User talk:Peter1c

From Wikiquote
Jump to: navigation, search

Hello, Peter1c, and welcome to English Wikiquote.


I know this is a belated welcome, but I am simply making amends. I have noted your work at times and am appreciative of it, and just thought it was time to make public note of it while I am briefly checking in here . ~ ♞☮♌Kalki (talk · contributions)⊙⚡ 20:49, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Your recent additions[edit]

Thank you for your recent additions. I have gone back to most of them and made some minor formatting corrections and added categories. You might want to take a look at my changes and apply them to pages going forward. The changes I made were to bold the name of the person, expand birth and death dates, and add an External links section (with a WP link, a DEFAULTSORT tag and categories). Thanks. ~ UDScott 15:42, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

I just wanted to say that I have been reading your additions to Wikiquote and I have been deeply inspired and moved. Keep adding quotes, and thank you! ExistentialBliss 20:52, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Max Scheler and Altruism are interesting articles. Like UDScott, I have added a DEFAULTSORT tag and categories as appropriate.--Collingwood (talk) 12:54, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Again, thanks for your contributions - but the pages need to have some categories added to them as well. I've added them where I noticed it, but it would be good to just add them when you are creating the pages. Thanks! ~ UDScott (talk) 13:59, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Ram Dass‎[edit]

Thanks MUCH for creation of the Ram Dass‎ page — had been intending to do one for him for ages — but never actually got around to it. ~ Kalki·· 01:49, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Vahik Ovanessian[edit]

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article Vahik Ovanessian, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but it may not satisfy Wikiquote's criteria for inclusion, for the reasons given in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikiquote is not" and Wikiquote's deletion policy).

You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Votes for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Collingwood (talk) 11:51, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Howard S. Becker[edit]

Thanks for creating the Howard S. Becker entry. As an artist, of cause, I had to add a chapter about Art World, and took some time to look into the other work of Becker. I must admit that at first I didn't understand all those different quotes about deviancy, until I read some parts of the book myself, and understood. I hope you don't mind I a few quotes together? -- Mdd (talk) 23:36, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Your addition could use more cite info[edit]

Regarding this addition, could you please add Year, Publisher, and Page number? Thank you for your interest in Freedom of speech, -- Cirt (talk) 22:06, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Nevermind, it was fixed by Ningauble (talk · contributions). Thanks again for your interest in Freedom of speech, -- Cirt (talk) 23:03, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Global account[edit]

Hi Peter1c! As a Steward I'm involved in the upcoming unification of all accounts organized by the Wikimedia Foundation (see m:Single User Login finalisation announcement). By looking at your account, I realized that you don't have a global account yet. In order to secure your name, I recommend you to create such account on your own by submitting your password on Special:MergeAccount and unifying your local accounts. If you have any problems with doing that or further questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Cheers, DerHexer (talk) 19:04, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks much[edit]

Thank you for creating the Wikiquote page for Argument from authority.

A few others that could use creating here on Wikiquote that I find most interesting are:

  1. Appeal to pity
  2. Appeal to emotion
  3. Formal fallacy / logical fallacy

If you wished to create any of those, or work on them together with me as a collaborative quality improvement project, it'd be most appreciated!

-- Cirt (talk) 21:11, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Chronology vs Alphabetical listings in theme pages.[edit]

I wish to start by saying that I very much appreciate many of your contributions here, and thank you for these, but I have noticed you changing theme pages, which are normally simply sorted alphabetically by author or source into sortation by chronologies (such as they generally are presented on pages for individuals). I actually don’t agree with dividing up the quotes on theme pages into eras. Sometimes the era assigned to quotations can itself be very dubious or indefinite, and I believe it could often present more problems of arrangement and duplication than simple alphabetized listings, which have been the general preference here on theme pages. Blessings. ~ Kalki·· 00:44, 26 March 2015 (UTC)


Your contributions I much approve of, and your collation of quotations at your User Page I do often browse.

Keep up the quality, I thank you for your work here; IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 17:54, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Also, I like reading your own writings. I especially liked this recent addition:

"The goal of the businesses that produce your entertainment isn't to help you strive for perfection in the way you and you alone can. Their goal is to make money. They distract your from your true tasks, the task of perfecting your intellect, the task of drawing ever closer to God."

Although I don't understand and politely request elaboration on this: "Shakespeare wrote his plays with an eye on profit."
Thanks, IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 03:59, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi IOHANNVSVERVS. Thanks for your encouragement and your feedback. What I meant to say is, cynics insist that even Shakespeare was trying to make money from his plays. But even supposing they are right, he hadn't reduced the moneymaking aspect of art to a science as Hollywood has.