Wikiquote:Village pump

Community portal Welcome

Reference desk Request an article

Village pump Archives

Administrators' noticeboard Report vandalism • Votes for deletion

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

Archives

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

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

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

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

---

Suggestions needed on two pages on same topic

We have w:2020–2021 Indian farmers' protest and w:2020 Indian agriculture acts two separate articles on the same topic that seems meaningful for Wikipedia. But, I wonder if we can have 2020–2021 Indian farmers' protest and 2020 Indian agriculture acts two separate Wikiquotes pages for, as far as I can think, both of them will perhaps have the same quotes on the same topic, or not? Lightbluerain (talk) 18:53, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

I think they can be merged into the acts page. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:20, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

@Koavf, act wasn't as popular as the protest. And, I too think perhaps merging is the only option. Thanks. Lightbluerain (talk) 18:40, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Folklore is back!

Please help translate to your language

You are humbly invited to participate in the Wiki Loves Folklore 2022 an international photography contest organized on Wikimedia Commons to document folklore and intangible cultural heritage from different regions, including, folk creative activities and many more. It is held every year from the 1st till the 28th of February.

You can help in enriching the folklore documentation on Commons from your region by taking photos, audios, videos, and submitting them in this commons contest.

You can also organize a local contest in your country and support us in translating the project pages to help us spread the word in your native language.

Feel free to contact us on our project Talk page if you need any assistance.

Kind regards,

Wiki loves Folklore International Team

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:14, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Community Wishlist Survey 2022

The Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is now open!

This survey is the process where communities decide what the Community Tech team should work on over the next year. We encourage everyone to submit proposals until the deadline on 23 January, or comment on other proposals to help make them better. The communities will vote on the proposals between 28 January and 11 February.

The Community Tech team is focused on tools for experienced Wikimedia editors. You can write proposals in any language, and we will translate them for you. Thank you, and we look forward to seeing your proposals! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 18:10, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Call for Feedback about the Board of Trustees elections is now open

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

More languages • Please help translate to your language

The Call for Feedback: Board of Trustees elections is now open and will close on 7 February 2022.

With this Call for Feedback, the Movement Strategy and Governance team is taking a different approach. This approach incorporates community feedback from 2021. Instead of leading with proposals, the Call is framed around key questions from the Board of Trustees. The key questions came from the feedback about the 2021 Board of Trustees election. The intention is to inspire collective conversation and collaborative proposal development about these key questions.

There are two confirmed questions that will be asked during this Call for Feedback:

1. What is the best way to ensure more diverse representation among elected candidates? The Board of Trustees noted the importance of selecting candidates who represent the full diversity of the Wikimedia movement. The current processes have favored volunteers from North America and Europe.
2. What are the expectations for the candidates during the election? Board candidates have traditionally completed applications and answered community questions. How can an election provide appropriate insight into candidates while also appreciating candidates’ status as volunteers?

There is one additional question that may be presented during the Call about selection processes. This question is still under discussion, but the Board wanted to give insight into the confirmed questions as soon as possible. Hopefully if an additional question is going to be asked, it will be ready during the first week of the Call for Feedback.

Join the conversation.

Best,

Movement Strategy and Governance

MNadzikiewicz (WMF) (talk) 14:54, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

"See also" policy/guidelines? UDScott, Kalki & Ottawahitech

• Re: See also * Famine * Hunger * Scarcity -- removed by User:UDScott
  Hello UDScott. Sorry for the confusion!
  1)If there is a policy page on the topic of the "See also" section, please let me know where to find it, as I have looked more than once with negative results.
  2)To explain, I put those three topics there because i believe they are very related/connected to the topic of Abortion. Apparently around 30,000 people die of hunger every single day of the week (mostly children under 14) due to scarcity of food or of money to buy it. Seems that many people who are researching Abortion on WQ, may not be aware of the problems of hunger/famine/scarcity - all of which are known to cause a huge amount of needless suffering. Unlike abortion those topics are generally not controversial or at least much less controversial. An abortion probably takes less than 30 minutes, while starvation may take years. It widely known that inability to get abortions can and does result in more children dying of hunger/malnutrition than would otherwise. It seems very, very cruel to let children die of hunger - especially in this world where tons of food (and birth control) sits rotting in warehouses. Even more when one considers the advancement of our technological & transport/distribution capabilities in the last 30 years - that would make it much easier than ever to end those horrors. It also seems that many very good, dedicated humanitarians, who are dedicated to outlawing abortions, apparently know little or nothing about hunger and famine.
  Also one could say that Wikiquotes is like a free cafe serving information. Adding relevant items to the menu, doesn't cost a cent, but can be very valuable in our 'customers' searches for information. When people say, 'I don't see how those topics are related to the topic', the most useful reply from my corner might be something like "and you won't see any relevance, unless and until you do further research & think about your findings'. People can't be forced to think of course, but it seems helpful for all editors so inclined, to encourage people to move in that direction.
  
  So en sum: Those three topics were placed there thinking they may be helpful topics of interest to some of the people visiting to read, learn and get a broad overview of the problem. Seems that better rounded, more thoroughly informed people will form more logical and helpful opinions & views, which are sure to lead us to more peaceful world. As Julian Assange has pointed out, we have to know the whole truth about issues to solve them. Lopsided views result in lobsided results.
  Not arguing or complaining, just explaining.
  
• Obviously there appears to be some confusion on this topice so at your earliest convenience
  Please give a professional WQ bureaucrat's opinion/ruling ie guidelines for "See also" - if such doesn't already exist (and if something like that does exist, please excuse me for failing to find it). Thank you very much!

This may be of interest to Kalki also & Ottawahitech who have also undone some of my attempts to contribute to the "see also" section on other pages. Revised WeNotMeC020 (talk) 18:24, 15 January 2022 (UTC)WeNotMeC020 (talk) 21:28, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

• Thanks very much folks for your tolerance!

*Relevant Older discussions

• Please avoid using "see also" sections to duplicate what already exists through the category system or through links in the quotations themselves. 73.71.251.64 02:13, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

• @ 73.71.251.64: Why not duplicate what already exists through the category system? Ottawahitech (talk) 21:34, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

• hi @ 73.71.251.64: Thank you for expressing your view on the 'see also' links and for your cooperation with and concern for wikiquotes. It seems that many relevant topics/links are not easily found thru the category system. Relying solely upon the category system would be one way to slow the process of learning for many people. Why make it harder than it has to be? Why not make it kind and thoughtful with relevant links at the viewers fingertip, like items on a menu? If visitors understand the category system - and prefer that, it is a click away. Seems that the ~prime objective of making the existing vast pool of information available to as many as possible for the good of our world, seems to be helped by adding relevant links in "see also". Editors who have a deeper than average understanding of a topic, can help enrich WQ & serve the public by adding links to pages relevant to the subject (many of which are definitely not to be found found quickly by digging in the category system). "See also" can help some readers get a broader view of the topic much faster than they might otherwise. We want to help people learn by making the process as thorough and easy as possible right? Seems that we editors should do everything reasonable in our power to accommodate the massive range of visitors/readers from those who read very little to those who can't get enough to read, from those who are just learning English to those who speak it fluently. What do you think?
• All that said, if there is a Wiki policy in place or consensus recorded and accepted by WQ management that regulates, forbids, or discourages using "see also" sections, please share it here. Thanks again for your participation & cooperation in this great endeavor!. WeNotMeC020 (talk) 17:26, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

• We should be: kind, thoughtful, passionate about getting it right, open, tolerant of different viewpoints, open to criticism, bold... and also cautious about changing our policies. The real struggle is not between the right and the left — that's where most people assume — but it's between the party of the thoughtful and the party of the jerks...

The primary issue is how seriously we take our chosen obligations to people in the developing world... Wikipedia as a readable product is not for us. It's for them. It's for that girl in Africa who can save the lives of hundreds of thousands of people around her, but only if she's empowered with the knowledge to do so...

• • Jimmy Wales

WeNotMeC020 (talk) 18:29, 15 January 2022 (UTC)edited WeNotMeC020 (talk) 18:37, 15 January 2022 (UTC)removed dupicated text

@WeNotMeC020, I fixed the links to the userpages of the concerned users in your message. But, perhaps I didn't sign after I pinged them, they wouldn't get notified even now. So, you can ping them separately if you feel the need. Lightbluerain (talk) 18:49, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

This is very long. Can you tell me in one or two setences what this is about? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:56, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

• I'll explain it:

Abortion Article

1. WeNot adds hunger, famine, scarcity, and starvation to the See also section of the Abortion article.

2. UDScott reverts, saying "Not sure what these topics have to do with Abortion - See also links should have some direct connection to a page's topic."

Abortion Talk Page

3. WeNot explains on the talk page.

4. Binksternet reverts, saying " revert off-topic sermonizing."

5. Stryknin reverts Binksternet, without edit summary.

6. WeNot removes talk page post, saying "Moved to 53 'See also' policy/guidelines? UDScott, Kalki & Ottawahitech"

7. WeNot posts here.

@UDScott, Binksternet, Stryknin: - Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 16:03, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

I don't know that there is a policy page on WQ about this specific topic, but we have always limited this section to links to pages that are relevant to a given page. This is also how Wikipedia has always treated it ("The links in the "See also" section should be relevant, should reflect the links that would be present in a comprehensive article on the topic, and should be limited to a reasonable number." from w:Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Layout#"See_also"_section). To have it any other way doesn't really make sense to me - the name itself implies that one should look at another page in addition to the one they are currently viewing because it bears some relevance. Otherwise, if the intent you have is merely to highlight interesting pages in which a reader might have some interest (but bear no relationship the current page) the section would appear to be misnamed. It is similar to other discussions about the placement of images on pages - we have maintained that any images placed on a page should have a relevance to the topic of the page. It is the same IMHO for links in the See also section - they should have a direct relationship to the topic as well. ~ UDScott (talk) 02:10, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

WeNotMeC020 would, no doubt, beg to differ. I do too (see WeNotMeC020's tl;dr post above: "inability to get abortions can and does result in more children dying of hunger/malnutrition than would otherwise"). That said, the relevance is too remote to justify adding the links to a Wikiquote article that consists solely of quotes about abortion (as opposed to, for example, a Wikipedia article discussing the effect of abortions). Note to WeNotMeC020: when adding a See also that is not clearly related to the article you would do well to include a snippet of text explaining the relevance. - Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 03:28, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you @Butwhatdoiknow for summarizing this, and for your informative comments as well. Onward! WeNotMeC020 (talk) 17:26, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you @UDScott for the information & for your time. The information in the manual of style as well as your comments all sound very reasonable and are much appreciated! WeNotMeC020 (talk) 17:24, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Talk to the Community Tech

Hello

We, the team working on the Community Wishlist Survey, would like to invite you to an online meeting with us. It will take place on 19 January (Wednesday), 18:00 UTC on Zoom, and will last an hour. This external system is not subject to the WMF Privacy Policy. Click here to join.

Agenda

• Bring drafts of your proposals and talk to to a member of the Community Tech Team about your questions on how to improve the proposal

Format

The meeting will not be recorded or streamed. Notes without attribution will be taken and published on Meta-Wiki. The presentation (all points in the agenda except for the questions and answers) will be given in English.

We can answer questions asked in English, French, Polish, Spanish, and German. If you would like to ask questions in advance, add them on the Community Wishlist Survey talk page or send to sgrabarczuk@wikimedia.org.

Natalia Rodriguez (the Community Tech manager) will be hosting this meeting.

Invitation link

• Join online
• Meeting ID: 85804347114
• Dial by your location

We hope to see you! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 00:21, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Subscribe to the This Month in Education newsletter - learn from others and share your stories

Dear community members,

Greetings from the EWOC Newsletter team and the education team at Wikimedia Foundation. We are very excited to share that we on tenth years of Education Newsletter (This Month in Education) invite you to join us by subscribing to the newsletter on your talk page or by sharing your activities in the upcoming newsletters. The Wikimedia Education newsletter is a monthly newsletter that collects articles written by community members using Wikimedia projects in education around the world, and it is published by the EWOC Newsletter team in collaboration with the Education team. These stories can bring you new ideas to try, valuable insights about the success and challenges of our community members in running education programs in their context.

If your affiliate/language project is developing its own education initiatives, please remember to take advantage of this newsletter to publish your stories with the wider movement that shares your passion for education. You can submit newsletter articles in your own language or submit bilingual articles for the education newsletter. For the month of January the deadline to submit articles is on the 20th January. We look forward to reading your stories.

Older versions of this newsletter can be found in the complete archive.

More information about the newsletter can be found at Education/Newsletter/About.

For more information, please contact spatnaikwikimedia.org.

---

About This Month in Education · Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · For the team: ZI Jony ^(Talk), Friday 14:39, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_Masefield

The quotation "I must down to the seas again" has a note that, in the writer's opinion, "sea", is a misquotation and is often substituted for "seas". The Wikiquote entry does not convey this accurately. - 12:55, 20 January 2022‎ user:Goghvan

I've done some clean up. Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 16:40, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Movement Strategy and Governance News – Issue 5

More languages • Please help translate to your language

Movement Strategy and Governance News
Issue 5, January 2022Read the full newsletter

---

Welcome to the fifth issue of Movement Strategy and Governance News (formerly known as Universal Code of Conduct News)! This revamped newsletter distributes relevant news and events about the Movement Charter, Universal Code of Conduct, Movement Strategy Implementation grants, Board elections and other relevant MSG topics.

This Newsletter will be distributed quarterly, while more frequent Updates will also be delivered weekly or bi-weekly to subscribers. Please remember to subscribe here if you would like to receive these updates.

• Call for Feedback about the Board elections - We invite you to give your feedback on the upcoming WMF Board of Trustees election. This call for feedback went live on 10th January 2022 and will be concluded on 7th February 2022. (continue reading)
• Universal Code of Conduct Ratification - In 2021, the WMF asked communities about how to enforce the Universal Code of Conduct policy text. The revised draft of the enforcement guidelines should be ready for community vote in March. (continue reading)
• Movement Strategy Implementation Grants - As we continue to review several interesting proposals, we encourage and welcome more proposals and ideas that target a specific initiative from the Movement Strategy recommendations. (continue reading)
• The New Direction for the Newsletter - As the UCoC Newsletter transitions into MSG Newsletter, join the facilitation team in envisioning and deciding on the new directions for this newsletter. (continue reading)
• Diff Blogs - Check out the most recent publications about MSG on Wikimedia Diff. (continue reading)

Zuz (WMF) (talk) 15:27, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Desktop Improvements update and Office Hours invitation

Hello. I wanted to give you an update about the Desktop Improvements project, which the Wikimedia Foundation Web team has been working on for the past few years.

The goals of the project are to make the interface more welcoming and comfortable for readers and useful for advanced users. The project consists of a series of feature improvements which make it easier to read and learn, navigate within the page, search, switch between languages, use article tabs and the user menu, and more.

The improvements are already visible by default for readers and editors on 24 wikis, including Wikipedias in French, Portuguese, and Persian.

The changes apply to the Vector skin only. Monobook or Timeless users are not affected.

Features deployed since our last update

• User menu - focused on making the navigation more intuitive by visually highlighting the structure of user links and their purpose.
• Sticky header - focused on allowing access to important functionality (logging in/out, history, talk pages, etc.) without requiring people to scroll to the top of the page.

For a full list of the features the project includes, please visit our project page. We also invite you to our Updates page.

The features deployed already and the table of contents that's currently under development

How to enable the improvements

Global preferences

• It is possible to opt-in individually in the appearance tab within the preferences by unchecking the "Use Legacy Vector" box. (It has to be empty.) Also, it is possible to opt-in on all wikis using the global preferences.
• If you think this would be good as a default for all readers and editors of this wiki, feel free to start a conversation with the community and contact me.
• On wikis where the changes are visible by default for all, logged-in users can always opt-out to the Legacy Vector. There is an easily accessible link in the sidebar of the new Vector.

Learn more and join our events

If you would like to follow the progress of our project, you can subscribe to our newsletter.

You can read the pages of the project, check our FAQ, write on the project talk page, and join an online meeting with us (27 January (Thursday), 15:00 UTC).

How to join our online meeting

• Join online
• Meeting ID: 89205402895
• Dial by your location

Thank you!!

On behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation Web team, SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 22:11, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Away for a week

I am going to be away on business for the next week or thereabouts. I expect everyone to be on their best behavior while I'm gone, and please try to finish assembling all the quotes by the time I get back. Cheers! BD2412 T 07:02, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Updates on the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement Guidelines Review

Hello everyone,

The Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) Enforcement Guidelines were published 24 January 2022 as a proposed way to apply the Universal Code of Conduct across the movement. Comments about the guidelines can be shared here or the Meta-wiki talk page.

There will be conversations on Zoom on 4 February 2022 at 15:00 UTC, 25 February 2022 at 12:00 UTC, and 4 March 2022 at 15:00 UTC. Join the UCoC project team and drafting committee members to discuss the guidelines and voting process.

The timeline is available on Meta-wiki. The voting period is March 7 to 21. See the voting information page for more details.

You can read the full announcement here. Thank you to everyone who has participated so far.

Sincerely,

Movement Strategy and Governance
Wikimedia Foundation

Zuz (WMF) (talk) 09:53, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Leadership Development Task Force: Your feedback is appreciated

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

More languages • Please help translate to your language

The Community Development team at the Wikimedia Foundation is supporting the creation of a global, community-driven Leadership Development Task Force. The purpose of the task force is to advise leadership development work.

The team is looking for feedback about the responsibilities of the Leadership Development Task Force. This Meta page shares the proposal for a Leadership Development Task Force and how you can help. Feedback on the proposal will be collected from 7 to 25 February 2022.

MNadzikiewicz (WMF) (talk) 09:53, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Folklore is extended till 15th March

Please help translate to your language

Greetings from Wiki Loves Folklore International Team,

We are pleased to inform you that Wiki Loves Folklore an international photographic contest on Wikimedia Commons has been extended till the 15th of March 2022. The scope of the contest is focused on folk culture of different regions on categories, such as, but not limited to, folk festivals, folk dances, folk music, folk activities, etc.

We would like to have your immense participation in the photographic contest to document your local Folk culture on Wikipedia. You can also help with the translation of project pages and share a word in your local language.

Best wishes,

International Team
Wiki Loves Folklore

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:50, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Request for adminship on Wikiquote (User: Ferien)

For your information an election for a new administrator for Wikiquote (WQ) is currently taking place . If you would like to participate or simply observe just click: WQ:Requests for adminship/Ferien. So far only admins and a member of the SWMT (m:Small Wiki Monitoring Team) have "voted" in this election which is open to all community members (I think?). WQ has 14 admins and had less than 500 active registered users (one or more edits) in January 2022.

According to WQ:RFA:

Current English Wikiquote policy is to grant administrator status to anyone who has been an active Wikiquote contributor for a while and is generally a known and trusted member of the community.

Ottawahitech (talk) 06:34, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Coming soon

Several improvements around templates

Hello, from March 9, several improvements around templates will become available on your wiki:

• Fundamental improvements of the VisualEditor template dialog (1, 2),
• Improvements to make it easier to put a template on a page (3) (for the template dialogs in VisualEditor, 2010 Wikitext and New Wikitext Mode),
• and improvements in the syntax highlighting extension CodeMirror (4, 5) (which is available on wikis with writing direction left-to-right).

All these changes are part of the “Templates” project by WMDE Technical Wishes. We hope they will help you in your work, and we would love to hear your feedback on the talk pages of these projects.

- Johanna Strodt (WMDE) 12:38, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Question:Images on content pages

Not everyone reading this “compendium of quotes” has a high speed internet connection and a lot of memory on the device they use to access WQ. Is there a limit to the number of images allowed on content pages? If so, should the limit be dIfferent for different types of pages?

I am sure this topic has already been discussed on WQ-VP before, however, due to my laziness I would to ask if there has ever been thought given to the practice of adding a vast amount of images to content pages created on WikiQuote (WQ). The problem I see (I am not an expert) is that the more images on a page the slower it is to load. Thanks in advance for your participation, Ottawahitech (talk) 16:43, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

No, there really has not been an established limit. But I will also say that under your Preferences, in the Gadgets section, there is a check box to 'Hide thumbnail images' precisely for the reason of someone having a slow connection - this eliminates the loading of images on pages. This might help. ~ UDScott (talk) 17:43, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback about the Board of Trustees elections

The Call for Feedback: Board of Trustees elections is now closed. This Call ran from 10 January and closed on 16 February 2022. The Call focused on three key questions and received broad discussion on Meta-wiki, during meetings with affiliates, and in various community conversations. The community and affiliates provided many proposals and discussion points. The reports are on Meta-wiki.

This information will be shared with the Board of Trustees and Elections Committee so they can make informed decisions about the upcoming Board of Trustees election. The Board of Trustees will then follow with an announcement after they have discussed the information.

Thank you to everyone who participated in the Call for Feedback to help improve Board election processes.

Best,

Movement Strategy and Governance

Zuz (WMF) (talk) 09:56, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Technical question: creating new content pages

One of the first things many WQ editors do before creating a new page of quotations is check to see what information can be found on other wmf-wikis on the subject. Existing content pages on Wikiquote (WQ) can be easily linked to their counterpart on Wikidata (WD) by clicking on the term Wikidata item under the Tools heading in the left hand menu all WQ pages. A (linked) list of such wmf-wikis can be found a at the bottom of each WD item.

Can a similar link to WD be provided for a WQ page that has not yet been created (a WQ redlink)? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 16:28, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

No, there's no way to link Wikidata items to pages that don't exist. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:05, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement guidelines ratification voting open from 7 to 21 March 2022

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

More languages • Please help translate to your language

Hello everyone,

The ratification voting process for the revised enforcement guidelines of the Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) is now open! Voting commenced on SecurePoll on 7 March 2022 and will conclude on 21 March 2022. Please read more on the voter information and eligibility details.

The Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) provides a baseline of acceptable behavior for the entire movement. The revised enforcement guidelines were published 24 January 2022 as a proposed way to apply the policy across the movement. You can read more about the UCoC project.

You can also comment on Meta-wiki talk pages in any language. You may also contact the team by email: ucocprojectwikimedia.org

Sincerely,

Movement Strategy and Governance

Wikimedia Foundation

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:22, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Has anyone voted? Ottawahitech (talk) 19:18, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

confused

How do you make something notable enough so it could go on wikiquote? ProtonLong Me (speak to me) 23:32, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

• @ProtonLong: Have you seen Wikiquote:Notability? That is a start, but the fact is, we haven't progressed very much as a project in terms of bringing structure to this quotation reference work. The German Wikiquote has a requirement that any quotations need to themselves be quoted in reliable and notable third party sources, which I think is a pretty good standard and one that I try to replicate with many quotations I add here by citing the original and tertiary sources. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:20, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
• See also WQ:WQ. A bit of history regarding structure here. - Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 16:26, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

  I am also confused. What does quotability have to do with notability? Notability determines whether a page on a topic should be created in the first place, and quotability determines which quotes can be included in an existing page. I think? Ottawahitech (talk) 17:15, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

  OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH thank you that clears my confusion. ProtonLong Me (speak to me) 19:25, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Alexei Navalny quote page

I noticed that the entire "quotes about" section of the Alexei Navalny page was entirely based on lengthy quotes from obscure partisan publications, saying that he is corrupt or involved in shadowy conspiracies. I wonder whether the page has been vandalized by a pro-Putin propagandist. I am sure that some people really have said negative things about Navalny, but it seems to stretch credulity that nobody ever said anything nice about Vladimir Putin's most famous domestic critic. Thank you very much for considering this concern!　--JohnDziak (talk · contributions)

Thank you for notifying us. Besides the situations around Mr. Navalny, and ongoing things in Russia and around, that kind of edits isn't be compatible with our WQ:BLP. I'll give a look to that article. --Aphaia (talk) 02:39, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I did not know that there was an official WQ policy regarding Biography of Living People. Time to check it out! Ottawahitech (talk) 14:55, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

on not only non-notable, but also unreliable publification/organization

In relation to the section on the above, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity seems a self-promotion of a conspiracy group to me. We have an established policies to deal with this kind? --Aphaia (talk) 03:44, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Please spend at least 2 or 3 minutes researching that group, before jumping to an unfounded conclusion that they are a conspiracy group. A look at the wikipedia page, or a bing or google search on Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIP) could give you a more informed perspective. Many of the former officers of the United States Intelligence Community in that group, have valuable insight to offer. Also, excuse me, but it does seem very hypocritical for you who appear to be pushing your own POV, to delete so much properly attributed material that libraryclerk191 posted. Agree that some of that (like on Zelensky) probably should have been deleted, but you deleted many more documented & relevant quotes that fit in quite well & helped me and others I know to get a more rounded view of the topics. Also, Aphaia it seems that you stooped quite low when you banned wikipedia editor libraryclerk0191 for a year, apparently without any warning and apparently no previous "offenses". I searched throughly & could find none whatsover, or is that the way present sytem works?
BTW - Isn't there a rule that wikipedians are to assume that their colleagues are working with good intentions in good faith? Did you decide that wasn't the case in that situation or are able to pick and choose which rules to follow? Thanks 2800:B20:111A:25B4:8545:A814:198C:7E7A 03:09, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Folklore 2022 ends tomorrow

International photographic contest Wiki Loves Folklore 2022 ends on 15th March 2022 23:59:59 UTC. This is the last chance of the year to upload images about local folk culture, festival, cuisine, costume, folklore etc on Wikimedia Commons. Watch out our social media handles for regular updates and declaration of Winners.

(Facebook , Twitter , Instagram)

The writing competition Feminism and Folklore will run till 31st of March 2022 23:59:59 UTC. Write about your local folk tradition, women, folk festivals, folk dances, folk music, folk activities, folk games, folk cuisine, folk wear, folklore, and tradition, including ballads, folktales, fairy tales, legends, traditional song and dance, folk plays, games, seasonal events, calendar customs, folk arts, folk religion, mythology etc. on your local Wikipedia. Check if your local Wikipedia is participating

A special competition called Wiki Loves Falles is organised in Spain and the world during 15th March 2022 till 15th April 2022 to document local folk culture and Falles in Valencia, Spain. Learn more about it on Catalan Wikipedia project page.

We look forward for your immense co-operation.

Thanks Wiki Loves Folklore international Team MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:40, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Dilemma: attributing work to globally banned user

I would like to put a table that contains useful information on my userpage, but I have a dilemma. Sometime ago I was advised that interacting with a globally banned user is a sanctionable offense, but could not any documentation saying so anywhere in wmf-land. The table was created years ago by a banned user.

Since I seem to be a magnet for all sorts of blockable offences, I am hesitant to proceed. I would like to ascertain that posting a table created by a globally banned user is not a sactionable offence, and would appreciate the community’s thoughts on this matter. Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 21:06, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

I wouldn't think it's a problem. Is there anything in the table that relates to why the person was banned? I'm guessing not. (Also I don't think that "interacting with a globally banned user" is sanctionable, unless there is proxying involved.) We often allow occasional good edits by bad actors, although it is useful for a user in good standing to put a "null edit" on top, or else revert and replace under the non-banned person's identity. Also, not all WMF-banned users are equal: sometimes people get banned for the way they treat others, not the content of their edits. Others are incapable of any collaborative venture at all (I can think of a current example we've been seeing every day for a while now). Anyway I think you're fine. Curious to know what others think. Antandrus (talk) 22:07, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Speaking as an admin, I cannot imagine why you would be banned for this. Note also that tables of factual information are not subject to copyright, so it's entirely possible that depending on the contents of this table, it's not something that requires attribution anyway. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:33, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you both for the vote of confidence (I think?). Unfortunately it appears no one else will stick their necks out? Ottawahitech (talk) 20:36, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the problem is. Please give attribution if it's required. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:54, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Ottawahitech, as a veteran editor I assure you it has not been the way of us, English Wikiquote community, to delete all past contributions of projectwide banned users just because these editors are permanently banned from editing this project. As for other projects, we ordinarily wouldn't dig much deeper. If WMF intervenes legally, or we notice serious concerns such as law enforcement involved, the story went and will go differently, but hopefully you don't argue such a case? :-) --Aphaia (talk) 07:17, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Update on Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement guidelines ratification vote (as of 18 March)

Dear all,

About 11 days ago the ratification voting for the Enforcement Guidelines of the UCoC started. There are three more days left before the voting closes. So far, 1569 voters from across several projects have cast their votes.

Out of the 26 eligible voters on En Wikiquote, none of these have cast their vote yet. If you haven’t voted, now is the time. Please vote or share your feedback on the guidelines from the perspective of this project here

Best, Zuz (WMF) (talk) 15:32, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

WQ pushing pro-western POV, severely unbalanced

Clearly WQ is pushing the mainstream, u.s. government's version of the current world conflict between the USA & Russia. Apparently attempts to provide balance with sourced quotations from notable people, that tell Russia's side of the story, including the ways that China, and other Russian allies see it are ignored, or apparently not allowed. That's a great way to dumb down & mislead the people who come to WQ for information, for truth. Gauging from the main page's quotes of the day, Hitler's Big Lie propaganda strategy is at work at WQ and in the MSM like never before. Quotations that indicate that well informed people of Russia & her allies view Russia's actions as an attempt to end the war, war crimes & crimes against humanity that started in Ukraine in 2014 are apparently not allowed. In the view of many, the US orchestrated coup against Ukraine's Russia friendly president and the installation of a cia controlled actor/puppet in 2014 was actually when this war started. Ukraine has in the last 8 years constantly shelled the Donbass region of Ukraine & killed over 14,000 there, because they were unable to support the US installed, anti-russian appointees.
The USA's big lie, is that Putin is a monster... guilty as charged with no trial or hearing that might explain the history, Putin's attempts to join NATO, to befriend the West, Putin's warnings re: Nato expansion with lines drawn in the sand, the USA's provocations, how President Putin and millions of others see it are not available here. It seems that the scholars and Russia experts in the USA & all around the world agree that the USA was provoked and that the USA, despite the information blackout in the MSM -are screaming that Putin is the villain - the pot calling the kettle black. WQ is urged not to violate it's own rules by siding with, what history has shown to be - an empire based on lies, that began with genocide against the Native Americans & slavery. The truth will set us free from permanent hostilities intentionally maintained to keep the people divided, the ruling elite in power, and the war bucks flowing. WQ should welcome conflicting POVs from people on all sides of conflicts. 2800:B20:111A:25B4:94FD:A844:10E4:7845 15:58, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Prior to writing this wall of text, did you read Wikiquote:Neutral point of view? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:44, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you @Koavf for providing the link to the policy on NPOV.

When I first arrived a WQ a couple of years ago I received the usual wall-of-text welcome message which told me to be BOLD, so I dove right in. Now I welcome and appreciate any tidbit of information that previous generations of editors made available to us. Ottawahitech (talk) 02:50, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

@ 2800:B20:111A:25B4:94FD:A844:10E4:7845,

Re: WQ should welcome conflicting POVs from people on all sides of conflicts

I believe that most active participants on WQ welcome conflicting POVs from all sorts of people. Yes it is true that due to the shortage of participants on this project some pages do not get the optimum attention, but we have to do the best we can with what we have. Any ideas on how to fix this? Ottawahitech (talk) 02:32, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

• Just to add, I believe one way some participants at WQ have been getting around the NPOV policy is using images that give prominence to a certain POV. Ottawahitech (talk) 14:38, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Join the Community Resilience and Sustainability Conversation Hour with Maggie Dennis

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

More languages • Please help translate to your language

The Community Resilience and Sustainability team at the Wikimedia Foundation is hosting a conversation hour led by its Vice President Maggie Dennis.

Topics within scope for this call include Movement Strategy, Board Governance, Trust and Safety, the Universal Code of Conduct, Community Development, and Human Rights. Come with your questions and feedback, and let's talk! You can also send us your questions in advance.

The meeting will be on 24 March 2022 at 15:00 UTC (check your local time).

You can read details on Meta-wiki.

Best, Zuz (WMF) (talk) 11:40, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Kyiv vs. Kiev

While I know that there is some edit-warring going on right now centered around the correct name for this Ukrainian city, I thought maybe we could discuss it here instead. To me, the name preferred by Ukrainians (and which appears to be adopted by many Western media outlets now) is Kyiv. To that end I, for one, would recommend its use in describing the city. That being said, where it gets more difficult is when the city's name is within a quote. In this case, I would recommend that whatever spelling was used in the original quote be used - as with anything else, we should not seek to change the quote simply because preferences have changed. To me this is a compromise that could work. Any thoughts from others? ~ UDScott (talk) 20:45, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Uncoincidentally I was just thinking about the same thing, and I agree. Let's use 'Kyiv' except where it is within a quote (keep the original spelling). Antandrus (talk) 20:56, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

And add -- I would suggest applying the same rule to other Ukraine places (Dnipro vs Dnepropetrovsk, Odesa vs Odessa, etc.) Antandrus (talk) 20:57, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

• The practice at WQ is to follow in the footsteps of enwiki, I think?

If so, enwiki has been using Kyiv since 2019 2020 following an exhaustive Request For Comment. The community consensus at enwiki on this last RFC, was to switch from Kiev to Kyiv. So, I vote Kyiv, but only in situations where the city's name is not in a direct quote.

BTW @UDScott, thanks for bringing this issue to the Village Pump, I was not aware of this edit-warring on WQ. Ottawahitech (talk) 13:12, 23 March 2022 (UTC) updated (correct link to follow) Ottawahitech (talk) 14:35, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

No problem - and I think we are in agreement - I would use 'Kyiv' except when 'Kiev' is used within a documented quote. The problem in the latest edit war seems to be that any use of 'Kiev', whether or not it is from a documented quote, appears to be unacceptable to some users. ~ UDScott (talk) 13:46, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

FYI I just discovered Category:People from Kiev. Ottawahitech (talk) 20:11, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

I moved these over to the proper category and made this a redirect. ~ UDScott (talk) 12:54, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your work, UDScott. And also for pointing it up. I fully support we use Kyiv overall, except documented quotations which each their original author/speaker has shown their own wording which we'd greatly esteem. --Aphaia (talk) 07:24, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

• Kyiv obviously, except in quotes where the spelling used in the quote should be kept. Kyiv is by far the common name here, and we should use that. That said, the edit warring that has been going on has been due to the banned LTA who has been targeting this project lately. JavaHurricane 13:40, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Request a protect on this page

Torture, an LTA kept edit-warring against common editors on this page. Please give a semi-protect to this page, many thanksPavlov2 (talk) 03:39, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

(Non-admin comment) Page protected by Koavf. JavaHurricane 13:43, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Leadership Development Working Group: Apply to join! (14 March to 10 April 2022)

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

More languages • Please help translate to your language

Hello everyone,

Thank you to everyone who participated in the feedback period for the Leadership Development Working Group initiative. A summary of the feedback can be found on Meta-wiki. This feedback will be shared with the working group to inform their work. The application period to join the Working Group is now open and will close on April 10, 2022. Please review the information about the working group, share with community members who might be interested, and apply if you are interested.

Thank you,

From the Community Development team
MNadzikiewicz (WMF) (talk) 09:55, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Should a list of WQ-admins be included in our welcome message?

I know many wikquotians participate or have participated in other wmf-wikis. When I visit foreign-wikis I always like to ascertain that the admins there are the friendly sort, so as not to get into trouble (yes I know I am paranoid:-) When I first started dabbling at Commons the welcome message I recieved included a link to the list of all Commons admins. This also came in handy later when I needed to contact a friendly Admin.

Does the WQ community believe we should add such a link to our standard welcome message? Thanks in advance for any thoughts you have. Ottawahitech (talk) 19:03, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Honestly saying, I forgot why we include them. I also forget it was written prior to the creation of WQ:AN or not. There would have been a historical reason I hope, or not from the first time. Anyway if you think it's now redundant, be bold. --Aphaia (talk) 07:27, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Another reason is: Frequent participants need to know where they can get answers to common questions (not everybody likes to use the Village Pump). Some of the best advice can be found on the user-talk pages of the more active admins. Comments? Ottawahitech (talk) 14:51, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Question about & page & quotes about living people

Hello Wikiquote editors: Could one of the admins please take a look at: Mafia state & let me know if it looks ok? and if not, what needs to be changed? Any suggestions? The sources referenced have potentially embarrassing and/or incriminating information about living people, but in the WQ page, their names were obscured in an effort to avoid breaking any rules. Any advice will be greatly appreciated. All the best, AB2022 Alphabravo2022 (talk) 03:26, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

I've done some cleanup to the page - I sorted the quotes by the authors. I also started to work on the individual quotes, but further cleanup is necessary. The names should not be removed from quotes (or abbreviated). Also, some of the "quotes" are entire paragraphs from an article, with mixed quotes by individuals and reporting by the article's author. I would not mix the two. ~ UDScott (talk) 20:48, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks a million! Cleaned it up & removed the clean up flag. P.S. If anyone notices mistakes i make or have made, please feel free to let me know. Prefer to do things right the first time but... Advice from those who know better, will always be appreciated here. --Alphabravo2022 (talk) 21:58, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

where

so I have a question, so like I just got banned on Wikimedia Commons, and Wikipedia for no reason at all? but basically where would I ask why I was banned? —This unsigned comment is by ProtonLong (talk • contribs) .

Wikipedia is published in 300 languages, but you aren't banned on the English one. You were blocked on Commons due to a CheckUser investigation. Have you used a different screen name while editing WMF projects? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:36, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

I accidently made another account, that's it. ProtonLong Me (speak to me) 23:40, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

My sister made ProtonShort ProtonLong Me (speak to me) 23:43, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

@ProtonLong: Everyone makes mistakes. If you somehow made two accounts and maybe you forgot your previous password, etc., then the solution is to try to use the original account and not use this one. Do you need help with that? Did you use the ProtonShort account or did only your sister use it? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:45, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

My sister uses ProtonShort but "The Health Inspector" is the account I accidently made ProtonLong Me (speak to me) 23:47, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Gotcha. So I recommend that you only use one account (this is a requirement). If you want to use your original account, but you want it renamed, that can also be done on our sister project Meta-Wiki. Do you want to rename your original account? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:54, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

The account I'm using is my original account, I think I'll keep my account name the same, but like is there a way to delete "The Health Inspector" the account I accidently created? ProtonLong Me (speak to me) 00:03, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Gotcha. I recommend that you go to m:Steward requests/Username changes and explain that, so that your two accounts can be merged. This will keep you from having any of these further blocks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:06, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Also, I don't want this account renamed because it's kind of funny, my sister is younger than me so she's ProtonShort and I'm older than her, so I'm ProtonLong. ProtonLong Me (speak to me) 00:07, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

So like, could you give me a little example of what I would put there? ProtonLong Me (speak to me) 00:15, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

You could write: "Please see this thread: https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wikiquote:Village_pump#where. Sorry, but I need help getting unblocked on Wikimedia Commons because I was confused about creating alternate accounts. Please help me. Thanks." —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:21, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

That's actually really helpful thank you! ProtonLong Me (speak to me) 00:23, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

One last question, how would I fill out this:

=== Oldname ===

{{SRUC

|status =

|domain = global

|Oldname =

|Newname =

|reason = (your remarks here)

}}

ProtonLong Me (speak to me) 00:26, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

status = don't change / domain = global / Oldname = the first account you registered / Newname = the second account you registered / reason = the message that I wrote above. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:28, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Okay, thank you! ProtonLong Me (speak to me) 00:33, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

I sent it. ProtonLong Me (speak to me) 00:37, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Quote of the day: Suggest it be neutralized or temporarily discontinued

Hello Co-workers:

I am writing to suggest that the quote of the day be transformed in one way or another. I am suggesting two possibilities:

1. Become neutral, rather than pushing a POV; or
2. Discontinue that space temporarily.

• Apparently ALL the quotes used there since the conflict has been presented as "the big news of the day", have been 100% supportive of the western mainstream/corporate "narrative" (POV) which largely consists of emotionally provocative, unproven accusations - made by politicians, the main stream media, and apparently public relations firms, many of whom, arguably have histories of dark deception - for the sake of money and power, and "freedom" not for and by the people, but for money worshippers, despicable tyrants, war profiteers, some of whom, appear to be genuine enemies of truth & democracy. The way the quote of the day feature has been used lately demonstrates perfectly, to my mind - an extreme example of pushing a POV - to the exclusion of all others, and that does not seem right or good. Some would view such views expressed there as fanatical blatherings. With all due respect, I am not questioning the intentions of the one who selects & publishes those quotes. Clearly many very good people accept without question what they hear, when it is repeated non-stop. They can't be blamed. Still, there are historical precedents (like Germany ~80 yrs ago) that we should/must learn from - if we want to move forward. Certain things can not/should not be swept under the rug. Sometimes the bull must be taken by the horns. As it is & has been since the conflict replaced corona virus as 'the top disturbing news story' of the day, the situation at Wikiquotes of the day makes one wonder, is the basic mainstream narrative: (Zelenskyy is good; Putin is bad) reflective of the view of the entire group here? Do all of us hate & distrust Mr. Putin, while worshipping & believing without question the words of Mr. Zelenskyy? We should seek the truth and question what we're told. We should not behave like mindless parrots. We should follow the rules here, we should strive to avoid hypocrisy! We should be bold, open minded, and skeptical of what we hear from war profiteers & people with documented, questionable histories. When we see editors ignoring or overlooking the rules of this project, we should speak up -with the goal of improving this operation. Some say the good thing about conflicts, is that when they are handled intelligently, they lead to better understanding & harmony. That's my 2 cents. Your thoughts? Thank you & best wishes. Alphabravo2022 (talk) 16:41, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

• @Alphabravo2022: No one can predict what quotes will be on WQ. You can help by adding quotes that you believe should be included, and you can participate in choosing the QOTD, I think? Ottawahitech (talk) Ottawahitech (talk) 17:02, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

  Do you seriously think so? Surely you jest! :-) Alphabravo2022 (talk) 14:38, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

  No jest. The same works for democracy: if no one votes democracy does not exist. Ottawahitech (talk) 14:52, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

  That sounds very nice, however for some analysts/truth seekers, "democracy" is an untried concept in the west. There are many good reasons to believe our system is run by, despite all the contradictory hype, a totalitarian regime, cleverly disguised as a democracy. As far as voting goes, in a nation that many with an abundance of good reasons, also view the totalitarian regime as a mafia state, our votes don't really matter in the 'important' elections, as long as totally insane madmen (and their minions) are counting the votes in their dream world version of reality. That's a macro of the micro - where here, admins who "know" that their views (& whatever stories CNN & MSNBC are pushing) are correct, aim to systematically eliminate all dissent -by hypocritically charging those who dare to disagree with the "official narrative" with pushing POVs & being propaganda agents for Russia. :-) Maybe an honest mistake, maybe not. In any event, that too, as they say will pass. Evolution, like truth is coming, & can't be stopped. Even when 500 people believe a sack full of lies, they are still lies. Only by facing the truth will we make progress. That is inevitable. :-) Alphabravo2022 (talk) 15:30, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

  @Alphabravo2022 I am not sure what you mean by our system is run by, despite all the contradictory hype, a totalitarian regime, cleverly disguised as a democracy.

  Whose system are you referring to? Surely not the United States'? After all WQ is a resource for all people of the world? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 20:13, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────────┘
This thread gives interesting insight into the now-blocked sockmaster behind Alphabravo. They saw themselves as outshouted by bad people, so they came to Wikiquote to shout their own point of view. For example, by adding six different quotes from Philip Giraldi to the Jeffrey Epstein article, all of them claiming that Epstein was a spy for Israel. They skillfully used images to call attention to their claims, presented as facts. I am glad they are gone, but the cleanup continues. HouseOfChange (talk) 13:47, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Hey HouseOfChange: Giraldi is a widely known & respected former CIA agent who is doing the best he can with what he's got. Your attempts to belittle him and others is just POV pushing. You Can't elevate yourself by trying to put others down. 24.214.70.31 16:21, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

• @HouseOfChange, There has been a fair amount of discussion on WQ:AN about this "now-blocked sockmaster". However, it appears that the determination of this user's sockmaster status, was done behind closed doors with no input from the WQ community, I think? Also unfortunately I cannot even include a diff to this discussion at AN, maybe someone else here can? Ottawahitech (talk) 17:39, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Stewards tell us that the same IP address signed into more than one account--that's socking, if done deceptively, as it was. The IP information is "behind closed doors" to protect the sockmaster's privacy. If you want to propose some new rules about how socks should be looked for and blocked, why not start a section about that here at Village Pump? HouseOfChange (talk) 19:00, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

@HouseOfChange, Do you honestly believe it is good policy to silence those you disagree with, instead of allowing them to have their say? Please click on User:24.214.70.31 who posted a message right above your message and tell me why they were blocked. Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 03:52, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Please AGF. The policy on sockpuppets is clear, and I support it. Editors are here to work on a project. Disruptive and deceptive editors make the project worse for everybody. There is much wisdom at w:WP:ISNOT: "Wikipedia is not an anarchy or a forum for free speech...Wikipedia is not a democracy...Wikipedia is not a battleground." Of COURSE the sockmaster claims they were blocked for their opinions but, in fact, they are lying. People don't get a permanent block for POV-pushing, adding dodgy sources, etc. People do get a permanent block for socking. HouseOfChange (talk) 14:40, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

CSI effect

I have no particular interest in judging anyone's actions in this dispute, however for the record, sockpuppet investigations can be inconclusive. I'm assuming you all know that IP addresses are quite often shared and that psychologically profiling accounts in an attempt to establish shared patterns in their behavior is a social science; it's not the smoking gun of finding matching alleles in two DNA samples using DNA profiling, it's more like stop and frisking everyone above or below a certain height of weight (or most likely skin tone), because you don't care if you get it wrong more often than right, as long as you eventually get it right. What part of that description of this process makes it sound like it is infallably accurate or that the stewards would agree with eachothers' interpretations of findings 100% of the time? I'm surprised there's no Rational Wiki article explaining the amount of guesswork involved in the science of sockpuppet investigations.
I have had dozens of accounts falsely attributed to me that suggest my only interests in editing wikis consist of adding categories to obscure Japanese anime and video games, it would seem that not once do these accounts ever add anything non fictional, which is what the majority of my edits across the non comedy wikis consist of. I transcribe Google Books and scientific journals to create gigantic additions to Wikiquote pages for incredibly controversial topics like abortion, do you have any idea how long these pages take to create? Where would I find the additional time to be wasting edit warring over which categories to add to a cartoon when editing Wikiquote takes me hundreds of hours? I'm a former administrator on Uncyclopedia, does it really seem like vandalism is my idea of a good joke? I am the leading contributor to abortion topics on Wikiquote, so trust me, I understand the desire to maintain people's privacy (and safety), however I would argue from my own experience, that at their worst, sock puppet investigations rely on unfalsifiable claims of identity fraud and propogate a form of digital Fregoli delusion.
Also, FYI, people can get a permanent block for socking; it's not a guarantee, I'm not sure what justification Kalki uses for having had multiple accounts or why that is considered different from socking, but if you would like to attempt to have Kalki blocked, either over past sock puppeting or over the current state of the QotD (QotD being the original subject of this thread), than I would recommend making that intention clear and formally declaring it. Who knows, it could work. CensoredScribe (talk) 15:41, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Ottawahitech, that IP was blocked by me as it was clearly block evasion. --Ferien (talk) 18:00, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Ottawahitech, why did you put now-blocked sockmaster in inverted commas? It's not an opinion, it's been confirmed. The user had made thousands of POV edits on many accounts that the community is now having to cleanup (Wikiquote:Administrators' noticeboard#Clean up on Aisle Five). Just because the checkuser data wasn't shown to the community - which it never would be by the way, even if we had checkusers of our own - doesn't mean the blocks were done without cooperation from the community or that they are entirely invalid. The Libraryclerk0191 was already blocked for a while before the investigation and using other accounts to evade blocks isn't acceptable, especially continnuing the behaviour that they were blocked for. --Ferien (talk) 17:58, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Selected pages: Alien

Considering the 1979 film Alien has more published research papers written about it than any other film, and is otherwise regularly listed in numerous internet article film rankings, would it be appropriate to add to the main page? When I asked for Game of Thrones to be added to the entries for television there was no debate regarding its overwhelming popularity, so I'm assuming a similar lack of conflict regarding this undisputable pop culture phenomenon. CensoredScribe (talk) 00:44, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

@CensoredScribe I never(?) looked at the Main page, at least not the part that is below the wq:QOTD. Looking forward to any comments by others. Ottawahitech (talk) 14:56, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

That's not surprising, other than the QotD the only other part of the main page that changes on a regular basis is the new pages, everything else moves at a glacial pace: if I'm not mistaken my asking for the addition of Game of Thrones to the list of selected pages for television is probably the last change made to any of the selected pages lists.
I have no particular interest in watching GoT, and could probably write a doctoral thesis elaborating why, however I recognize the fact that "For the record, if the Game of Thrones audience made up a country, it would be 62nd most populated in the world.", so I wouldn't argue that it shouldn't be included on the list, though I might want to add The Wire and Breaking Bad. I prefer to justify my contributions through largely uncontested statistical figures such as impact factor: here are two articles from 2012 and 2015 which attempt to determine the most academically referenced works of film and television, “Which Pop Culture Property Do Academics Study the Most?” and “Which Sci-Fi Films Get Cited in Research?”, I’m assuming the rankings are still more or less accurate, and that Alien and Buffy the Vampire Slayer are the most referenced film and TV show in academic journals. CensoredScribe (talk) 22:49, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Tips needed: Finding sources for a particular quote made by a particular person

Today I discovered a little WQ-gem that I had never seen before. Normally I would have just moved on and not stopped by to see if the page had interesting quotes. But this one has only one quote. It is not an w:wp:orphan, but according to its pageview statics it is not widely visited.

Make a long story short, I really liked the one quote and decided to look for more quotes by and about the same subject.

WQ is usually a good source for quotes in my experience, and so are other wmf wiki-sisters. But today I decided to see what google had to offer: clicked the website at the top of the google-list, chose the top quote on the page and tried to add it to our WQ page. This website did not provide any backup info such as date etc, but since I liked this quote so much I decided to add it hoping someone else would find the missing info, if not today, then maybe a few years from now. Lo and behold when I tried to publish my edit I got a stern warning from our spam filter.

So here I am writing this w:wp:TLDR asking others to share tips about how they find a source for a particular quote made by a particular person. Anyone up to it? Ottawahitech (talk) 15:44, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

If Google doesn't quickly turn up a source for a quote (string of text) then I don't know a good answer. Answering a question I do know how to answer, the en-wiki article's sources are a good place to find some quotes. Googling the person's name and some relevant topic often yields citable RS with good quotes. Google Books with preview is a great source for published authors. HouseOfChange (talk) 02:43, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Let's talk about the Desktop Improvements

Hello!

Have you noticed that some wikis have a different desktop interface? Are you curious about the next steps? Maybe you have questions or ideas regarding the design or technical matters?

Join an online meeting with the team working on the Desktop Improvements! It will take place on 29 April 2022 at 13:00 UTC and 18:00 UTC on Zoom. Click here to join. Meeting ID: 88045453898. Dial by your location.

Agenda

• Update on the recent developments
• Questions and answers, discussion

Format

The meeting will not be recorded or streamed. Notes will be taken in a Google Docs file. Olga Vasileva (the Product Manager) will be hosting this meeting. The presentation part will be given in English.

We can answer questions asked in English, French, Italian, and Polish. If you would like to ask questions in advance, add them on the talk page or send them to sgrabarczuk@wikimedia.org.

At this meeting, both Friendly space policy and the Code of Conduct for Wikimedia technical spaces apply. Zoom is not subject to the WMF Privacy Policy.

We hope to see you! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 00:35, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Just a note for anyone interested in this topic:

There an active discussion about it at wikt:Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2022/April#Let's_talk_about_the_Desktop_Improvements where you can participate (if you are not blocked at wiktionary). Ottawahitech (talk) 14:55, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Coming soon: Improvements for templates

Fundamental changes in the template dialog.

Hello, more changes around templates are coming to your wiki soon:

The template dialog in VisualEditor and in the 2017 Wikitext Editor (beta) will be improved fundamentally: This should help users understand better what the template expects, how to navigate the template, and how to add parameters.

• project page, talk page

In syntax highlighting (CodeMirror extension), you can activate a colorblind-friendly color scheme with a user setting.

• project page, talk page

Deployment is planned for May 10. This is the last set of improvements from WMDE Technical Wishes' focus area “Templates”.

We would love to hear your feedback on our talk pages!

-- Johanna Strodt (WMDE) 11:13, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Editing news 2022 #1

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this multilingual newsletter

New editors were more successful with this new tool.

The New topic tool helps editors create new ==Sections== on discussion pages. New editors are more successful with this new tool. You can read the report. Soon, the Editing team will offer this to all editors at the 20 Wikipedias that participated in the test. You will be able to turn it off at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing-discussion.

Whatamidoing (WMF) 18:55, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

New competition on English Wikipedia and related SiteNotice request

A popular article writing competition CEE Spring (about Central and Eastern Europe; now with special subcategory about Esperanto) is happening on the English Wikipedia until the 31st May 2022. I warmly invite you to participate, write some article and win a valuable prize! If you have question, I will happily answer it on the competition page talk.

Also, for more wide outreach, I have just asked for a CentralNotice, which should appear also in this project. If you have a comment on the request, you are welcome to write it on the request page. --KuboF Hromoslav (talk) 18:29, 3 May 2022 (UTC)