User talk:Ningauble/Archive 11

From Wikiquote
Jump to: navigation, search

This is an archive of past discussions on User talk:Ningauble from Jul–Dec 2013.
Do not edit this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please use the current talk page.


Please see my latest request. Thanks and sorry for the impatience. ~ DanielTom (talk) 20:55, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. Not quite as I suggested, but I think the template is better now. Cheers. DanielTom (talk) 22:00, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
New request (probably "idiotic", I would test it without asking, but only admins can edit it). (Not sure if you have it on your watchlist.) Thx ~ DanielTom (talk) 17:23, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
Since you say it is probably idiotic, I should probably ignore it accordingly; but instead I will explain on the template talk page why the space is there. ~ Ningauble (talk) 12:18, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
Both templates seem to be working properly now. I was actually thinking of the IP template, don't know why I confused to two. From memory, we had to use "{{anon}}~ ~~~~" with no space between the template and the signature so as to not mess up the format. Looks like you fixed that now, thanks. ~ DanielTom (talk) 12:44, 24 August 2013 (UTC)


Just dropped you an email. EVula // talk // // 05:32, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Got it. Replied via email. ~ Ningauble (talk) 13:06, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

"Most viewed articles"[edit]

Why is it stuck at April 2013? Do you know? ~ DanielTom (talk) 15:09, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't know. It may be broken in some way, or it might not be fully automatic. (It may have been purely coincidental that it was current when we enquired about it a couple months ago.) Henrik would be the one to ask. ~ Ningauble (talk) 10:56, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
Incidentally, I can't really contact Henrik on Wikipedia anymore without breaking a few rules, as you know, but I can try leaving him a message on other wikis.
Another (unrelated) question, if I may. Is this correct syntax? Thanks ~ DanielTom (talk) 19:42, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
N-no, I would not capitalize the middle of a stutter like that; only the first letter of the sentence. However, if that is the orthography used in the source then it would be appropriate here. ~ Ningauble (talk) 21:43, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
I-i'm thankful for your help. (Hmm, that doesn't look right.) Alas, the words in the source are all capitalized (as is common in manga), so I cannot tell from there. Thanks for your advice, though. ~ DanielTom (talk) 22:01, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
("I'm" should always be capitalized, the first person singular subject pronoun is a special case. It and the "royal We" are the only pronouns that are capitalized like proper names.) ~ Ningauble (talk) 22:06, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
(Actually, that's not right. When any pronoun refers to the monotheistic deity it is also capitalized like a proper name.) ~ Ningauble (talk) 22:25, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
Tricksy little exceptionses. ~ DanielTom (talk) 12:39, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
Yes, well. Pronouns are also capitalized when used in formal address, e.g. "Her Majesty", "Your Honor", & "My Lord". The first person singular subject pronoun is the only one that is always capitalized ... except in cases of poetic license like e. e. cummings. Rules would have little meaning without exceptions. ~ Ningauble (talk) 14:47, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
Now the link doesn't even work. R.I.P. ~ DanielTom (talk) 20:14, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Not cool.[edit]

At all. -- 04:06, 18 July 2013 (UTC)


FYI [1] Mdd (talk) 16:04, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

It is not necessary to notify me of postings on the Anministrators' noticeboard: it's on my watchlist. ~ Ningauble (talk) 14:44, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
I am just wondering, if you could give me your feedback on my latest suggestion to you on the Administrators' noticeboard? -- Mdd (talk) 12:49, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
I assume you refer to this question. I will reply there. ~ Ningauble (talk) 15:59, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
Yes, thank you. -- Mdd (talk) 18:11, 24 September 2013 (UTC)


Need your suggestion/help here:- Justicejayant (talk) 07:50, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Replied there. ~ Ningauble (talk) 14:12, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
I have found a few quotes here, that were very misleading or copied from some dead/rumor site. Like one of this page of Jawaharlal Nehru, i removed, it's link was dead and originally came from some troll source like "book is banned by government", lol. Agreed with you on Little Richard talk page, but there are somethings, like "self admission" or even a single essence that would lead a person to believe on the given quote. I will let update on this page soon. Justicejayant (talk) 18:51, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Is it just me...[edit]

Suddenly, when I type ":", or "~", etc., on Wikiquote, the format starts to mess up, and such characters appear in a small version (ː ̃ ̴ ); I don't know why, as in other wikis I don't have the same problem. ~ DanielTom (talk) 15:56, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

And when I type "+", it appears like this: ̟ ~ DanielTom (talk) 16:00, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
I am not seeing it. Is your language preverence set to English? Do you have any custom CSS? Have you tweaked the keyboard map on your computer? Consider rebooting. ~ Ningauble (talk) 16:08, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
Your hint at a language preference made me try Ctrl+M, and it worked. (It was not my computer's problem, because I wasn't having this problem on other wikis.) Anyway, problem solved, thanks. ~ DanielTom (talk) 16:50, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Beast Wars[edit]

The Beast Wars page under Dialogue[2] is becoming to long, there's too much dialogue. IP address user[3] shows no signs of stopping. Isn't there some kind of rule of putting too much on these pages here? 14:48, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, there is some kind of rule at Wikiquote:Limits on quotations. Note also at Wikiquote:Guide to layout#Television that the quotes and dialog should be sourced and organized by episode. ~ Ningauble (talk) 15:31, 30 July 2013 (UTC)


for your help at Meta. ~ DanielTom (talk) 17:23, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

(unrelated) Does Wikiquote have a template similar to {{od}} on other wikis? Thanks. ~ DanielTom (talk) 21:25, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

{{outdent}} ~ Ningauble (talk) 18:36, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Ah. (Thanks again.) ~ DanielTom (talk) 16:37, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Roll on, roll off.[edit]

In the long run, you're better off ignoring it. BD2412 T 23:01, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate the wisdom of not feeding trolls in the hope that they will get bored and go away. A continuing pattern of incivility from someone who is not going away is a different situation. In the near term he may learn to conduct himself in a collegial manner, without ad hominem characterizations and accusations, or he may not. The long term will take care of itself accordingly. ~ Ningauble (talk) 23:37, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
(Careful, he might hear you. Ah, so nice to call others "trolls" and then complain about ad hominem! Where would the World be without double standards?) ~ DanielTom (talk) 23:46, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


Could you take a look at some of the quotes there?

"Modern day Portugal has been an integral member of the European Union (EU) and is a strong proponent of European integration."
"Portugal is a close and valued ally."
"Portugal and the United States have been partners for more than 200 years, and allies for more than 60 years."

How are those even remotely notable or quoteworthy? Thanks. ~ DanielTom (talk) 22:57, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Please refrain from questioning the contributions of someone whose actions you are enjoined from contesting. ~ Ningauble (talk) 15:54, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Yeah... no. Article quality is more important than my being blocked for 30 days. I thought you of all people would understand this. ~ DanielTom (talk) 20:31, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Wikiquote has over 20,000 pages, and probably hundreds of thousands of quotes. I have a hunch that it would be very easy to find and address a multitude of quotes that are far more deleterious to the compendium than what you are pursuing. BD2412 T 21:20, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
All articles are equal, but some articles are more equal than others. Different editors care about different articles, depending on their background and preferences, and will edit the ones that give them the most pleasure, or those which they deem most important. We cannot all do everything. ~ DanielTom (talk) 22:08, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Unsourced quotes[edit]

Hello ǃ

I was wondering what I should do when I encounter unsourced quotes. I notice that they've been moved to the talk on some pages. Is this current practice or should I just leave them on the main page until someone's found a source for all of them ? Thanks. --Aphorist (talk) 09:50, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it is current practice to remove unsourced attributions from articles as described at WQ:SOURCE and more specifically at WQ:SAU. The practice began about five years ago, but there are still quite a few of unsourced bits remaining to be cleaned up. ~ Ningauble (talk) 14:31, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

ːːOkay, I'll do so from now on then ǃ Again, thanks. --Aphorist (talk) 15:05, 17 September 2013 (UTC)


==Homestar Runner==

A page that you have been involved in editing, Homestar Runner, 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/Homestar Runner. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Thank you.


"Extremists"? I invite you to reconsider your characterization of those with whom you disagree. ~ Ningauble (talk) 17:03, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
You assume too much, and you mischaracterize my words, I am not saying anyone is, I am saying there is no need for anyone to be so, and I hope you would agree with me that moderation is best. :) -- Cirt (talk) 17:52, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Ningauble, I think we've both done this in the past with each other, perhaps by mistake.

I was not calling anyone an extremist.

But I was saying that it is not a good idea for anyone to be so, in the future.

I think that in the case of this discussion, it is a good idea to try to show gestures of good faith and attempt to come to a compromise solution.

I hope in the future we can both extend more good faith to each other, and assume less negative impressions, and assume more kind positive ones! :)

I hope you are doing well, Ningauble.

-- Cirt (talk) 18:24, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I understand that you believe "characterization of those with whom you disagree" was a mischaracterization of your words. I am at a loss to understand how, in the context of that discussion,[4] your remark, "no need for extremists", could be construed to refer to the matter under discussion rather than parties to the discussion; however, I recognize it is your opinion that I mischaracterized the plain meaning of your words in a manner that displays bad faith, and I certainly believe that for me to do so would be a serious breach of the norms of conduct that administrators are expected to uphold.

Therefore, pursuant to my previous commitment to submit questions about improper conduct on my part to WQ:AN for review by uninvolved administrators, I have initiated a discussion there about my alleged mischaracterization of what you wrote. ~ Ningauble (talk) 22:14, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Alright, I'll read that there, thank you for the notification about it here. -- Cirt (talk) 22:21, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about the recent kerfuffle[edit]

Ningauble, I am deeply sorry to you about the recent kerfuffle.

It does seem that both of us in the past have had problems with mischaracterizing each others's comments and misconstruing what was meant by the other party.

For this reason and also for reasons of those mentioned by others in related threads, I will take much greater care in the future to comport myself of a much higher degree of politeness, kindness, and civility both with you and with all others here on this site.

Thank you for your help in all this, and your polite demeanor,

-- Cirt (talk) 22:27, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Travels With Charley[edit]

Hello Ningauble, I was reading this[5] and noticed that it has spelling errors, no page numbers, and fails to specify the edition used (rumor has it that the 1962 printing has been 'improved' in various ways since Steinbeck died). Are you interested in seeing that section improved? — 14:53, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

If you are interested in improving it, and have a good edition at hand, please be bold. ~ Ningauble (talk) 15:24, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Have to visit the library, but I doubt they have all editions. I'm working with somebody over at the Travels With Charley wikipedia article, I'll ask on the talkpage to see who has what editions. As for right now, I'm going to make a couple edits from memory slash googling. Somebody put "sill" instead of silly, and methinks used the wrong adjective later in the quote. There are a couple other obvious clerking-errors, which I might massage a little, or simply tag as {{dubious}}. Thanks 15:52, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Sourced Everything[edit]

Thanks for letting me know, but now you must have a look at Vedic science. Thanks Justicejayant (talk) 18:06, 24 October 2013 (UTC)


Sorry, maybe a stupid Question, but what does 2010s deaths mean exactly? Best regards, 22:29, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

2010s deaths identifies the decade in which the person passed away. It serves to distinguish deceased persons from living ones, and to place them in a rough historical context. ~ Ningauble (talk) 14:57, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Lock this page[edit]

Muhammad. A guy uselessly removing the sourced quotes that he don't like, he seems to be adamant too. 14:41, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svgY Done, semi-protected for three months. Any other administrators, please feel free to modify, -- Cirt (talk) 17:35, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Stop deleting my Zach braff quotes.[edit]

It has come to my attention you had been deleting my Quotes about Zach Braff. I want you to know that those quotes are verified and trusted from unknown sources, therefore I ask you to stop playing with your Banhammer and quit reediting the Zach Braff Quotes page. Everything said by him is a treasure so lets as Wikipedos forge an allience where everyone upholds the truth like in in wikileaks and not delete any more invaaluable content from this site. Now, if you don't believe me, you can ask Zach Braff himself and he OF COURSE will be more happy to share those ideas with your, and im not kidding when I say he will be happy.

Anyway, I hope you take this the good way, listen to my reason and forget about my Quotes, which by the way i'll be uploading it until He just run out of steam, if you catch my drift.

I thank you for your collaboration and i hope we could be friends.

Sincerely, the guy who quote Zach Braff.

Page needs to be locked[edit]

Here Bhagavad Gita a user keeps adding a primary source, unproved quote of Einstein, and quote of some no namer. Kindly lock the page. 19:13, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

This page should be really locked, it's Vandalized by a highly obsessional edit warrior, who is only there for promoting bad translation(of one quote) as well as for promoting unreliable(basically troll links), more info here [6] Justicejayant (talk) 02:51, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
What you mean I'm only there for promoting bad translation and all that? Don't you know how heavily I've contributed to the article? And there is absolutely no problem in translating Varna as caste, since that's what the definition of cast is. When the English word came into use is irrelevant. — 03:02, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

The article has been semi-protected for a period of three months due to "Edit warring / Content dispute". Contributors are welcome to use the article talk page for a collegial discussion of specific ways to improve article content. (E.g., user Kalki has already made constructive recommendations there regarding variant translations.) Because the disagreements have become rather heated, please take special care to be objective and polite when discussing the matter. ~ Ningauble (talk) 15:48, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Quote investigator[edit]

Hiǃ The Quote investigator has information that might be useful for your work here on Wikiquote. It is okay if you make use of his material, as long as he is given rightful credit. --Spannerjam (talk) 12:40, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Quote Investigator by Garson O’Toole does good work, and is already cited in several articles. One of these days he may publish a book. In the meanwhile, the website is worthy of citing because it is well researched and meticulously cited. When QI credits another researcher, such as Ralph Keyes, The Quote Verifier for its conclusion, credit should go to the prior research. ~ Ningauble (talk) 14:22, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

The Lord of the Rings (movies)[edit]

Good edit, I think. I copied it, see The Hobbit (movies). Best, DanielTom (talk) 15:57, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Maybe it should be a redirect, or the two might be merged under a more encompassing title, in order to avoid the two pages getting out of sync (e.g., your new page omits the 1978 film and my old page omits the 2013 film). ~ Ningauble (talk) 16:20, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
Maybe. If you can think of a clever way that works, go ahead. There is just one more film missing, which will come out next year, so I don't think it will be that hard to keep the pages synchronized. (I liked the 1978 film, BTW. Pity they didn't make the other parts. My favorite LOTR interpretation is the 1981 BBC radio dramatization, for which I may create a WQ page, when I have the time.) DanielTom (talk) 16:52, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

"Spam" filter[edit]

Please remove Twitter from the filter to avoid things like this from happening. Thanks ~ DanielTom (talk) 20:31, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

I have referred your request to WQ:AN#Blacklisted social networking sites in order to give more visibility to the WikiRetweet issue. ~ Ningauble (talk) 15:53, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. DanielTom (talk) 14:33, 22 December 2013 (UTC)