User talk:Kalki

I will cherish these few specks of time. ~ Everything Everywhere All at Once ~

⨀

⨀ ⨀

⨀

Well is ALL.
Well All IS.
ALL IS WELL.
ALWAYS and ALL WAYS.

---

Do not be deceived by the way men of bad faith misuse words and names … Things are set up as contraries that are not even in the same category. Listen to me: the opposite of radical is superficial, the opposite of liberal is stingy; the opposite of conservative is destructive. Thus I will describe myself as a radical conservative liberal; but certain of the tainted red fish will swear that there can be no such fish as that. Beware of those who use words to mean their opposites. At the same time have pity on them, for usually this trick is their only stock in trade.

~ R. A. Lafferty ~

♘☤ Kalki · † archives: X · index · iota · imago · αnima · 2003 · 2004 · 2005 · 2006 · 2007 · 2008 · 2009 · controversies · assessments‎‎ · VOC·K · 2009 † 2010 · outrages · 2011 · contentions · RfA1 · 2012 · RfA2‎‎ · 2013 · 2014 · RfA3‎‎ · 2015 · RfA4 · 2016 · 2017 · 2018 · 2019 · 2020 · 2021 · 2022 · 2023 · 2024 · 2025 · Magic · Worldsong · Restorations · Chronology · Vox Box · Heroes · OZ · OASIS · ♖

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

This user has been on Wikiquote for 22 years, 3 months, and 7 days.   144,444+ This user has made over 144,444 contributions to Wikiquote.

With this and other accounts I have made over 157,000 contributive edits, created well over 17000 pages and done substantial work on well over 1000 more, some of which are listed here.

⨀ ∴ ☥ ♥ ☮ ∵ ꇎ ॐ

· I usually have only a sporadic presence here on most days. ·

I remain very busy with many urgent and diverse tasks and expect to very often be doing very minimal editing here for most of the days of most of the coming years.
Though I once regularly spent many hours of most days at least monitoring this site, I now quite often spend less than an hour a day doing so, at various random periods within any day. There are sometimes stretches of weeks where I am hardly online at all, most days. There may be a few periods in some years where I will have the opportunity for extensive activities here for days at a time, but I am not actually counting on that occurring very often. I shall continue to usually check in at least daily, most of the time, but Time shall reveal what opportunities times can provide.
· So it goes… ⨀∴☥☮♥∵ॐ …Blessings. ~ ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki·⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ ·
· ALL abides, always, and all abide, ALWAYS amidst ALL. ·

---

initial proposal for QOTD of 2025·06·11

I had preferred this to several other proposals available on the suggestions page for that date, but it and the one I had been most inclined to use prior to posting it were both suddenly downvoted with zeroes as I was about to post them. I decided I would post the best currently available layout I had made here. ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki ⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 00:26, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

I want y'all to consider what kind of government it appears to be when every time we exercise our democratic right to protest, the military is deployed against us. What type of government is that? People are being swept up and torn from their families, and I feel it's my responsibility as an artist to use this moment to speak up for all oppressed people. For Black people, for Latino people, for trans people, for the people in Gaza. We all deserve to live in hope and not in fear, and I hope we stand together, my brothers and my sisters, against hate, and we protest against it. ~ Doechii ~

Wikiquote:Quote of the day/Protect

Hi Kalki. I'm not sure if you have seen the discussion on my talk page related to this page. I know that in years passed, we had discussed reducing the buffer for the protected days, but it had gotten increased again a couple of times (most recently by you this month). I am sure the adjustments were in response to disagreements on the process for selecting the quotes for the QOTD. After reading the discussion, might I ask for your input on again relaxing the protections to the current day? I want to get your feedback in this discussion based on your long history with the QOTD pages. I haven't always agreed with you over the years, but I do find that you usually operate with the project's best interests in mind. I look forward to the discussion. Thanks. ~ UDScott (talk) 16:52, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Please pardon my lack of response yesterday, and the fact that I very likely will not have time to make a substantial response for another day or so. The last couple of months have kept me in a very hectic pace of activities most days, even by my standards, and the last couple of days have even been more hectic than most of them. I had expected to make fuller response today but it has thus far been far busier upon me than yesterday, but I expect some opportunity to concern myself more extemsively with matters here within the next few days. Thanks for your notice upon these matters, and I must now do a very few things here, and then leave again, for at least a few hours, and expect to be very busy most of the coming day thereafter. ~ ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki ⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 20:38, 1 June 2024 (UTC) + tweak

Hi Kalki. Just wanted to nudge you on this (and related) topic(s). As I have said before, I don't always agree with your choices, but in I do respect your desire to protect the best interests of the project. Within the specific area of QOTD, as you are likely aware, there has arisen some discussion regarding the selection process. It would be great if there was more participation in the process, as I am sure you would agree. The latest issue is the ultimate selection of what will appear on the front page. Are you open to discussion of that process and adding some steps or guidance or whatever to open this part of it to additional participants? I am by no means trying to take over anything - just trying to facilitate some discussion about the process and ways it might be improved. Thanks for your consideration and look forward to the discussion. ~ UDScott (talk) 14:37, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Ficaia

An user has started mass deleting quotes he appears not to like on dozens of pages without giving valid, specific reasons for each deleted quote but hand-wavingly claiming that they all have the same problem (wrong formatting, or typos, or bias, or academic prose) which is not true, as the quotes are all different and usually are adequately sourced etc, and in any case, a discussion and the cleanup template should be used instead before deleting. Mass deleting without giving a specific rationale for each deleted quote is not helpful at all. Just as an example, here he removed dozens of quotes from Voltaire and others. Since you have interacted with the user before I am notifying you. --ᘙ (talk) 22:37, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

I have also noticed this behavior on the pages for abortion and human, where they have moved many quotes to the talk page, I would not consider an analysis of fictionalized television depictions of a subject from NPR to be academic prose. The page they created for history of abortion was also problematic being idiosyncratically organized and Eurocentric, they also seemed unwilling to have quotes featured on multiple pages. CensoredScribe (talk) 14:55, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Theme pages that apply specifically to humans

In keeping with Wikipedia, we have a page now for race that applies specifically to humans, Race (human categorisation), as well as one for the "informal" biological classification Race (biology). Why are humans singled out for their own page, couldn't all of the theme pages have new versions created that are exclusive to humans? By having these two pages is Wikiquote suggesting that the "informal" biological classification of race is in fact formal and that animals other than humans have races, or that the racial classification for humans are also informal? The American Anthropological Association says race isn't a formal construct, so are we allowed to add that to the Wikiquote page for Race (human categorisation)? CensoredScribe (talk) 23:37, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

Luigi Mangione

Hi, I don't know what the policies are in Wikiquotes in terms of length and of notability. Luigi Mangione is the suspect in the killing of Brian Thompson. Police allegedly found on him a few pages of writings that the media is calling a manifesto. We are being very careful in en.wikipedia to call it a piece of writing and not a manifesto. A user has put the alleged text of the writing in the Luigi Mangione entry of en.wikiquotes. I was curious to know what the policy is of such a post. And is there a process for me to nominate it for deletion if it breaks policies? Thank you, Kingturtle (talk) 02:40, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

I recognize a few problems with the page, some that are not addressed by any policies I am aware of, but within a couple of hours, after I do tomorrow's QOTD, I will trim the page down to a few generally quoted portions to better conform to existing policies. ~ ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki ⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 23:44, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Covid-19 articles

Could I get your opinion on the current state of the Covid articles? I was reminded of them as there's a VFD for Embryonic stem cells going on right now that cites technical jargon as a reason for deletion, but I think that at least the Christopher Reeve quotes are notable if edited and I'm confused why HouseOfChange considers it point of view pushing when he's the only advocate being quoted, everything else is just facts. If it's too much to ask for your help on both, I'm more concerned about the Covid articles. CensoredScribe (talk) 23:26, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

The concern at Wikiquote:Votes_for_deletion/Embryonic_stem_cells is not POV-pushing but Wikiquote:Quotability. Long quotes from medical journals or public testimonies are rarely if ever "witty, pithy, wise, eloquent, or poignant." WQ is not a public billboard where people immortalize paragraphs they unilaterally decided were "important." If we abandon quotability requirement, we are a tempting target to POV pushers like the LibraryClerk sockfarm and to promotional accounts like the Alex Smithson sock farm. I did not accuse CensoredScribe of POV-pushing but his IDIDNTHEARTHAT concerning quotability is troubling. HouseOfChange (talk) 17:47, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

When I first started adding material from science journals, I added the intros and the conclusions, because they were the most concisely written parts. Then I started including paragraphs with more than four references. HouseOfChange, if this is about making the page more concise, rather than deleting it, I don't have a problem with that, part of the reason I got worse about concision over time is because I was really hoping to meet someone who shared an interest in this material who could help me with the actual editing process. But that never ended up happening with the exception of some help I got from GreenMeansGo, instead I've done over a dozen and a half abortion pages entirely on my own, which is sad.
Also, I should add that the page also has presidential addresses from George W. Bush and Barack Obama so even if none of the science journals count as notable that's three notable people. So yeah, I hear you, I can remove the parts of the journals that aren't the beginning or the end, and I can understand your frustration at feeling ignored, because that's how I feel. CensoredScribe (talk) 14:25, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

This seems increasingly off-topic for the talk page of Kalki, who is busy elsewhere. I am sorry for your hurt feelings, but the fact is that despite repeated discouragement from other editors you persist in creating articles and adding quotes that do not meet WQ policy. I wish you would review those policies and direct your substantial energies into a direction more likely to add value to WQ and get appreciation from others for your effort. But I will caution that even a prodigiously productive and good editor like UDScott rarely gets thanks from others for his good work. HouseOfChange (talk) 19:49, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

I think asking why Covid-19 pandemic is a good page and why Embryonic stem cells is not is a valid question to ask Kalki; both are very technical medical topics, no? Yet one was deleted and the other was not and I'd like to know why so I can improve more pages like Covid-19 pandemic and make less like Embryonic stem cells. Personally, I did not find UDScott to be very helpful on the page for Roe v. Wade, nothing they added to the intro was ever included on the Wikipedia page and was ultimately removed for going off topic. I can understand not being very interested in the subject however as I myself I did not find much of anything on the page for Roe v. Wade to be particularly noteworthy outside of the briefs. I've thanked UDScott for their work before on film categories before, having made a couple myself and knowing how easy it is to make bad ones, and I would be willing to collaborate with them in the future despite the deletion of Embryonic stem cells and Teratoma at their request.
So let me ask you HouseOfChange, where do you think I should be directing my substantial energies instead of towards the page for the topic that would hypothetically allow me to regenerate from injuries and ultimately be a more efficient editor at any topic because my body is less broken and I can type faster? I still think the gender gap mailing list isn't going to appreciate me telling them there's nothing they can do that would be effective at recruiting and retaining female editors excep for them to somehow get section Section 230 of the Communication Decency Act repealed so they feel more secure. You have said you are too busy now for those mailing lists, I also believe I have better things to do than pretend I'm working hard to solve an unsolveable problem. I'd rather solve it. CensoredScribe (talk) 19:09, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Gamification of the system

Posting new suggestions for QOTD two minutes before the deadline is obviously problematic. Ficaia (talk) 00:05, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

You've also ignored my vote. Ficaia (talk) 00:12, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

What makes you think you can do that? Ficaia (talk) 00:12, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

I had actually not noticed your somewhat inexplicable vote until after I had already posted the QOTD. I see no reason to take it further into account other than as another incident of your quite evident and apparently obsessive trolling in various matters in the past year of your activities here. ~ ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki ⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 00:23, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

Who is Kalki?

Hi,

Apologies immediately if I'm misusing the Add Topic function, however my curiosity has reached its limit. I have checked WikiQuote every day for many years, and always it's Kalki.

Simply put, your dedication to WikiQuote is inspiring.

I would like to get to interview you, if that is something you are open to?

Sincerely,

PhanesdiRienzo PhanesdiRienzo (talk) 00:40, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliments, but I am not inclined towards doing any interviews. I just intend to keep doing a few things that need to be done as I encounter them. I don’t even do nearly as much here as I used to, in years past. There are many other things keeping me busy, and I have recognized that I have to spend more time on many of those, even though there is still much to be done here. ~ ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki ⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 09:26, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

I fully understand. I'm not affiliated with any media outlet, it was more just to hear from the person who has carried so much of the weight on WikiQuote. There's a lot of overlap in our author interests.

Your Chronology page offers insight enough. Went all the way back to your Cumaean edits, which felt kind of personal so I stopped there. This is an alternate account of mine cause I felt exposed using my main.

So yeah, I understand.

Well, please know you have inspired many a day with your QOTD selections if this is the last of our correspondence. I'm glad enough to have made contact with the ever-elusive Kalki! PhanesdiRienzo (talk) 11:56, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

best way to report disruptive editing from new user?

i tried posting on vandalism in progress last week but there hasn't been a response there, is there a different way or different page i should report stuff like this to admins? the user is still making large subtractive changes to pages like they have been trying to do with the zionism page - A23423413 (talk) 02:16, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

I apologize for not responding here sooner. I have been far busier than normal, and expect to continue to be for some weeks yet. The admin page is probably the best place to report problems, but I expect other admins, much like myself, have limited time for many of the contentions here. I am just now responding to your note, and am also responding to some of the contentions with the person you have mentioned, in the note he posted below this one. There are many contentions to deal with on many wikis, and thus far, few admins to do much work on this one. ~ ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki ⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 01:07, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

thank you for adding this, helped put things in perspective for me - A23423413 (talk) 18:17, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Revert

I have reverted your revert in the Zionism article following this comment. I will not reinstate anything in the other article we have interacted on until verifying everything I have removed.
Best, NorthernWinds (talk) 16:08, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

I will begin with brief note on my rather limited response to your assertions thus far : amidst intermittent considerations of some very dreary contentions here, I have been extraordinarily busy, and expect to be even more so for the next several weeks. I am currently engaged in many exhaustive preparations before leaving on an extensive trip, and until that trip has finished I fully expect to have very little time to work here on MOST days. Today was a particularly strenuously exhausting day, but it has now given me a bit more time than recent days to simply rest wearily in a chair and catch up on some of the many tasks to do here.

In recent days I had observed some of your activity, and that it had already clearly been pointed out elsewhere, by another administrator, that the long standing guidelines on notability are precisely that — general guidelines in seeking and selecting quotes, and NOT absolute strictures by which the value of quotes or their relevance on any pages should be absolutely judged. I myself, personally, have never accepted many of them as even very good guidelines, but only as very tenuously acceptable ones, at best, as advice in seeking out quote options — and absolutely NOT as imperative mandates by which to absolutely exclude quotes.

There was much more I had considered stating, but knew I did not have the time to engage in properly indicating many things sufficiently. Thus, though I was strongly inclined to again revert most, if not all, of your removals, for many reasons. I see that some renewal of the page has begun by others, and knowing that I do not have inclinations to spend much of my limited time in extensive contentions on many of these matters, for at least another month or so, I am more inclined to let things proceed largely without my intervention, if possible, for the time being. I do hope things come to a stable and satisfactory conclusion, eventually.

I will very soon again be leaving for some relatively minor tasks to finish my day, and then expect to be back and need further rest, before facing another intensely busy day tomorrow, and the next several days, before leaving on my trip, which I anticipate will be even more thoroughly time-consuming. So it goes... ~ ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki ⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 01:07, 8 August 2025 (UTC) + tweaks

I did not see this until today, my apologies. What you are saying here about policy/guide was indeed told to me in Jimmy Carter's talk page around the same time of your reply. I can get the urge to revert changes like mine because it is unusual that these removals happen. Perhaps it is not a requirement (or was not at the time, depending on when you are reading this) but I did ask for other signs of notability and did not revert reverts immediately, but only after waiting some time. I truly do not believe these quotes are notable due to lack of repetition in secondary sources. When you do have time, I am open to discussion on all of my changes. Additionally, you may be interested in the policy proposal I have opened in the WQ:WQ talk page (I proposed to make secondary sources a requirement).

Best, NorthernWinds (talk) 20:03, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Gleichschaltung

A page that you have been involved in editing, Gleichschaltung, has been listed for deletion. All contributions are appreciated, but it may not satisfy Wikiquote's criteria for inclusion, for the reasons given in the nomination for deletion (see also what Wikiquote is and is not). If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Gleichschaltung. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Thank you. Markjoseph125 (talk) 00:26, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

Policy change proposal

There is a policy change proposal for a topic we have previously discussed. You may visit WQ:WQ and vote/suggest improvements on the talk page. Best, NorthernWinds (talk) 11:55, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Please Look Into

Hello Kalki,

I’ve posted a request on the Administrators’ Noticeboard regarding a proposed merge of the Shadan Kapri Wikiquote entry with the previously deleted Wikipedia article. Given your experience and thoughtful contributions, I’d be grateful if you could take a look and share your perspective. Thank you so much! SheSaidCampaign (talk) 01:20, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

World is waiting for you lord kalki

why you not come the sins are everywhere ~2025-69383-7 (talk) 17:23, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Quote of the Day

Heed my vote. Ficaia (talk) 23:21, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Earlier in the day, I had considered all the available suggestions for the date, and though there remain many good ones available for future use, I narrowed my likely options to those I considered the best of them for today to these three:

Egocentrics are attracted to the inept. It gives them one more excuse for patting themselves on the back. ~ Helen Hayes

All stories have a beginning, a middle and an ending, and if they're any good, the ending is a beginning. ~ James Clavell

God gives us intelligence to uncover the wonders of nature. Without the gift, nothing is possible. ~ James Clavell

After going about other tasks and not encountering any more notable statements to suggest or use for the remainder of the day, of these I chose the middle one, and after changing my ranking on it at 23:07 UTC, a little less than an hour before the posting of a layout was due, immediately began doing extensive searches on the Commons for images to use with it. I thus did not notice your remark on my talk page until I went to test-post 3 layouts of images to compare in preview, with only about two minutes before the UTC date change. Noticing your note, and then your apparently spiteful and rationally untenable vote of "0" regarding it, and remark "don't change your vote at the last second", I very briefly considered changing my rankings again, in reaction to your apparent trolling, and to meticulously accommodate your extremely disruptive extreme ranking shift as best I could, but realized that this would have actually involved changing my votes in the final seconds to something I considered inferior for this particular day — and then having to renew a search for images for a layout, probably for at least tens of minutes, by which time you would probably disrupt things even further. I swiftly decided to very slightly hone the image sizes on one of the layouts I had developed for final visual balancing, and stick with the quote I had chosen before I noticed your actions and remarks, so as to finish the task promptly, and be able to leave to attend to other matters. That intention was delayed a bit by notice of your comments elsewhere, which I shall now respond to elsewhere, as I did have to leave before attending to them, but have now returned.

I will note that I have nearly always taken account of all the available suggestions on a page, and make final choices among what seem to be the best ones in the last hours available to me to do so, so as to keep options open so long as possible, while you have several times now seemed to be intent on simply interfering with the processes of my selections by casting extremely disruptive and personally spiteful rankings down-voting WHATEVER I select, even AFTER what you quite facetiously and usually quite WRONGLY tend to label "the last second." So it goes… ⨀∴☥☮♥∵ॐ …Blessings. ~ ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki ⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 07:15, 10 October 2025 (UTC) + tweaks

All stories have a beginning, a middle and an ending, and if they're any good, the ending is a beginning. ~ James Clavell ~

Has Enough Time Passed?

Hello Kalki I was wondering if enough time had passed that I could come back and contribute now? It's been almost 20 years since my Wazzawazzawaz/MyName/Rappy30V2/Old-Ti89/HP50G trolling. I was only 13 back then I'm in my mid 30s now. May i please have a chance? WazzawazREBORN (talk) 02:58, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

I am only one of many who countered vandalism of people using such usernames — If there was a Wikimedia ban placed on such accounts I am certainly not someone who is either inclined to rescind them, nor capable of it, even if I were. I do not concieve that there are many Wikimedians who would be inclined to "pardon" such accounts nor anyone openly professing to having used them. ~ ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki ⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 22:57, 18 October 2025 (UTC)