential at times and like it's not worth mentioning, but I think most people would have a hard time arguing it doesn't make at least a small difference in someone's life being able to more readily access information on topics that they feel are important, whatever those topics may be. Just thought I would mention this in case anyone else has had experiences that sound similar, or has any interest in the gender gap Wikipedia points out in advertisements and tries to address with campaigns like #SheSaid. CensoredScribe (talk) 14:48, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How CensoredScribe is your question connected to Wikiquote which is what this page is intended for? Mcljlm (talk) 14:46, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what all of the objectives of #SheSaid are, but considering #SheSaid's advertisements are displayed at the top of all of the pages for three months out of the year, I would say that the answer to your question is all of them. What pages, do you think, aren't edited by women? CensoredScribe (talk) 02:26, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Quoting the intro to this page: "This is the place if you (a) have a question about Wikiquote and how it works or (b) a suggestion for improving Wikiquote." HouseOfChange (talk) 15:56, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikiedu.org mentions improving Wiki Data in addition to Wikipedia, so how about one of the administrators here asks that they mention Wikiquote? We could use their help just as much as Wikipedia, and unlike Wikipedia's summaries, the direct quotations we've collected can be used as references, which is of more help to students. Seeing real people's faces and not just their screen names helps to improve Wikipedia's public image, making it look safer for new people to use. CensoredScribe (talk) 21:04, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This page is not intended for efforts to start a chat about random topics with little relation to improving Wikiquote. HouseOfChange (talk) 13:09, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't consider a gender gap or a race gap to be random topics with no relation to improving Wikiquote HoC, if no X gender or Y ethnicity are editing Wikiquote that looks bad to the press. You have made less than two thousand edits, you may well be the administrator with the quickest rise to power, and it shows. CensoredScribe (talk) 02:19, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Voting to ratify the Wikimedia Movement Charter is ending soon

edit
You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Hello everyone,

This is a kind reminder that the voting period to ratify the Wikimedia Movement Charter will be closed on July 9, 2024, at 23:59 UTC.

If you have not voted yet, please vote on SecurePoll.

On behalf of the Charter Electoral Commission,

RamzyM (WMF) 03:46, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

U4C Special Election - Call for Candidates

edit
You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Hello all,

A special election has been called to fill additional vacancies on the U4C. The call for candidates phase is open from now through July 19, 2024.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members are invited to submit their applications in the special election for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

In this special election, according to chapter 2 of the U4C charter, there are 9 seats available on the U4C: four community-at-large seats and five regional seats to ensure the U4C represents the diversity of the movement. No more than two members of the U4C can be elected from the same home wiki. Therefore, candidates must not have English Wikipedia, German Wikipedia, or Italian Wikipedia as their home wiki.

Read more and submit your application on Meta-wiki.

In cooperation with the U4C,

-- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 00:03, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Category

edit

I'd like to create a category for people who have been awarded of the w:Compasso d'Oro (presumably "Category:Compasso d'Oro winners", by the logic of established practice here on Wikiquote). As I'm still not fully familiar with the ins and out of this wiki, I thought it best to ask for guidence. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 13:57, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We already have the scheme at Category:People by award, so in principle, this is a perfectly fine approach. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 11:28, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quotes in context

edit

Lots of political in-groups talk about quote fragments among themselves without knowing the original context of such fragments. When possible, let's make those fragments available in their wider context. Also, when quotes about some politician criticize the person for having said XX, let's have the WQ article include the original XX quote in its context. I'm motivated by recent publicity given a "snippet"[2] of a quote by Joe Biden (made in a private phone call with donors) to claim he urged Trump's assassination, but there are plenty of other examples. HouseOfChange (talk) 11:17, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is certainly true that entirely factual quotations can be sliced and diced or presented in a way that is very disingenuous and misleading. When I add quotations, I always make sure to at least contextualize it by place and time if I can and then any other additional situational information that makes it clear why something was being said and why it's worthy of quotation. This is subjective, but so is selective quotation with no context. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 11:27, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You make an excellent point that situational information, e.g. place and time, are important to determine what meaning was intended. Going back to my example, if Biden wanted to issue a call for Trump's assassination, a private phone call with some donors would be an unlikely place for it. HouseOfChange (talk) 14:39, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Movement Charter ratification voting results

edit
You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Hello everyone,

After carefully tallying both individual and affiliate votes, the Charter Electoral Commission is pleased to announce the final results of the Wikimedia Movement Charter voting.  

As communicated by the Charter Electoral Commission, we reached the quorum for both Affiliate and individual votes by the time the vote closed on July 9, 23:59 UTC. We thank all 2,451 individuals and 129 Affiliate representatives who voted in the ratification process. Your votes and comments are invaluable for the future steps in Movement Strategy.

The final results of the Wikimedia Movement Charter ratification voting held between 25 June and 9 July 2024 are as follows:

Individual vote:

Out of 2,451 individuals who voted as of July 9 23:59 (UTC), 2,446 have been accepted as valid votes. Among these, 1,710 voted “yes”; 623 voted “no”; and 113 selected “–” (neutral). Because the neutral votes don’t count towards the total number of votes cast, 73.30% voted to approve the Charter (1710/2333), while 26.70% voted to reject the Charter (623/2333).

Affiliates vote:

Out of 129 Affiliates designated voters who voted as of July 9 23:59 (UTC), 129 votes are confirmed as valid votes. Among these, 93 voted “yes”; 18 voted “no”; and 18 selected “–” (neutral). Because the neutral votes don’t count towards the total number of votes cast, 83.78% voted to approve the Charter (93/111), while 16.22% voted to reject the Charter (18/111).

Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation:

The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees voted not to ratify the proposed Charter during their special Board meeting on July 8, 2024. The Chair of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees, Nataliia Tymkiv, shared the result of the vote, the resolution, meeting minutes and proposed next steps.  

With this, the Wikimedia Movement Charter in its current revision is not ratified.

We thank you for your participation in this important moment in our movement’s governance.

The Charter Electoral Commission,

Abhinav619, Borschts, Iwuala Lucy, Tochiprecious, Der-Wir-Ing

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:52, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vote now to fill vacancies of the first U4C

edit
You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Dear all,

I am writing to you to let you know the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is open now through August 10, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

In cooperation with the U4C,

RamzyM (WMF) 02:47, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

edit

How can languages be added to the language list? The French page of Albert Camus can be found by clicking 45 more at the end of the languages list and then Français but logically it should be in the default list. Mcljlm (talk) 14:39, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how it was done, but checking our Albert Camus today, I see Français on the default language list. HouseOfChange (talk) 13:30, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Languages are added via our sister project Wikidata. At Wikidata, there is an entry for Albert Camus and there, you can find two distinct types of information: one is general statements about him (birth and death dates, links in databases, etc.) and the other is links between various Wikimedia Foundation projects about this topic (such as w:avk:Albert Camus and s:Auteur:Albert Camus). If someone wants to add a link between these projects, it should be done there. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:25, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mcljlm, HouseOfChange: see https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Universal_Language_Selector/Compact_Language_Links#How_it_works

“With compact language links a short list of the relevant languages for the user is displayed at first. This selection is based on your previous language selections, your browser settings, your location, and properties of the article you're reading. You can read more about this selection at this FAQ: How do you decide which languages are shown to me in the initial compact list?.”
— [[{{{2}}}]], {{{3}}}

1992 FARHAAD (talk) 17:16, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder! Vote closing soon to fill vacancies of the first U4C

edit
You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Dear all,

The voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is closing soon. It is open through 10 August 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility. If you are eligible to vote and have not voted in this special election, it is important that you vote now.

Why should you vote? The U4C is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community input into the committee membership is critical to the success of the UCoC.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

In cooperation with the U4C,

-- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 15:30, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Explanatory footnotes?

edit

How can I add an explanatory footnote?, like can be done at Wikipedia here. Thank you. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 20:31, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To quote Wikiquote:Templates#Quotes_by_people, a good place for clarification is the line below the line for the source of the quote:
* English Quotation
** Source of the quote. (with a date of source, when known)
** Optional clarifications, notes on context, etc.
Not quite what you asked, but I hope it's helpful. HouseOfChange (talk) 19:45, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To add to HouseOfChange's helpful tip - at WQ, we try to keep all notes with the quote, rather than at the bottom of the page. So we actually discourage the use of footnotes. ~ UDScott (talk) 20:35, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have done something similar here (scroll down to the last quote by John Naughton). Nobody ever complained about that and it complies to the requirement above. I think that might help. - Emilija Knezevic (talk) 19:08, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, now that you've brought it up - I would actually change what you did there to have the Douglas Adams bit as a second sub-bullet to the quote, rather than a footnote. ~ UDScott (talk) 19:35, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I have no problem doing that. But do I mark the place of the footnote within the quote with a bullet (or a number), because it is marked in the source, and WQ should preserve what is said in the source? - Emilija Knezevic (talk) 20:46, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Coming soon: A new sub-referencing feature – try it!

edit
 

Hello. For many years, community members have requested an easy way to re-use references with different details. Now, a MediaWiki solution is coming: The new sub-referencing feature will work for wikitext and Visual Editor and will enhance the existing reference system. You can continue to use different ways of referencing, but you will probably encounter sub-references in articles written by other users. More information on the project page.

We want your feedback to make sure this feature works well for you:

Wikimedia Deutschland’s Technical Wishes team is planning to bring this feature to Wikimedia wikis later this year. We will reach out to creators/maintainers of tools and templates related to references beforehand.

Please help us spread the message. --Johannes Richter (WMDE) (talk) 10:36, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What are human categorisations and what theme pages apply exclusively to humans?

edit

In addition to the disambiguation page for race, in keeping with Wikipedia we now have two race pages, one for Race (human categorisation) and another for Race (biology). So what exactly are human categorisations? If you type in human categorizations on Wikipedia does anything come up? Are we suggesting that humans uniquely possess race? CensoredScribe (talk) 15:33, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are Wikipedia pages for both: Race (biology) and Race (human categorization). The definitions of each are spelled out in more detail there. ~ UDScott (talk) 15:37, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I asked for the definition of "human categorizations", can anyone here provide one and cite their source? I'm curious what other pages are listed as a type of (human categorizations) or if this technical terminology in parenthesis is exclusive to this one particular page, which doesn't make it sound very technical. Aren't jobs and religions ways of classifying people, so why are those pages titled differently from race if they only apply to people? CensoredScribe (talk) 23:05, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see your point. In my opinion, the more proper place to ask that question would be the Wikipedia Race (human categorization) talk page. And about the Wikiquote, the debate here would be "Does Wikiquote have to keep with Wikipedia?". I am not sure if there would be anybody to debate that. - Emilija Knezevic (talk) 19:48, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sign up for the language community meeting on August 30th, 15:00 UTC

edit

Hi all,

The next language community meeting is scheduled in a few weeks—on August 30th at 15:00 UTC. If you're interested in joining, you can sign up on this wiki page.

This participant-driven meeting will focus on sharing language-specific updates related to various projects, discussing technical issues related to language wikis, and working together to find possible solutions. For example, in the last meeting, topics included the Language Converter, the state of language research, updates on the Incubator conversations, and technical challenges around external links not working with special characters on Bengali sites.

Do you have any ideas for topics to share technical updates or discuss challenges? Please add agenda items to the document here and reach out to ssethi(__AT__)wikimedia.org. We look forward to your participation!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:20, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abubakar Muhammad Zakaria

edit

Hi, sorry if i posted this on wrong page. I don't know what English Wikiquotes policy is about very long quotes. This article contain very long quote. The quote should be verified also as it was created by an IP, now globally blocked for long term abuse, probably an LTA created it. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 18:47, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted it. Thanks for posting. If you do want to see our policy on length as it relates to quotability: WQ:LENGTH. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:22, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very bad quotes selected as QOTD for purely political propaganda

edit

Hello,

I once again have to bring the community's attention to User:Kalki's parochial use of Wikiquote's Main Page as a propaganda tool for the Democratic Party.

List of Kalki's single-handed QOTD selections in the last 4 days in a row:

  • August 21, 2024 -- quote by Joe Biden (absolutely unremarkable and unmemorable, nothing new in it)
  • August 22, 2024 -- quote by Michelle Obama (not exactly a "quote", more like a speech)
  • August 23, 2024 -- quote by Oprah Winfrey (absolutely unremarkable and unmemorable, nothing new in it)
  • August 24, 2024 -- quote by Kamala Harris (absolutely unremarkable and unmemorable, nothing new in it)

As Kalki keeps selecting vapid and empty "quotes" for the QOTD, for political purposes, and cannot be trusted to be balanced, I should think the community needs to take action.

While I would not suggest blocking Kalki (though he is seriously hurting Wikiquote's neutrality and literacy-level), I would recommend we implement a new rule according to which the QOTD must be quoted in books (to be of actual quotes that have passed the test of time). At least this would both improve the quality of the quotes and remove the incentive to use the QOTD for purely political propaganda. ~ DanielTom (talk) 13:13, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The reality is that this process is not only de facto personality-based but it's actually the de jure process. I think this is a serious problem with a pretty fundamental part of the site and should be changed to one that is voted on by the community or that has rotating individuals responsible for its implementation. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 13:19, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Many users from the Wikiquote community have already proposed and !voted for different quotes for each of the above-mentioned days (see August 21, August 22, August 23, August 24), Kalki just chooses to ignore them (preferring instead his own selections, which no one had the chance to !vote for or oppose). ~ DanielTom (talk) 13:45, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The events of the political processes of the United States in the past month have been quite extraordinarily historical, and I have selected notable quotes of notable persons involved in those processes in some of these recent days — all of the 4 quotes cited as "very bad quotes" were from very widely noted and very widely lauded statements from the 4 days of the 2024 DNC.
Earlier in the month I had quoted one of the most notable statements of the much maligned Republican president of a century ago:
Being a politician is a poor profession. Being a public servant is a noble one.
~ Herbert Hoover ~
Last month on the 4th of July, I selected on of the more notable statements of one of Republican Ronald Reagan's favorite Republican presidents:
We are not likely to improve our own condition or help humanity very much until we come to the sympathetic understanding that human nature is about the same everywhere, that it is rather evenly distributed over the surface of the earth, and that we are all united in a common brotherhood. We can only make America first in the true sense which that means by cultivating a spirit of friendship and good will, by the exercise of the virtues of patience and forbearance, by being "plenteous in mercy," and through progress at home and helpfulness abroad standing as an example of real service to humanity.
~ Calvin Coolidge ~
Last month, on the 15th, after the attempt on Trump's life by a deranged individual, and before he dropped out of the race, I quoted a Biden statement in response to that:
The choice we make in this election will shape the future of America and the world for decades to come. I believe that with all my soul. I know that millions of my fellow Americans believe it as well. And some have a different view as to the direction our country should take. Disagreement is inevitable in American democracy. It is part of human nature. Politics must never be a killing field. I believe politics ought to be an arena for peaceful debate, to pursue justice, to make decisions guided by the Declaration of Independence and our constitution. We stand for an America not of extremism and fury, but of decency and grace. All of us now face a time of testing as the election approaches. The higher the stakes, the more fervent the passion becomes. This places an added burden on each of us to ensure no matter how strong our convictions, we must never descend into violence.
~ Joe Biden ~
On the 29th I quoted the highly respected UN Secretary-Generals Hammarskjöld on a statement relevant to his times, and our times, and all time:
It is when we all play safe that we create a world of utmost insecurity. It is when we all play safe that fatality will lead us to our doom. It is in the "dark shade of courage" alone that the spell can be broken.
~ Dag Hammarskjöld ~
There are people who like to falsely and foully frame everything they like or dislike in petty pissant partisan terms — and those who can see clearly beyond them. One notable Republican, among the many who spoke at the DNC, as well as very publicly in recent months and years:
I'm going to focus my attention on the millions of Republicans and independents at home that are sick and tired of making excuses for Donald Trump.
If Republicans are being intellectually honest with ourselves, our party is not civil or conservative. It’s chaotic and crazy. And the only thing left to do is dump Trump … Let me be clear to my Republican friends at home: If you vote for Kamala Harris in 2024 you’re not a Democrat, you’re a patriot.
I will note, that I myself, many years ago, though never highly partisan at any point, WAS for many years actually REGISTERED as Republican — and had NEVER voted Democratic in ANY of several presidential elections in which I had voted, but switched to registering as an Independent when I saw the party was clearly becoming far too thoroughly corrupted in various ways for me to wish to have any further official attachment to it.
Though I am willing to tolerate and accept a great deal of error, ignorance and confusion in any living being, I will confess have an extremely strong bias for favoring actual truth rather than falsehoods and outright lies made to sound like truth to those with shallow and small levels of awareness or attention to actual facts. I am well aware that often makes me persona non grata to those who prefer various vapidities and outright lies to many forms of truth, but it is a fate I am willing to accept.
Busy as I am with many projects, I was just about to leave for most of the day when I noticed the above comments on waking my computer — and have made a response for now — but I do not expect to be back soon. ~ ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki ⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 15:33, 24 August 2024 (UTC) + tweaks[reply]
This gibberish treats your fellow editors with utter contempt. Ficaia (talk) 15:44, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is no way that you believe that the voluminous Kamala Harris excerpt is actually quotable material. A quotation should be something that someone could plausibly memorize and attribute to someone: a few sentences at most, with a clear point. Issues with your QotD selections go back for several years and it seems like you can't or won't listen to that criticism. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:11, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Wikiquote should not be a record of breaking news. Wikipedia:In the news is shaped by dozens of editors and is a much better source for that.
Kalki has a long history of abusing his admin privileges to shoe-horn in his own picks at the last second. As he is the only admin who edits QOTD, this means he effectively controls the process. He also cannot or will not respond coherently to questions/concerns. This makes him unfit to be admin IMO.
I think access to upcoming QOTD pages should be extended to all editors with 1000+ edits, so decisions about quote selection, image choice, etc can be made by everyone actively involved in Wikiquote. Ficaia (talk) 15:42, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In our small community, typically we let slide a few questionable actions by generally good users (Deuteronomy 25:4) but the problem here is that QOTD is very prominent on our home page. Taking care of QOTD every day is a lot of work, and in general Kalki has chosen good quotes, although on occasion some political drums get pounded -- in this case, over a run of several days. Wouldn't it be possible for any other admin to respond in real time to complaints about the main page? Let's work on solving the problem here, without attacking our valued and very hard-working admin Kalki. HouseOfChange (talk) 16:09, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Kalki clearly says above he doesn't think he's done anything wrong. Obviously that is a problem. A refusal to address concerns is unacceptable in an admin. Ficaia (talk) 17:20, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Kalki clearly says above that he believes his quotes averaged over time show a balance of different points of view. So, what do we want to see happen going forward. IMO if admins can correct mainpage errors then any bad QOTD can be corrected. HouseOfChange (talk) 17:49, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you find his argument persuasive? Ficaia (talk) 03:14, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am persuaded that Kalki makes a real effort to be balanced. I am not persuaded that the people objecting to a four-day stretch of pro-Harris eloquence are objecting because they prefer lies or vapidity to truth. I also object to having such a four-day stretch on our homepage, because I think it looks bad for the project, not because I am "highly partisan" in an anti-Harris direction. Au contraire, as the seasick Frenchman said when asked if he had dined. HouseOfChange (talk) 21:11, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think anyone is attacking Kalki as such: there are problems with his behavior and attitude and it's okay to point them out. No one is denying the long-term investment of time that he's put into this site, nor is anyone saying that all of his editing is problematic. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:10, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize that I implied otherwise. Looking for solutions, would a length limit on QOTD begin to address some concerns? 22:22, 25 August 2024 (UTC) HouseOfChange (talk) 22:22, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It would be a start. There have been several criticisms of Kalki's ownership of QotD and that's one of them: that excessively long not-quotable quotations are chosen. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:34, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Making it a requirement that the QOTD has to be from a book is blatantly preferential to a particular medium; plenty of the most famous quotations were first published in newspaper articles and nowadays a television news interview is the more likely medium for a politician rather than print journalism. Would you seriously suggest quotes from the moon landing aren't sufficiently memorable because they were made on television and not in print? CensoredScribe (talk) 15:28, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For today's QOTD, Kalki again chose to use a quote he suggested only at the last second and which consequently no one else had a chance to vote on. See here. Ficaia (talk) 10:39, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Announcing the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee

edit
Original message at wikimedia-l. You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Hello all,

The scrutineers have finished reviewing the vote and the Elections Committee have certified the results for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) special election.

I am pleased to announce the following individual as regional members of the U4C, who will fulfill a term until 15 June 2026:

  • North America (USA and Canada)
    • Ajraddatz

The following seats were not filled during this special election:

  • Latin America and Caribbean
  • Central and East Europe (CEE)
  • Sub-Saharan Africa
  • South Asia
  • The four remaining Community-At-Large seats

Thank you again to everyone who participated in this process and much appreciation to the candidates for your leadership and dedication to the Wikimedia movement and community.

Over the next few weeks, the U4C will begin meeting and planning the 2024-25 year in supporting the implementation and review of the UCoC and Enforcement Guidelines. You can follow their work on Meta-Wiki.

On behalf of the U4C and the Elections Committee,

RamzyM (WMF) 14:06, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have your say: Vote for the 2024 Board of Trustees!

edit

Hello all,

The voting period for the 2024 Board of Trustees election is now open. There are twelve (12) candidates running for four (4) seats on the Board.

Learn more about the candidates by reading their statements and their answers to community questions.

When you are ready, go to the SecurePoll voting page to vote. The vote is open from September 3rd at 00:00 UTC to September 17th at 23:59 UTC.

To check your voter eligibility, please visit the voter eligibility page.

Best regards,

The Elections Committee and Board Selection Working Group

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:15, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paraphrasing

edit

Hello. I have this idea about including the paraphrasing of quotes for modernizing or less complicated interpretations of them. For example, including a modern English version of Shakespearean quotes and modern English versions of Olde English quotes or even just less complicated paraphrased iterations of certain harder to grasp quotes to go along with ones already listed? My idea is that just below the quote we could indicate the paraphrased version. Like so:

  • Lorem ipsum odor amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit.
  • Paraphrased as: Lorem ipsum odor amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit.

Huggums537(sign🖋️|📞talk) 03:35, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If RS can be cited for a paraphrase, I believe it could be added below a quote. Creating your own paraphrase would be "original research," and/or "synthesis" IMO. HouseOfChange (talk) 21:04, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Altering another user's edit history to include death threats

edit

Maybe I'm the only one here who has ever noticed another user's page being scrubbed clean of offensive comments they later regretted making. It wasn't on this particular Wiki but on Wikipedia. I assume it could happen here as well and it might be even easier given the vastly smaller number of page views and users. But for those of you who haven't personally witnessed it happen before, let's say that hypothetically someone could change page histories. Doing that for main space pages is going to get noticed obviously because those pages have lots of page views, but what about a talk page? Only users normally look at those. The village pump here gets a lot of views in part because we have fewer discussion pages than Wikipedia, so I think Wikiquote might be harder to tamper with. But hypothetically, say someone altered another user's contributions to include death threats of the kind that warrant immediate action from law enforcement (I think it would be wise for me not to specify further with any specific examples or say which law enforcement agencies would be tasked with that, but you get the point.) Or alternatively, what if someone created a sock puppet which was determined to be linked to your account. Do you think law enforcement agencies are going to immediately trust our records and the amateur detective work of Check User? Of course not, they are going to do their own investigations because they don't trust a bunch of amateur journalists who call arguing with one another wars and who have a single investigator that doesn't leave any notes that can be reviewed. I also don't think they are going to like the fact that a wiki makes it easier to make anonymous death threats or attribute them to others, and they might mention that to the media next time a government official gets asked about Wikipedia. So when was the last time a government official got asked about Wikipedia during an interview and what were they asked about? Does anyone have an answer? CensoredScribe (talk) 19:27, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No.
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this div with your comment. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:43, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How does Wikiquote treat malicious quotes

edit

There are quotes which are spoken to convince other people to be malicious, such as encouraging discrimination. How does Wikiquote treat such quotes if they have reached notability standard? DutchOff (talk) 01:12, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you've taken a look at Wikiquote:Policies and guidelines, you may have seen that we defer a lot of content policies to en.wp. Even there, we do not link to w:en:WP:NOTCENSORED and the only thing that really comes close to what you're describing is Wikiquote:Neutral point of view. So inevitably, if you have a list of quotations for Adolf Hitler, you're going to have some pretty vile sentiments and we try to be comprehensive, so a important historical figure like this will have to have relevant, but grotesque quotations. I think the only real guideline here is good judgement: make sure that if you are adding what could be viewed as a pretty controversial or malicious quotation, ensure that it's actually notable and you have sources and it's added in an appropriate place (e.g. don't add some gross racist comment at a mundane topic just because the quotation mentions that mundane topic). Anyone else who thinks I'm overlooking policy here, please do correct me. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:33, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your wiki will be in read-only soon

edit

Read this message in another language • Please help translate to your language

The Wikimedia Foundation will switch the traffic between its data centers. This will make sure that Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia wikis can stay online even after a disaster.

All traffic will switch on 25 September. The switch will start at 15:00 UTC.

Unfortunately, because of some limitations in MediaWiki, all editing must stop while the switch is made. We apologize for this disruption, and we are working to minimize it in the future.

A banner will be displayed on all wikis 30 minutes before this operation happens. This banner will remain visible until the end of the operation.

You will be able to read, but not edit, all wikis for a short period of time.

  • You will not be able to edit for up to an hour on Wednesday 25 September 2024.
  • If you try to edit or save during these times, you will see an error message. We hope that no edits will be lost during these minutes, but we can't guarantee it. If you see the error message, then please wait until everything is back to normal. Then you should be able to save your edit. But, we recommend that you make a copy of your changes first, just in case.

Other effects:

  • Background jobs will be slower and some may be dropped. Red links might not be updated as quickly as normal. If you create an article that is already linked somewhere else, the link will stay red longer than usual. Some long-running scripts will have to be stopped.
  • We expect the code deployments to happen as any other week. However, some case-by-case code freezes could punctually happen if the operation require them afterwards.
  • GitLab will be unavailable for about 90 minutes.

This project may be postponed if necessary. You can read the schedule at wikitech.wikimedia.org. Any changes will be announced in the schedule.

Please share this information with your community.

Trizek_(WMF), 09:37, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Re: The Vector 2022 skin as the default in two weeks?

edit
A two minute-long video about Vector 2022

Hello everyone, I'm reaching out on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation Web team responsible for the MediaWiki skins. I'd like to revisit the topic of making Vector 2022 the default here on English Wikiquote. I did post a message about this almost two years ago (where you can find all the details about the skin), but we didn't finalize it back then.

What happened in the meantime? We built dark mode and different options for font sizes, and made Vector 2022 the default on most wikis, including all other Wikiquotes. With the not-so-new V22 skin being the default, existing and coming features, like dark mode and temporary accounts respectively, will become available for logged-out users here.

So, if no large concerns are raised, we will deploy Vector 2022 here in two weeks, in the week of September 16. Do let me know if you have any questions. Thank you! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 21:48, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, it's still terrible unusable garbage. Sorry for not pointing that out earlier! DragonflySixtyseven (talk) 01:33, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can Wikiquote be licensed for use in an entertainment product?

edit

I was wondering if the image of Wikiquote could be used in a music video, television program or film and for what cost and who would be responsible for approving that decision. Our individual contributions are released under a creative commons license, however the website itself and the associated imagery is not. I was thinking a music video would be the most likely option as I doubt anyone wants us to be featured on a police procedural. CensoredScribe (talk) 02:43, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

edit
Apologies for cross-posting in English. Please consider translating this message.
Tracked in Phabricator
Task T66315

Hello everyone, a small change will soon be coming to the user-interface of your Wikimedia project. The Wikidata item sitelink currently found under the General section of the Tools sidebar menu will move into the In Other Projects section.

We would like the Wiki communities feedback so please let us know or ask questions on the Discussion page before we enable the change which can take place October 4 2024, circa 15:00 UTC+2. More information can be found on the project page.

We welcome your feedback and questions.
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:57, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What happened to the categories on Wikipedia

edit

I have to post this here instead of on the Wikipedia pump because my IP range is blocked for no reason when zi edit on my phone. What happened to the categories at the bottom of articles on the mobile version of the site? You finally added them, then they disappeared for a while, then they came back, then they disappeared for good and that was years ago. Please bring them back and keep them there, there is no reason to not have them there and it is extremely inconvenient 2603:7080:8140:8A60:BD5C:A9F2:A0A4:B28B 20:04, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to Participate in Wiki Loves Ramadan Community Engagement Survey

edit

Dear all,


We are excited to announce the upcoming Wiki Loves Ramadan event, a global initiative aimed at celebrating Ramadan by enriching Wikipedia and its sister projects with content related to this significant time of year. As we plan to organize this event globally, your insights and experiences are crucial in shaping the best possible participation experience for the community.

To ensure that Wiki Loves Ramadan is engaging, inclusive, and impactful, we kindly invite you to participate in our community engagement survey. Your feedback will help us understand the needs of the community, set the event's focus, and guide our strategies for organizing this global event.

Survey link: https://forms.gle/f66MuzjcPpwzVymu5

Please take a few minutes to share your thoughts. Your input will make a difference!

Thank you for being a part of our journey to make Wiki Loves Ramadan a success.


Warm regards,

User:ZI Jony 03:19, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Ramadan Organizing Team

Recent repurposing of year pages

edit

I recognize that year pages are held for placeholders, but I see some years being repurposed for a movie list (see 1998, 1999). Are these changes OK, or should we revert them? MathXplore (talk) 23:49, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Undone. This is silly: this site is not Wikipedia. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:51, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Preliminary results of the 2024 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees elections

edit

Hello all,

Thank you to everyone who participated in the 2024 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees election. Close to 6000 community members from more than 180 wiki projects have voted.

The following four candidates were the most voted:

  1. Christel Steigenberger
  2. Maciej Artur Nadzikiewicz
  3. Victoria Doronina
  4. Lorenzo Losa

While these candidates have been ranked through the vote, they still need to be appointed to the Board of Trustees. They need to pass a successful background check and meet the qualifications outlined in the Bylaws. New trustees will be appointed at the next Board meeting in December 2024.

Learn more about the results on Meta-Wiki.

Best regards,

The Elections Committee and Board Selection Working Group


MPossoupe_(WMF) 08:26, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Using profanity in conversations on Wikiquote and an official list of prohibited words

edit

It's against the site rules to call another editor a slur, right? So can someone share a link to a page that states as much? Or is this not really a rule and more of a guideline, one of those things left at the discretion of the administrators. What about a misspelled version of a slur, like referring to other editors as naggers and acting surprised that someone would misconstrue your language to mean something else? Are the offenses that warrant blocks just the slurs for race, sexuality and nationality, what about the derogatory B, C and P words used for women? Can we call male editors the D word for men or is that also hate speech? Most profane words are also derogatory slurs, but not all of them; are we allowed to say the synonyms of Heck or Darn? CensoredScribe (talk) 18:24, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We follow Wikipedia:No personal attacks, which spells out some of what you are mentioning. There is no hard and fast list of acceptable words or phrases, but this page provides clarification on the topic. Do you have specific examples of such behavior (preferably with links) that you wish to have some assistance with? ~ UDScott (talk) 18:36, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seeking volunteers to join several of the movement’s committees

edit

Each year, typically from October through December, several of the movement’s committees seek new volunteers.

Read more about the committees on their Meta-wiki pages:

Applications for the committees open on 16 October 2024. Applications for the Affiliations Committee close on 18 November 2024, and applications for the Ombuds commission and the Case Review Committee close on 2 December 2024. Learn how to apply by visiting the appointment page on Meta-wiki. Post to the talk page or email cst@wikimedia.org with any questions you may have.

For the Committee Support team,


-- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 23:08, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

edit

what does john dewey say about critical thinking 41.74.57.198 19:52, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link: John Dewey. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:29, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Hello everyone, I previously wrote on the 27th September to advise that the Wikidata item sitelink will change places in the sidebar menu, moving from the General section into the In Other Projects section. The scheduled rollout date of 04.10.2024 was delayed due to a necessary request for Mobile/MinervaNeue skin. I am happy to inform that the global rollout can now proceed and will occur later today, 22.10.2024 at 15:00 UTC-2. Please let us know if you notice any problems or bugs after this change. There should be no need for null-edits or purging cache for the changes to occur. Kind regards, -Danny Benjafield (WMDE) 11:29, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automatic talk page archival

edit

Hi all, is it possible to configure the automatic archival of old discussion threads (say after 3 months of inactivity) similarly to Wikipedia, and what's the best/recommended way of doing so? Sorry if this is a stupid question, but I've looked around and not found anything obvious. Gawaon (talk) 08:54, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are a few pages that are automatically archived by a bot, such as Wikiquote:Vandalism in progress. Note the code at the beginning:
{{User:MABot/config
|archive = Wikiquote:Vandalism in progress/Archive/%(counter)d
|algo = old(10d)
|counter = 15
|maxarchivesize = 300K
|minthreadsleft = 2
|archiveheader =
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
}}
Which tells the bot when and how to archive that page. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 13:16, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see, thank you. Gawaon (talk) 17:12, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Final Reminder: Join us in Making Wiki Loves Ramadan Success

edit

Dear all,

We’re thrilled to announce the Wiki Loves Ramadan event, a global initiative to celebrate Ramadan by enhancing Wikipedia and its sister projects with valuable content related to this special time of year. As we organize this event globally, we need your valuable input to make it a memorable experience for the community.

Last Call to Participate in Our Survey: To ensure that Wiki Loves Ramadan is inclusive and impactful, we kindly request you to complete our community engagement survey. Your feedback will shape the event’s focus and guide our organizing strategies to better meet community needs.

Please take a few minutes to share your thoughts. Your input will truly make a difference!

Volunteer Opportunity: Join the Wiki Loves Ramadan Team! We’re seeking dedicated volunteers for key team roles essential to the success of this initiative. If you’re interested in volunteer roles, we invite you to apply.

  • Application Link: Apply Here
  • Application Deadline: October 31, 2024

Explore Open Positions: For a detailed list of roles and their responsibilities, please refer to the position descriptions here: Position Descriptions

Thank you for being part of this journey. We look forward to working together to make Wiki Loves Ramadan a success!


Warm regards,
The Wiki Loves Ramadan Organizing Team 05:11, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Village_pump_archive_63&oldid=3627286"