Originally posted to Wikiquote:Village pump in 2004.

Village pump archive 2

	Archives
	; 2003; 2004; 2005: 01–06 · 07–09 · 09–12; 2006: 01–05 · 06 · 07–09 · 10–11 · 12; 2007: 01 · 02 · 03 · 04 · 05–06 · 07 · 08–11 · 12; 2008: 01 · 02–04 · 05–06 · 07–08 · 09–10 · 11–12; 2009: 01–02 · 03–09 · 10–12; 2010: 01–06 · 07–12; 2011: 01–05 · 06–08 · 09–12; 2012: 01–02 · 03–04 · 05–08 · 09–12; 2013: 01–06 · 07–12; 2014: 01–04 · 05–08 · 09–12; 2015: 01–03 · 04–08 · 09–12; 2016: 01–03 · 04–07 · 08–12; 2017: 01–06 · 07–12; 2018: 01–06 · 07–12; 2019: 01–06 · 07–12; 2020: 01–06 · 07–12; 2021: 01–06 · 07–12; 2022: 01–06 · 07–12; 2023: 01–06 · 07–12; ;

Linking to Wikibooks

Is this a good idea to link from Wikiquote to Wikibooks ? I mean, for example, from Shakespearean quotations to appropriate scenes of Shakespeare plays that are in Wikibooks. Unfortunately we can not link to specific lines :-(
--Kpjas 17:49, 16 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Well i thinks its a good idea as,

intergrates Wikimedia projects together.
helps ppl that want the full text, rtaher than just quotes.

-fonzy

Even though you can't link to specific lines, you can link to sections using section linking, which can often get you very close. Nanobug 02:22, 17 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Actually, since Wikibooks is a wiki, you can link to specific lines. You add a div tag with an id attribute surrounding the line, in Wikibooks. Then link to it with #, and you're golden. It's just a lot of trouble to do it for lots of lines. w:User:JesseW 19:13, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Boldly reformatting special pages

I find it cumbersome that, unlike discussion pages, many discussion-style special pages (like Wikiquote:Village pump and Wikiquote:Bug reports) don't have a convenient Post comment link (a "+" tab using the new software). The result is an odd mix of horizontal-line-divided, untitled topics and table-of-contents indexed sections, the latter of which often appear halfway down the page. I've been bold enough to reformat some discussion pages that had this problem in various wikis. I'd like to do it for Bug reports, too, but I'd opinions on whether this is acceptable. Does anyone mind if I retroactively add these headings? Am I right in thinking that the Post comment approach is relatively new and is therefore not implemented everywhere it would be useful? Is there any metawiki discussion about adding it to special pages? -- Jeff Q 13:11, 30 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure about any discussions on the matters at Meta-wiki, but adding section headers where they seem appropriate is no problem with me. I had noted much the same thing in the various listings, but simply was not too bothered by it, for the most part. ~ Kalki 13:40, 30 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Searching for Quotations

I'm not sure about Wikiquote's policies on linking to external websites, but I'd like to recommend that my Quotations and Proverbs Search tool be added to the no-results-found page (search results). Either a link, or my searchbox (javascript include) would, I think, aid users who cannot find what they are looking for in Wikiquote. -- Fagan

Wikiquote logo

Out of vague curiosity, what happened to the old Wikiquote logo? It seems to have been replaced by something with a yellow background and some text. Is that a consequence of the new skin? If so, is the old logo being reworked to accommodate the change? Sorry if I missed something.

The logo being used now actually was the original logo, but I am not aware of why the reversion occured during the recent software upgrades. ~ Kalki 04:29, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I just wanted to ask the same question. At the moment, I am collecting information about the logos of the different Wikimedia projects on meta:Logos. Could you Wikiquotists tell there which logo is the right one? Information about the author and link to a high resolution version would be nice, too. --Elian

the answer to that is this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/upload/6/6c/Wikiquote4logo.png - fonzy

I can't fix these things if you don't tell me about them -- Tim Starling 03:37, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Volunteers wanted: Wikimedia Embassy

Hello, at meta:Wikimedia Embassy we have a list with people of the different wikipedias to contact for questions about their projects. It would be fine to have someone from Wikiquote there, too. If you like to do the job, please fill in your name there. --Elian

Please let's not forget to link to and from Wikipedia

Linking from Wikipedia to Wikiquote as an internal link: [[Wikiquote:Theme]] Andries 21:14, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

For a list of wikiquote and wikipedia articles with the same titles (almost all the names of books, films or people), see w:User:Topbanana/Reports/A wikiquote article exists on this topic - Topbanana 14:09, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Multi-language Wikiquote

I've been asked to set up a wikiquote in another language, so I'm converting it to the multi-language style, like Wikipedia and Wiktionary. Except this time I'm implementing an on-demand system so only the wikis people want will be created. The URL of this wiki will change from wikiquote.org to en.wikiquote.org, with a redirect left behind so nothing will be broken. If I do it right, at the most you'll just see a couple of minutes of downtime here and there. Maybe the logo image will disappear, or the site will go into an infinite redirect loop, or you'll get blank pages or database errors. Don't bother reporting it unless the problem persists for more than 5 minutes. -- Tim Starling 14:07, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I've set up the Main Page of [it.wikiquote.org]. A couple of problems: the main page is called "Wikipedia", but should be "Pagina principale" (I fixed this with a redirect for the moment). A lot of MediaWiki messages are still in english and i would like to translate them but I suppose is a task for an administrator. I would like to know who should I ask to become an administrator of it.wikiquote. I'm already one of the administrators of it.wikipedia, if this can be a useful reference. w:User:Snowdog - w:it:Utente:Snowdog

Try Requests for permissons on the meta wiki. Thats the usual process for getting admin rights on a new project. Krik 22:25, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)

It is good to see that Wikiquote projects for languages other than english have finally begun, despite the adjustments that now need to be made here. I had known for some time that the "en:SUBJECT" links to Wikipedia were slated to become obsolete, and had not used them, but currently even the format that I had been informed would remain valid, "wikipedia:en" is not working properly, and forms a link to an empty page within Wikiquote to edit, designated with a "Wikipedia:En". I hope this can be fixed without needing to revise all these individual links, but I will post announcements and examples in the next few days indicating that now (and hopefully forever) the preferred link format from a Wikiquote project to a Wikipedia project in the same language is: [[w:Name or Subject]] (See Wikiquote:Templates for more information on formatting links between projects).

Prior to using "wikipedia:en" I had tried "w:en" thinking it a likely abbreviation, but at that time it did not function. Currently a similar situation exists in the Wikipedia, where [[q:Name or Subject]] is non-functional, but I believe this would be a good alternative to the current [[Wikiquote:Name or Subject]] format, and could easily accomodate the additional languages that will be developed in a manner similar to that used with the Wikipedia links. I am suggesting that it should probably be used as a preferred format (but without making the previous link format obsolete, having it instead default to the Wikiquote of the same language, as the "w:" does for the Wikipedia).

Other relatively minor issues that have arisen amidst all the recent changes (since the software upgrades) are that the older logo has replaced the newer, and that the "Q" favicon which had been displayed in some browsers is now replaced with Wikipedia's "W" (when the older favicon has not been retained in a browser's support files). ~ Kalki 02:34, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

When I converted Wiktionary to a multi-language project, I introduced the concept of a "lateral" interwiki link, which links to the same language of a different project. Since wikiquote is now converted, it can also take advantage of this fetaure. I think q: would be quite acceptable as a lateral interwiki prefix for wikiquote. I'll see what I can do about setting that up. I would recommend w: over w:en:, as it skips a redirect and provides an easy way of linking to the Wikipedia of the same language as the source wiki. To link to a Wikipedia of a different language, the w:en: style is fine. The other lateral interwiki prefix is wikt: for wiktionary. Not sure what happened with the favicon, I'll look into it. -- Tim Starling 04:08, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Quote of the day on Wikipedia

Would it be possible to put a quote of the day onto Wikipedia? People could then put it on their user pages, and it would link to both Wikipedia's article on the cited person and through to wikiquote, giving a good bit of publicity for this place. Is this possible in a transwiki process or does the two have to be maintained separately? Use this link to contact me on Wikipedia Duncharris 20:35, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Wikilink to specific quote?

I have been working on some wikipedia pages which include quotes. I wonder if there is some way to link directly to a particular quote. For example, if a particular quote was given a linkable tag then I could put that in the wikipedia entry. In that way, clicking on the references would center on the relevant quote. If this mechanism already exists, could you please point me towards it (sometimes I miss the obvious)? So, why link to wikiquote anyway? Well, lots of quotes floating around are slightly wrong in the phrasing, misattributed, or not sourced (as a random example see George W. Bush). By linking to wikiquote, I ensure that any updates in sourcing, attribution, error correction, etc are automatically corrected in my wikipedia entry. Of course, I could just link to the whole page, but the page may be so long as to be a burden to the reader (see Bush again). Of course, I could just link to the section. But again (see Bush) that may be quite long, and it's not as elegant. So, my humble proposal would be to add an optional tag for each quote. For example, "make the pie higher" could be tagged or labeled as simply "pie" (George_W._Bush#pie).

Well, I'll answer my own question having poked around quite a bit. You can add a labelled div section.

For example <div id="pie"> "make the pie higher" </div> will allow someone to link to the pie quote just as if it were a section heading. --Wolfman

Multiple languages / semi-translations of quotations

I've been steadily adding new pages and adding quotes to existing pages, and I've just come across something I hadn't seen before: A long, long, much-too-long list of supposed translations of English-language quotations into other languages. The first one I found was W. H. Auden, but there are others. Someone please tell me, what is the point of translating a single sentence by an English-speaking author into languages like Albanian, Basque, and Limburgian, fer cryin' out loud??? First, Auden did not write in any of those languages. (If you know of a famous Limburgian author whose words deserve to be recorded in Wikiquote, go to it.) Second, I very much doubt that whoever committed this nonsense is fluent in all those extremely minor languages, so the supposed translations are suspect. (If they were machine-produced, all the more reason to doubt their accuracy.) Third, what is the relevance or utility of taking up all that space with someone's attempt to show off? It strikes me as being very close to a subtle form of vandalism.... --Michael K. Smith 16:18, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I agree they should be removed. I don't think that they were meant as vandalism, but probably were simply an early effort to provide sample statements in many languages that was quickly rejected as impractical. I think they were actually rejected early on, and no more were added, but they were not all removed. For some time I had been thinking of doing so and placing them on a single page somewere, but I might simply erase them now. I know of a few pages where they exist, and might go about removing them in the next day or two. ~ Kalki 18:42, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Images

The pages on this wiki look kind of plain. It may be helpful if images were on the pages. Strangely enough though pictures don't seem to be on many (if any) pages though. Should images of people, movies or what not be used in Wikiquote? --Alsocal 05:13, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I think putting images are a good idea. Articles concerning people might be improved with the author images. Some of theme articles would be better to have an appropriate image. --Aphaia 13:36, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I am aware that pictures can enhance pages significantly but up to now have discouraged their use here, for several reasons, but now see reasons for relenting. Most importantly, development seems to be proceeding well on the Wikimedia Commons as a site to store GNU FDL and public domain images that can be used across all Wikimedia projects and I would like to encourage the use of it for any images to be used here. I would still like to discourage the uploading here of copyrighted images that invoke fair use, or that are merely redundant copies of images already used on the Wikipedia; there is no need to clutter up the Wikimedia servers with these.

I feel there is no need to suddenly fill this project or its pages with images, and I would like to caution people to keep the sizes of any images that they use relatively small, and to normally try to use only one well chosen image to a page. Though many of us are blessed to have broadband connections most people still do not, and every image can greatly increase the time it takes pages to load, and the amount of browsing that many people can do. ~ Kalki 21:07, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Here is some information, and an example link to the Wikimedia Commons:

Notice about Wikimedia Commons from Erik Möller (W:User:Eloquence)

Wikipedia integration

I just want to voice my real desire for Wikiquote to be integrated into Wikipedia as a /quote subpage instead of a sister project. Just seems inefficient to have a seperate login and system for quotes. Of course I have to assume this was rejected for a good reason... but nobody told me bout it! :') RoyBoy 06:58, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

If your only concern is the separate login you should be pleased to know that a single account for all WikiMedia projects will be introduced in the near future. See Single_login_poll on Meta for details. About the sub page - IIRC the sub page system has been abandoned in favour of a separate page for each article for the sake of clarity and ease of navigation (there was a mention about it somewhere on Wikipedia or Meta, can't remember where exactly...). Special greatings to all form the polish Wikiquote team. :) --TOR 12:52, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Interlang encouragement

I propose we make more interlang links as same as Wikipedia. Most of non-English authors have their own article in their mother tongue projects. Theme artcles are found in many projects too. Putting interlang links and finding new quotations can improve both projects. I think it is our virtues as a multilingual project. --Aphaia 13:32, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)

This is certainly a worthy task for those who wish to do it; the more links between the Wikiquote projects in various languages the better. I would also like to add that having quotes in the original languages as well as English translations should also be retained as a goal of the English Wikiquote project. ~ Kalki 20:40, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the New Favicon

I would like to thank whoever was responsible among the designers and developers for the new Wikiquote favicon that uses the logo Neolux designed. I don't actually know how long its been around, and only noticed it a few days ago, because I was using a browser I don't normally use, and saw it in the address bar. I had to delete my old favicons folders, or reset some preferences in my primary browsers (Safari and Firefox) so it would show up in these, but I definitely like it. THANKS. ~ Kalki 20:21, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Oh, it's been around for some time now. I don't know exactly but a few weeks at least. And yeah, it makes using tabs so much easier when you've got Wikipedia open in one and Wikiquote in the other. No more slip ups like uploading an image to Wikiquote by mistake :P --TOR 10:09, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Attributed?

Maybe I haven't found it yet, but I haven't found anything that explains what "Attributed" means. My first assumption was that it means "attributed to XXX, but no verfication found yet", but that would mean that there should also be a separate category for "False attributions" (or maybe "Proven false") where it is known that thorough searches have been done (through both public records and private letters, etc.) and no version of the quote has been found, where it has been proven that someone falsified the quote, or where it has been shown the quote is by someone else. For some major figures (Abraham Lincoln for example) there are so many false quotes out there that there really needs to be some way to keeping track of all the false quotes for them, if for no other reason than to have a list to check against when people add new quotes. gK ¿? 09:18, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

A discussion occurred here about name designations, and a bit earlier on the same page. "Sourced" was suggested for all quotations with citations, with a recommendation to abandon "Verified" as too strong a word, far too casually applied, too easily, by too many. "Attributed" to be used on quotes known to be attributed to an individual or source, but without definite citations, and various options for more dubious quotations were proposed or suggested at various places: "Misattributed" for quotes that were known to be wrongfully attributed to a source, and "Probably spurious" where the evidence indicates that they were probably fabricated quotations (sometimes even with fabricated citations). "Quotations by others about ________" is also a recommended heading. "Almost certainly spurious" has sometimes been used, where the evidence of falsehood is especially strong, and occasionally such quotations, or misattributions have been removed to the talk page, because they are not considered worthy of considiration as even possibly genuine, or correctly attributed. It is not recommended that even such quotes as are commonly misattributed to a source be deleted entirely, because we should aim at providing information that debunks false quotes, as well as that which confirms the true ones. Any more precise information or speculation about a particular quotation's origins than the various headers provide can be made in the comments beneath the quote, or sometimes on the talk page. ~ Kalki