Wikiquote:Village pump

Community portal Welcome

Reference desk Request an article

Village pump Archives

Administrators' noticeboard Report vandalism • Votes for deletion

Wikiquote discussion pages (edit) see also: requests
Village pump comment | history | archive General policy discussions and proposals, requests for permissions and major announcements.	Reference desk comment | history | archive Questions and discussions about specific quotes.

Archives

Welcome, newcomers and baffled oldtimers! This is the place if you (a) have a question about Wikiquote and how it works or (b) a suggestion for improving Wikiquote. Just click the link above "create a new topic", and then you can place your submission at the bottom of the list, and someone will attempt to answer it for you. (If you have a question about who said what, go to the reference desk instead.)

Before asking a question, check if it's answered by the Wikiquote:FAQ or other pages linked from Wikiquote:Help. Latest news on the project would be available at Wikiquote:Community portal and Wikiquote:Announcements.

Before answering a newcomer's question abruptly, consider rereading Please do not bite the newcomers.

Questions and answers will not remain on this page indefinitely (otherwise it would very soon become too long to be editable). After a period of time with no further activity, information will be moved to other relevant sections of Wikiquote, (such as the FAQ pages) or placed in one of the village pump archives if it is of general interest, or deleted. Please consider dating and titling your discussions so as to facilitate this.

---

New blocked text

administrator: change the MediaWiki:Blockedtext to like this:

Your account or IP address has been blocked.

$7, You have been blocked by $1 for this reason: $2 Start of block: $8 Expiration of block: $6 Block ID: #$5 Current IP address: $3

What can I do now?

• If instructions are given above in the block message, follow them.
• If you have never edited Wikiquote before and/or do not have an account, consider creating one.

If you wish to appeal the block, or you believe you have been blocked by mistake, please see the following section.

The current block will automatically expire $6. You have many routes to appeal the block or its duration. Firstly, if you are a registered user and have a valid e-mail address confirmed, you can contact $1 via e-mail. This feature can be removed if abused.

Alternatively, you may appeal the block by requesting that another administrator review the block. To do so, add {{unblock|your reason here}} to the bottom of your user talk page to request unblocking. You must state a reason for this, and the block can then be discussed. Our guide to appealing blocks might help you in composing a persuasive unblock request.

If $7 is not blocked, your IP address ($3) or range may have been blocked. Please check here. If this is the case, please copy and paste the following text to the bottom of your user talk page.

{{unblock-ip|1=$3|2=<nowiki>$2|3=$1}}</nowiki>

Please note: While this block may be upsetting or unexpected, abuse of appeal processes, repeatedly using the unblock template when denied, personal attacks, or impolite conduct may lead to the removal of your ability to edit your talk page.

~2025-35059-43 (talk) 05:16, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

are they waiting for so long? ~2025-34907-64 (talk) 16:32, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

N Declined, blocked for sockpuppetry. Codename Noreste (talk) 19:51, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Proposal: Create a Patrollers User Group

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T413848
Resolved

Hi everyone,

I'd like to suggest creating a Patrollers user group on English Wikiquote. This would let trusted, active users help with routine patrolling by having their own edits automatically marked as patrolled and by marking other users’ edits as patrolled, easing some of the day-to-day workload for admins.

English Wikiquote currently doesn't have a non-admin group focused on patrolling, though similar groups exist on other Wikimedia projects. Adding one here could improve recent changes review and general maintenance.

The group could include the autopatrol and patrol rights, with membership granted by admins based on trust and activity. Feedback on usefulness and scope would be welcome.

Thanks. Saroj (talk) 18:30, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

That would be patroller in the MediaWiki software, but would it also make sense to create an autopatroller (autopatrolled) user group? Simply, autopatrollers solely have their own edits automatically marked as patrolled (in addition to patrollers and administrators). Codename Noreste (talk) 19:16, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

I think a separate autopatroller group could definitely be useful. It would help by automatically marking the edits of trusted users, without giving them broader patrolling responsibilities. That way, admins and patrollers can focus more on reviewing newer or higher-risk edits. Having both groups, with clear scopes, could keep things flexible and reduce routine workload if the community feels it’s a good fit. Saroj (talk) 03:41, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea to me. ~ UDScott (talk) 13:14, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

For (upcoming) patrollers and administrators, I would suggest that for these user groups, we can also add the patrolmarks user right, which should add a red exclamation mark next to non-patrolled page creations in recent changes. (turns out those with patrol already have patrolmarks already) Codename Noreste (talk) 18:59, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

Saroj and UDScott, the user groups have been implemented hours ago. I will make their respective pages, but we need to decide a criteria for granting and revocation. Codename Noreste (talk) 05:19, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

I think granting and revoking these rights can mainly rely on admin discretion, guided by an editor's activity, trustworthiness, and understanding of Wikiquote norms. Keeping the criteria lightweight should help keep things flexible without adding unnecessary bureaucracy. Saroj (talk) 07:06, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Agreed. Let's keep the criterias simple and lightweight. Codename Noreste (talk • contribs) 08:09, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Second proposal: add some protection levels?

I am proposing on adding any of the following protection levels to this project.

Proposal 1: Autopatroller protection

This involves adding a new user right for protection, editautopatrolprotected, in which only autopatrollers, patrollers, administrators, and bots can edit pages with this protection.

It would be used when semi-protection has proven to be inefficient, or to prevent sockpuppetry or edit wars, but it might also be used on templates where semi-protection would not be enough to prevent vandalism. We might need to consider updating the protection policy soon, given that autopatroller protection should not be indefinite in articles.

Proposal 2: Template editor protection

In the second proposal (or if the first proposal is unsuccessful), a new user group would be created, Project:Template editors (with the templateeditor user right).

This protection should be used only on high-risk templates/Lua modules where full protection would otherwise be too restrictive, unless such templates are used in the interface/system messages (in the latter, full protection would be useful).

In conclusion...

Thoughts? Codename Noreste (talk) 20:35, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

I support adding autopatroller protection as a practical middle ground when semi-protection fails, but I don't think a separate template editor protection is necessary at this stage, as full protection already covers high-risk templates and it’s better to try one change first and reassess later. Saroj (talk) 16:50, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Request for New Author Page: Shon Mehta (Philosopher/Author)

I am requesting the creation of an author page for Shon Mehta. She is an author and philosopher whose work is included in the Oxford University Press (Headway 5th Ed) and Indian SCERT curriculum. Her quotes, such as 'Maybe I am a villain in your story...' (from the novel The Timingila, ISBN: 978-0692108031), are widely cited but often misattributed to 'Anonymous' online. I have provided source citations for her core works to assist an editor in building this page. TinaTami (talk) 06:52, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Quotes about, in stead of from the person in article.

Mostly I'm active on nl:wiki so new here on Wikiquote. I noticed that in Ramin Hosseinpour, all quotes are about the artist, not from him and I presumed we collect sourced quotations from notable people here. We're having some issues with the Dutch-languaged Wikipedia article about the artist, and the article about his short film concerning verifiability (we're following up on that) and there seem to have been some issues with the information on Wikidata, that people have looked into, so perhaps this is a crosswiki issue, concerning the artist and his work as a subject. One of our moderators suggested to bring this to the attention here on Wikiquote. Hope someone here can look into it as well. Thanks. Jaap-073 (talk) 19:58, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

@Jaap-073 Well, we should primarily have quotes from the person, but 'quotes about' are also fine and good, though I would maybe hold them to a higher standard when it comes to "interestingness". If you can't find any quotes from the person worth keeping in most cases (historical people I would treat differently) I would not have a page. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:59, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation @PARAKANYAA. Just to be sure I understand: So in principle it's okay (allowed, not forbidden) but for a page to exist here we do focus on the quotations from the person in question? Jaap-073 (talk) 21:10, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

@Jaap-073 I'm not sure if it is an official rule, but that is what I read from the way Wikiquote's guidelines are set up. Also, he isn't enwiki notable and the enwiki page is very salted which suggests a promotional history. We do delete pages for only having mundane quotes, and that is very much the case for the page you mention, which only has aggressively flattering promotional statements with no quotability or depth.

I would vote to delete this, personally. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:13, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

A Steward on nl:wiki has just put a global block in place on the account in question, and said something about socks (probably sock-puppetry) because problems arose in multiple languages.

My gut instinct was, this may have been a way to generate attention and promote the artist and his work. Perhaps the same goes for this Wikiquote page, and then I'd second the motion but as this was my first edit here in quote-land I would prefer to humbly submit to your collective wisdom as what is to be done here. Thanks again. Jaap-073 (talk) 21:20, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

@Jaap-073 I will nominate this for speedy deletion. If that doesn't work I will take it to VfD. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:28, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you @PARAKANYAA.

If I get around to it, I'll try to fin a source for "I don't argue, I explain" by Violet Crawley, The Dowager Countess of Grantham, for the Downton Abbey entry here. Much more fun imho. Jaap-073 (talk) 21:34, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

N Deleted Saroj (talk) 04:56, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank You for Last Year – Join Wiki Loves Ramadan 2026

Dear Wikimedia communities,

We hope you are doing well, and we wish you a happy New Year.

Last year, we captured light. This year, we’ll capture legacy.

In 2025, communities around the world shared the glow of Ramadan nights and the warmth of collective iftars. In 2026, Wiki Loves Ramadan is expanding, bringing more stories, more cultures, and deeper global connections across Wikimedia projects.

We invite you to explore the Wiki Loves Ramadan 2026 Meta page to learn how you can participate and sign up your community.

📷 Photo campaign on Wikimedia Commons

If you have questions about the project, please refer to the FAQs:

• Meta-Wiki
• Wikimedia Commons

Early registration for updates is now open via the Event page

Stay connected and receive updates:

• Telegram channel
• Mailing list

We look forward to collaborating with you and your community.

The Wiki Loves Ramadan 2026 Organizing Team 19:45, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Annual review of the Universal Code of Conduct and Enforcement Guidelines

I am writing to you to let you know the annual review period for the Universal Code of Conduct and Enforcement Guidelines is open now. You can make suggestions for changes through 9 February 2026. This is the first step of several to be taken for the annual review. Read more information and find a conversation to join on the UCoC page on Meta.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. This annual review was planned and implemented by the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, you may review the U4C Charter.

Please share this information with other members in your community wherever else might be appropriate.

-- In cooperation with the U4C, Keegan (WMF) (talk)

21:02, 19 January 2026 (UTC)