User talk:Om777om

From Wikiquote
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is Om777om's talk page, where you can send messages and comments to Om777om.


  • Sources to photo captions to Commercialization?
  • The mind is sharper and keener in seclusion and uninterrupted solitude. Nikola Tesla : The source?
  • Perfection is not required: Wikipedia is a work in progress. Collaborative editing means that incomplete or poorly written first drafts can evolve over time into excellent articles. Even poor articles, if they can be improved, are welcome. For instance, one person may start an article with an overview of a subject or a few random facts. Another may help standardize the article's formatting, or have additional facts and figures or a graphic to add. Yet another may bring better balance to the views represented in the article, and perform fact-checking and sourcing to existing content..."

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Editing_policy

Helloǃ Have you noticed this?w:Wikipedia talk:External links--Risto hot sir (talk) 22:07, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

78.144.90.38 wrote:

Orwell[edit]

  • They remembered a million useless things, a quarrel with a workmate, a hunt for a lost bicycle pump, the expression on a long-dead sister's face... but all the relevant facts were outside the range of their vision. They were like the ant, which can see small objects but not large ones. And when memory failed and written records were falsified — when that happened, the claim of the Party to have improved the conditions of human life had got to be accepted... orwell in 1984
  • In your reaction to an imagined attack on your country or an insult to its government, you draw closer to the herd for protection, you conform in word & deed, & you insist vehemently that everybody else shall think, speak, & act together. & you fix your adoring gaze upon the State, with a truly filial look, as upon the Father of the flock."
  • The sense of insecurity, the desire for protection, sends one's desire back to the father & mother, with whom is associated the earliest feeling of protection. It is not for nothing that one's State is still thought of as Fatherland or Motherland, that one's relations towards it is conceived in terms of family affection. The war [World War I] has shown that nowhere under the shock of danger have these primitive childlike attitudes failed to assert themselves again, as much in this country as anywhere. If we have not the intense father-sense of the German who worships his Vaterland, at least in Uncle Sam we have a symbol of protecting, kindly authority . . . A people at war have become in the most literal sense obedient, respectful, trustful children again, full of that naive faith in the all-wisdom & all-power of the adult who takes care of them, imposes his mild but necessary rule upon them & to whom they lose their responsibility & anxieties. In this recrudescence of the child, there is great comfort, & a certain influx of power. On most people the strain of being an independent adult weighs heavily . . . Randolph Bourne, The State
  • xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • "It's not a matter of whether the war is not real, or if it is, Victory is not possible. The war is not meant to be won, it is meant to be continuous. Hierarchical society is only possible on the basis of poverty & ignorance. This new version is the past & no different past can ever have existed. In principle the war effort is always planned to keep society on the brink of starvation. The war is waged by the ruling group against its own subjects & its object is not the victory over either Eurasia or East Asia but to keep the very structure of society intact.
  • "During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." George Orwell

Om777om (talk) 18:54, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Redirects[edit]

Redirects to article are created like this: [1]. See also Help:Redirect. jni (talk) 09:47, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Freedom of the Press Foundation[edit]

Om777om (talk) 16:57, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Whether an amateur or professional troll.… please format better.[edit]

I do not have time to discuss many matters with you now, but will you at least format your anti-American propaganda properly, rather than sloppily, in your unrelenting efforts to further your pro-Putin agenda, whether as a hireling troll, or simply a sincerely duped zealot. Though there are others who do it so sloppily, though their errors have been pointed out to them, quotations should not have bullets between paragraphs, but rather breaks: <br />. I really must prepare to leave now, for several hours, and probably will check back only briefly before leaving. ~ Kalki·· 23:49, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Ok Sure - i'll definitely go back & make corrections on my formatting... In any event, thank you very much for all the good that you do & for nudging me on my formatting errors. Om777om (talk) 03:18, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Recently, those who have criticized the actions of the U.S. government... have been called “anti-American.” ..The term “anti-American” is usually used by the American establishment to discredit...its critics. Once someone is branded anti-American, the chances are that he or she will be judged before they are heard, and the argument will be lost in the welter of bruised national pride.
    But what does the term “anti-American” mean? Does it mean you are anti-jazz? Or... opposed to freedom of speech?...That you have a quarrel with giant sequoias? Does it mean that you don’t admire the hundreds of thousands of American citizens who marched against nuclear weapons, or the thousands... who forced their government to withdraw from Vietnam? Does it mean that you hate all Americans?
    This sly conflation of America’s culture, music, literature, the breathtaking physical beauty of the land, the ordinary pleasures of ordinary people with criticism of the U.S. government’s foreign policy (about which, thanks to America’s “free press”, sadly most Americans know very little) is... extremely effective strategy.
    To call someone “anti-American”, indeed to be anti-American, (or for that matter, anti-Indian or anti-Timbuktuan) is not just racist, it’s a failure of the imagination. An inability to see the world in terms other than those the establishment has set out for you... If you don’t love us, you hate us... If you’re not with us, you’re with the terrorists.

Selective quoting[edit]

Please be more careful (and precise) in your quoting from material. I have noticed this before, where you take parts of a quote and selectively omit portions of it - this seems to be done to push a certain POV and is a dangerous practice - especially as many may not check the original source to see if it is correctly captured here. As an example, this edit that I corrected shows that the "sheer madness" line that you quoted was not directly tied to the previous lines, but in the original source, it occurs several sentences later and was not written with a direct connection as your edit implies. I don't believe you have malicious intent, but imprecise quoting or selective omission of parts of quotes is not a good practice in which to engage. Thanks. ~ UDScott (talk) 19:21, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for that, but FYI: Your suggestion that i may intentionally push certain POVs is incorrect. The authors quoted obviously have their own POVs. Frequently it seems best to selectively remove portions of a quote for the sake of brevity. When i do, you will always find three dots (Ellipsis) used to indicate an intentional omission. In many cases it seems the best way to get to the author's point without beating around the bush or quoting their 'hot air'. “Struggling to be brief I become obscure.” wrote Horace over 2,000 years ago, but we have a 250 word quote limit, so we're all doing the best we can.
The link you gave with your example of the two words: "sheer madness" was, contrary to your suggestion, most certainly the author's description of the competition he was writing about. It was most certainly directly tied to the previous lines (in the first half of the same paragraph), contrary to your comments suggesting such is not the case. "Sheer madness" are two very powerful words that imo, belong there. Your removal of them could be viewed as a way to water down the idea expressed by the author and could easily be viewed as you pushing a POV - a very dangerous practice indeed. As they say it's not so much what is said, as it is how what is said is taken. Some people who are very comfortable with the competition based world as it is now, could easily take offense by ideas expressed by certain authors who hold conflicting POVs. As you said, I don't believe you have malicious intent, but imprecise quoting or selective omission of parts of quotes is not a good practice in which to engage.

So, Thanks for expressing your view. I will strive to be more careful and to keep certain things in mind about this environment.

  • For the record - in case anyone is interested below is 1) the text i extracted from Bellamy's paragraphy, 2) Bellamy's paragraph & 3) UDScott's version.
  • The text inserted by me, later changed by UDScott:
  • The next of the great wastes was that from competition. The field of industry was a battlefield as wide as the world, in which the workers wasted, in assailing one another, energies which, if expended in concerted effort, as to-day, would have enriched all... To deliberately enter a field of business and destroy the enterprises of those who had occupied it previously, in order to plant one's own enterprise on their ruins, was an achievement which never failed to command popular admiration... sheer madness..
  • Suggest changing the last line to: was an achievement which never failed to command popular admiration... This certainly seems like sheer madness,
  • Entire original paragraph shortened to quote---- The next of the great wastes was that from competition. The field of industry was a battlefield as wide as the world, in which the workers wasted, in assailing one another, energies which, if expended in concerted effort, as to-day, would have enriched all. As for mercy or quarter in this warfare, there was absolutely no suggestion of it. To deliberately enter a field of business and destroy the enterprises of those who had occupied it previously, in order to plant one's own enterprise on their ruins, was an achievement which never failed to command popular admiration. Nor is there any stretch of fancy in comparing this sort of struggle with actual warfare, so far as concerns the mental agony and physical suffering which attended the struggle, and the misery which overwhelmed the defeated and those dependent on them. Now nothing about your age is, at first sight, more astounding to a man of modern times than the fact that men engaged in the same industry, instead of fraternizing as comrades and co-laborers to a common end, should have regarded each other as rivals and enemies to be throttled and overthrown. This certainly seems like sheer madness, a scene from bedlam... (it's a large paragraph- this is only about 40% of it).
  • UDScott's edit: The next of the great wastes was that from competition. The field of industry was a battlefield as wide as the world, in which the workers wasted, in assailing one another, energies which, if expended in concerted effort, as to-day, would have enriched all. As for mercy or quarter in this warfare, there was absolutely no suggestion of it. To deliberately enter a field of business and destroy the enterprises of those who had occupied it previously, in order to plant one's own enterprise on their ruins, was an achievement which never failed to command popular admiration.

--- Thanks again for expressing your views. Cheers. Om777om (talk) 20:30, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

I do agree that these are powerful words - and I would suggest that the better way would be to include the quote in its entirety (i.e. the full paragraph) instead of making it seem that those words and the sentences earlier in the paragraph are directly connected. The practice of culling out words between thoughts is what I objected to. This leads one down a dangerous path where the choice of what to eliminate is a subjective one. Instead, I would rather let the author's words stand as written. If there are quotes that you wish to add to a page in which there are too many extra lines between them, then show two quotes rather then separating them with ellipses. ~ UDScott (talk) 20:38, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

OK. Thank you. Om777om (talk) 20:48, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for Living wage and Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity[edit]

Om777om, Thank you for creating Living wage and Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity. These are valuable and timely additions to the Wikiquote project. One request: when including images, please select a quotation or portion thereof sourced within the body of the article and include as caption below image. I don't have a good explanation for why it's done this way, but this seems to be the tradition. Best regards and thanks again. ~ Peter1c (talk) 23:28, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Peter1c, Thank you for all the Great Work you've done here in the last ~10 years, &4 mentioning the community norm of putting some words along with images. It's good to know. Thanks & Cheers Om777om (talk) 18:32, 18 April 2019 (UTC)