Wikiquote:Village pump

From Wikiquote
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Community portal
Reference desk
Request an article
Village pump
Administrators' noticeboard
Report vandalismVotes 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.

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.

Four new Wikiquotes were just created[edit]

Welcome our friends at bcl:, bn:, ig:, and tl: if you get the chance. These are the first new Wikiquotes since sah: back in June 2018 and that was the first one in five and a half years! —Justin (koavf)TCM 12:58, 10 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Koavf What would we do without you, our global ambassador? Nice to see that the wikimedia movement continues to produce new language editions of WQ, which I assume the above are. I am curious to find out where there is a list of all the WQs by language. Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 14:17, 25 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am but a humble servant, OHT. Thanks for your support. —Justin (koavf)TCM 14:18, 25 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
...and I should add - one who keeps many editions of the Village pump alive across the wikiverse. Cheers Ottawahitech (talk) 14:22, 25 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I was just talking to someone who linked me to w:List of Wikipedias. Interesting that this is an article on enwp (not META), and that it in mainspace. I wonder why we don't have a List of Wikiquotes, mainspace or otherwise.
Anyone care to speculate? Ottawahitech (talk) 16:06, 26 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Probably because this project is much less active. —Justin (koavf)TCM 16:10, 26 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes this project is less active, but does the wq-community like this status quo? Anyone? Ottawahitech (talk) 00:58, 27 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I just made my first ever "edit" at the Igbo WQ. But now I am worried.
I value my privacy and don't know if anyone has the authority to check my IP address. I contributed in good faith using google translate, but have no idea how these WQs are managed and if anyone looking at my edits has checkuser rights on the igWQ.
Anyone? Ottawahitech (talk) 21:14, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There are no local CheckUsers at ig.wq. Of course, stewards or developers with access to the server logs can check, but that's always true. —Justin (koavf)TCM 22:10, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Ottawahitech. As for Wikiqoutes in other languages, if you go to Main page and then look left down "In other languages", these are all WQ projects in different languages. There are quite a few languages. As for your privacy concerns, I would be far more concerned about my privacy when using Google Translate. Privacy concerns/protections are the same whatever WMF project you participate in. WMF does not create a profile on you to target you with advertising, and Google does. - Emilija Knezevic (talk) 22:26, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Emilijaknezevic: Thanks for sending us over to the main page. I forget to check it on a regular basis, and it does have some good information and sections that some may not be aware of.
As far as your google comments, would you elaborate why you feel google cannot be trusted to shield the privacy of those who use it? Ottawahitech (talk) 16:58, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You may want to check this out, or this. Emilija Knezevic (talk) 16:07, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for providing those two enwp-links which explain why some people feel google cannot be trusted to shield privacy. I wonder if there is information about it at enwq? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 20:59, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


We do not need more volunteers at wikiquote[edit]

I don't think, so no, I think those of us who work on the smaller projects would like there to be more active or closer to comprehensive like Wikipedia, Wiktionary, Wikidata, and Commons are. —Justin (koavf)TCM 08:46, 27 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Are you sure? Then why are the two of us having a dialogue on the Village pump. Doesn't anyone else have an opinion? I know it was thanksgiving in the USA but this page still had 180 pairs of eyes on it the day before. Just curious. Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 15:46, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry for the ignorance, but an opinion about what? What is the discussion? Is it that you are looking for a list of other Wikiquote sites (besides en)? If that is it, then I can tell you that for me, I don't have time to think about other WQ sites - there's barely even enough hours to keep this one afloat (barely). I tend to focus my time here on other tasks than this (there are always plenty of open tasks here that are more critical, and such a list probably falls into the "nice to have" category). ~ UDScott (talk) 16:44, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi @UDScott, and thank you for stepping in. BTW it is never ignorant IMIO to ask questions (even Dear Abby said so in 1970 in a Dear Abby column in The Milwaukee Sentinel: "There is no such thing as a stupid question if it's sincere. Better to ask and risk appearing stupid than to continue on your ignorant way and make a stupid mistake." -- didn't we both work on a dear abby article/quote-compendium a while ago? ).
Anyway, back to your question, the answer is yes, at least as far as I am concerned, I'll let Koavf talk for himself. The initial question I asked was if we had a list of Wikquotes by language, then we got caught up in some banter, and I was wondering why no one else was participating, and I understand from your post that you feel overwhelmed by the amount of work that is required of you, so don't have time to engage in niceties? Did I get this right? Ottawahitech (talk) 05:14, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, at times I can feel overwhelmed, but I was not really complaining (although sometimes I do wish I could spend more time on content) - what I meant was that I just do not have time for many of these kinds of discussions nor do I have time to figure out where such a list might be found (or compiled if it does not exist). More power to you and others that wish to figure these things out, but I find that there is too much work in cleaning up and improving the site that precludes me from joining in at times. But don't let me or my lack of participation in discussions hold you back. Cheers! ~ UDScott (talk) 14:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

although sometimes I do wish I could spend more time on content

Join the crowd, @ UDScott, I can think of many other wq-wikignomes who would love to spend more time adding content, undisturbed. Many of them have not yet chimed in into this thread Ottawahitech (talk) 20:17, 9 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We absolutely do need more volunteers. Adding content is easy. Making sure it's good content is not. DragonflySixtyseven (talk) 15:38, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@DragonflySixtyseven, so does this mean we are only interested in volunteers who can hit the ground running, or are we also willing to help train enthusiastic noobs? Ottawahitech (talk) 21:42, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Inactive admins for vote of confidence review[edit]

Per Wikiquote:Village_pump_archive_25#Vote_for_confidence and relevant threads like Wikiquote:Village_pump_archive_54#Inactive_administrators and Wikiquote:Village_pump_archive_58#IMPORTANT:_Admin_activity_review, I would like to bring to attention the following admins who have not been active in awhile here at en.wq:

With the usual caveats of thank you for your service, you can ask to be an admin at any time that you have the availability, and they may see this thread and be reminded that they are interested in doing this work again, etc., do we think that these three should retain their permissions? Is it time to remove adminship from any of these three? —Justin (koavf)TCM 23:42, 15 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Keep for Jni for now, last admin action and edit in December 2021. Global inactivity policy says to remove adminship from those who haven't edited or made an admin action for 2 years, I don't think we have a local one, but it hasn't been a year yet.
  • Remove from Miszatomic. Last admin action and edit over 2 years ago. Thank you for your service.
  • Keep for Pmlineditor for now, last admin action in November 2021, not a year ago yet and per global inactivity policy above.
Perhaps we should work on a local inactivity policy if the community think one is appropriate? --Ferien (talk) 21:00, 16 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We should have one, yes. I think that two years inactive is a valid starting point, unless someone has a compelling reason to change it. —Justin (koavf)TCM 21:37, 16 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
On simplewiki, you have to make 100 edits/admin actions in a year Jan-Dec or your admin will be removed. I think that's quite an unusual example and I don't believe the community here would support it. 1 edit/admin action a year seems reasonable to me and 50 edits/admin actions over 5 years - I think enwiki have done something similar? - so people don't game the system and just make one minor edit or page deletion every year just before their admin would be removed. --Ferien (talk) 18:37, 17 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That seems reasonable to me: there should be some volume of contributions. —Justin (koavf)TCM 19:06, 17 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Koavf: Thanks for posting. I just clicked on the first wiki-link in your message above and found out it is dated 2008. Has there really been no discussion of this topic since that time? Ottawahitech (talk) 13:05, 27 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My second link is from a decade later. —Justin (koavf)TCM 20:18, 27 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • There is an actual Draft Policy that was discussed in 2015. Note that the sole author of that draft, thus far, is no longer active. I imagine one reason it was not discussed very much was because there had been, at the time, some disagreement about several votes to de-sysop individuals for inactivity in the absence of such a policy. ~ Ningauble (talk) 21:54, 29 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I believe I supported adoption of that proposal at the time, and would still. BD2412 T 07:56, 30 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Discussion at VIP (Vandelism In Progress): Adding anti-Semitic vandalism to the "Talmud" page[edit]

Please see see for the discussion Ottawahitech (talk) 17:49, 16 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

2 IPs involved in this discussion, 2 admins are addressing the implications:

Should the Talmud page which was created on WQ in 2004 by User: Kalki be deleted or not? Ottawahitech (talk) 18:00, 16 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I would say not. There are doubtless difficulties, but the work is a key world text. It might be a good idea to quickly review the entries for obvious inaccuracies, the help of someone like en:WP User:Debresser if he is still around. The next difficulty might be deciding which actually meet WQ:FAME. As far as the English corpus is concerned text may have been translated in many different ways. Thirdly if too much material remains, perhaps the page should be split into the various divisions, with only the most famous quotes being kept on the main page. Good luck! Rich Farmbrough (talk)
I think I would also remove much of the commentary, and PoV words. This is not Wikipedia, nor yet Wikibooks. Rich Farmbrough (talk)
@User:Rich Farmbrough, Thanks for the thorough reply! I believe the Talmud page has survived, so far. What I do not understand is: Did Talmud survive on Wikiquote (WQ) because it is special in some way, or do all topics that have been established as notable on the English Wikipedia deserve a main-space page on WQ? Anyone? Ottawahitech (talk) 13:24, 4 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
While I can't answer for WQ history or procedures, I would say that any book where quote would be cited primarily to the book would be a candidate for a page. These would be primarily books with unknown (but also perhaps multiple (or both)) authors. For example the Poetic Edda could have a page, but the Prose Edda should be a section redirect to Snorri Sturluson#Prose Edda. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 20:06, 12 November 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

Jr./Sr. names[edit]

Wikipedia has moved all names with "Jr." and "Sr." suffixes to titles with no comma before the "Jr." or "Sr.", in accordance with prevailing style guide practice; should we follow suit? BD2412 T 07:30, 17 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Weak oppose I am more familiar with and accustomed to ", Jr./Sr.", but that's just me. I'll defer to the community and I agree that consistency with Wikipedia is generally desirable. —Justin (koavf)TCM 08:25, 17 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Comment There is a script that can accomplish this, but it would have to be performed over a virtual platform because of inter-wiki variations in the relay analytics. Ronald Franklin McDonald (talk) 19:32, 19 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose - the comma is helpful in delimiting the name proper from the generational tag (which, after all, is a type of dismbiguator). Rich Farmbrough (talk)

UCoC EG Community review period closed[edit]

Dear Wikimedians,

Thank you for participating in the review of the Revised Enforcement Draft Guidelines for the Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC). The UCoC project team and the Revisions Committee appreciate you all taking the time to discuss the guidelines, suggest changes, and ask questions.

This community review period lasted from September 8 to October 8, 2022. Over the past four weeks, the UCoC project team has collected valuable community input from various channels, including three conversation hours sessions, where Wikimedians could get together to discuss the revised UCoC Enforcement Guidelines. The Revisions Committee will review community input when they reconvene in the second week of October 2022. The UCoC project team will support them in providing updates as they continue their work and will continue to inform the community about all important developments and milestones as the Committee prepares the final version of the UCoC Enforcement Guidelines that is currently scheduled for a community-wide vote in mid-January of 2023.

On behalf of the the UCoC project team,

Zuz (WMF) (talk) 11:42, 20 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pageviews question[edit]

Why does this page get less pageviews than Wikiquote:Community Portal? Just curious. Ottawahitech (talk) 16:43, 25 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Filter again[edit]

This really need attention, as innocuous edits by newbies or even vandalism reverts is tripping the filter.-TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 21:58, 26 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@TagaSanPedroAko: Thanks for posting. I am not familiar with filtering. Can You elaborate please. Ottawahitech (talk) 13:08, 27 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's with the abuse filter. -TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 13:23, 27 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry about that, TagaSanPedroAko. I've disabled the filter temporarily while I take a look at it. --Ferien (talk) 13:36, 27 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ferien,@TagaSanPedroAko, others:
I have been caught by this filter a few days ago when I used w:wp:hotcat to add a category w:wp:sort key. Since that time I have been pestered by a request to CAPTCHA every time I enter a new quote, and of course, every time I use hotcat to add a category sort key. It is a major annoyance for me (and possibly others?).
A kind WQer (@user:Lemonaka) has tried to help by posting this on my user talk page:

You are blocked the autopromotion of Ottawahitech for a period of 5 days by abuse filter...

Is there nothing that can be done about it Ottawahitech (talk) 15:47, 31 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Here's a dumb method, just leave here for about 5-10 days. The period will end, and you will get autoconfirmed. Lemonaka (talk) 16:20, 31 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ottawahitech, a bureaucrat may be able to give you confirmed. --Ferien (talk) 16:22, 31 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you. @User:BD2412, @User:GreenMeansGo,@User:UDScott Ottawahitech (talk) 16:32, 31 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Done. Not really sure if it will work, because I'm not qualified to comment on the filters themselves. GMGtalk 13:48, 1 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@GreenMeansGo @TagaSanPedroAko: should have posted earlier: I have been CAPTCHA-free for a couple weeks. Ottawahitech (talk) 15:57, 18 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A small idea[edit]

I have been observing this IP vandal for close to half a month and now I have a small idea about his vandalism. Since every time we reverted, he would clearly came back to the same place again and again with more IPs, why don't we roll back him just once, report it, then waiting for the sysop to protect the relevant page or block the relevant IP, and then roll back to the unvandalized version?

The previous steps are

  1. Vandalized
  2. We reverted
  3. Vandal reverted our version
  4. Harsh Edit warring with multiple IPs of this asshole
  5. Block & Protect with large amount of nonsense history

Now the steps could be

  1. This asshole vandalize
  2. We revert only once & report
  3. Vandal revert our version
  4. Waiting for sysop instead of having fun with him, vandal being blocked, page protected
  5. We revert back to unvandalized version

Is this a reasonable suggestion?

Courtesy to @User:Koavf Lemonaka (talk) 03:25, 5 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you see edits consistent with this behavior, for sure report ASAP and do not ever feed the troll by responding to email, if you receive it. —Justin (koavf)TCM 11:34, 5 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes please follow the second set of steps. I'd also advise, if a sysop is around, for you to wait for a sysop to revert it, as sysops can use "botrollback" hiding both the change and rollback from recent changes and then can block the IP. --Ferien (talk) 15:44, 6 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm also going to try this approach. Might end up wasting less time too. Antandrus (talk) 22:37, 6 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The basic problem with GRP is his extreme persistence (he's been disrupting Wikimedia for nearly two decades now in this fashion). He often waits for protections to expire to restore his drivel (I've seen this happen a lot), and will link to revisions containing the nonsense elsewhere to bypass edit filters and the blacklisting of his websites. And the worst problem is the abusive nature of the links. I therefore recommend that any edit by GRP containing links (or an attempt at one, with obfucsation to evade the filters) should be revdelled to prevent this behaviour. JavaHurricane 03:42, 8 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I was trying to collect and analyse his edit pattern. I have some knowledge of filters and blacklists, but it's a little hard. I'd better urge someone who please contact Wikimedia foundation or police because I have seen this person harassing us outside the project. Lemonaka (talk) 03:53, 8 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Invitation to attend “Ask Me Anything about Movement Charter” Sessions[edit]

Hello all,

During the 2022 Wikimedia Summit, the Movement Charter Drafting Committee (MCDC) presented the first outline of the Movement Charter, giving a glimpse on the direction of its future work, and the Charter itself. The MCDC then integrated the initial feedback collected during the Summit. Before proceeding with writing the Charter for the whole Movement, the MCDC wants to interact with community members and gather feedback on the drafts of the three sections: Preamble, Values & Principles, and Roles & Responsibilities (intentions statement). The Movement Charter drafts will be available on the Meta page here on November 14, 2022. Community wide consultation period on MC will take place from November 20 to December 18, 2022. Learn more about it here.

With the goal of ensuring that people are well informed to fully participate in the conversations and are empowered to contribute their perspective on the Movement Charter, three “Ask Me Anything about Movement Charter" sessions have been scheduled in different time zones. Everyone in the Wikimedia Movement is invited to attend these conversations. The aim is to learn about Movement Charter - its goal, purpose, why it matters, and how it impacts your community. MCDC members will attend these sessions to answer your questions and hear community feedback.

The “Ask Me Anything” sessions accommodate communities from different time zones. Only the presentation of the session is recorded and shared afterwards, no recording of conversations. Below is the list of planned events:

  • Asia/Pacific: November 4, 2022 at 09:00 UTC (your local time). Interpretation is available in Chinese and Japanese.
  • Europe/MENA/Sub Saharan Africa: November 12, 2022 at 15:00 UTC (your local time). Interpretation is available in Arabic, French and Russian.
  • North and South America/ Western Europe: November 12, 2022 at 15:00 UTC (your local time). Interpretation is available in Spanish and Portuguese.

On the Meta page you will find more details; Zoom links will be shared 48 hours ahead of the call.

Call for Movement Charter Ambassadors

Individuals or groups from all communities who wish to help include and start conversations in their communities on the Movement Charter are encouraged to become Movement Charter Ambassadors (MC Ambassadors). MC Ambassadors will carry out their own activities and get financial support for enabling conversations in their own languages. Regional facilitators from the Movement Strategy and Governance team are available to support applicants with MC Ambassadors grantmaking. If you are interested please sign up here. Should you have specific questions, please reach out to the MSG team via email: or on the MS forum.

We thank you for your time and participation.

On behalf of the Movement Charter Drafting Committee,

Zuz (WMF) (talk) 10:21, 7 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A query[edit]

I found an article that consists only of a single quote, "Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy". Should this be redirected or merged? Not sure what is the right course of action currently. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 16:46, 7 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The quotation itself should appear on relevant pages (beer, Benjamin Franklin) and the page should be deleted, as we don't have entries for particular quotations themselves. —Justin (koavf)TCM 16:49, 7 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Cheers Koavf. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 16:59, 7 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request for help of testing a new report tool[edit]

Hello everyone, according to sysop @Koavf:'s instruction, I have created a report tool, mainly just a variant from WD on meta.
To install this, you could insert


to your common.js and it will be loaded. This added a button Warn in P-change area and would enable us to send a warn or make a report just with one click.

If you encounter any bugs, please feel free to report them. Thanks a lot in advance. Lemonaka (talk) 08:52, 8 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Soliciting opinions for site notice[edit]

MediaWiki:Sitenotice was very stale, so I commented it out. Does anyone have a suggestion for a site notice that is meaningful and may encourage further edits and engagement? —Justin (koavf)TCM 08:59, 8 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Koavf: Maybe something related to WQ:Shesaid. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 09:00, 8 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, this is just what I'm going to suggest Lemonaka (talk) 09:01, 8 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What about include recent activity wiki loves women? Lemonaka (talk) 09:01, 8 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
RC and L, that is so obvious, holy crapgoodness gracious. —Justin (koavf)TCM 09:09, 8 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Koavf: You and I go back a couple of years, before I got involved in the English Wikiquote, we share quite few values and tendencies IMIO, so I know you will not be offended by what I say. IMIO admins on wmf-projects,which you are on enWQ, get some perks that come with the job, but are also held up as an example by others in the wmf-community. They are considered leaders whom others emulate. The downside for admins is that they cannot, or should not, act freely and normally and must always consider their audience. I don't know much about religion, but I know enough to know that using the word "holy" in conjunction with that other word, may be either offensive to some, or give the allure to the VP as a low class establishment. Am I making sense?
(I have been doing too much "talking" lately, I blame this on User:~Riley who greeted me at enWQ a long wiki-time ago and said: "If asking questions lead to improving content, then you're on the right track". Where is Riley anyway?) Ottawahitech (talk) 13:05, 19 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Why a holy is offensive? I don't quite get that. Lemonaka (talk) 13:15, 19 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OHT, thanks. I take your message in a spirit of good faith and constructive criticism. I think that what I wrote is probably only the mildest amount of offensive, but sure, someone could object to that language and I appreciate any feedback that someone gives me in good faith as an informal ambassador of the Wikimedia movement. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)TCM 13:34, 19 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nice idea for a brief time, but it is quite large (depending in window size) and very bright. Can you tone it down a bit? ~ Ningauble (talk) 00:42, 9 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I reduced the size by 10% and made the color a little less blinding. Happy to get any other suggestions. —Justin (koavf)TCM 01:10, 9 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Template:test2 seemed miss an icon compared to other templates in this series. Could anyone help to fix it? Thanks! Lemonaka (talk) 09:31, 8 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes check.svgY DoneJustin (koavf)TCM 09:52, 8 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wondering about stuff that is just blatantly wrong/I'm being a cry baby probs[edit]

If you go to add to an episode and encounter a lengthy addition to it that is blatantly wrong what is the thought process? I'm sure WikiQuote advocates accuracy so I was just wondering...This is my latest hobby as a cartoon lover and I apologize if this seems snarky... ToonFreak61 (talk) 13:19, 14 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you see wrong content on Wikiquote, please do remove it. Also, note that we have guidelines on the length of quotations and there are relevant American laws about fair use, so we shouldn't host lengthy excerpts from media, but something that is actually quotable. —Justin (koavf)TCM 13:51, 14 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you Justin. ToonFreak61 (talk) 04:40, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Join the Movement Charter Regional Conversation Hours[edit]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.
More languagesPlease help translate to your language

Hi all,

As most of you are aware, the Movement Charter Drafting Committee (MCDC) is currently collecting community feedback about three draft sections of the Movement Charter: Preamble, Values & Principles, and Roles & Responsibilities (intentions statement).

How can you participate and share your feedback?

The MCDC is looking forward to receiving all types of feedback in different languages from the community members across the Movement and Affiliates. You can participate in the following ways:

  • Attend the community conversation hours with MCDC members. Details about the regional community conversation hours are published here
  • Fill out a survey (optional and anonymous)
  • Share your thoughts and feedback on the Meta talk page
  • Share your thoughts and feedback on the MS Forum:
  • Send an email to: movementcharterwikimediaorg if you have other feedback to the MCDC.

Community consultation hour for the Sub-Saharan Africa region will take place this Friday, November 25, on Zoom. It will be translated into French language. The conversations will not be recorded, except for the section where participants are invited to share what they discussed in the breakout rooms. We will take notes and produce a summary report afterwards.

If you want to learn more about the Movement Charter, its goals, why it matters and how it impacts your community, please watch the recording of the “Ask Me Anything about Movement Charter” sessions which took place earlier in November 2022.

Thank you for your participation.

On behalf of the Movement Charter Drafting Committee,

Zuz (WMF) (talk) 11:56, 22 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Zuz (WMF) What is the Wikimedia movement? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 15:09, 24 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ottawahitech: m:Wikimedia movement. —Justin (koavf)TCM 16:14, 24 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you, @Koavf

The Wikimedia movement is the totality of people, activities, and values

@Zuz (WMF): Does this definition include blocked users or not? Ottawahitech (talk) 17:48, 24 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi @Ottawahitech, Users can be blocked for various reasons and durations. So, I think this depends on the reason for which users were blocked and for how long. If a user is blocked indefinitely and for vandalism, I do not think they can contribute to the projects.Zuz (WMF) (talk) 11:46, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for replying @Zuz (WMF). OK, so what about other blocked users, those not accused of simple vandalism? Are they part of the Wikimedia movement??
Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 20:38, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Shesaid campaign is heating up[edit]

I am not sure how many content contributors of WQ actually visit this forum, but if there are any, I dare anyone to pick one of the red-list items from: Wikiquote:SheSaid/RedLists#Suggestions_for_Botswana and come up with a suitable enWQ new article that will not immediately be speeded, prodded, or even in the rare case vfded. Ottawahitech (talk) 15:01, 24 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Ottawahitech: The root caused of the problem may be that many on that list may be non-notable and without an English Wikipedia (enW) Article which is perhaps the suggested standard to meet. There may be less of a problem for people who would almost certainly meet (enW) notability requirements such as politicians and perhaps some sports biography. I even probably more than you do not want to see people wasting their time attempting to create on Wikipedia only to see ones contributions trashed from history. I'd also note that you are probably aware myself and UDScott are probably responsible for most of the Speed'ing, Prod'ing, VFD'ing and tagging for Copyvio and cleanup. I'm reasonably sure there is no intention to deliberately target Botswana/Africa related articles by anyone including myself but there has apparently been high number of articles created in this area with no associated enW article in the #SheSaid (as far as I can tell). The #SheSaid campaign has been under administrative workload, has had administration in general here on enWQ, and we'd like better mentoring. In fact the reason I came here is Bogolo Kenewendo's contributes appear to me to continue to have problems albeit showing massive improvements. However I'd like people to consider recent edit history on Bogolo Kenewendo end determine if mentorship is necessary. The other thread has shown the need for mentorship, Mothusi has shown ability to learn community norms but it likely doesn't help there's not a standard for notability here as far as I can tell. I apologise if I sometimes seem bullying rather than assertive but I've but a fairly intensive effort in support of the #SheSaid campaign. check my and by alt accounts (global) contributions particularly including Quarry and perhaps Wikidata where I've been trying to ensure an associated Wikidata item is linked back to the article here. If people are concerned there may be be bias or systemic bias on the enQ there the correct place is to raise the matter first or perhaps the WMF if you remain unsatisifed. The ArBCom candidates are currently on at W:Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2022/Candidates and there is surely rarely a better place to raise any concerns rather than whinging about it here. I'm going to ping a number of other people {who have been active/involved in this area to a bigger or lesser extent to try to get consensus of sorts or to get to get specific prescriptive proposals. @Anthere, Emilija Knezevic, Kolobetsoo, Saroj Uprety, Ferien, Rubbish computer: -- 14:21, 27 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi I didn't get a notification for this ping unfortunately. I think more oversight is needed for the campaign; I'd be willing to mentor if that helps. It's a shame that new users are coming to Wikiquote, actually creating content and that it is then all being deleted. I feel like it makes WMF projects seem completely inaccessible, when we could always do with more users. At the same time, I don't want to keep loads of articles that aren't notable. I think there has been a lack of communication between the people running the SheSaid campaign and the users of Wikiquote. Perhaps I could make a list of articles that need more established notability and work on having these kept, if it hasn't been done already? I'm totally ok with making lists of articles in userspace and working on them: see User:Rubbish computer/Wikiquote pages with no quotes. I'm busy moving currently but have some time to spare, and hopefully more time very soon once settled. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 19:21, 27 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Is there a list of every new SheSaid article anywhere also? Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 19:23, 27 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pinging Djm-leighpark Ottawahitech Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 19:32, 27 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Rubbish computer: I've done a trio of Quarry queries which I think may help help identify notability problems at Wikiquote talk:SheSaid#Quarry Tools, and I think you might find the first and third of some use. There is a little bit of "art"/"training" to use those tools but broadly it relates to particularly identifying cases where there is no wikidata item linked to wikiquote and fixing the link to enW first if necessary, going to the wikidata item from the enW article and inserting any missing link to Wikiquote. The third query help identify new articles that may require a #sheSaid link, and I'm hoping an updated version of it may include a #SheSaid present column which would be even more useful. If you need more details that would be better asked in a new section. Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 21:03, 27 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Djm-leighpark I have a question in regards to the Quarry tools:
Last year IIRC The Italian WQ created a lot more new articles about women. This year we are doing much better than we did last year, I think. Can your tools give some statistics? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 15:34, 8 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pinging the people Djm-leighpark tried to ping above but failed, @Anthere, Emilijaknezevic, Kolobetsoo, Saroj Uprety, Rubbish computer: --Ferien (talk) 16:54, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In general, the newly created articles that we can identify as such are listed here : As Djm also pointed to, his query can help identify those articles. I ran a training session again last Saturday and insisted again on notability issues as well as does and don’t. I want to also emphasize that I absolutely do not believe in any country targeting in bad faith by admins. The situation is created by a few brand new editors and this is independent from where they come from or from who they write about. What might add an additional strain is that there are rather few Wikipedia articles about Botswana women (to pick up that example, but this is true of many African countries) so it is harder to rely on creating entries about women already covered by Wikipedia. Anthere (talk) 19:31, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I think there has been a lack of communication between the people running the SheSaid campaign and the users of Wikiquote.

If there is/was miscommunication between the people running the SheSaid campaign and the users of Wikiquote, it’s not for lack of trying by User:Anthere and other shesaid organizers. Postings about this campaign have been appearing in the Village pump on a regular basis since I first joined here in 2020: Here are links to some such postings: 20:19, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re: mentioning the word "bias"
I want to clarify that when I mentioned an existence of a "bias" I did not mean by any particular person or any particular WMF project. What I meant is that certain groups of people are under-represented, on all projects, in general. One of those groups is women of colour. So, when somebody wants to create an article about a person who does not have an article on any WP project yet, the notability has to be proven, that is needed for sure. The article creator has to provide references to prove notability, and ... this is the way how it is on any project. If the fist article happens to be on enWQ, maybe just do not discard the attempt altogether if there is no related article on any WP or Wikidata yet. This is all what I am trying to say. I am sorry if my words in another post came across differently. Thank you all for participating in this conversation. - Emilija Knezevic (talk) 01:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Criticism of Wikipedia[edit]

What does the community think of Criticism of Wikipedia? While this is certainly a valid topic for quotes, it's been used to pursue a very specific political agenda. I think it would benefit from a wider variety of quotations, or just merging into Wikipedia. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 17:32, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

SheSaid Idea[edit]

How about for the rest of the SheSaid event, the admins could make the featured quote a women's for the meanwhile. - Some Wandom Noob (talk) 19:48, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Great idea. I suggested something similar for the first campaign, but there was a tepid response. :/ —Justin (koavf)TCM 20:20, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Some Wandom Noob: have you tried suggesting a quote to Quote of the day? Ottawahitech (talk) 01:15, 4 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Matters arising from a trawl through new articles since 1 October 2022[edit]

Background: I've been trawling through articles created since 1 October 2022 (current having reached 8/9 November 2022 - and may continue or give up depending on RL etc etc). In general I've been adding a (dummy) #SheSaid comment where useful and linking to Wikiquote from Wikidata when needed so Wikiquote is aware of the Wikidata item. But I've also actioned with some Prod & VfD's on the way where something has caught my eye in passing. Outcome: As a result of this crawl I've got a number of different comments/questions/suggestions: -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 09:00, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Update on the crawl through: Essentially I dealt with or actioned everything related to new articles I'm interested in (subject to missing something) from 1 October 2022 to 17 November 2022. My next target, if I allocate time to the matter, is 18 november 2022 to 30 November 2022. My plan A will be to create a list of articles in that range needing SheSaid comments for an AWB jockey to apply; the pass(es) to manke any enWQ and Wikidata links set up; then a pass to check/raise any concerns that I haven't raised on the earlier pass. Hopefully this helps explain any random edit pattern that I may do but be aware I may also do other things too. Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 01:42, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Adding missing SheSaid comments[edit]

I have compiled a list of articles created in October that could be marked with a SheSaid comment at User:Djm-leighpark/XX. I think I have taken reasonable care not to suggest any inappropriate gender re-assignments. These could possibly be done efficiently with AWW. @Rubbish computer I note you are a certified AWB jockey and wonder if you would be prepared to take on this mission - I'll be upfront :I can't give you no help and I won't clear up the mess if it goes wrong, that would be up to you. If you decide to pick up the baton please note you are doing so here and then also say if you've given up. If anyone else wishes to steal the AWB mount please say so here; if I decide to pull the baton back to process the list manually myself I'll also leave a note here. Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 09:00, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Djm-leighpark, I will do so, just need to update my AWB first as haven't used it in a long time. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 10:31, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Rubbish computer I've added an additional list to be processed at the same location to cover those needing doing for November 2022. If you need help with AWB reg. expressions expressions let me know but (from memory) the device I use for AWB work has a flat, it a tad power hungry and ancient, and I don't think I AWB on any wiki currently so I'd be working off untested theory unless I take a dump. Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 09:36, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Rubbish computer: I've now got authorisation to use AWB on my declaration alt. account Bigdelboy so I'll now hope to take up this task myself. Thanks for offering though. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 05:45, 15 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Update: My alt. account Bigdelboy has just completed adding identified #SheSaid tags for October & November via AWB. I'll be looking to do the same for December in the run up to Christmas so hopefully coming towards the end of December things ill be up to date. While the order used may be essentially by date I may also use some quarry queries to identify candidates via categories and or stub templates and may do an initial stripe through that way. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 23:45, 18 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've developed an quarry query that can, thanks to the contributions of a few individuals adding appropriate categories and templates to new articles, identify with reasonable accuracy a majority of outstanding articles needing SheSaig comment tagging for December, A results snapshot is now at User:Djm-leighpark/XX and Bigdelboy has processed up to and including articles created to 3 December 2022 from that list via AWB; but be aware manually intervention has been made while processing AWB batches to minimise the dummy edit changes. I'm going to pause processing that table for a short while, though I might do 2 or 3 short batches today but I intended to process that list more thoroughly to conclusion from 20 December 04:00 UTC hopin gto complete in a couple of days to enable a review & gap analysis. Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 10:02, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles losing their English Wikipedia article[edit]

Is there a need here for a bot to monitor for article that have lost their associated English Wikipedia item. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 09:00, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A Bot to link wikidata item to their associated Wikiquote article[edit]

I'm not sure oit is possible to create/operate a Bot to link a wikidata item to their associated Wikiquote article, or whether that count/would create problems. There may already be one out there, I think I've I've noticed a bot doing it on :d for :igWQ. Manually if there a good enWQ to enWP link and the enWP articles been curated or done by an autoconfirmed its a simple matter of putting the Wikiquote title in the paste buffer, clicking to the enWP article then clicking the Wikdata item link. At the Wikidata item locate the Wikiquote box, add a line for "en" and paste in the enWQ title from the paste buffer, publish it, and click back to the Wikiquote item as a confirmation. Only a sloppy half-asleep idiot could somehow get that wrong! Mote seriously the automated updates of Wikidata enWP (or even enWQ->enWP->Wikidata) [[:d:Talk:Q1149711|can get this stuff wrong with fake results]. But the question is should a bot be used for this and if so who it going to request it? -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 09:00, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Have you by chance seen Special:UnconnectedPages? —Justin (koavf)TCM 16:39, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Koavf: I wasn't aware of that Special: page, but ultimately it likely looks at the same field I'm looking at on Quarry queries at the moment so it possibly doesn't give me personally much help towards leveraging any solution here, though it is another trick up the sleeve and some might it useful as a feed into an off-wiki aggregation solution. I am personally minded the need for a solution here has become more acute with a recent surge in new articles created. Unfortunately most of these have not been linked to Wikidata items, though I suspect many have associated enWP articles where those have been curated a bot will likely have linked/created an associated Wikidata item. While I've trawled through in broadly create order sequence new articles from 1 October 2022 to 26 November 2022 the sparsity of linked wikidata items beyond this point means in my view a switch to at least semi-automation is now crucial. There are several here who could contact the WMF softies or otherwise put in a bot request. I have some p-language capability so I may look to consider e.g. PWB FrameWork: There's a risk of re-inventing the wheel but there's also risk of the bot having side-effects and I'd want to feel in control of that. I have a feeling if I put in the right bot request question precisely specified correctly to the right person I might get a suitable action fairly quickly. But that's a lottery though I have come up with a couple of wins in that area from helpful people recently. Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 07:11, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles on subpages[edit]

In general whats the policy with subpage articles in mainspace on enWQ, thoguhts on associated Wikidata items. I'd note the creation of a subpage at Melanie Kaye/Kantrowitz was probably unintentional and a different use-case. (Sorry me looking this up for myself at this moment would be a distraction). And are some of these abusing "fair-use"? Thankyou -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 09:00, 2 December 2022 (UTC) User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 09:00, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Melanie Kaye/Kantrowitz is not a subpage. It is a person's name. Saroj Uprety (talk) 12:29, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Saroj Uprety: Thanks. OK. I've read w:Wikipedia:Subpages and while "/" it e.g. userspace denotes a subpage (as can be seen by a breadcrumb) in article space it doesn't. Thus none of the are actually subpages, though some might rely on inherited notability and not be expected to necessarily have a 1-1 relationship with an enWP item; though they might be expected to connect to a wikidata item in most cases I suppose. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 15:17, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am joining this conversation to offer some opinions.
First of all, I was unaware that Wikiquote handles subpages differently from Wikipedia. Nevertheless, if it only functions as a prefix, I still think the use of / to denote subpages makes for much better organization. For example, there is a page called Qur'an on justice. It would be neater if this page was moved Io Quran/Quran on Justice, with the old page, Qur'an on justice, as a redirect. Then one would have a single tree of pages pertaining to the Quran, with Quran as the root of the tree.
With regard to notability, I think the Islamic concepts of Jannah and Jahannam are extremely notable, so much so that one would be misrepresenting the faith if one were to leave out any mention of them. However, with regard to organization, it is probably for the better that everything is not placed on the same page, and the Quran page is very large as it stands now. Thus one has Quran/Heaven in the Quran and Quran/Hell in the Quran. It also makes for a better reading experience, I think, when separate things are kept separate and such diametral concepts as Heaven and Hell are covered on different pages.
With regard to fair use, The Clear Quran, which is the translation quoted, grants a limited license to reproduce excerpts not to exceeding 10% of the entire work.[1] As for quotations from, most of their texts are in the public domain.[2]
These considerations could be generalized to other religious texts. For example, pages quoting books from the New Testament might be given the prefix New Testament/, to keep all such pages in one place. I think that would be an improvement, but I am curious as to what others think.
I hope this is helpful. BurningLibrary (talk) 14:22, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@BurningLibrary: I'm not actually sure Wikipedia and Wikiquote actually handle subpages differently. I am not reasonably sure both do not have/permit subpages in (main) article space, but will permit them in other spaces. What I can say is I seem to be noticing the acceptance of the use of "/" in articles here on Wikiquote and I'm not sure if I've much if any use in that way on the English Wikipedia. In terms of splitting a large page to logical subpages as you suggest does to me make sense but I haven't checked policy here. Thankyou. -- 09:53, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Djm-leighpark (talkcontribs) 09:54, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

For information: I've started a discussion at Template talk:Oldprod about a suggested change to bring it into line with w:Template:Old Prod at sister project enWP. Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 06:41, 7 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Technical question[edit]

Technical question (sort of, I think?): Where can I find a cleanup(?) WQ-category that says the page is due for an update?

Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 21:18, 7 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Have you looked at Special:SpecialPages? —Justin (koavf)TCM 22:02, 7 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oops, I did not explain myself right. What I am looking for is template/category to ask editors to add information to a page that has become outdated. For example when some dies or when a person gets elected to a new position, etc. Thanks n advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 02:19, 8 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ottawahitech: Are you looking for d:Q5617874 / w:Template:Update ? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Djm-leighpark (talkcontribs) 03:59, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
@Djm-leighpark, Yes, thank you. I believe this was what I was looking for. Do we have such a templateplate at enWQ?
@Ottawahitech Sadly, we don't have such a template at enWQ Lemonaka (talk) 14:36, 5 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reminder to provide feedback on the Movement Charter content[edit]

Hi all,

We are in the middle of the community consultation period on the three draft sections of the Movement Charter: Preamble, Values & Principles, and Roles & Responsibilities (statement of intent). The community consultation period will last until December 18, 2022. The Movement Charter Drafting Committee (MCDC) encourages everyone who is interested in the governance of the Wikimedia movement to share their thoughts and opinions on the draft content of the Charter.

How do you share your feedback?

Interested people can share their feedback via different channels provided below:

If you want to help include your community in the consultation period, you are encouraged to become a Movement Charter Ambassador. Please find out more about it here.

Thank you for your participation!

On behalf of the Movement Charter Drafting Committee,

Zuz (WMF) (talk) 13:40, 8 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Community Wishlist Survey 2023 opens in January[edit]

Please help translate to your language

(There is a translatable version of this message on MetaWiki)


The Community Wishlist Survey (CWS) 2023, which lets contributors propose and vote for tools and improvements, starts next month on Monday, 23 January 2023, at 18:00 UTC and will continue annually.

We are inviting you to share your ideas for technical improvements to our tools and platforms. Long experience in editing or technical skills is not required. If you have ever used our software and thought of an idea to improve it, this is the place to come share those ideas!

The dates for the phases of the Survey will be as follows:

  • Phase 1: Submit, discuss, and revise proposals – Monday, Jan 23, 2023 to Sunday, Feb 6, 2023
  • Phase 2: WMF/Community Tech reviews and organizes proposals – Monday, Jan 30, 2023 to Friday, Feb 10, 2023
  • Phase 3: Vote on proposals – Friday, Feb 10, 2023 to Friday, Feb 24, 2023
  • Phase 4: Results posted – Tuesday, Feb 28, 2023

If you want to start writing out your ideas ahead of the Survey, you can start thinking about your proposals and draft them in the CWS sandbox.

We are grateful to all who participated last year. See you in January 2023!

Thank you! Community Tech, STei (WMF) 16:44, 15 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Movement Charter: End of the community consultation round 1[edit]

Hi everyone,

On behalf of the Movement Charter Drafting Committee (MCDC), we would like to thank everyone who has participated in our first community wide consultation period on the Movement Charter.

People from across the movement shared their feedback and thoughts on the content of the Movement Charter. If you have not had the chance to share your opinion yet, you are welcome to do so by giving the drafts a read and filling out the anonymous survey, which is accessible in 12+ languages. The survey will close on January 2, 2023. You are invited to continue to share your thoughts with the MCDC via email too:

What’s next?

The Movement Strategy and Governance team will publish the final report with a summary of the feedback received in January 2023. It will be shared with the MCDC and the communities via different distribution channels.

After receiving the final report, the MCDC will review the suggestions and communicate the changes by providing an explanation on how and why suggestions were or were not adopted in the next versions of the drafts. There will be additional ways to engage with the Movement Charter content in 2023, including early feedback on a proposed ratification process and new drafts of different chapters in the second quarter of 2023.

We invite you to sign up for the MCDC monthly newsletter, which will be delivered to the Talk page of your choice. Monthly updates are available on Meta to stay updated on the progress of the MCDC.

Interested people can still sign-up to become a Movement Charter Ambassador (MC Ambassador) to support their community. MC Ambassadors Program will restart accepting applications from both individuals and groups ahead of the next round of consultations in the second quarter of 2023.

We thank you for your participation, time, and effort in helping to build the charter for our movement!

On behalf of the Movement Charter Drafting Committee

Zuz (WMF) (talk) 10:00, 16 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikimedia Sound Logo Voting: Final days![edit]

Sound logo campaign lockup - English.png

Hello wikiquote (:

The Sound Logo contest presented the 10 finalist, out of 3,000 submissions from 135 countries.
Play a part and help us decide what the Sum of All Human Knowledge sounds like!

The voting is open until 19 December 2022, 23:59 UTC.
Check the info on how to vote on Wikimedia Commons; or about the contest on the project's page on Meta-Wiki.

CalliandraDysantha-WMF (talk) 23:38, 17 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cite Q template[edit]

Please will an admin import w:Template:Cite Q, and the Lua modules it uses, from the English Wikipedia, so that it can be used here to cite works which are represented in Wikidata? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:25, 28 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes check.svgY Done Saroj Uprety (talk) 17:30, 28 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you. {{Cite Q}} is now in use, for example, on Daniel Gooch. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:54, 28 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Could an admin also please check if these templates Template:Split article and Template:Split have been correctly imported? Template:Split article does not seem to work correctly? thanks! pinging also @Saroj Uprety: who handled the last request.-- (talk) 14:54, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

IMPORTANT: Admin activity review[edit]

Hello. A policy regarding the removal of "advanced rights" (administrator, bureaucrat, interface administrator, etc.) was adopted by global community consensus in 2013. According to this policy, the stewards are reviewing administrators' activity on all Wikimedia Foundation wikis with no inactivity policy. To the best of our knowledge, your wiki does not have a formal process for removing "advanced rights" from inactive accounts. This means that the stewards will take care of this according to the admin activity review.

We have determined that the following users meet the inactivity criteria (no edits and no logged actions for more than 2 years):

  1. Miszatomic (administrator)

These users will receive a notification soon, asking them to start a community discussion if they want to retain some or all of their rights. If the users do not respond, then their advanced rights will be removed by the stewards.

However, if you as a community would like to create your own activity review process superseding the global one, want to make another decision about these inactive rights holders, or already have a policy that we missed, then please notify the stewards on Meta-Wiki so that we know not to proceed with the rights review on your wiki. Thanks, Stanglavine (talk) 14:52, 3 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Stanglavine, Can you please explain why you are considering the removal of the admin designation from user:Miszatomic now. The policy you are referring to was adopted, you say, in 2013. So why the sudden interest in English Wikiquote (ENWQ) internal affairs?
I am also wondering if the consideration of wq:Stewards is done in public or behind closed doors? If it is done in public will you notify us where this particular discussion regarding Miszatomic is taking place? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 17:28, 12 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ottawahitech: I doubt the stewards are singling out ENWQ. Removal of rights if an account is inactive as is good practice as having them is a security risk from a bad actor taking over. Its also not a stain against the user characters and if they wished to indicate that they would like to resume as an admin they would typically be welcomed back but there would probably need to be a certain level of activity seen first. Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 17:41, 12 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Djm-leighpark, not so quick please.
Should Stewards be trusted to decide behind closed doors who gets to be an admin at Wikiquote? What do you know about @Stanglavine, the steward who started this topic but has not responded to my question posted 3 days ago even though they were pinged to this discussion?
Do we really want to trust users who are not part of this community and who are not accessible to us to make the right decisions? Ottawahitech (talk) 21:13, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is the very nature of stewards: they are trusted with very broad rights across the entire scope of WMF wikis, but you're right that the extent to which they need to intervene largely depends on the extent to which there is a local community that is self-regulating. —Justin (koavf)TCM 21:22, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Concur with Justin. And this is just a standard procedure probably agreed quite openly somewhere, the steward is being open about the upcoming de-sysop which is triggered by bots according to an algorithm. And this sort of monitoring is an extra burden the sysops here could likely do without and prefer to leave centrally. They are also needed to handle some cross-wiki abuse. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 22:41, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
None of what both of you have said so far answers any of my original questions addressed to @Stanglavine who is still MIA (missing in action)?

I am also wondering if the consideration of wq:Stewards is done in public or behind closed doors? If it is done in public will you notify us where this particular discussion regarding User:Miszatomic is taking place?

btw I personally much rather have inactive admins than semi-active ones who undermine active content-builders, but I am wiling to listen to reason if anyone can convince me otherwise Ottawahitech (talk) 19:45, 16 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There is no consideration or discussion, in private nor in public, regarding User:Miszatomic. As explained by the links in Stanglavine's post to the community, this is a routine activity specified by established policy. It is nothing new or sudden, it as has been done periodically for previous inactive administrators at Wikiquote and elsewhere. The Stewards are simply carrying out the plain instructions of the policy, and giving public notice of what is happening. Miszatomic has ample opportunity to address the situation if desired. ~ Ningauble (talk) 21:13, 17 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Re: As explained by the links in Stanglavine's post
which links are you referring to? There are 6 links in @Stanglavine post above.
Re" established policy
which established policy?
Re: it as has been done periodically for previous inactive administrators at Wikiquote
I have been here since 2020 and don't remember a similar post on the Village pump. Can you please link to all such notices for removal of admin rights of previous inactive administrators? (before and after 2020)
Thanks in advance Ottawahitech (talk) 23:32, 17 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Ottawahitech: I'd suggest intentionally or not your probably beginning to try peoples patience with this thread. I think a number of people have spent their time coming to this thread to try to good faith give their best response and may like me think why did I bother?. We bother a little bit because you do a fair bit of good work on Wikiquote and we'd like to give you the time of day for that. But while not directly relevant this thread reminds me of painful AfD's on Wikipedia where one wishes someone (and that might arguaably include myself) had read w:WP:Don't bludgeon the process. Any putting bits in bold or shouting in capitals usually doesn't help anyone's case. Per that I'll soon start ignoring you completely or giving "." acknowledgement answers of having read you question. Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 08:02, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Ottawahitech I don't want to be so aggressive, but some seemed a little hard to understand.
1.As explained by the links in Stanglavine's post
FWIW, Admin_activity_review is a global policy, if we do not have a local one, this is automatically active. as has been done periodically for previous inactive.....
Yup, please search the archive yourself, you may get some or none.
3.I am also wondering if the consideration of wq:Stewards is done in public or behind closed doors?
Emmm, steward is globally, I believe even back to when User:Hasley has been elected as a steward, there is nothing called local steward. The consideration of steward regarding important issues are done privately, they have a group for private information on email list or IRC. If you are interested in steward's work, you can try to ask user:Vermont or user:Sotiale, they are nice and kind, IMO. Lemonaka (talk) 09:23, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm happy to be a bit more clear. Ottawahitech, it would be helpful if you would stop assuming bad faith with topics like this. The policy, as well as this year's review, is public on Meta. It's linked in Stanglavine's message. Your assumption that there's some secret meeting of stewards to remove local admins is completely baseless and unhelpful in constructive dialogue. Vermont (talk) 16:51, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry @Vermont, I didn't find out that question is a trap. I used to believe ottawahitech is asking "Do stewards have a private group for communication?", But what they really intend to ask is "Do stewards have a secret meeting to do some bad things...." Oh, hell.... Lemonaka (talk) 20:02, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you @Vermont for supplying a link to the Global admin activity review policy.
I understand, please correct me if I am wrong, that:
  • The maximum inactivity for admins at the English wikiquote (enwq) is defined as zero edits and zero admin actions in the last two years
  • The Stewards conduct annual or semi-annual audits of all holders of enwq admin rights
If this is correct I wonder if members of the enwq community can have access to the detailed results of this audit?
In other words I believe this community should be made aware of the current activity level of all its administrators. Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 20:05, 21 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
See Special:ListAdmins, and then click on contribs :-) Vermont (talk) 23:25, 21 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For specifics on which admins were identified in the review, see meta:Admin activity review/2022/Data. Vermont (talk) 23:26, 21 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Are the stewards planning an announcement on village-pumps across the wmf-verse about the upcoming elections and annual reconfirmation of stewads? Would it not be a good idea to encourage participation of all members of the wikimedia movement? Ottawahitech (talk) 15:46, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ottawahitech For this object, you may contact @Zuz Lemonaka (talk) 14:32, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ottawahitech, a CentralNotice is created that appears on all wikis informing users of the election. Announcements on village pumps aren't necessary and I've never seen one before, so I don't see why this year would be different. --Ferien (talk) 16:21, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Edit of[edit]

This user was blocked on English Wikipedia for disruptive editing, I doubt that whether these additions are accurate or not? FWIW ,[3] Special:Diff/3227682 and so on. Lemonaka (talk) 14:35, 5 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There would appear to be a major problem in general with block-evading non-collaborrating anon-IPs making (for practical purposes) unverifiable dialog changes in films/tv-series/video-games etc. Even blocked IP's from known sockpuppets are editing here with near immunity and sysops taking criticism it their unenviable task of having to deal with it. The edit you mention is trivial in my opinion in the grand order of thngs. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 10:58, 9 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Djm-leighpark Yes, that's why I'm sending this question to Village pump, some of these edits could not be verified on time. Previously I have caught some IP editors making these disruptive edits, then began vandalizing more aggressively. But if they don't be so aggressive, some minor hoaxes may never be caught by others. Lemonaka (talk) 22:08, 9 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Upcoming vote on the revised Enforcement Guidelines for the Universal Code of Conduct[edit]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.

Hello all,

In mid-January 2023, the Enforcement Guidelines for the Universal Code of Conduct will undergo a second community-wide ratification vote. This follows the March 2022 vote, which resulted in a majority of voters supporting the Enforcement Guidelines. During the vote, participants helped highlight important community concerns. The Board’s Community Affairs Committee requested that these areas of concern be reviewed.

The volunteer-led Revisions Committee worked hard reviewing community input and making changes. They updated areas of concern, such as training and affirmation requirements, privacy and transparency in the process, and readability and translatability of the document itself.

The revised Enforcement Guidelines can be viewed here, and a comparison of changes can be found here.

How to vote?

Beginning January 17, 2023, voting will be open. This page on Meta-wiki outlines information on how to vote using SecurePoll.

Who can vote?

The eligibility requirements for this vote are the same as for the Wikimedia Board of Trustees elections. See the voter information page for more details about voter eligibility. If you are an eligible voter, you can use your Wikimedia account to access the voting server.

What happens after the vote?

Votes will be scrutinized by an independent group of volunteers, and the results will be published on Wikimedia-l, the Movement Strategy Forum, Diff and on Meta-wiki. Voters will again be able to vote and share concerns they have about the guidelines. The Board of Trustees will look at the levels of support and concerns raised as they look at how the Enforcement Guidelines should be ratified or developed further.

On behalf of the UCoC Project Team,

Zuz (WMF) (talk) 08:00, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Voting now open on the revised Enforcement Guidelines for the Universal Code of Conduct[edit]

Hello all,

The voting period for the revised Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement Guidelines is now open! Voting will be open for two weeks and close at 23.59 UTC on January 31, 2023. Please visit the voter information page on Meta-wiki for voter eligibility information and details on how to vote.

For more details on the Enforcement Guidelines and the voting process, see our previous message.

On behalf of the UCoC Project Team,

Zuz (WMF) (talk) 13:46, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Voting closes soon on the revised Enforcement Guidelines for the Universal Code of Conduct[edit]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.
More languages Please help translate to your language

Hello all,

Voting closes on the revised Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement Guidelines at 23.59 UTC today, January 31, 2023. Please visit the voter information page on Meta-wiki for voter eligibility information and details on how to vote. More information on the Enforcement Guidelines and the voting process is available in this previous message.

On behalf of the UCoC Project Team,

Zuz (WMF) (talk) 10:02, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Proposed change to Religious-stub template[edit]

Notification: I am proposing a change to {{Religious-stub}} as it classifies people to which it is applied as a religious leader which gives a misleading impression in some cases. I am thinking particularly of cases such as Derek Malone-French (see history) and the martyr Claus Felbinger where leader perhaps gives a false impression though they may be thought of as a leader in a more abstract sense. The discussion is at Template talk:Religious-stub#Proposed fix to misleading usage of Religious-stub so feel free to contribute there (or suggest a better forum). Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 08:41, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Voting on the revised Enforcement Guidelines for the Universal Code of Conduct is closed[edit]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.
More languages Please help translate to your language

Hello all,

The vote on the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement Guidelines is now closed. The results will now be counted and scrutinized to ensure that only eligible votes are included. Results will be published on Meta and other movement forums as soon as they become available, as well as information on future steps. Thank you to all who participated in the voting process, and who have contributed to the drafting of Guidelines.

On behalf of the UCoC Project Team,

Zuz (WMF) (talk) 19:22, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

All articles are now linked to a Wikidata item[edit]

All articles are now linked to a Wikidata item. Well almost all. The (current) circa 90 exceptions here. I believe all on that list are in a deletion/move/mergeto process (or victims of a distributed transaction fail) and my basic intent is that they will get a sitelinked wikidata item if that process does not complete or is stalled. That UnconnectedPages(main) has always been a small proportion of the articles of Wikiquote, though it probably rose to over 1800 with the surge in #SheSaid articles at the beginning of December though this was resolved by the start of 2023 with about 1245 on the list from memory. While I was able to use some automation to resolve part of that at the start of January over 600 were resolved on an article by article basis. Connecting the Wikidata item for articles with an associated English Wikipedia article is trivially easy, and mostly takes under a minute for most cases unless there's an underlying discrepancy (e.g. bio article linked to disambiguation page). While most of the action for this has occurred on Wikidata a visible effect here is my decision to send articles to the VFD process when it seemed there was both a good reason to do so and I was not prepared to create a Wikidata item for them. I'd prefer the VFD list was under 40; not over 50 at a push; and certainly not over 60. Obviously I've pushed that up to circa 83. I was at one point thinking of deferring adding items to the VfD list. In weighed my priorities, difficulties if momentum of the reduction of hte Unconnected page list was lost and the painful though of getting back into it, the unexpected option of getting a relatively good run on the last part of that list meaning the endpoint was in sight. In particular 11 February 2023 or soon after might see my contributions over the WMF wikis in totality change considerably and I wouldn't want to leave outstanding stuff on Wikiquote. Thankyou. -- Djm-leighpark(a)talk 21:54, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]