User talk:Cirt/Archive 1

From Wikiquote
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome[edit]

Hi, Cirt. Welcome to English Wikiquote.

Enjoy! – RyanCross (talk) 03:01, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

No problem. :) – RyanCross (talk) 03:02, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Speedy delete tags[edit]

Hi Cirt. You recently tagged an article {{delete|reason}} but {{delete}} does not have a reason parameter. When giving a reason, use {{db}} (short for "delete because") so the reason will show. Thanks. ~ Ningauble 16:47, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, I will do that from now on! Cirt (talk) 17:02, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Your question on stubs[edit]

You wrote:

Thank you for the recent formatting help on the Oregon politicians pages I created. Quick question - generally what is a good number of quotes to have to remove the {{stub}} notice? Three or more? Cirt (talk) 15:31, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
No problem. Well, unfortunately, there is no hard and fast rule for when a page transforms from the stub to a proper page. As a rule of thumb, typically the stub tag is removed after a page gets 5 or more quotes, but, if you review the discussion contained here: Wikiquote talk:Stub, particularly in the bottom section, you will see that it is nearly impossible to set a definite rule. Just use your best judgment in determining if the number of quotes present represents a fair sampling of the person's potential quotes. But definitely a page with only one quote should be a stub in most cases. ~ UDScott 16:04, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Template categories[edit]

Hi Cirt. I really appreciate the category work you are doing. Did you know:

  • If you categorize a template with <noinclude>[[Category:NameOfCategory|{{PAGENAME}}]]</noinclude> instead of just <noinclude>[[Category:NameOfCategory]]</noinclude> then the category will be alphabetized by template name instead of lumping them all under "T" for Template.

Note also that I have suggested merging your new Category:Sister project templates into a preexisting category. I think it would be better to keep them all together. Regards, Ningauble 17:14, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Done[edit]

Cirt (talk) 15:45, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Fantastic job[edit]

I just wanted to say fantastic job with your contributions to all the articles listed at User:Cirt/Contributions! You must be very dedicated to our articles and quotes. Keep up the good work. – RyanCross (talk) 05:33, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the kind words! Really appreciated. Cirt (talk) 05:39, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
No problem. You've only been active here for about three weeks and I'm impressed of what you've done already. I assume you'll be doing more? :-) – RyanCross (talk) 05:45, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Yes I have a few other projects/areas/ways I'd like to continue to contribute. Cirt (talk) 06:05, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Ah, good. Well, see you around, – RyanCross (talk) 06:19, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Fundraiser notice[edit]

There's a gadget for it already in place; if it's still displaying, click the "expand" link and it will disappear. EVula // talk // // 22:47, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Still shows up in a few places (Special:Preferences), unless you add it to your .css file. Cirt (talk) 22:53, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
The preferences should be the only place it shows up; all gadgets are disabled when you view your preferences, to make sure that any malicious gadgets can be deactivated. EVula // talk // // 23:02, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Ah well, in any event, doesn't show up there for me anymore. :P But thanks for the edification. Cirt (talk) 23:05, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Jim Carrey[edit]

Hi! I'm glad that you re-created the Jim Carrey entry. I knew that he had remarkable quotes but I didn't have time to find them. FloNight♥♥♥ 23:32, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the kind words. I actually agreed wholeheartedly with the points you made at the previous deletion discussion for the page - but then as part of my work on Comedy I wanted to turn redlinks blue and did some research to find some poignant sourced quotes by Carrey from interviews and such. Cheers, Cirt (talk) 00:17, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Bud Selig[edit]

Hello. Since you do a lot of article work around en.wikiquote, do you mind looking over the Bud Selig article for me? I've been working on it for probably about a month on that page now, but I would like a second opinion of what you think of it or if you think it needs some significant/minor changes. Thanks, and happy holidays, RyanCross @ 10:44, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

I will try to do that. Thanks for the advice and compliments. :-) — RyanCross @ 11:02, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Benfo-Dutch 2 persons[edit]

Hello, thanks for your remark, I didn't know. We are preparing the quotes together and I (Fons Heijnsbroek) puts them on Wikiquote. Is that a problem? And can you give me a suggestion how to make that clear?

all the best,

Benfo 14:28, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Benfo-Dutch[edit]

thank you for your suggesstions. I made it more clear now, and hope this will do better.

all the best,

Benfo 14:00, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

thank you[edit]

thank you for your comment, otherwise I coud not have repaired it.

82.95.116.60 09:13, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Adminship?[edit]

Hey there. I just came by to ask if you were interested in adminship. If you are, I'll be happy to nominate you. I looked over most of your contributions several days ago, and all of them seemed were positive and overall helpful to our community. I've been meaning to ask you, but I wanted to see for myself of your speedy deletion work, so I had to wait until I was an administrator. I looked over it today, and I think you would be a fine administrator for our project in the future. You've been active for about two months, so waiting another month won't hurt since I generally expect at least three months of activity before I nominate someone. Of course, if you are interested in running, I'll ask you again when the time comes and I'll look over your contributions again since you're probably going to do a lot more work for Wikiquote in the next month or two. So, are you interested in becoming an admin in a month or two? — RyanCross (talk) 04:17, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the nomination offer, I am flattered. I am interested, but I agree with you that now is a bit too soon. I will think this over, and defer to your judgment if you wish to nominate me at some point in the future. Cirt (talk) 04:44, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
Very well. Take care. And again, thank you for your support in my RfA. :-) — RyanCross (talk) 04:48, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Robert Orben[edit]

Thanks. Evrik 18:47, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Mnemonics heading[edit]

Thanks for showing your technical expertise. That's the kind of glitch that has been me throwing my arms up in despair! -- Antiquary 19:40, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Speedy to Prod instead[edit]

Just thought I'd let you know. If you disagree with PRODing it rather than speedy deleting it, do say so. — RyanCross (talk) 06:46, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Yu-gi-oh: The Abridged Series[edit]

I declined your {{db}} as "hoax" because the subject does appear to exist. If the article misrepresents the subject (I have not looked at it) or if you think it is non-notable (I don't see obvious notability from googling "Yu-gi-oh Abridged") then try again. I wasn't comfortable with speedy delete because it seems to need some looking into for a determination. ~ Ningauble 17:59, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Category work[edit]

<noinclude>[[Category:NameOfCategory|{{PAGENAME}}]]</noinclude>

Cirt (talk) 15:01, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

RfB thankspam![edit]

Just wanted to drop you a line to thank you for your support of my RfB, which just closed with unanimous support. :) EVula // talk // // 19:19, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Your checkuser request[edit]

I see your recent checkuser request at WQ:AN. Please email me if you wish to privately tell which ones to check, so I can fulfill the request. Thanks.--Jusjih 04:19, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

thank you[edit]

I also noticed that there don't seem to be active sysops on WQ. (anon) —This unsigned comment is by 173.52.21.50 (talkcontribs) .

Journalism[edit]

Hey Cirt: if we had barnstars at this project, I would nail one over your door. That was a fantastic job! ~ Ningauble 01:58, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Catherine of Aragon[edit]

I suspected, and was able to confirm by an Amazon.com word search for the Alison Weir book (using the word "upper"), that the second quote on the Catherine of Aragon page was said about Catherine rather than being by her. It was on the same page (197) as the first quote but was said by Anne Boleyn. Thank you for your work, BTW, on saving this article. - InvisibleSun 04:06, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

RfA nomination[edit]

Wikiquote:Requests for adminship/Cirt. Good luck, Cirt! :-) — RyanCross (talk) 09:43, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Sysop status[edit]

Congratulations, you are now an administrator here. ~ Kalki 13:32, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Cirt (talk) 13:34, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations, Cirt. :-) You'll do fantastic. — RyanCross (talk) 17:56, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Many thanks, and thanks again for the kind words in the nom. Cirt (talk) 18:23, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Vandal fighting[edit]

Thanks for all the vandal fighting that happened earlier — I had dozed off while doing some work on a page and just woke up a short while ago, and saw what had gone on. Sorry I wasn't around to help out earlier. ~ Kalki 12:04, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I see the problem was finally solved. Thanks for your help. And yes, I've learned what to do now incase of move-page vandalism. xD By the way, good idea to move-protect WQ:RFA. — RyanCross (talk) 20:33, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

New page[edit]

Hi, I created a new page: Pan Tadeusz. Can it be added to the New Pages section on the Main Page? Kpalion 00:51, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. One minor thing about formatting though: since it's a book title, shouldn't it be in italics? Kpalion 18:04, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

RE: Adminship[edit]

Please, I'd love some help The C of E 15:28, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Misc template deletions[edit]

As you already noticed, I just nominated several templates that you recently created for deletion:

I believe they are unnecessary. However, that is not to say they would be completely useless if you want to pursue further development of the frameworks of which they are components at Wikipedia. Please share your thoughts at the VfD discussions. Thanks. ~ Ningauble 17:18, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Cheers[edit]

I'd like to personally thank you for setting the RFA page for me. I can't thank you enough The C of E 18:26, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism[edit]

Firstly, thank you for blocking the vandal! That was tiring. Secondly, is there non-admin rollback here? It would have been much easier (I haven't used undo on any project in like... 6 months :P). Thanks. ;) TheAE talk 19:27, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, it's something that has to be requested on bugzilla:, after community consensus to implement it (probably on WQ:VP). I remember Simple English Wikipedia did it recently, so it can't be too hard to get passed. God bless, TheAE talk 19:37, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Haha, yeah, it would. I'm only semi-active here (I'm an admin & 'crat on simple:). I might become somewhat active here, maybe just for vandalism fighting. TheAE talk 19:40, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Template:Cite book problems[edit]

There's a problem with your WP-ported version of Template:Cite book. Please see WQ:VP#Template:Cite book problems for details. I plan to revert to the previous version until we can fix it. If you have any ideas or suggestions, I'd love to hear them. I'm also raising a discussion about making WP template porting and documentation a bit easier at Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Template:Template documentation. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 19:23, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

deletion vote Wikiquote article "Shamanism"[edit]

There are no copyright violations. In each case where there is a person claiming that there is violation of copyright, the claim is based on this being copied from a website, but, as I have answered in each case, I am the owner of that website. Furthermore, this would not "seem to be largely or primarily an author seeking to promote his own work", since the articles involved are all quotations (properly referenced) from books by other authors, all published by reputable academic sources, mainly university presses.71.76.32.220 20:52, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi[edit]

Mind showing me around? Best regards, --Kanonkas 20:09, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Jim Carrey[edit]

Just curious, but what was the reason you handled this page the way you did after it was vandalized? I thought when we moved it back to its normal name (along with all the others), all was OK (apart from the protection that you then assigned to it). Just wondering. ~ UDScott 19:24, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

The vandalism still showed up in the edit history. Cirt (talk) 19:28, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Ah, OK - although the same is true of all those other pages that were vandalized. ~ UDScott 19:38, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Assurance of Quote-Authenticity in a Wikiquote to be Created by New User[edit]

Question withdrawn. Thank you. Henry Delforn 03:05, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Message for you...[edit]

... here. Just thought you should know. Please delete the page after you have read it. Thanks. — RyanCross (talk) 02:36, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes check.svgY Done. Cirt (talk) 19:15, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I have a question about User talk pages[edit]

Thanks for the Welcome message on my talk page. To illustrate that old saw about "No good deed goes unpunished," I now have a question to bug you with.

I have put some material on my talk page regarding a Winston Churchill quote that another user felt was not adequately sourced, along with some other material that I believe correctly identifies the source of the quote. I did this so that I could pull the info together from several sources before asking anyone else to comment on it. I would like to ask you if this use of my talk page is an appropriate use ( I intended to put a short note at the Village pump, asking for reaction from others based on my talk page info ).

I realize I could just go ahead and edit the Churchill entry, but as a very new user, I'm still trying to form a better impression of what works best around here. I have already added some other quotes, but I am still unclear about the standards for sourcing . . . Thank you , --Archimedes 00:52, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply: I also notice that you archived the old entries on the Churchill talk page, so thanks for that as well. I will transfer the discussion I mentioned above to the Churchill talk page as soon as I can shorten it a bit & otherwise clean up my cut-n-paste stuff. I have another question; how do you "sign" these entries so that a (talk) link to your talk page appears after your name? I'm using 4 tildes to "sign" my entries; have not found anything to explain how you do what I'm asking about. Archimedes 17:04, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

:-)[edit]

Hi, belated thanks for the welcome. :-) Shappy 14:40, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Importing filters[edit]

  1. go to the source filter, click "Export this filter to another wiki"
  2. Then copy-paste to http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter/import

Cirt (talk) 12:34, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Tagging vandals[edit]

Why not use the {{vblock}} template in situations like this? It categorizes them for internal references and suppresses external search engine indexing. Is there a down-side? ~ Ningauble 14:39, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Nah, you are right. I was just being fast/lazy whilst in the thick of the vandal fighting part of it. :( Cirt (talk) 16:24, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Abuse filter 8[edit]

FYI: I modified a filter you created, because it threw a false positive in a clear case of "constructive removal." ~ Ningauble 18:15, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Okay, no worries. Cirt (talk) 19:47, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

RFA[edit]

Excuse me, I'm sorry to trouble you but I'd like to apply for adminship but I can't seem to find the instructions to do so and so I would like to respectfully ask if you could either tell me how to make a RFA page or create one on my behalf I've been here for 1 year and I would like to try and help make Wikiquote a better site The C of E 15:49, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

If you follow the link to your old RfA that's on your talk page, you'll be able to navigate back to the main RfA page which has instructions. Cirt created your last one, I think it's reasonable that you create your second one. EVula // talk // // 17:03, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
I agree with EVula (talk · contributions). That prior RfA link is Wikiquote:Requests for adminship/The C of E. Cirt (talk) 18:20, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Bob Ross[edit]

I just stumbled across the article Bob Ross in my wandering around the Wiki and wanted to give you a "thumbs-up" for your good work cleaning up the article and "saving" it from the AfD. I would've been sad to see an article on a figure like Bob Ross lost, but I don't think I would've had the energy to save it myself. Kudos, Peace and Passion ("I'm listening....") 07:37, 4 August 2009 (UTC).

Eh...[edit]

I was willing to let him stir up shit on his talk page (or mine) for a bit longer, and was only going to come down hard on him if he started putting articles up for deletion, but I can't say that I'm opposed to the block. *shrug* EVula // talk // // 16:50, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay thanks. Cirt (talk) 16:58, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Also, I'm glad I wasn't the only one that was suspecting we were dealing with a Dennys sock... I wouldn't mind confirmation, but that was the first thing I thought of when I saw his sig... EVula // talk // // 17:14, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
I placed the {{sockpuppet}} tag because I think the block evasion justifies making the new block an indefinite one. The similar pattern of haranguing multiple users with petulant foolishness might only lead one to suspect puppetry, but I am virtually certain because of two specific parallels with absurdities that were peculiar to the old account: demanding that an article be deleted in order to start a new article, and arguing that an article should be kept because it is listed at WQ:REQ. Great minds think alike, small minds repeat themselves. ~ Ningauble 17:51, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Agreed. Cirt (talk) 17:54, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Ningauble, that's a far more scientific rationale than my gut reaction of "huh, both of them surround their signatures with ()." ;) EVula // talk // // 17:58, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Omar Rodriguez-Lopez[edit]

While I do not disagree with your deletion of this page and the early closure of the vfd, it does not follow our policy for speedy deletions, which says in the Notes section "Note that possible copyright infringements are not candidates for speedy deletion." - which was the reason I nominated it for vfd rather than just deleting it. Again, I do not disagree, but we should either change the policy or allow the vfd to continue for the full review period. ~ UDScott 17:01, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

We should change the policy. Copyright violations should be speedy deleted. Cirt (talk) 17:04, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
Agreed. I would support that. ~ UDScott 17:05, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
Yes check.svgY Done. Cirt (talk) 17:06, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────────┘
Wikiquote talk:Speedy deletions. Cirt (talk) 17:08, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Archiving talk at Rush Limbaugh[edit]

Please restore your recent archiving of discussion at Rush Limbaugh, and in the future, if you believe an archive is needed please propose it on the talk page and seek a consensus of editors to proceed. I have never had an active discussion which I contributed to archived less than 30 minutes later. I believe the discussion of the sourcing for the slavery/Ray quotes is significant to editors on that page and to the Wikiquote project in general. patsw 17:23, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

No. The discussion involved poor sources. If you want to reinitiate a new discussion at the talk page about new sources that are actually both secondary, independent, and reliable, you are free to do so. Cirt (talk) 17:31, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Generally I think it's a better practice not to archive something unless no comment has been added to the discussion for at least a few days. The purpose of archiving is to put away discussion to which no one has anything more to contribute, not simply to shelve something that has very recently been resolved. Also, I wanted to let you know that I posted User:TheVidiot's email to me on his talk page - you may wish to respond to the points he raised therein. I already have. Thanks, by the way, for removing that annoying post to my talk page. BD2412 T 17:56, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Generally I agree with you about archiving, of course. But this is not generally, and users were arguing back and forth and back and forth and back and forth and back and forth, seemingly ad infinitum, and I thought it best to start the discussion anew about better sources. About User:TheVidiot - I respectfully defer to your review. :) And about your user talk page, you are of course welcome! ;) Cirt (talk) 18:01, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Some Experiences ( & Thoughts ) Re: Sourced / Unsourced / Misattributed / Etc.[edit]

Cirt - a bit earlier, I was reading the discussion at the Village Pump regarding Sourced / Unsourced Sections etc., & it stimulated some thoughts on the topic that I wanted to share. I am more than a bit reluctant, however, to just jump into the discussion on the Village Pump, since I have only been here at Wikiquote for a short time (two or three brief periods of activity punctuated by longer periods of inactivity - at least, IIRC ). Since I was also looking for someone to ask a few questions, even before reading this discussion, and since you were one of the people I had thought of in that regard, I thought I would start by writing a note to you. To focus my musings and ramblings, I did some research on a fairly well-known quote: "Many complain of their memory, few of their judgment." I chose this quote to look at because I had just been doing some editing on the page for Poor Richard's Almanack immediately prior to going to the Village Pump. I thought I would treat this quote in the manner I might employ if I were ignorant about it, and see what would come up. The first thing I did was to do a plain-vanilla Google search on the quote. Using [Quote Many complain of their judgment] as the search argument, I got 12,200,000 results. Out of the first ten results (i.e., first page), eight attributed this quote to Benjamin Franklin. The seventh and tenth results, respectively, attributed quotes that were phrased slightly differently to Francois de La Rochefoucauld (brainyquote) and Michel de Montaigne (iWise). The eight quote sites that attributed this quote to Franklin were : quotes(dot)net - two results, randomquotes(dot)org - two results, finestquotes(dot)com, feedagg(dot)com, nickelkid(dot)net, and last but not least, sayings-quotes(dot)com. There is one teeny problem - out of ten results, the number of results with more info about it than just a name (Franklin, de la Rochefoucauld or Montaigne ) to slap on it is ZERO . But so far, my man Ben is winning 8 - 1 - 1 . I feel like I'm getting warm. Click on Next, & result # 11 , and (WhaHoo!) benandverse(dot)com not only has the exact quote, but it also gives a year for it (1745), AND it mentions Poor Richard! Gee, that sounds familiar! Let's try a new search with [Quote Ben Franklin 1745 {text} Poor Richard]! Bingo! The first result this time says, "600 Proverbs from Poor Richard's Almanack by Ben Franklin": at richhall(dot)com. and when I search to find the word judgment (Find on this page), occurrence #5 of judgment is the quote, and when I scroll back about half a page, I see that the quote is in a section labelled 1745 ! Looks like I'm all set - right?

Regrettably, I have to interrupt this program briefly, because it is now 4:02 A.M. local time, I have things I MUST do tomorrow (alright, today), and I'm getting punchy due to lack of sleep. However, I DO have a point - & I promise to complete this narrative soon - ASAP, in fact. Besides, although I don't want to just leave you hanging, I'm betting that you already have some suspicions about where I'm going with all this. As T1 said, "I'll be back." I'm sure you have no lack of other things to do in the interim. Later - Archimedes (talk) 08:15, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Okay sure, feel free to continue it later. :) Cirt (talk) 10:34, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, I will. Archimedes (talk) 13:52, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Now, where was I? So far, the vote tally was 8-1-1, IIRC. (Of course, this isn't necessarily a democracy we're dealing with here, but I wouldn't rule out at least the possibility that at least some people might look at it that way ... or, simply take the first result that popped up ... or, stumble on this quote by reading a dead-tree copy of Poor Richard, for that matter.) Hmmm. Speaking of [Poor Richard's Almanack], mebbe I'll do a Google Books search on that! If I do so, and click on the first result that I get ( it's labelled "Juvenile Fiction" - 1914 -, but OTOH, it says that it's Full view ), I see a box with "Search in this book" in it - [1745] here returns {No results found in this book for 1745}, but if I try [complain memory few judgment] (small box ...), here is what I get: another, larger box with Page 36 .. in the upper right-hand corner, and 345. Many complain of their memory, few of their judgment. in the center. Clicking on the Page 36 .. takes me, unsurprisingly, to page 36 ... looks good to me! Ben, you da man!

Time for a little break. I'll return shortly ... Archimedes (talk) 15:01, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

OK, I'm back. I still wanna know what happens if I do a Google Books search with the full quote : [Many complain of their memory few of their judgment ]; that is just how I roll. Lessee ... who the [bleep!] is Charles Caleb Colton? Lacon; or, Many things in few words : not only the first result, but the fourth too (different editions, it seems like). In the first result, you are pointed to p. 146 ; near the bottom of the page, we see MEN OFTENER COMPLAIN OF THEIR MEMORY THAN THEIR JUDGMENT.-Why is it that we so constantly hear men complaining of their memory,* but none of their judgment; is it that they are less ashamed of a short memory, because they have heard that this is a failing of great wits, or is it because nothing is more common than a fool with a strong memory, nor more rare than a man of sense with a weak judgment. And, at the very bottom of the page, this note appears:
{asterisk} Of all the faculties of the mind, memory is the first that flourishes, and the first that dies. Quintilian has said, "Quantum memoriae tantum ingenii ;" but if this maxim were either true, or believed to be so, all men would be as satisfied with their memory as they at present are with their judgment.

(Is that really ingenii, or is it something else? My eyes are getting blurry ... and I'm getting a headache. Maybe I should take another break ... Archimedes (talk) 16:20, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
I would say always best to obtain the hardcopy of the book itself, to verify it. Cirt (talk) 20:57, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Cirt - I was striving for a sort of ironic effect, there. I was about to walk away because I had already spent an enormous amount of time at the computer, and I was looking for something mildly amusing to say. FWIW, I'm a hardcopy sort of person, too - not that I let that deter me from doing a lot of reseach on the Net. Still busy - BBL Archimedes (talk) 22:56, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

If I may intrude here, I believe that the quote you are looking for is on the page for François de la Rochefoucauld:

  • Tout le monde se plaint de sa mémoire, et personne ne se plaint de son jugement.
    • Everyone blames his memory; no one blames his judgment.
      • Maxim 89 from Reflections; or Sentences and Moral Maxims (1665–1678) - InvisibleSun 02:06, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello, InvisibleSun. Actually, I was getting to that - but I'm a very slow typist, among other thigs. Thank you for taking an interest, tho ... I do appreciate ! Archimedes (talk) 02:33, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Cirt - I was striving for a sort of ironic effect, there. I was about to walk away because I had already spent an enormous amount of time at the computer, and I was looking for something mildly amusing to say. FWIW, I'm a hardcopy sort of person, too - not that I let that deter me from doing a lot of reseach on the Net. Still busy - BBL Archimedes (talk) 22:56, 19 October 2009 (UTC) Ahhh - that's better ! When I was signed on last, Cirt, I had been working on a longer post, and when I tried to save it, I was notified that your User Talk page had changed since I grabbed it. Here is a save I did of my changes then - starting here - You just gotta love that serendipity ! Prior to yesterday, I had never heard of Charles Caleb Colton, or Lacon: yet the first paragraph (i.e., #1) of Lacon, IMHO, could have been written with the express intention of discussing the problem that we are addressing here! Wierd ... see if it strikes you the same way ...

  • It is almost as difficult to make a man unlearn his errors as his knowledge. Mal-information is more hopeless than non-information; for error is always more busy than ignorance. Ignorance is a blank sheet, on which we may write; but error is a scribbled one, on which we must first erase. Ignorance is contented to stand still with her back to the truth; but error is more presumptuous, and proceeds in the same direction. Ignorance has no light, but error follows a false one. The consequence is, that error, when she retraces her footsteps, has further to go, before she can arrive at the truth, than ignorance.
    • Lacon, vol. I (1820) #1

In any case, I'm back. Home is the sailor, home from the sea,

and the auto home from the Collision Repair Center ...
and no worse for the fender-bender at all. Apparently, never happened (... in the literal sense, i.e. "from appearances alone").

Getting back on topic: Lacon was the first Google books result for the quote. Interesting as Lacon may be, however, it is clearly not the info I went searching for. The second result is for a book titled A Course of English Reading by James Pycroft, and without going into (any more) tiresome detail, trust me, that one isn't what we're looking for either; I'm not even sure what Google Books search saw in it, other than that, on p. 40, Pycroft uses the word memory a whole lot, and also the word judgment a few times as well. Movin' right along ... Result #3, otoh, is more promising. Title is Dictionary of Essential Quotations (1983), ed. Goldstein-Jackson, Taylor & Francis, ISBN 0389203939 , and , on p. 102, there's our quote, all right, attributed to our old buddy Benjamin Franklin (1706-90) Poor Richard's Almanack, 1745. Lookin' good ... Google Books search result #4 is another edition of Charles Caleb Colton's Lacon, from 1836: I believe we can just pass that one right by , for now. Result #5 is Mike Myers' CompTIA A+ guide to managing and troubleshooting PCs (second edition), Michael Myers, McGraw-Hill ISBN 0072263563, and on p. 117 (the first page of Chapter 4, which apparently discusses RAM, i.e. Random Access Memory, we see our old (dead, actually, if we want to be honest ...) hermano Senõr Franklin. And our quote. RAM. "Memory". OK, I get it! Ooops! Dunno what I did, but the results page just reshuffled like a kaliedoscope! Perhaps it would be sensible if I summarize at this point; nothing here that is substantially different from what I've already seen. Minor variations, yes; startlingly new directions, no. To sum up; so far, the consensus seems to run towards Ben Franklin, or specifically, Poor Richard.

OK, that clears the backlog - let me know what you think of the Colton quote. I certainly like it - as a matter of fact, I put it on my user page.
And, while we're asking questions, why, I wonder, does tout le monde assume that every line of Poor Richard's Almanack is material that was 100% original from Benjamin Franklin ?

Just thought I'd ask ... Later, Archimedes (talk) 02:34, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

InvisibleSun - may I suggest you check the history for the last revision to the Poor Richard's Almanack page, and then maybe come back here? Just a suggestion ... Archimedes (talk) 02:39, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Might I suggest this discussion could be best continued at the talk page of the quote page in question? Cirt (talk) 05:50, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Cirt - me again. My suggestion that InvisibleSun check the most recent update to the Poor Richard's Almanac page was a response to his earlier post, in which he pointed out that the quote I've been discussing here, "Many complain ... etc." was actually a quote from de la Rochefoucauld: my reply was intended to draw his attention to evidence that I already knew that - to wit, the last update to Poor Richard, which I made myself, less than 24 hours before InvisibleSun's comment, to add a note which pointed to the de la Rochefoucauld maxim ... and one of the things I was building up to in this discussion was that, despite the apparent overall consensus that the quote was a Franklin quote, Ben actually borrowed it from François. And, to take it a bit further, this is one of the things that bothers me about the whole Sourced / Unsourced issue - IMHO, a good deal of it is simply focused on the wrong things. Having said that, I do want to apoligize for hijacking your User page this way. And for inflicting this long, rambling discursion on you. When I'm mulling something over, I tend to talk out loud, if you will ... kind of my way of seeking feedback. Archimedes (talk) 08:05, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Okay no worries. Cirt (talk) 09:32, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Heads-up[edit]

Wikiquote:Administrators'_noticeboard#Block_review_requested:_TheVidiot. Regards, Daniel 23:38, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Cirt (talk) 23:40, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Proabivouac[edit]

Since User:Proabivouac turned out to be correct maybe an unblock is in order? JoshuaZ 00:53, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

[1]. Cirt (talk) 00:56, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Re:Welcome[edit]

Hi. Thanks for the warm welcome. :-). Regards, Trivelt 20:48, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Some Questions[edit]

Cirt - I have some questions / things I could use some help/advice/a clue on. If you have the time ... Starting with: a while back, I wanted to set up a Username on Wikipedia, and because there seemed to be a conflict with another User over the name Archimedes, I ended up creating another Username ( CononOfSamos ) over there. Up to this point, I have not needed to actually do any edits on Wikipedia, so I have not addressed this issue. I am fine with the idea of using the CononOfSamos Username on both sites ( there do not appear to be any conflicts ), but I am wondering what the correct procedure is to convert already existing info under Username Archimedes to another name? Is this doable? I have a number of other questions, but I don't wish to overtax your patience. Thanks up front for any help / advice you can give me ... Archimedes (talk) 16:28, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

I would suggest posting about it to WQ:AN, and/or asking a bureaucrat. Cirt (talk) 07:07, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

That would be fine. How does one identify bureaucrats? Is there a list?

One other matter: I made some edits to the Thomas Fuller (physician) page, including setting up a separate section for External Links. After this change, a box shows up on the lower right stating that Wikipedia has an article for this person : however, if you click on the link, you get a page stating that the article does not exist. Actually, there is a page for him on Wikipedia, but it is titled Thomas Fuller (writer). I believe this page should be renamed, but I am unsure how to go about accomplishing this. There are actually seven (7) Thomas Fullers on Wikipedia, including two architects, two politicians, and one ex-slave, plus the physician and an earlier English writer ( who also has a Wikiquote page ). Ningauble gave me some help with my Username, but I believe he is still mostly on break. At the least. his User page ( User:Ningauble ) still says he has "Gone fishing". Is Ningauble a "bureaucrat" on Wikiquote? CononOfSamos (talk) 21:00, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

[2] = crats on quote. :) Cirt (talk) 22:13, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Wickedictionary[edit]

Please take another careful look at the wickedictionary. It is an academic source.Stingray 05:31, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

QOTD[edit]

Thanks for posting the 2 QOTDs for the 3rd and 4th — I will henceforth attempt to post some selections into place to keep ahead of the rolling protection, which will be at least 2 or 3 days ahead of time, at the current protection levels. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 02:54, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Derek Abbott[edit]

Hi :-) I closed the Derek Abbott VFd discussion today as Keep. I can see where you are coming from about Physorg.com. But after reviewing the comments in the discussion, I think most people think it meets the threshold as a reliable source for our purposes. Thank you for bringing the article to the attention of the community because I do think that it is important for us to review these borderline entries. Take care, FloNight♥♥♥ 13:05, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Re: Thank you[edit]

Glad to be of help. :-) --Ole.Holm 15:05, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! :) Cirt (talk) 15:16, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

WP:HOTCAT[edit]

I declined a speedy deletion request for the WP:HOTCAT redirect you created, and prodded it instead. If you still want to use this, just pull the tag. ~ Ningauble 15:26, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Okay thank you. Cirt (talk) 19:19, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Recent vandalism... again...[edit]

This appears to be another apparent sockpuppet of the slew of vandalism connected to the user name... User:MuchoSemen13. The same person keeps creating incessant vandalism, following around contributions and either reverting them at random or just plain vandalizing with different user names. I've found another recent sockpuppet vandalizing the same articles. Please check Black Frieza. All the same exact edits as the person pointed above, all the same places, same reverting vandalism. Please look at how the same person is reverting all the same material using different usernames, causing vandalism on the same places. Please look after these specific articles for me and if necessary, protect them from recently joined users in order to avoid vandalism; please help me maintain and sustain resourceful articles while avoiding vandalism from this same person. I will bring forward any other instances to your attention. - Zarbon 06:17, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

And now there's yet another slew of obvious sockpuppets for the same user... User:Meester Seester and TheClownPrinceofCrime. Please help me stop this vandalism, it's really getting out of hand again. - Zarbon 05:38, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
Can you please protect all the articles I've listed on my user page as articles I've worked on/started/etc. because the user is just running through them specifically and vandalizing those articles with different user names. There's another obvious sock again... Cyui. - Zarbon 15:59, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
Stop asking me here. The proper place is at WQ:AN. Cirt (talk) 19:28, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Prince[edit]

This just was created. I don't really see a purpose for it. Enigmaman 05:26, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes check.svgY Done, thanks. Cirt (talk) 07:08, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Just created again. By the way, there are two malformed noms on RfA. I tried to remove them and got reverted. Is it standard procedure to leave up stuff from people who have no idea? Enigmaman 00:52, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
In the future, this stuff is better discussed at WQ:AN please. Cirt (talk) 04:39, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Didn't want to ask a wide audience. Enigmaman 07:14, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
That's really the best way to go in the future. Cirt (talk) 08:10, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Hat and hab[edit]

Sorry it took me so long to respond. Copy the contents of user:Bawolff/monobook.js to the end of mediawiki:Common.js. Cheers. Bawolff

works for me. Did you do a hard refresh? Bawolff 04:12, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
Works now, thanks so much! Cirt (talk) 04:19, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

BotWars[edit]

EleferenBot was removing wikilinks for a deprecated project, as was at least one other bot. Please discuss at Wikiquote:Village pump#BotWars: Simple English interwiki. ~ Ningauble 20:56, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

It was removing valid links that are still active. -- Cirt (talk) 21:09, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
I used a script last update (meta:Pywikipediabot/interwiki.py)! On February, 27th addition of a line has been made:
self.obsolete ={ ... 'simple': 'en', #http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_closing_projects/Closure_of_Simple_English_(3)_Wikiquote ... }
For this reason the bot has removed references. svn wikiquote_family.py. --Eleferen 05:12, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Inertia[edit]

I don't see why you blocked User:Inertia several hours after came down from whatever he was high on, and apologized at the Vandalism in progress noticeboard. Blocks are supposed to be preventative, not punitive. ~ Ningauble 21:55, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Changed to warning. -- Cirt (talk) 22:11, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


Polite discussion[edit]

Cirt, I believe you responded to some of my attempts to explain my contributions with "Why don't you expend all this energy instead towards finding the original sources for these quotes". The last time I checked, ignoring my arguments by responding with of handed rhetorical questions like this one is not quite "polite conversation" and certainly ruder than anything I had said up until that point. Although someone actually went to do exactly what you asked, but then you continued to object to the contributions, why criticising me for not being polite? Very odd. Gregcaletta 10:22, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

The other users at Talk:Julian Assange have been polite and matter-of-fact, and I truly have appreciated that, very much. :) -- Cirt (talk) 21:14, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Bowfinger[edit]

You might want to take a look at a comment I left on this film's talk page. Obviously you might feel differently than me, but would be interested to hear your opinion. Thanks! ~ UDScott 00:48, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

user:Ashot Arzumanyan [edit]

Hi, Cirt. user:Ashot Arzumanyan who you indef-blocked asked for unblocking recently. Could you please make a comment on his talk page? Thanks, --Aphaia 19:06, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Will defer to judgment of another administrator about that, no objections, either way. :) -- Cirt (talk) 14:15, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks :)--Aphaia 21:29, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 12:45, 30 July 2010 (UTC)