From Wikiquote

Jump to: navigation, search

The imperialist ideology of force, from whatever side it comes, must be shattered for all time.
~ The White Rose ~

The real division is not between conservatives and revolutionaries but between authoritarians and libertarians.
~ George Orwell ~

I AM an Anarchist.
All good men are Anarchists.
All cultured, kindly men; all gentlemen; all just men are Anarchists.
Jesus was an Anarchist.
~ Elbert Hubbard ~

Once for all, then, a short precept is given thee:
Love, and do what thou wilt.
~ Augustine of Hippo ~

Love works magic.
It is the final purpose
Of the world story,
The Amen of the universe.
~ Novalis ~

♘ Kalki · †alk · iota · index · imago · αnima · ! ¡ ! · Magic · Worldsong · Restorations · Chronology · Vox Box
… Ω …

Moderate strength is shown in violence, supreme strength is shown in levity.
~ G. K. Chesterton ~
in
The Man Who Was Thursday

Whatever pretended pessimists in search of notoriety may say, most people are naturally kind, at heart.

~ James Branch Cabell ~
in
The Cream of the Jest

Of course I'm sane, when trees start talking to me, I don't talk back.

~ Terry Pratchett ~
in
The Light Fantastic

The law of levity is allowed to supersede the law of gravity.

~ R. A. Lafferty ~

All of us, without being taught, have attained to a belief in some sort of divinity, though it is not easy for all men to know the precise truth about it, nor is it possible for those who do know it to tell it to all men.
~ Julian the Philosopher ~

We are all absolutely free. If everybody could go into dhyana at will, nobody could be controlled — by fear of prison, by fear of whips or electroshock, by fear of death, even. All existing society is based on keeping those fears alive, to control the masses. Ten people who know would be more dangerous than a million armed anarchists.
~ Robert Anton Wilson ~

Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods.
~ Albert Einstein ~

Individual things are nothing but modifications of the attributes of God, or modes by which the attributes of God are expressed in a fixed and definite manner.
~ Baruch Spinoza ~

A democratic civilization will save itself only if it makes the language of the image into a stimulus for critical reflection — not an invitation for hypnosis.
~ Umberto Eco ~

I learned very early the difference between knowing the name of something and knowing something.
~ Richard Feynman ~

We live beyond words, as also we live beyond computation and beyond theory.
There is no reason whatever to assume that the languages of science are less limited than other languages.
~ Wendell Berry ~

Thanks to TV and for the convenience of TV, you can only be one of two kinds of human beings, either a liberal or a conservative.
~ Kurt Vonnegut ~

Both absolute power and absolute faith are instruments of dehumanization.
Hence absolute faith corrupts as absolutely as absolute power.
~ Eric Hoffer ~

As soon as men live entirely in accord with the law of love natural to their hearts and now revealed to them, which excludes all resistance by violence, and therefore hold aloof from all participation in violence — as soon as this happens, not only will hundreds be unable to enslave millions, but not even millions will be able to enslave a single individual.
~ Leo Tolstoy ~

That which is not just, is not Law; and that which is not Law, ought not to be obeyed.
~ Algernon Sydney ~

There is no greater mindlessness and absurdity than to force conscience and the spirit with external power, when only their creator has authority for them.
~ Ferenc Dávid ~

I am the dreamer and the doer
I the hearer and the knower
I the giver and the taker
I the sword and the wound of sword.
If this be true, then let sword fall free from hand.
I embrace myself.
I laugh until I weep
And weep until I smile…
~ Ray Bradbury ~

Kids! Bringing about Armageddon can be dangerous. Do not attempt it in your own home.
Good Omens

This is the primary account of Kalki, who has also used many other account-names here, some since the very first days of this Wiki.

"If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it."
Foundational Principles against overly-controlling forces developing on the wikis.
Even if you have read them before, PLEASE EXAMINE ANEW: Wikipedia:Ignore all rules, and the other links available there, including the links delineating much which Wikipedia was NOT.
These were some of the earliest directives established by the founding workers on the Wikimedia projects.

"Ignore all rules: If rules make you nervous and depressed, and not desirous of participating in the wiki, then ignore them entirely and go about your business." ~ RulesToConsider
"IAR is policy, always has been" ~ Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales

I am in a period of drastically reduced activity here : I once was an admin here (from 29 January 2004 to 1 December 2009), but being that no longer, there is far less usefulness or need for my regular presence, and I am far less inclined to spend as much time monitoring things. I will continue to serve, protect and develop this project to the extent I can amidst many other concerns, but I follow no set schedule, and now expect to often not be around for several days at a time, though I will likely be around most days for at least a few minutes. A devotion to Awareness, Life, and Love and to the principles of Justice, Unity and Liberty in truly genuine ways far beyond that of lip-service, based on an intense commitment to the crucial virtues of honesty and compassion, continues to guide and abide with me. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 04:44, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit]

We gaze continually at the world and it grows dull in our perceptions.
Yet seen from the another's vantage point, as if new, it may still take our breath away.
~ Alan Moore ~
in
Watchmen

It's unique because it doesn't look like a comet with the typical tail; it looks like a cloud.
It's not what you would normally see at all ...
George Masterson

Everybody is special.
Everybody.
Everybody is a hero, a lover, a fool, a villain, everybody.
Everybody has their story to tell...
~ Alan Moore ~
in
V for Vendetta

I love my Beloved
… ooh …
ALL and Everywhere.
~ Kate Bush ~

No one is exempt from talking nonsense. The great misfortune is to do it solemnly.
~ Anthony de Mello ~

There’s something out there and it’s laughing at us.
Wonderfalls

Anything that happens, happens.
Anything that, in happening, cause something else to happen, causes something else to happen.
Anything that, in happening, causes itself to happen again, happens again.
It doesn't necessarily do it in chronological order though.
~ Douglas Adams ~
in
Mostly Harmless (1992)

Once a man has tasted freedom he will never be content to be a slave.
~ Walt Disney ~

To cease from evil, to do good, and to purify the mind yourself, this is the teaching of all the Buddhas.
~ Gautama Buddha ~

A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.
~ Jesus Christ ~

When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things. For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know just as I also am known.
And now abide faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.
~ Paul of Tarsus ~

All those who listen to me shall pass on my words to others and those to others again; and may the last ones understand my words better than those who listen to me directly.
~ Muhammad ~

The single spirit doth simultaneously temper the whole together;
This is the single soul of all things;
All are filled with God.
…
ALL things are in ALL.
~ Giordano Bruno ~

All Faith is false, all Faith is true: Truth is the shattered mirror strown
In myriad bits; while each believes his little bit the whole to own.
Sir Richard Francis Burton

All power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
…
There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it.
~ Lord Acton ~

That power which circumstances placed in my hands, and which is an emanation of divinity, I am conscious of having used to the best of my skill.
I have never wittingly wronged any one.
~ Henrik Ibsen ~

The evolution of man is the evolution of his consciousness.
~ G. I. Gurdjieff ~

A master in the art of living draws no sharp distinction between his work and his play; his labor and his leisure; his mind and his body; his education and his recreation.
He hardly knows which is which.
He simply pursues his vision of excellence through whatever he is doing, and leaves others to determine whether he is working or playing.
To himself, he always appears to be doing both.
~ L. P. Jacks ~

I am convinced that everyone can develop a good heart and a sense of universal responsibility with or without religion.
~ Tenzin Gyatso, 14th Dalai Lama ~

The words "God is love" have this deep meaning: that everything that is against love is ultimately doomed and damned.
~ Halford E. Luccock ~

I've never seen anybody really find the answer, but they think they have.
So they stop thinking.
But the job is to seek mystery, evoke mystery, plant a garden in which strange plants grow and mysteries bloom.
The need for mystery is greater than the need for an answer.
~ Ken Kesey ~

Kalki talk archives: index · 2003 · 2004 · 2005 · 2006 · 2007 · 2008 · 2009 · November 2009 Controversies · FloNight Assessments & Responses‎‎ · VOC·K · Outrages of Autumn 2010‎‎ · 2009 † 2010 · 2011 · Magic · Worldsong · Restorations · Chronology · Vox Box

[edit] Sporadic presence

I had expected to have had time to be much more busier on this project this week than I have thus far had — as many diverse concerns are diverting much of my attention to other matters. I still expect to have more time available to do things here in the weeks ahead, but as usual, my opportunities will probably be sporadic for a while yet. I have much "real world" work to do for a few weeks and I also have to do some major reviewing, consolidation and processing of many of the files on my hard drives some time in coming months, and this might actually consume most of my computer time. Even though I might often browse the internet and check in here, most of my attention will probably be focused on other concerns, and I might take an hour or so at a time to do some relatively relaxed work here. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 22:55, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Doctor Who work

I intend to gradually do extensive work on the Doctor Who pages in coming months — adding airdates and links, and doing minor cleanup work. I don't plan to actually add many quotes to the articles initally, but eventually might do so, as I review past episodes of the series in the coming year. I encourage anyone interested in developing the Doctor Who pages more extensively to register a user account here, so as to have more effective influence on policy decisions which need to be confronted in coming months regarding existing guidelines and limitations that have been promoted regarding quotes from TV shows and films, including those of Doctor Who. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 06:21, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I saw you edit to the Eleventh Doctor's wikiquote and am informing you that it was been undone. The quotes you put are good but the article needs to conform to the limits on quotations. This is wikiquote's way of avoiding copyright violations and deletion of the page for these violations. If you think that the quotes should still be on the page, please remove quotes that is already there. The limit for Eleventh Doctor episodes is 5, so be sure to conform to that to avoid removal of the quotes. The Eleventh Hour, The Big Bang and A Christmas Carol can have up to 7 quotes due to the increased episode length. Teyrn of Highever 11:14, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Actually, there are no copyright violations involved at all, but I recognize that there are contentions over how many quotes should be recommended, and what responses should be made when recommendations are exceeded. As there are no actual legal mandates, I recommend permitting interested editors striking a proper balance — which worked quite well here for years, on nearly all pages, with very few exceptions which were handled in acceptable ways by admin intervention, rather than setting mandatory numerical limits — which I believe is to a great extent a farce — especially when it is implied that exceeding such overly stringent limits as are currently set here on a policy page actually violate copyright restrictions — they do not. I am not intent on restoring the quotes to that page at this time, as I have little interest in presenting all arguments I believe relevant at this time, but I do believe there is a need for debates on the issue in coming months. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 11:22, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

While I can't say anything about copyright laws, this is a wikiquote policy and unless there is something definitive from someone familiar with copyright laws, I'd prefer to keep on the safe side. I know you used to be an administrator, but it would be better to have a second opinion, preferably a specific example or some document. Anyone can say that there are no copyright violations. Teyrn of Highever 16:42, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

On the other point, there was a discussion on the ninth doctor's page about quote limitations. The consensus appeared to be that the limitations, while flawed, were useful. They kept people from quoting entire scenes and forced editors to stick to the significant rather than the adding every joke in the episode. Teyrn of Highever 16:42, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I am not complaining about your actions, I have complaints about the existing policy, and I do not seek to blame you personally for participating in enforcing current strictures. I hope to see the issue reconsidered more thoroughly by more people, and more resilient directives arrived at — rather than rules based primarily on numerical restrictions. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 16:52, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't think that you need to add the air dates to any of the pages. I can't find any other wikiquote that has the air dates. Some of the other doctors have air dates, but since you are the one who put them, that seems to prove my point. Is this a personal preference or something that I am unaware of in the wikiquote guidelines? Teyrn of Highever 16:47, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

There is perhaps no "need" for the airdates — and I generally oppose codifying or mandating things that don't need to be codified or mandated — but I believe that adding them provides very useful information for anyone quoting from the episodes — which is helpful in comparison of eras on a program which has existed since 1963. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 16:52, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

[edit] SOME significant removals from Doctor Who pages

These are quotes which have been removed from Doctor Who pages, the inclusion of which in no way actually exceeded fair use provisions, are presented here to provide samplings of the problem of editorial stifling of additions to the Wikiquote project on some program pages. Doctor Who merely is one of the few I am actually much interested in — but I believe the restrictions recommended actually are excessive and should be revised. ~ Kalki

[edit] Eleventh Doctor

Removal mentioned above.

Leaving the appropriateness of the established limits aside, I find it hard to believe there are 5 other better quotes (or 7 for the longer episodes) than these listed below for each episode. For me, when I try to remain within the limits, but want to add quotes of obvious import, such as these, I would remove something already there and replace it, rather than just removing the last added quotes. The exercise should be to judge the quality of the quotes and retain the best, not just stick with what has been there, especially if inferior.

And to revisit the topic of the limits themselves, I am certainly not opposed to reopening this discussion, as I have written before. For myself, I just try to act to enforce what has been agreed upon. If different standards are later agreed, I am happy to expand what is allowed. Perhaps we should reopen discussion on the established limits and hold a vote. ~ UDScott 15:27, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I do think that is desirable, but would rather wait until more editors of program pages have had time to get the word of such being contemplated within a month or two before initiating one. I am personally for higher recommendations, rather than "limits" and no absolutely set cutoff points — so as to allow room for reasonable adjustment among concerned editors, rather than people trimming things to fit numerical limits far below anything actually legally mandated. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 15:45, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

While a discussion should occur, the problem is many editors just unilaterally declare that the limits should be discarded. I know that there are things like "Ignore all rules", but the limits have a two-fold purpose. One, they prevent copyright issues. Because Doctor Who is British, there might be different rules that need to be observed, but this should be noted in talk pages rather that having editors scream "Free Use!" Second, the limits are quality control. On the Ninth Doctor's page, before trimming, one episode had 15 quotes, some one which were entire scenes. If the purpose of wikiquote was to quote the entire episode, it wouldn't be a website of quotes; it would be a website of transcripts. There was a discussion on the Ninth Doctor's page similar to this, that I know you were part of Kalki. If we are to have a discussion, it would need to have others be a part of it because there may be other aspects, legal or otherwise, that we are not seeing. Teyrn of Highever 17:15, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

More recent removals added to the listings below (2011·08·31)

[edit] The Eleventh Hour [5.1]

Amy Pond: I thought... well, I started to think you were just a madman with a box.

The Doctor: Amy Pond, there's something you better understand about me, 'cause it's important and one day your life may depend on it. … I am definitely a madman with a box.

I can defend this one on something other than wikiquote's rules. This line is a caption of a picture. Though, I'm not sure about the pictures either, it just seems like a way for people to to skirt around the rules on quote limitations. Teyrn of Highever 17:19, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I really think you are taking even the numerical rules a bit too literally if you count a caption that uses a quote as a reason for removing that quote from the article based on numerical limits. Captions are used on many pages to draw attention to significant quotes and make the pages more interesting — having a caption that uses a duplicate of quote or portion of a quote should in no way be thought of as exceeding or seeking to exceed the limits suggested. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 17:28, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I am restoring this particular quote, as the rationale for removal seems entirely flawed. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 17:33, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I was using the "it is already listed on the page" rule rather than LoQ. I wasn't counting the captions as part of any particular episode. My issues with captions is an separate thing from why the quote was removed. Teyrn of Highever 17:33, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I see you restored it and removed :

The Doctor: Just had a fall. All the way down there, right to the library. Hell of a climb back up.

Amelia: You're soaking wet.

The Doctor: I was in the swimming pool.

Amelia: You said you were in the library.

The Doctor: So was the swimming pool.

I personally prefer the "madman with a box" quote, but still think the need of cutting out the above quote to add it to comply with the current limitation settings illustrates the absurdity of them. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 17:45, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm not doubting that there are issues with the limitations, it's just that when it comes to things like copyright laws, we can't decide to ignore them because they are inconvenient or annoying. On the topic of removal, it was either this one or the next one for the episode. And while I agree that this quote is good, of the seven listed, I felt this one to be least important. This one says a bit about the story, the others all say something about the characters. Teyrn of Highever 18:00, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

That is one of the current problems with some of the current restrictions — they are too easily misunderstood as mandated by copyright laws — when they actually are not, and are simply established by assumptions which are inconvenient and annoying. I again I wish to emphasize that the target of my criticism is the existing mandates — not your attempts to comply with them. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 18:08, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The Impossible Astronaut [6.1]

The Doctor: Shout if you get into trouble.

River Song: Don't worry, I'm quite the screamer. Now there's a spoiler for you.

[edit] Day of the Moon [6.2]

The Doctor [on how long the Silents have been on Earth]: As long as there's been something in the corner of your eye, or creaking in your house, or breathing under your bed, or voices through a wall — they've been running your lives for a very long time now. So keep this straight in your head: we are not fighting an alien invasion — we're leading a revolution. And today the battle begins.

[edit] The Curse of the Black Spot [6.3]

Captain Avery: I'm confused.

The Doctor: Yeah, well, it's a big club. We should get T-shirts.

[edit] The Doctor's Wife [6.4]

Amy: You want to be forgiven.

The Doctor: Don't we all?

The Doctor [to constructed agents of the House of Nothing]: You gave me hope, and then you took it away. That's enough to make anyone dangerous. God knows what it will do to me.
Basically — RUN!

The Doctor: Uh, Amy, this is, well, she's my TARDIS. Except she's a woman. She's a woman and she's the TARDIS.

Amy: She's the TARDIS?

The Doctor: And she's a woman. She's a woman and she's the TARDIS.

Amy: Did you wish really hard?

The Doctor: Shut up — its not like that.

Idris: Hello. I'm... Sexy.

The Doctor: Oh, still shut up.

Doctor [To House, as Idris dies and releases the TARDIS essence]: I think you should be very, very careful about what you let back into this control room. You took her from her home. But now she’s back in the box again and she’s free! Oh, look at my girl, look at her go! Bigger on the inside! You see, House? That’s your problem. Size of a planet, but inside you’re just so small! Finish him off, girl.

Idris: [as the TARDIS] Doctor. Are you there? It's so very dark in here.

The Doctor: I'm here.

Idris: I've been looking for a word. A big, complicated word but so sad. I've found it now.

The Doctor: What word?

Idris: "Alive." I'm alive.

The Doctor: Alive isn't sad.

Idris: It's sad when it's over. I'll always be here. But this is when we talked. And now, even that has come to an end. There's something I didn't get to say to you.

The Doctor: Goodbye.

Idris: No. I just wanted to say... hello. Hello, Doctor. [Starts to cry] It's so very, very nice to meet you.

The Doctor: [crying] Please... I don't want you to.

Idris: [Fades away in a ball of light and whispers] I love you.

Amy: Look at you pair. It's always you and her, isn't it, long after the rest of us are gone. A boy and his box, off to see the universe.

The Doctor: You say that as if it's a bad thing, but honestly, it's the best thing there is.

The House: Fear me. I have killed hundreds of Timelords.

The Doctor: Fear me. I've killed all of them.

[edit] The Rebel Flesh [6.5]

The Doctor: There are people coming. Well, almost.

Amy: Almost coming?

The Doctor: Almost people.

[edit] The Almost People [6.6]

Jen (Ganger): You've tricked him into an act of weakness, Doctor.

The Doctor: No, I've helped him into an act of humanity. Anyone else like the sound of that: act of humanity?

Amy [having discovered that the Doctor and the Ganger had deceived them all]: I never thought it possible.

The Doctor (Ganger): What?

Amy: You're twice the man I thought you were.

2011·06·06

[edit] A Good Man Goes to War [6.7]

The following passage has actually been restored now. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 11:52, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Amy: I wish I could tell you that you'll be loved. That you'll be safe and cared for and protected. But this isn't the time for lies. What you are going to be, Melody, is very, very brave.

Madam Kovarian: Two minutes.

Amy: But not as brave that they'll have to be. Because there's someone coming. I don't know where he is, or what he's doing, but trust me, he's on his way.

[Shot of a hand with a sonic screwdriver, on a Cybermen control ship]

Cyber Leader: Intruder: Level Nine. Seal Level Nine.

Amy: There's a man who will never let us down. And not even an army can get in the way. [Madame Kavorian goes to take Melody] Leave her. Just you leave her. Leave her. [sobs]

Cyber Leader: Intruder: Level Eleven. Seal Levels Twelve, Thirteen, and Fourteen. [explosion] Intruder: Level Fifteen.

Amy: He's the last of his kind. He looks young but he's lived for hundreds and hundreds for years. And wherever they take you, Melody, however scared you are, I promise you, you'll never be alone. [Amy kisses Melody's forehead] Because this man is your father.

Cyber Leader: Prepare to engage.

Amy: He has a name but the people of our world know him better... [door slides open on the Cyberman control ship, revealing Rory] ...as the Last Centurion.

Rory: I have a message and a question: a message from the Doctor and a question from me. Where is my wife? [The Cybermen do not respond] Oh, don't give me those blank looks. The Twelfth Cyber Legion monitors this entire quadrant. You hear everything. So you tell me what I need to know, you tell me now, and I'll be on my way.

Cyber Leader: What is the Doctor's message?

[The entire fleet explodes behind Rory]

Rory: Would you like me to repeat the question?

Dorium Maldovar: [seeing the TARDIS and the Doctor standing in front of him] No! Not me! You don't want me! I'm old! I'm fat! I'm blue! [suddenly furious] You CAN'T need me!!

The Doctor: Hello everyone! Guess who? Please, point a gun at me if it helps you relax.

[edit] Let's Kill Hitler [6.8]

Mels: [pointing a gun at the Doctor]: I need out of here. NOW!

The Doctor: Anywhere in particular?

Mels: Let's see — you've got a time machine, I've got a gun. What the hell — let's kill Hitler.

Amelia: Why are you always in trouble? You're the most in trouble in the whole school, except for boys.

Mels: And you?

Amelia: I count as a boy

Rory: Am I getting warm?

Amelia: Yes, Rory.

Mels: I took a bus.

Rory: You stole a bus.

Amy: Who steals a bus?

Amy: [throwing arm around Rory] He's gorgeous, he's my favorite guy, but you know, he's gay.

[simultaneously]

Rory: A friend. [looks at Amy] I'm not gay.

The Doctor: You've shot it! You shot my Tardis! You shot the console!

Mels: It's your fault!

The Doctor: How is it my fault?

Mels: You said guns didn't work in this place! You said we we're in a state of temporal grace!

The Doctor: That was a clever lie, you idiot! Anyone could tell that was a clever lie!

Teselecta antibodies [programmed response]: Welcome. You are unauthorized. Your death will now be implemented. Welcome. You will experience a tingling sensation and then death. Remain calm while your life is extracted.

Adolf Hitler: This box... what is it?

The Doctor: It's a police telephone box from England. That's right, Adolf. The British are coming.

Mels: Penny in the air. [she begins regenerating with Time Lord energies] The penny drops.

Rory: What the hell is going on?

The Doctor: Back! Back! Get back!

Mels: The last time I did this I ended up a toddler — in the middle of New York.

Amy: Okay, Doctor, explain what is happening — please.

The Doctor [having realized the threads of destinies]: "Mels"… short for…

Mels [nods in affirmation]: Melody.

Amy: Yeah. I named my daughter after her.

The Doctor: You named your daughter — after your daughter.

Rory Williams: Is anybody else finding this day just a bit difficult? I'm getting a sort of banging in my head.

Amy Pond: Yeah, I think that's Hitler in the cupboard.

Rory Williams: Not helping.

The Doctor: If you were in a hurry you could have killed me in the cornfield!

Melody: We'd only just met! I'm a psychopath — I'm not rude. [Attempts to shoot the Doctor, but he has stolen the clip from her gun]

Amy: You're not a psychopath! [to the Doctor] Why would she be a psychopath?

Melody: Oh, Mummy, Mummy — pay attention. I was trained and conditioned for one purpose: I was born to kill the Doctor.

Amy: I don't understand, one moment she's going to marry you, then she's gonna kill you?

The Doctor: Well, she's been brainwashed, it all makes sense to her... plus, she's a woman... [beat] oh, shut up, I'm dying!

The Doctor: I need an interface... Voice Interface, come on! Emergency!

[a hologram of the Doctor appears]

Voice Interface: Voice Interface enabled.

The Doctor: Oh, no, no, give me someone I like!

[hologram changes into Rose Tyler]

The Doctor: [sarcastically] Thanks! Give me guilt! [hologram changes to Martha Jones] Also guilt! [hologram changes to Donna Noble] More guilt! Come on, there must be someone else left in the universe I haven't screwed up yet! [hologram changes to 8-year-old Amelia Pond]

Voice Interface: Voice Interface enabled.

The Doctor: Ah... ah! Amelia Pond! Before I got it all wrong... my sweet little Amelia.

Interface Program: I am not Amelia Pond. I am a voice interface.

The Doctor: Ah, let's run away and have adventures! Come along, Pond!

Voice Interface: I am not Amelia Pond. I am a voice interface.

The Doctor: You are SO Scottish... how am I doing?

Voice Interface: Your system has been contaminated by the poison of the Judas tree. You will be dead in 32 minutes.

The Doctor: So, basically, better regenerate, that's what you're saying?

Voice Interface: Regeneration disabled. You will be dead in 32 minutes.

The Doctor: Unless I'm cured, yeah?

Voice Interface: There is no cure. You will be dead in 32 minutes.

The Doctor: Why do you keep saying that?!

Voice Interface: Because you will be dead in 32 minutes.

The Doctor: See, there you go again, skipping 31 whole minutes when I'm absolutely FINE. Scottish, that's all I'm saying.

Voice Interface: You will be fine for 31 minutes. You will be dead in 32 minutes.

Teselecta replicator [in the guise of Amy]: You killed the Doctor on the orders of the movement known as the Silence — an Academy of the Question. You accept and know this to be true?

Melody: Quite honestly, I don't really remember. It was all a bit of jumble. [in pain as the replicator suddenly emits a tormenting beam out of it's mouth]: Get off me!

The Doctor [showing up in white tie and top hat]: Sorry? Did you say she killed the Doctor? The Doctor? Doctor who?

The Doctor [to the replicator tormenting Melody]: Don't you touch her! Do not harm her in any way!

Teselecta leader: Why would you care? She's the woman who kills you.

The Doctor: I'm not dead.

Teselecta leader: You're dying.

The Doctor: Well, at least I'm not a time-traveling shape-shifting robot operated by cross people — which I have got to admit, I didn't see coming. What do you want with her?

Teselecta leader: She's Melody Pond, according to our records, the woman who kills the Doctor.

The Doctor:And I'm the Doctor — so what's it got to do with you?

Teselecta leader: Throughout history many criminals have gone unpunished in their life-times. Time travel has — responsibilities.

The Doctor: Ha, ha ha! What? You got yourselves time travel so you decided to punish dead people?

Teselecta leader: We don't kill them, we extract them near the end of their established time lines.

The Doctor: And then what?

Teselecta leader: Give them hell.

The Doctor: I'd ask you who you think you are, but the answer is pretty obvious. So who do you think I am? "The woman who killed the Doctor." It sounds like you've got my biography in there — I'd love a peek.

Melody: Just tell me. The Doctor. Is he worth it?

Amy: Yes. Yes. He is.

[Melody's hands glow. She kneels down and takes the Doctor's head in her hands]

The Doctor: River? No! What are you doing?

River: Hello, sweetie.

[She kisses him, using her regeneration energy to restore him]

Amy: You're safe now. Apparently you used all your remaining regenerations in one go. You shouldn't have done that.

River: Mother, I had to try.

Amy: I know.

River : He said no one could save him — but he must have known I could.

The Doctor: Rule one: The Doctor lies.

Nurse: She just needs to rest. She'll be absolutely fine.

The Doctor: No, she won't. She will be amazing.

The Doctor: Oh, she'll come looking for us.

Amy: Yeah, but how? How do people even look for you?

The Doctor: Oh, Pond — haven't you figured that one out yet?

[scene shift to Luna University in 5123]

Professor Candy: So then tell me — why do you want to study archeology?

River: Well, to be perfectly honest, Professor, I'm looking for a good man.

The followng are 2 which I removed so as to not trigger numerical based objections as I restored 2 of the above which I consider more significant to the episode and to the series in general:

[Melody interrupting an important social lunch.]

Melody: Ladies and gentlemen. I don't have a thing to wear! [points guns] Take off your clothes!

Rory: Okay, okay, I am trapped inside a giant robot replica of my wife. I'm really trying not to see this as a metaphor.

[edit] Closing Time [6.12]

The Doctor: A silver rat with glowing red eyes?

Shopkeeper: Yes. Then it zizzed off. I wanted to get one for my nephew. But Stock Room say there's no such item.

The Doctor: I bet they do.

The Doctor [explaining his appearances are not what has caused aliens to appear]: It's a coincidence! It happens! It's what the universe does for… [sees Amy and Rory shopping in the store, and Amy being asked by a young girl for her autograph]… fun. [suprised to see the child who asked for an autograph pointing towards him — turns around and sees poster featuring Amy modeling for "Petrichor" perfume: "For the girl who's tired of waiting."]

[edit] Tenth Doctor

[edit] Last of the Time Lords [3.13]

Martha: Do you wanna know what I was doing, travelling the world?

The Master: [exasperated] Tell me.

Martha: I was telling a story, that's all. No weapons, just words. I did just what The Doctor said. I went across the continents, all on my own, and everywhere I went I found the people and I told them my story... I told them about the Doctor... And I told them to pass it on. To spread the word so that every one would know about the Doctor.

The Master: Faith and hope? Is that all?!

Martha: No! Because I gave them an instruction. Just as the Doctor said...

The Doctor: [in flashback] Use the countdown.

Martha: I told them that if every one thinks of one word, at one specific time—

The Master: Nothing will happen! Is that your weapon? Prayer?!

{The following portion was NOT removed from the page, but more context is indicated by the preceding portions of this dialogue.}

Martha: —Right across the world! One word, just one thought, at one moment! But with fifteen satellites!

The Master: [slowly] What?

Captain Jack: The Archangel Network.

Martha: A telepathic field, binding the whole human race together. All of them, every single person on Earth, thinking the same thing at the same time! And that word, is Doctor!

The Master: Stop it! No, no, no, no you don't!

[The world begins chanting the Doctor's name, he begins rejuvenating]

The Master: Stop this right now! STOP IT!

The Doctor: I've had a whole year to tune myself into the psychic network and integrate with its matrices.

The Master: Stop! I order you to stop!

The Doctor: The one thing you can't do... is stop them thinking. [He begins rising upwards angelically] Tell me the human race is degenerate now... when they can do this.

The Master: [with a look of horror, fury and disbelief] NO!!

[He shoots at the Doctor, but the laser energy is absorbed by a forcefield]

The Doctor: I'm sorry. I'm so sorry.

The Master: Then I'll kill them!

[The Master aims his laser screwdriver at Martha and her family, but the Doctor simply raises his hand and it flies out of the Master's grasp. The Master turns back to face the Doctor]

The Master: You can't do this! You can't do... IT'S NOT FAIR!

The Doctor: And you know what happens now!

The Master: No!

[The Doctor advances towards the terrified Master, who scrambles back, clawing at the walls like an animal]

The Doctor: You wouldn't listen. Because you know what I'm going to say...

[The Master huddles in a corner, hiding his face. The Doctor descends to the ground and puts his arms around the Master soothingly]

The Doctor: I forgive you.

[edit] Ninth Doctor

[edit] Rose [1.1]

Rose: So what you’re saying is, the whole world revolves around you?

The Doctor: Sort of, yeah.

Rose: You’re full of it.

The Doctor: Sort of, yeah.

[edit] marxism=religion?

I just got done talking to a marxist friend and when he got done laughing he suggested that instead of being a jerk I simply give you some links showing that you're wrong.

—This unsigned comment is by Pumpee (talk • contribs) .

Of course fanatics who believe advocates of relgions MUST believe in God or gods, and that all religions are deplorable would NEVER call their form of fanaticism a religion — I have never assumed such NONSENSE. But words are often used to disguise as much as they reveal — and some people DO use the term "religion" for various social convictions, whether they have any declared beliefs about metaphysical matters or not — especially the fanatically held faiths of any group which believes that THEIR way of defining people, places, things, and WORDS is the ONLY way they can or should be defined — and these are indeed often such absolutist faiths as exceed the bounds of even those who DO call their particular forms of faith "religions". I do not OFTEN do so — but sometimes choose to when I feel it is proper to begin to shock people enough that they might begin to wake up from their lazy lethargies of false assumptions — where they assume that so long as they have a gang of fellows who agree with them, they are PROVEN right — especially if they have one large enough to make others suffer for disagreeing with them, or cower in fear of doing so. Truth is NOT dependent primarily upon OPINION — and Reality is not dependent upon it at all. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 20:09, 3 July 2011 (UTC) + tweaks

This is not a place for "truth". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability

—This unsigned comment is by Pumpee (talk • contribs) .

EVERYPLACE is a PLACE for TRUTH — even lies and stupidity are to some extent involved with truths — in ways beyond the reckoning of most. Verifyability is not always easy — even when one sticks to truth, but it certainly is in THIS regard. Pardon my overestimation of others familiarity with the diverse varieties of facts and fictions of human poetry and prose, both which are involved in forming any humanly adequate sense of Reality, and with religion and faiths that declare themselves anti-religious — and their common elements of duplicity and artificial distinctions to justify persecuting each other, or other political or religious faiths, or "deviants" within their own ranks who commit the sins of dissent and must be "purged" as "heretics" to cleanse the group of the "pollution" of any variety of non-standardized ideas. I am sometimes amazed that there seem to be so many people still so naïve and ignorant as to be unaware of the prolific comparisons — but even a quick search brings up this:

Polish philosopher Leszek Kołakowski, author of the massive and influential Main Currents of Marxism, also regarded Marxism as a religion, especially in its eschatology. The idea of Marxism as religion is not confined to its critics. Marxist Antonio Gramsci wrote that Marxism "is precisely the religion that has to kill off Christianity. It is a religion in the sense that it is also a faith with its own mysteries and practices, and because in our consciences it has replaced the transcendental God of Catholicism with faith in Man and his best energies as the only spiritual reality."

The Myth of Religious Violence : Secular Ideology and the Roots of Modern Conflict (2009) by William T. Cavanaugh, p. 111

This has only been a brief comment, and there are several other comparisons on the pages I drew this quote from, but I must be leaving soon — I have delayed adressing some things I must before leaving for a while... ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 21:32, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Joseph Stalin

If you tink stalin was good leader or greatest leader isn't important what's important is that he an icon of atheism world wide. You ask man on street who this Douglas Adams is and most have never heard of him. You say the name Stalin and they know who you're talking about. --Pumpee 05:18, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

You seem to be increasingly behaving as simply a troll — by making contentious edits, accusations, assessments and removing properly placed, formatted and source information from the page you are contending about. For most people, Stalin is hardly considered an "icon" of athiesm, so much as one of totalitarian dictatorship. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 05:30, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Christian anarchism

No problem. Thanks for looking over my edits. Just a small thing - Is there any way I can unify my Wikipedia user page across accounts (such as Wikiquote) without just copying and pasting? If I change something on my main account, I do not want to have to duplicate the amendment on all accounts. I am already running the unified login. Nirvana2013 10:24, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

I think that there might be something like that in the works somewhere, but I haven't personally looked into it, and don't know that much about it, if it is being developed, or has been. I am just checking in before leaving for a bit, but thanks again for creating Christian anarchism. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 10:29, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Feminism

Believing you to be an experienced editor based on your policy violations in both edit summaries and abuse of talk pages I was content to allow you some latitude in displaying poor behavior. Looking at your userpage though it seems you have something of a sordid history of sockpuppetry and other violations. As a former admin I should not have to tell you about proper netiguite in Wikimedia projects.--Cybermud 00:26, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

I am sure your sordidly insulting remarks which attempt to make my past attempts at doing genuinely good work and promoting general good will seem entirely sordid, and your transparent attempts to intimidate me might work with a far less experienced and intelligent idiot than I happen to be. I honestly must laugh at most attempts to intimidate or threaten me, for many reasons which I might eventually disclose. I have been threatened with death on more than one occasion in very genuine and immediate ways, and I have always been surprisingly and indeed astonishingly resolute in my defiance of improper demands upon me or others, and acceptance of the likelihood or apparent certainty of facing death because of my decisions or actions. Some who know of some of my actions consider it miraculous that I have survived some of my acts of peculiar determination.
I am not easily dissuaded or persuaded by anything but honest and frank observations which seem valid and correct — any assertions or efforts I consider to be unjust or hypocritical to any degree persuade me to nothing but contempt for the low rational and ethical perceptions of the people who insist upon making them. I honor ALL people to the extent I trust them to be capable of reasonable responses to reasonable assessments, even when they must for various reasons disagree with those I happen to hold. I will confess that I am not greatly inclined to greatly honor people of so little integrity that they take great exception to honest expressions of opinion, even those I myself must oppose. Some of your comments or actions have actually contained some reasonable and perhaps valid assessments, but frankly I find most of them insultingly presumptive — and in response to brusque behavior in removing material others had added and I and others considered sufficiently appropriate for inclusion to that article, I responded with brusque remarks in restoring the material. They were an honest declaration of my observations and perceptions, and perhaps someone who was less irritated and indignant about many forms of human hypocrisy and presumption might have been more mildly discreet or even cloyingly hypocritical and flattering in their remarks. I plainly am not one of those people. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 03:17, 27 August 2011 (UTC) + tweaks

[edit] Hi! And Eno!

Ѽ helo thar! About two hours ago, I added a quote to the Brian Eno page, which had been untouched for a while, and like two minutes later you came by and spiffed up the page. First off, thank you! (My superpowers do not include spiffing.) Second off: Assuming it wasn't coincidence, how'd you do that? Namely: is the Eno page on your watchlist?; or is there a realtime scroll/crawl/tickertape somewhere of all page-saves, and Eno caught your eye there? I'm always learning (and forgetting, and relearning) basic stuff about Wikimedia stuff, and I occasionally work up some curiosity. (By the way, you might like this thing I added: Peter Schmidt (artist)#Ten_Freedoms. And yes, that's a sorely unspiffed new page there. Rearrangement and wisdom welcome.) — Sburke 12:25, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

In the navigation section of most pages one can find a link to the Recent changes page. I have a bookmark set in most of my browsers by which to view the last couple hundred changes here, and one can tweak one's preferences to have the page default to different levels of display. One can also place pages on one's watch list, which produces a bold rendition of the page names in this list of changes. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 13:23, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

[edit]

Ω

[edit] Thanks

...for your excellent work improving Harvest - Cheers! BD2412 T 03:05, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm always eager to do what good I can, where I can, when I can — and I hope to be able to do more elsewhere soon. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 03:08, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Hi

Thanks for your welcome. How do I SUL my account ? I tried Special:MergeAccount, and I've got linked Wikipedia, Commons and Wikiversity accounts now. I'm not currently active on any other Wikimedia projects - I had a Wikipedia account a long time ago, but found things there too stressful. I was just reading this site today, and really enjoying it, so I thought I'd help out. --A Divine 20:52, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm a bit rusty, as I haven't registered any new accounts in quite a while (despite it being a rather recreational and inspirational hobby of mine in the past), but there should be a link which shows up in your Preferences "Manage your global account" which will permit you to take whatever actions are necessary. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 22:44, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

[edit] to User Kalki, signed User Buster Keaton

hi, I wrote a message for you on my User Talk ; yours, Buster Keaton 16:30, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm always happy to help others to find a bit more happiness — and much like Meher Baba's assertion: "Don't worry — Be Happy." ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 17:52, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for welcome and help

TisTRU (talk · contributions)

[edit] Thanks

Hi, thank you very much for welcoming me. Hopefully I will contribute somehow. I see that you have expanded The Urantia Book article. That's excellent. It's no wonder that English Wikipedia (and it's sister projects) is way better than other Wikipedias, if en-users act so rapidly and lavishly. Have a nice day!--Maksymilian Sielicki 18:33, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Virginia Woolf

Don't worry, I'm done with that section. Although I'd like to know why you think that quotation I removed is important. :-) Nemo 18:58, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't believe I added it to the page originally, and would temper it with other observations to the extent I myself might ever quote it, but I do like it:

I like the copious, shapeless, warm, not so very clever, but extremely easy and rather coarse aspect of things; the talk of men in clubs and public-houses; of miners half naked in drawers — the forthright, perfectly unassuming, and without end in view except dinner, love, money and getting along tolerably; that which is without great hopes, ideals, or anything of that kind; what is unassuming except to make a tolerably, good job of it. I like all that.

I simply like the honest simplicity of the statement — though I myself would usually qualify such a statement in various ways.... ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 19:04, 14 December 2011 (UTC) + tweaks

Sorry, I don't know en.quote policies and guidelines very well, I mainly edit it.quote, so I have to ask you: is "I like it" a valid reason to keep a quotation here? Thanks, Nemo 19:09, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Some would disagree, and seek to set up much more artificial and convoluted rules for inclusion, adapted to their own particular inclinations, which could then be imposed on others with less chance of successful objections, but I think someone "liking" something is generally a good enough reason, if there are not any significant and compelling reasons against it. I am much more a "preservationist" and an "inclusionist" than most in many matters — and I know and accept others have different inclinations. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 19:16, 14 December 2011 (UTC) + tweak

[edit] Muhammad

The links do not work anymore. Can you update them with the new hadith links.--Cmmmm 19:00, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I am not sure which links you refer to; there are many links on that page, and I am not sure what new Hadith links you might have in mind; updating any external links should be no problem for any registered editor, if the the links are not blacklisted for some reason. ~ ♘☮♌ Kalki (talk · contributions) ⊙⚡ 19:07, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

The links belong to the http://www.cmje.org/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/002-sbt.php#001.002.024 site and I can not do this. Please update this links.--Cmmmm 19:11, 1 January 2012 (UTC) They changed their entire website and now all links go to their central site and not to the hadith.--Cmmmm 19:13, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I will probably attempt to update any links requiring it within a few days. ~ ♘☮♌Kalki (talk · contributions)⊙⚡ 19:17, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

This is just a further note to myself, as I have been toying around with my signature today, attempting to develop some ideas I have had in mind quite a while. I think this version might be my final one for today, and I like the ambiguities involved in using a dark horse image in white on a gray background for the white knight connotations amidst a presentation of rather cryptic and enigmatic symbols… ~ ♞☮♌Kalki (talk · contributions)⊙⚡ 19:29, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Can you please update the links now because wikipedia will be stop working in the next 13 hours!--Cmmmm 16:58, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I have obviously neglected attending to these, but quite honestly tracing down and updating obsolete links I wouldn't normally follow anyways is not something that has ever struck me as one of my most pressing concerns here. Now that I am reminded, I might do something with them soon — but whatever might occur with Wikipedia today, there are MANY things of higher priority I must attend to, and am just briefly checking in here now, prior to leaving, at least for a short time. ~ ♞☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 17:44, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I finally got around to doing some work on this, but I have only stripped out many of the dead links, and did not make much effort to replace them with different online links; I retained Book, chapter and verse citations, which should suffice, and that is about all I am likely to do on these anytime soon. I have made no effort to update some of the cites which used obsolete templates, because the template itself would need to be updated, if possible, and I am not sure that this could easily be done. ~ ♞☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 13:14, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Can be the Earth a theme also? --Wiki Wisdom 20:08, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Generally, I believe most of us tend to use the category "Theme" primarily for pages for which we haven't thought up more specific categories, and it is probably a bit too general to be considered optimal for that page — but I myself usually do only very rudimentary category work with pages, and let others handle expanding those to the extent they are inclined to do so. ~ ♞☮♌Kalki (talk · contributions)⊙⚡ 20:31, 1 January 2012 (UTC) + tweaks

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for your message. I'm glad to have found an way to share the results of my obsession with collecting quotes. :)

—This unsigned comment is by Peter1c (talk • contribs) .

I'm always glad to encourage others in such obsessions, as they usually permit a broad range of concepts to be encountered, and I believe the more extensive one's encounters and perceptions, the more profound can be one's penetration into matters of utmost importance. ~ ♞☮♌Kalki (talk · contributions)⊙⚡ 23:40, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Redlinks

Greetings Kalki. I wish you would not unlink redlinked author names, or make them into links to Wikipedia. With respect to Hoyt's quoted authors at least, the redlinks are a reminder to me that pages likely need to be made for the person in question. I may not get around to those soon, but I will eventually. Cheers! BD2412 T 03:10, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

For the convenience of readers, I have always been inclined to link names of people who have pages on Wikipedia but not here to those pages, and to remove bracketts from names of people who have neither, and yet have some scholarly or professional expertise or personal familiarity with the subject or person their quotes are being used for. I doubt if I will curb that practice much — but I will try to bear in mind they might have some relevance to secondary works familar to a few people, and perhaps do some checking on other occurences of the names here. ~ ♞☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 03:23, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

As it turns out we have a page on William Wycherley; the name was misspelled (or perhaps given an alternative spelling) in Hoyt's, resulting in the red link. Cheers! BD2412 T 03:31, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks Kalki

Thanks for the compliment. Do you think all the quotes will be removed because they're too long?--11614soup 21:31, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

I doubt that. I shall certainly strive to prevent it, should attempts be made to do so — one can hardly delve into much of the subtlety and somber and humorous profundity of Søren Kierkegaard's thoughts without quite a few long quotes. ~ ♞☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 21:26, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Absurdism

Kalki, just a question: what is your criteria for labeling a particular author, work, or quote as as absurdist? With some it's obvious (e.g. Kierkegaard, Camus, or Newton), but others not so much (e.g. Whitman, Baum, Carroll). I'm not necessarily questioning these designations, but when I look at some of the authors, works, or even individual quotes you've attached to this philosophy, I don't really see the connection. For example, how is The Wizard of Oz associated with absurdism? I know it is certainly an allegorical and often fantastic tale, but I'm not sure how it fits with the tenets of Absurdism. Again, maybe I am wrong, but could you explain the connection with this and others you have grouped under this banner? Thanks. ~ UDScott 02:09, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

I actually do welcome your expressions of skepticism, and can agree that they might be valid in many ways, but will make just a brief reply at this point, as I feel a more extensive response would be appropriate within the next month or so, but don't have the time to compose it now, and would like some time to reflect on how much I wish to present about some matters of profound absurdity and absurdism. I do recognize some of the designations would seem a bit strained to some at this point, and will refrain from adding such to some of the more dubious candidates which I might consider until after I have presented a more thorough justification. For now I simply will present the current intro of the page for Absurdism:

Absurdism is a philosophical stance which implies that the efforts of humanity to find or absolutely define, limit, express or exclude the inherent meanings of anything, including existence, are absurd because the qualities of communicable information available to the human mind, and relationships within Reality makes any certainty about such impossible. Philosophical schools of absurdism explore the fundamental nature of the Absurd and how individuals, once becoming conscious of the Absurd, can or should react to it. Like Existentialism it was strongly evident in the thought of Søren Kierkegaard, but was more expressly developed by Albert Camus in his essay The Myth of Sisyphus and works of Absurdist fiction, as a repudiation of assumptions found in athiestic nihilism and theistic existentialism as well as authoritarianism. It has far earlier expression in some significant statements of ancient philosophers, including Socrates, Laozi, and Zhuangzi. In many ways it relates to the discipline of semiotics, stances of extreme skepticism even to the point of strong agnosticism, many forms of mysticism and art, and has specifically given rise to works in the genre known as the Theatre of the Absurd.

I recognize that this packs in references to much information that many people might not be familiar with, or confused about. Before creating the page, I browsed the article on Wikipedia, and actually consider it to need much further work, and a rather atrociously confused mess on many points, though I do rather like the graph currently on that page (though I see that it has been sometimes altered in ill-informed ways). Where some might treat the label of Absurdism as merely a brief historical "fashion" in the arts and philosophy to be applied only to those schools and forms of it which arose primarily in Europe after World War II, I have preferred a much broader definition than that, which declares it a philosophical stance — and thus one that can sometimes be applied to those who are significant presenters of such stances — whether they themselves tend to abide in such or designate themselves such or not. Clearly such application to Kierkegaard can be justified in ways similar to those used to apply the label Existentialism to his thought, though there often should be definite qualifications made. I can perceive that some might find such use confusing for a time, as Absurdist perspectives and semiotic disciplines such as I and others embrace often can be.

The current intro on Wikipedia begins:

In philosophy, "The Absurd" refers to the conflict between the human tendency to seek value and meaning in life and the human inability to find any. In this context absurd does not mean "logically impossible," but rather "humanly impossible." The universe and the human mind do not each separately cause the Absurd, but rather, the Absurd arises by the contradictory nature of the two existing simultaneously.

I can accept all of that as adequate, but believe the lack of cohesion or clarity evident at some places on the rest of the page is rather disheartening. It goes on to state:

Absurdism is very closely related to existentialism and nihilism and has its origins in the 19th century Danish philosopher, Søren Kierkegaard, who chose to confront the crisis humans faced with the Absurd by developing existential philosophy. Absurdism as a belief system was born of the European existentialist movement that ensued, specifically when the French Algerian philosopher and writer Albert Camus rejected certain aspects from that philosophical line of thought and published his essay The Myth of Sisyphus. The aftermath of World War II provided the social environment that stimulated absurdist views and allowed for their popular development, especially in the devastated country of France.

This too is adequate and to some extent accurate, but in ways that could be very misleading to many. I can agree that "Absurdism is very closely related to existentialism and nihilism" — but would emphasize in many ways it can be considered a FORM of the first that sometimes but not always incorporates or refers to aspects of the later. But to say that "has its origins in the 19th century Danish philosopher, Søren Kierkegaard" is actually to absurdly restrict it far too much, and give the quite brilliant Mr. Kierkegaard a bit too much credit. In my initial intro to the WQ page I softened this to "Like Existentialism it has origins in the thought of Søren Kierkegaard" and then even further qualified that to its current form. I would insist that the stance he took, at times, has it's base in Reality itself — NOT in any particular expressions or manifestations of his particular genius.

I believe Camus recognizes and asserts much the same thing when he declares: The absurd is the essential concept and the first truth. I consider this absurdly PROFOUND and those who seek to qualify or mitigate it by restricting it to a few historical manifestations which have occurred somewhat absurdly misguided. I believe that the absurd, in this context, clearly can be related to many of the absurdly profound statements of Socrates, Laozi, Zhuangzi and others, and even to concepts of human genius and to the Tao itself — though it would be rather absurdly authoritarian to insist upon disclosing upon what authority such assertions can rest, I will remark in a rather absurdly silly and humorous sort of way.

I actually have already done MUCH more work in relation to that page and its related category pages than I had initially intended, and know that I should prepare a more extensive revelation about my own views on the Absurd and Absurdism before applying the label quite so extensively as I am inclined to do. I will just repeat that I obviously am not restricting the designation to some of those who have historically been most associated with the label, or those who have been active since the seminal essay of Camus in 1942. Despite the rather dark associations absurdism tends to have,with many, because of many of the dark gloomy influences that were clearly evident in the aftermath of World War II and the depths of the Cold War, on the artists who worked with it in various fields, I actually assert that there is DEFINITELY a bright side to it which often gets ignored, and does occur in some of the works of Tom Stoppard, Terry Gilliam and the other Monty Python artists — which I myself hope to make more plain, in statements such as this:

Working with Knowledge and Science is Technology. Working with the Absurd is Art and Magic. To work and play with them all is Life.
I believe humanity has a NEED for ALL of these, and a greater appreciation of that fact.

I fully agree with the brilliant artist-magician Alan Moore when he asserts the following statements in a 1998 interview:

I think there is too much darkness in magic. I can understand that it is part of the theatre. I can understand Aleister Crowley — who I think was a great intellect that was sometimes let down by his own flair for showmanship — but he did a lot to generate the scary aura of the magician that you find these sad, Crowleyite fucks making a fetish of. The ones who say "oh we’re into Aleister Crowley because he was the wickedest man in the world, and we’re also into Charles Manson because we’re bad. And we are middle-class as well, but we’re bad." There are some people who seek evil … there are people who seek it as a kind of Goth thing. That just adds to the murk to what to me is a very lucid and flourescent subject. What occultism needs is someone to open the window, it’s too stuffy and it smells. Let’s get some fresh air, throw open the curtains — I can’t go for that posturing, spooky guy stuff. …The more I look at most of the art movements, it’s all occultism, when you get down to it. The Surrealists were openly talking about being magicians. … I see magic as a vantage point from which one can look down on the rest of consciousness. It’s a point outside normal consciousness from which you can look at normal consciousness, it’s a point outside beliefs from which you can look at beliefs. All beliefs are reality tunnels, to use Anton Wilson’s phrase. There is the Communist reality tunnel, the Feminist reality tunnel, all of which seem to be the whole of reality when you are in the middle of them. The whole universe is based on Marxist theory if you’re an intent Marxist. Magic is having a plan of all the tunnels, and seeing the overall condition in which they all work. Being aware of different possibilities. … I don’t distinguish between magic and art. When I got into magic, I realised I had been doing it all along, ever since I wrote my first pathetic story or poem when I was twelve or whatever. This has all been my magic, my way of dealing with it. … I believe it was Wittgenstein who said a thought is a real event in space and time. I don’t quite agree about the space and time bit, Ludwig, but certainly a real event. It’s only science that cannot consider thought as a real event, and science is not reality. It’s a map of reality, and not a very good one. It’s good, it’s useful, but it has its limits. We have to realise that the map has its edges. One thing that is past the edge is any personal experience. That is why magic is a broader map to me, it includes science. It’s the kind of map we need if we are to survive psychologically in the age that is to come, whatever that is. We need a bigger map because the old one is based on an old universe where not many of us live anymore. We have to understanding what we are dealing with here because it is dangerous. It kills people. … Organised religion has corrupted one of the purest, most powerful and sustaining things in the human condition. It has imposed a middle management, not only in our politics and in our finances, but in our spirituality as well. The difference between religion and magic is the same as what we were talking about earlier — I think you could map that over those two poles of fascism and anarchism. Magic is closer to anarchism.

I do NOT seek to discourage or dissuade any person from their traditional paths of faith, or traditions of science, and KNOW that virtues DO exist in MOST of these, as well as many flaws and deficiencies which are appalling and distressful. I believe an active recognition of the reality of bigotry in MANY of the most overt and disguised forms is NECESSARY in this time of immense transformation which is occurring in the world.

MOST of my life, taking a cue from the great Augustine of Hippo who declared: "Love the sinner and hate the sin", I have declared to myself such short admonitions as this: HATE BIGOTRY — NOT THE BIGOTS. I would actually on reflection be inclined to extend that to "HATE ALL BIGOTRY — NOT ANY BIGOTS — however foul they might be", but the shorter form is more memorable and easy to recite in times of contempt and distress at witnessing the subtle or overt activity of various forms of bigotry.

I do NOT hate bigots, nor seek to promote hatred of them, NOR retaliation for their often very real and deplorable crimes — but I do encourage a spirited and vigorous opposition to their efforts to oppress others, whenever it is morally possible (which, unfortunately is not always the case, no matter how desirable that might seem). What I hate quite earnestly, when I am not in states of profound transcendence of ALL idiocies, is the idiocy of BIGOTRY itself, in ANY and ALL forms, whether manifested by "right" or "left" political wings of various social factions, or by theists or atheists, gnostics or agnostics. Since I was a VERY young child I discerned that it was NOT any particular group of people or forms of Religion or Sciences that were to blame for the WORST of humanity's problems: it was the nearly omnipresent BIGOTRY that existed — and which people seemed so HATEFUL of in others, especially those of other social groupings than their own, and BLIND to in themselves.

I truly hate and DESPISE this form of absurd moral BLINDNESS, and have done my best to find antidotes for it in humour and in art, but I know it is not going to be fully remedied by any one prescription of some form of medicine or treatment for all. But the closest thing I think humanity can ever come to such a universal panacea is a very broad and tolerant absurdism, which MANY of the Mystics and true Magicians throughout the ages have embraced and promoted in various ways, in many traditions.

I believe a very broad, general and profoundly ethical absurdism, NOT bound to tightly to any particular political or religious creeds, which, despite all discouragements and obstacles, absurdly embraces and promotes Joyous Universal Love and the artistic magic they permit is even more vitally and morally important than even the very best forms of anarchism which have ever been developed — but I recognize that BOTH can be very dangerous to those uninitiated into many of the subtle and overt influences one must consider and deal with as a living human being in private or in extensive association with other human beings. I believe a LOVE of humanity and a WILL to develop Absurdly Angelically Anarchistic Alliances among people rather than asinine authoritarian autocracies is what is needed in this world. I believe that anyone very familiar with my actual life and careers in various fields of worthwhile endeavor would be able to testify that I have been a diligent and self-sacrificing worker in more ways than most could easily appreciate. I do not claim to always be of what many would consider saintly disposition — but I truly do earnestly strive to serve virtue and truth in such ways as to make my life worthy to be counted among the those deserving of blessings.

Now, as that about completes my short answer, full of digressions that will seem absurd to some — I rather expect some people might not be eager to be burdened with what I was considering as a long one. So it goes …

Absurdly yours and ALWAYS Absurd, ♞☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 17:44, 12 January 2012 (UTC) + tweaks

OK, despite all of the above, I still do not feel you ever fully answered my question - and I feel that the issue is growing. I'm not sure where you will stop, but at the rate you are going, this page will become one of the largest here. And yet I am still somewhat confused on the criteria for inclusion, both in general and on a more specific level. The first refers back to my original question regarding what selection criteria are applied for people or works to be included - as I said, some are obvious, but others are not. Only by the broadest application of Absurdism would some of these be included (and that often seems be a stretch on your part to apply this theme to them). On a more specific level, I mean that even if I accept that a given work might be worth inclusion, why does that automatically mean that any quote (whether related to Absurdism or not) could be included? As an example of this, take The Green Mile. I would again say that the connection to Absurdism is tenuous at best, but even if I accept its place here, how is the following quote even remotely about the topic at hand?

"Your name is John Coffey."
"Yes, sir, boss, like the drink only not spelled the same way."

I think the page is a good idea, but I fear that stretching to make it apply to so many authors or works has become more an exercise of your personal viewpoint and opinion rather than an objective application of a theme - which is not a precedent I would like to encourage on the site (I imagine much worse applications of this principle than yours, but yours is more obvious than others might be and is thus the subject of my queries). ~ UDScott 20:43, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

I just happened to see your note a few minutes ago, and these are just a few spontaneous comments, and I truly am taking into consideration many things to present in the next few week and months on the profundity of the perspectives of Albert Camus and others on many things. And of course I never FULLY answered your questions or addressed all your concerns, and I doubt if I or anyone else ever could — and whatever responses I make will clearly seem absurdly ridiculous to many, but I tell you now, some of your assertions actually seem absurdly ridiculous to me — even though I can understand and sympathize with some of them, to some extent, I actually find them hilariously unappreciative of the depths and breadths of heights of Absurdist Awareness, throughout the ages — which Camus himself emphasized was something universal and not limited to him or the developments of Existentialism which had occurred since Kierkegaard or himself. I will attempt to present far more that might make more sense to you in a more clearly rational and logical way in the coming weeks, but I make no promises as to when or how — currently I am juggling MANY activities here and elsewhere, and though I do expect to remain busy here, and consider this project important in many ways there are some matters that I know are of far greater importance I must soon address. ~ ♞☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 21:29, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

I too am getting a sense that the net is being cast too broadly here. Bear in mind that if a category or theme is construed too broady it loses significance and impact. The ultimate reductio ad absurdum is that a concept which encompasses everything distinguishes nothing, and has no meaning in the information-theoretic sense. ~ Ningauble 21:06, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

I want to emphasize that I actually agree with many of the observations BOTH of you make, and yet find some of them absurdly unperceptive of a great deal — but I probably will trim out some of the material I had been adding to that page soon, including the John Coffey quotes from King's work, which I actually retained only on a whim, and can agree don't convey much to most people. I also certainly do recognize the page can't keep growing at this rate — but while I take into account many things to add or remove, I intend to keep it as interesting as possible for a broad range of people actually inclined to celebrate absurdism, rather than those who are more inclined to embrace the Curse of Grey Face. Though I confess to being an absurd absurdist, I am actually NOT a discordian, by the way, but as I have indicated before, I do appreciate their humor, and would like to make this place more conducive to anarchists and other people of true integrity — and less to those authoritarians who are inclined to believe their examples are such as most people should follow, or MUST follow, if they have the sufficient power or numbers to impose obedience on the weak and timid. By the way, everyone is fully welcome to outdent their own comments at any point and not feel they must slavishly indent them more than my rather facetious signatures. So it goes…

~ ♞☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 21:29, 13 January 2012 (UTC) + tweaks

Apart from all the rest, in what way do my questions (or those from others) that may disagree with you cast me in the role of being authoritarian? I am not asking in any attempt to "impose obedience" but because I just do not understand the connection of your selection of quotes to the theme topic. I have never tried to impose my opinions on others here (acting only when there is consensus about a particular way of doing things - and I in no way think I know it all about how this site should run - I in fact am more ignorant than many others here). But if you feel more comfortable automatically falling back into the role of being attacked by administrators who just want to establish meaningless rules and stifle freedom, so be it. That was not my intent (this is where trying to rationally discuss things with you gets tiresome and exasperating again by the way). ~ UDScott 21:41, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

I truly do NOT intend to give you or any other person any profound disrespect — but any attitude of profound disrespect for either absurdism or anarchism and adherence to their most ethical imperatives does tend to irritate me — as I confess to be an absurdist, and sympathize highly with the genuine anarchists, though many of those who embrace that NAME are inclined to behave far too much like authoritarian idiots or nihilistic nitwits from my perspectives. So I hope you can see, that I do believe an ABSURD patience is something I believe is appropriate on the part of most — and it is something I would NOT demand from anyone — though I might HOPE to inspire such in some. So it goes…

~ ♞☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 21:49, 13 January 2012 (UTC) + tweaks

[edit] Quote of the day

Sorry, I didn't realize that the old suggestions were still valid and I had to put new ones to the bottom. Nemo 10:24, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

No problem. Your suggestion was welcome, and I ranked it somewhat higher than you did, but hadn't even noticed it until after making a selection and layout for this year on that date, which would have remained the top ranked quote. ~ ♞☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 13:51, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Theological concerns

My Dear Kalki,

I am unable to be especially active here -- I have been so on Wikipedia, but time is never enough. But I drop by from time to time to see what progresses in articles of interest. I saw, then, that you took up a fine reformation of the Pantheism article, and so I wondered if you might do the same for the Pantheism and Pandeism articles in your future concerns. Pandeism, especially, presents some oddities, I feel, in picture selection and overall organization, with the three sections. Deism I may tend myself -- if the time ever presents itself!!

Blessings,

DeistCosmos 08:13, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

I take it you were commenting on my relatively minor work on Panentheism, in your first comments on my recent work. All of these articles can use further work, but there are many others to attend to as well, and I do what I can, when I can. There are still a few things I began work on last month that remain unfinished, and I hope to complete those soon, before tackling whatever else arises in the weeks ahead. ~ ♞☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 08:22, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

[edit] VP discussion

Wikiquote:Village_pump#Liberal_use_of_images. --Michaeldsuarez 21:03, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

[edit] TY

Thankyou for the welcome and for looking over my first quote article. :) — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 11:58, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Like I said Kalki...

I think I discovered what the firestorm was all about...and like I said, some one didn't get it. But the quote of the day will no doubt continue, and no matter how hard you try, stuff like this will occasionally happen. All the best...--Oracleofottawa 02:00, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

I am just getting back online, from another person's home, and probably will only do a few things here before leaving, but thanks for the encouragement. I am sure there are many things upon which we would probably disagree rather strongly, but I sense that you perceive what GENUINE civility consists of. THANKS. ~ ♞☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 02:07, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Greetings and blessings

Thank you for the message. --Michaeldsuarez 16:29, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. I am well aware my rhetoric about issues I care about deeply can be very harsh at times, but I truly have no personal animosity to those I must disagree with to any extent, for any reason, and often try to make that clear. ~ ♞☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 16:31, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] 48 hour block

Kalki, I have blocked you for 48 hours for your continued use of rhetoric debasing other editors as authoritarian. Please do not take this personally. I would suggest that in the future you address your comments to the issues at hand, without casting aspersions on the motivations or personalities of those with whom you disagree. For example, if someone removes a quote or an image from a page, initiate a discussion on the talk page to explain why that particular quote or image is appropriate for the page. There is no need to address the motives of the person removing something if a good argument can be made for the thing itself, irrespective of motive. If some action has been taken pursuant to a policy with which you disagree, initiate a discussion at the village pump about the policy itself, and how and why it should be changed. Do not attack the motivations of those with whom you disagree; if you believe they are making bad arguments, point out the flaws you perceive in their arguments. Also, please bear in mind that I do not hold Cirt blameless in this matter, and will deal with him. I would advise you to avoid dealing with Cirt on anything but the most professional level, as I am sure there is much you can do here when your current block expires that would not have you running into him. Cheers! BD2412 T 20:43, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

I'M BACK — briefly, but must be leaving soon. I have now begun to be far too busy on SEVERAL MAJOR projects where I am FAR less constrained than I have come to be here, and believe I can have immense IMPACT in a very short time — the next few months seem very opportune at MANY levels of my lifelong Absurdist endeavors. I confess I still have fondness and devotion for this still worthy project, as corrupted and decrepit as it is increasingly becoming lately through the infusion of authoritarian influence, sheer venality and lust for what is simply convenient and SEEMS "obvious" or even necessary to the dull, and the BANALITY of evil, to anyone who has eyes to see and heart to feel the ways of Justice and injustice.

It seems that I will have to place MOST of my wit and rhetoric out of the reach of censors here in coming months and apply my absurdly potent wisdom and comically Magic skills at many forms of "artsy" art and "crafty" craft for the benefit of others increasingly at other places where it is more appreciated, and people can work and play unimpaired by the presumptive deniers and mockers of the most sacred principles of Humanism, Universalism humanity and the ALL: FREEDOM OF THOUGHT AND EXPRESSION of TRUTH and TRUE OPINION.

I probably will NOT be active here EVERY day for a while, but will still attempt to serve it in ways that have not as yet been impaired, and check in on it on MOST days. I know this sudden mostly spontaneous flow of words is a bit dense, but so are many aspects of my thought processes in both highly amusing and sometimes tragic ways. I don't believe it is either NECESSARY or proper nor even POSSIBLE to MAKE meanings plain and evident to all — but it is nearly ALWAYS best when one is DEVOUTLY HONEST and as fair as possible, even with the dishonest and deluded.

I might have more to say later today, and at least start on some work I had requested the opportunity to do… but will attempt to do some final tweaks on a couple things before leaving within the next hour or so. PEACE, LOVE AND UNDERSTANDING — was about to sign off with that, but am reflecting a bit more: ain't it so ABSURDLY FUNNY how differently people can use different words — Some artists of unjust oppresson and destruction, denigration and suppression, LACKING in many forms of understanding "make a desert and call it Peace." Others make deserts bloom, well guided by love of truth and powers of absurdly magical DEVOTION to ALL. I aim to be an artist of the second sort, and some of my talents and accomplishments of previous years are such as I believe I will be able to make far more EVIDENT to many in this coming year. Blessings to all. ~ ♞☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 19:00, 7 February 2012 (UTC) + tweaks

I am just BRIEFLY checking in here, and MUST be going again soon, but would like to THANK and BLESS many of my adversaries with SINCERE appreciation of them for their criticisms and condemnations of my opinions and talents and my rights to EXPRESS them (or, even upon a VERY limited scale, to even INDICATE them here in very subtle or obscured and highly subdued ways). I truly LAUGHED far harder and far longer and for FAR more reasons than most of you will ever be able to surmise — and amidst all the laughter and the sorrows and the pity for others which I have felt, MANY epiphanies have come, and MANY of my LONG DELAYED activities and efforts to contribute ELSEWHERE have begun to be increased and already bear rich fruit which I intend to share with MANY eventually. I truly am in a state of HECTIC WORK on MANY things, and expect to be for MONTHS — and I EXALT in that. THERE IS MUCH GOOD I CAN DO FOR OTHERS ELSEWHERE AND I INTEND TO DO IT — AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTOLERANCE AND HOSTILITY TO MY ATTEMPTS TO DO SO MUCH OF IT HERE. There are far more important tasks to be done than I have ever yet attempted here, and now I have more time and opportunity to do them. I harbor no resentments towards even the worst of my adversaries on ANY matter, let alone those I believe are only slightly in error on a few things, and I TRULY wish you all : BLESSINGS. ~ ♞☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 17:04, 8 February 2012 (UTC) + tweaks

[edit] Bhagat Singh

Revision history of Bhagat Singh shows me that you contributed significantly to it, which included sourcing several of the quotes. I believe that published works by Bhagat Singh are now most probably in the public domain. If I am correct in holding this view, they should probably all be uploaded to wikisource. A related document is the Manifesto of the Hindustan Socialist Republican Association, which I believe is most probably in the public domain too. If you have access to The selected works of Shaheed Bhagat Singh, if it contains the manifesto, and you believe that the manifesto does fall under public domain, please upload it to wikisource. Thank you. Regards--Siddhartha Ghai 18:45, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

I personally do not own a copy of this work, and have not done much investigation of what might be available or in the Public Domain on the internet. More material by the author would be welcome here, even if that is not found. ~ ♞☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 18:52, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Kalki

[edit]

[edit] Sporadic presence

[edit] Doctor Who work

[edit] SOME significant removals from Doctor Who pages

[edit] Eleventh Doctor

[edit] The Eleventh Hour [5.1]

[edit] The Impossible Astronaut [6.1]

[edit] Day of the Moon [6.2]

[edit] The Curse of the Black Spot [6.3]

[edit] The Doctor's Wife [6.4]

[edit] The Rebel Flesh [6.5]

[edit] The Almost People [6.6]

[edit] A Good Man Goes to War [6.7]

[edit] Let's Kill Hitler [6.8]

[edit] Closing Time [6.12]

[edit] Tenth Doctor

[edit] Last of the Time Lords [3.13]

[edit] Ninth Doctor

[edit] Rose [1.1]

[edit] marxism=religion?

[edit] Joseph Stalin

[edit] Christian anarchism

[edit] Feminism

[edit] Hi! And Eno!

[edit]

Ω

Contents

[edit] Thanks

[edit] Hi

[edit] to User Kalki, signed User Buster Keaton

[edit] Thanks for welcome and help

[edit] Thanks

[edit] Virginia Woolf

[edit] Muhammad

[edit] Thanks

[edit] Thanks

[edit] Redlinks

[edit] Thanks Kalki

[edit] Absurdism

[edit] Quote of the day

[edit] Theological concerns

[edit] VP discussion

[edit] TY

[edit] Like I said Kalki...

[edit] RE: Greetings and blessings

[edit] 48 hour block

[edit] Bhagat Singh

Personal tools

Namespaces

Variants

Views

Actions

Search

Navigation

Wikiquote links

Toolbox