| This is an
archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
current talk page. |
Edit 1 per, you guessed it, Adagio News Day. —
La Pianista
Speak ·
Hear
04:48, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
- Strong support - the link to WP:WARN makes sense, and I 100% agree with the second link. After all, true elegance shows itself in universal politeness and basic human civility towards everyone. It sets a good example, in short. —
La Pianista
Speak ·
Hear
04:48, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
- Strong Support - Per my and La Pianista's above. Aren't we cute when we agree?
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
12:06, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose! Eagles, fishes,... we all are animals... I've to agree (^__^). Seriously, it's a good phrase, but I don't like the links. How about: The
fishes (vandals) that
nibble (abuse) at every
bait (vandalism or, as an alternative,
Wikipedia:Most vandalized pages) will be
caught (administrator intervention against vandalism)??? –
pjoef (
talk •
contribs)
09:03, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Reopened - no consensus.
Simply south (
talk)
21:42, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Approved for
Wikipedia:Motto of the day/April 29, 2009.
Queenie
16:47, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
I don't know whether to use
→ or
→.
Simply south (
talk)
12:22, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Conditional Weak Support: Per your edit summary, a little bland, if it was changed to
I'm lovin
it that would gain my weak support. Also, I think
→
Spitfire
Tally-ho!
12:26, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose - (EDIT CONFLICT) I don't really like the motto- crass comercialism is something to be avoided usually, especially tired fast food slogans. Additionally, the link doesn't fit. Either Spitfire's suggested links or South's suggested revision would result in my upgrading to Weak Oppose. Additionally, I think the McDonald's link would be more appropriate than the Timberlake one for attribution purposes.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
12:38, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Rejected in favour of edit 2.
Queenie
18:35, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Edit one Per Simply south.
Spitfire
Tally-ho!
12:40, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Rejected in favour of edit 2.
Queenie
18:35, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
edit 2. Complete change of direction and a line that is often repeated in the song. And i am not doing this for commercialism.
Simply south (
talk)
22:19, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Approved per weak consensus for
Wikipedia:Motto of the day/April 28, 2009.
Queenie
18:35, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm on the wall with this one. Maybe some consensus on the links will help. BW21.--
Black
Watch
21
21:58, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Approved per consensus.
Simply south (
talk)
21:42, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Cautiously trying my hand at a little humour, although I like to tell myself it displays a very deep message. More then ever feel free to oppose this one.
Spitfire
Tally-ho!
21:25, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
- Weak Oppose - I understand what you're trying to say, but I don't like the imagery of vandals as eagles and constructive editors as weasels. Incidentally, I have taken the liberty of correcting the spelling of "
weasel."
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
11:26, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose: Same thoughts as our motto lord. The eagle is usually seen as a creature of strength and majesty, while the weasel is as a treacherous one and... well, a weasel. Ooh.. big words There is also the fact that Wikipedians don't like
weasels :)
Chamal
talk
12:21, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
- I think what you mean to say is "It is claimed that some people say that many Wikipedians have suggested that, argueably, Weasels may be generally considered to have been shown by studies to be in some manner thought to be detrimental to what is believed to be an otherwise important project to some." Something like that? :-)
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
12:41, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Declined in favour of edit 1.
Simply south (
talk)
Edit 1 Linking to The Office, where I first heard the original. Also correcting Nutiket's smudge in otherwise perfect perfection (won't he be happy at hearing that), in his linking to WikiProject Weasels instead of WP:WEASEL (upon further thought changing that to WP:VAND, since weasel words don't merit a block per se). —
La Pianista
Speak ·
Hear
04:44, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Approved edit 1 per consensus.
Simply south (
talk)
21:42, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Ahh, the nice simple ones, as always, feel free to oppose, I don't mind
Spitfire
Tally-ho!
21:00, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
- Support. Encouraging idea. ~
A
H
1(
T
C
U)
00:34, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Borderline between weak and normal support - I like the message, and the links are fine, but the quote is a little... wierd. Are grains of sand often used in watchmaking? Do we have any watchmakers in the room? Or at least a watch repairman?
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
11:30, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
- Weak support - I like the links, but the quote itself is a bit
–
Juliancolton
Tropical
Cyclone
14:22, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
- Weak support - It has tremendous potential, but I don't see how grains of sand equates with watch-making. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
La Pianista (
talk •
contribs)
- Hesitant Suggestion - Maybe "gear" or something like that instead of "grain of sand," though normally I am not cool with changing an actual quotation...
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
12:07, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
- Comment: I think that by watch he may have meant what we know as "hour glass"?
Spitfire
Tally-ho!
14:46, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
- Reply - I doubt it. They did have watches during his time, and I don't think they used sand.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
19:04, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
- Reply: I think that it means that if even a teeny grain of sand gets into a watch, it upsets the whole balance. I had that experience.. -_-
Queenie
19:20, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
- Reply - If that is the intended meaning of the quote, then the link is definitely inappropriate, as it would imply that editors can frak up the whole watch. Well, I mean, they CAN, but that's not a message we want to send...
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
19:50, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
- Support! So "puritan" and "holy" (^__^). This quote is about sin: "No sin is small. —It is against an infinite God, and may have consequences immeasurable.— No grain of sand is small in the mechanism of a watch." As Spitfire correctly said, watch is referred to a hourglass (sand clock). –
pjoef (
talk •
contribs)
09:28, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
- In that case, I change my opinion to strong oppose; we shuold not be sending such a negative message. I can't think of better links off the top of my head, though.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
12:31, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
- weak support --
88wolfmaster (
talk)
23:44, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
- How about changing the first link to
WP:WAR or
WP:DISRUPT? —
Jake
Wartenberg
01:50, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Declined in favour of edit 1.
Simply south (
talk)
21:42, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Edit 1, per
Jake Wartenberg.
Approved edit 1 per consensus.
Simply south (
talk)
21:42, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Another longer one, I'm happier with the links here, although feel free to disagree! By the way, this is qouted from David Augsburger, only wikipedia doesn't have an article on him, so in this case how do I reflect this in the motto? Hah, guess I won't need to if this never gets through but still, any help is appreciated.
Spitfire
Tally-ho!
20:47, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
- Support. Good idea because it shows that having a little AGF is better than blocking a user outright when the decision is difficult. ~
A
H
1(
T
C
U)
00:37, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
- Comment: ah well, I made a page on him, just have to hope it doesn't get deleted >.<
Spitfire
Tally-ho!
09:25, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
- Support - I like the motto, the message and the links. It does seem likely that that page will get deleted on notability grounds as soon as one of the
content burglars notices it; if that happens, I would suggest turning the page into a redirect to the appropriate section of either
List of Fuller Theological Seminary people or
Claremont School of Theology.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
12:12, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
- Weak support - It's okay, but there are some issues with the links. For example, the ability to block != power. Also, I'm not too keen on the link to "hard decisions". –
Juliancolton
Tropical
Cyclone
14:20, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
- Support! Spitfire, I don't know him very well, but I think that his book The Freedom of Forgiveness must be included in the
Bibliography section.
Also, add {{
talkheader}} and {{
WPBiography}} to the article's
talk page. Done 09:53, 16 March 2009 (UTC) I've also added the template {{
Persondata}} to
the article, but it's empty. Do you know his date and place of birth? –
pjoef (
talk •
contribs)
10:13, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
- Unrelated comment: Thanks Pjoef, I added The Freedom of Forgiveness, however, I do not know his date nor place of birth and none of the sources seem to provide it, but if I come across it I'll remember to add it, regards
Spitfire
Tally-ho!
12:24, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Approved per consensus.
Simply south (
talk)
21:42, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
I don't know if it has been used yet, but it is here if necessary. –
pjoef (
talk •
contribs)
08:14, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
- You don't need to be sorry. I admit my guilt. I searched for the Latin phrase but not for the English translation /o\. –
pjoef (
talk •
contribs)
10:31, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Approved per consensus *sigh*.
Simply south (
talk)
21:42, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
This is a commonly used phrase which I'm sure must have been used here before. Any suggestions for better links?
Wikiert
T
S
C
16:35, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
Weak Support: I like it, whilst being bold is good, it also does no harm to be a little discreet, which this motto encourages, the motto is maybe a little simple, but thats not necessarily a bad thing
Spitfire
Tally-ho!
16:55, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
Rejected in favour of Edit 1.
Queenie
16:26, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Edit 1, as suggested by La Pianista above.
Wikiert
T
S
C
15:48, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Approved for
Wikipedia:Motto of the day/April 22, 2009.
Queenie
16:26, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
--
88wolfmaster (
talk)
23:54, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Approved for
Wikipedia:Motto of the day/April 21, 2009.
Queenie
17:40, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
I have a feeling this'll be shot down at once, but I'll
have a go anyway.
Queenie
18:43, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Approved per weak consensus.
Simply south (
talk)
14:56, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
→ Cut out the
poetry, Watson.
From
The Adventure of the Retired Colourman. Bland?
Chamal
talk
04:11, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Approved for
Wikipedia:Motto of the day/April 19, 2009.
Queenie
20:00, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Taken from
Wikipedia:About. This page is running dry again, so I added two mottos this Monday, and I hope they are good enough. Have a wonderful week. –
pjoef (
talk •
contribs)
08:45, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Declined - no consensus.
Simply south (
talk)
11:45, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
This one's from
Sherlock Holmes in
The Dying Detective. Better links, anyone?
Chamal
talk
04:37, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Approved per
WP:SNOW.
Simply south (
talk)
22:27, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Life lies before you like fresh fallen snow. Be careful where you walk, for every step
will show.
Hmm, another
Spitfire
Tally-ho!
05:23, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Approved for
Wikipedia:Motto of the day/April 17, 2009.
Queenie
14:11, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Not the most interesting one, I guess.
Chamal
talk
12:15, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
- Weak Support - It IS bland, but everybody's been clamoring for short mottos lately, so it kind of fits what we're looking for, and it is good to remind people of the health sustaining benefits of the Wikibreak...
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
15:05, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose - Everyone is not clamoring. And yes, this motto is a bit meh. —
La Pianista
Speak ·
Hear
05:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
- Apologetic Statement - Sorry, I didn't mean to be so
sweeping in my assumptions. I'll rephrase (changes italicized). "...but many individuals
weasel words, such as La Pianista
[1], have been clamoring for short mottos lately..." Does that work better, my dear?
original research? :-P
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
12:35, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- A) I am not "
many individuals." Weaseling, indeed. Unless, of course, your admiration for me is so great that you have cloned my being to provide you with those attractive women to feed you grapes. B) The diff you provide is not appropriate for "clamoring." There is a certain
giving of hints peculiar to our gender, which comes across as much more elegant and apropos. I prefer the latter -
clamoring is wholly indelicate, unbefitting of
a lady such as I. —
La Pianista
Speak ·
Hear
06:14, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
- A) I did not say that you were "many individuals," I used you as an
example of that group. The weaseling tag was directed at my own phrasing, not at
you. As for
cloning you... hmmm... well, cloning is complicated and expensive, and as you already have a
clone sitting around that hasn't done anything since
January 24th, I guess she can feed me grapes. I'll
have them delivered immediately. Thanks for the suggestion. B) Clamoring was an innappropriate categorization of your actions and comments, and I apologize from the bottom of my heart. We could perhaps say instead that you were wistful for the bygone days of shorter mottos; would that be more appropriate?
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
13:25, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
- Weak Oppose: Can't support something that might encourage users to leave the project, even if only for a short time, I know it wasn't meant to mean that, but it could be interpreted to
Spitfire
Tally-ho!
17:32, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
Rejected per consensus and
WP:SNOW.
Queenie
15:32, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Chamal
talk
11:57, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Reply It's about the message not the film quality. BW21.--
Black
Watch
21
22:00, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
- Extra
Badgering Comment I have to agree with BW21, here. The movie is poorly made, but it's the motto's fault.
Simon
KSK
18:10, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
- I agree with you, Simon. It is the motto's fault. We should beat the motto with sticks.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
12:11, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Approved and beaten with sticks for
Wikipedia:Motto of the day/April 16, 2009.
Queenie
18:57, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Yet another inauguration excerpt. Not too sure about this one, though. The NPA link is kinda of deep.
Simon
KSK
22:43, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- People who are POV-pushers are not necessarily vandals. WP:POINT also is not necessarily
vandalism. But the second link makes more sense I guess, though it's not perfect. So, Weak Support if link suggested by La Pianista is added, plus Nutiketaiel has a point too.
Chamal
talk
13:23, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
Reopened - no consensus.
Queenie
Talk
13:39, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Approved per very weak consensus for
Wikipedia:Motto of the day/April 15, 2009.
Queenie
18:54, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
→
Mistakes are part of the
game. It's how well you
recover from them, that's the mark of a
great player.
–
Juliancolton
Tropical
Cyclone
18:29, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Rejected in favout of Edit 2.
Queenie
18:47, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
→
Mistakes are part of the
game. It's how well you
recover from them, that's the mark of a
great player.
Edit 1 at the suggestion of La Pianista. I'm not sure about referring to adminship as a game, but we'll see what everybody else thinks. –
Juliancolton
Tropical
Cyclone
14:32, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Rejected in favour of Edit 2.
Queenie
18:47, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
→
Mistakes are part of the
game. It's how well you
recover from them, that's the mark of a
great player.
Edit 2 - maybe this can work. At least, if FA isn't hackneyed already. —
La Pianista (
T•
C)
18:03, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support, though not as much support as for edit 1 - This version is good and the links fit. I do think Edit 1 is better, but since that seems unlikely to pass because of everyone's reverence for Admins and failure to obey the dictates of the LOLcat, I offer my support to La Pianista's alternative.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
19:51, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Reopened all - no consensus.
Simply south
is this a
buffet?
12:22, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
Approved for
Wikipedia:Motto of the day/April 14, 2009.
Queenie
18:47, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Even
Einstein asked questions.
α§ʈάt̪íňέ
-210
discovered elements ∞
what am I?
23:30, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
-
Rejected in favour of Edit 1.
Queenie
16:42, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Per Chamal.
Simon
KSK
21:27, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
Approved for
Wikipedia:Motto of the day/April 13, 2009.
Queenie
16:42, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Why do i have this feeling i have tried this? If not, a common sketch where a news reporter (not always the same person) turned up in different locations announcing this, then most times it would move onto another sketch. I am also wondering whether for the second link it could use a specials page but i have forgotten which one it is (if e1 done, log for new users).
Simply south
is this a
buffet?
16:11, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Approved per consensus.
Simply south (
talk)
18:11, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Any better links?
Chamal
talk
13:31, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
- Weak Support - Not bad; the chosen link is adequate, though not great. How about
WP:Talk Page,
WP:TALK or
WP:CONSENSUS?
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
13:47, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support - Works for me. –
Juliancolton
Tropical
Cyclone
16:56, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
- A plug to Editor review could go well here.
iMatthew //
talk //
02:28, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support. How about
WP:SPOKEN? –
pjoef (
talk •
contribs)
11:54, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support: I like this one more then the others, I think drawing more people to the village pump is a better idea then drawing them to the spoken article project or peer review, just my opinion,
Spitfire
Tally-ho!
16:55, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
Rejected in favour of Edit 1.
Queenie
20:35, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Edit 1 - Per Pjoef, above.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
13:30, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Approved for
Wikipedia:Motto of the day/April 11, 2009.
Queenie
20:35, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Edit 2 per me. —
La Pianista (
T•
C)
17:55, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- Neutral - Though it pains me to do so, Pianista, I maintain my support for Pjoef's suggestion (above). The link to
WP:SPOKEN directs the user to an underutilized and underrated section of the Wiki that helps make it more accessible to everyone, and I think they deserve the attention. In addition, the
WP:SPOKEN link fits slightly better with the quote.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
19:42, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Reopened all - no consensus.
Simply south (
talk)
16:08, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
- Rejected in favour of Edit 1.
Queenie
20:35, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Thomas Southerne (1660 - May 22, 1746), The Loyal Brother, Act I, Scene i (1682) –
pjoef (
talk •
contribs)
11:16, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- Weak Oppose - I like the quote, but the last two links bother me. It implies that there are only two choices- to become a featured article, or to be deleted. Many articles are just fine hanging out at the GA level. I'm not sure I like the implication of an "all or nothing" there.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
13:26, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- Re2Nutiketaiel: please, see
Article development,
How to develop an article and
Evolution of an article – an example.
I thought you'd listen to my reason
But now I see you don't hear a thing
Got to make you see how it's got to be
Yes if it's all right
All or nothing yeah yeah
All or nothing
All or nothing for me
Things could work out just like I want them to
If I could have the other half of you
That's all I would if I only could
Is to say
All or nothing oh yeah
All or nothing if I could I'd say
All or nothing for me
Pa pa pa pa ta pa pa pa ta ta (x2)
I ain't telling you no lie Nutiketaiel
So don't just sit there and cry Nutiketaiel
All or nothing (oh no)
All or nothing (oh yeah)
All or nothing (gotta gotta gotta keep on tryin')
All or nothing ......
(For me, for me, for me we're not children...)
All or nothing ...... for me yeah
Small Faces, "
All or Nothing" (1966) ~
Small Faces - All Or Nothing on YT
What a powerful voice! Enjoy! Well, it is not intended to be a declaration of love, but I'm merely trying to be humorous (^__^). Probably, I have violated the rules to bring this to you, Nutiketaiel /o\. But, I think it comes under
Wikipedia:Ignore all rules (^__^)!!! Yours sicerely! –
pjoef (
talk •
contribs)
10:36, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Declined i favour of edit 1.
Simply south (
talk)
18:56, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Edit 1-
Thomas Southerne (1660 - May 22, 1746), The Loyal Brother, Act I, Scene i (1682); changed per my above suggestion.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
17:19, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Approved per consensus.
Simply south (
talk)
18:56, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
If life gives you
lemons, you had better go get
water and
sugar too or your
lemonade will not taste very good.
This is a slight alteration of a quote I heard from one of my co-workers. I normally wouldn't be happy with referring to Stubs as "Lemons," but I think it works in the context of the quote- namely, something that's not all that great on its own, but with water and sugar becomes something
really sweet. I am not totally satisfied with the link for
water, though, so I am open to suggestions on that point. It would be nice if there was a page with information on the inclusion of supporting materials in general... does anyone know a page like that?
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
13:55, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Links for water and sugar switched per suggestion from South.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
17:52, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Approved per
WP:SNOW.
Simply south (
talk)
16:48, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
United Daughters of the Confederacy. BW21.--
Black
Watch
21
01:59, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
- Support - Nice one. –
Juliancolton
Tropical
Cyclone
05:10, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
- Weak Support - It's OK, but as a general rule I don't like encouraging people to pray. Except to me, of course.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
14:05, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
- Reply - Slow news day???
Simon
KSK
21:37, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
- Reply - Eh, sure, why not?
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
12:53, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
- Support - per Julian and Pianista.
Simon
KSK
21:37, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
- Support: The links outline some of the more important things about using wikipedia, minus "pray" of course :p,
Spitfire
Tally-ho!
17:02, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
- Support. Good idea and philosophy. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
AstroHurricane001 (
talk •
contribs)
Approved per
WP:snow.
Simply south (
talk)
16:48, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
I found the quote kind of interesting, but I'm not too sure about the links.
Chamal
talk
14:56, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Support: it's ok! –
pjoef (
talk •
contribs)
08:48, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Weak Support with Suggestion - It's not bad, but the links don't seem to fit well. What about "The greatest challenge for
eight men... was
saving one."? Those links would have my strong support- they highlight an important area of the Wiki in a way that fits with the wording and original context of the quote.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
12:27, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Declined in favour od edit 1.
Simply south (
talk)
16:48, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Edit 1 per Slow News Day, aka MOTD Editor in Chief, and/or Nutiketaiel, and/or Jim. —
La Pianista
Speak ·
Hear
06:54, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Strong support - There really isn't much left to say without making this sound suspiciously like bribery...and/or sockpuppetry. —
La Pianista
Speak ·
Hear
06:54, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Strong Support - To clarify, this is not strong support for the motto since some users have asked me not to support my own suggestions (even though, if I were to do so, this motto would have my strong support). This is actually Strong Support of
La Pianista's decision to
promote me to
Editor-in-Chief. This is a proud day for me, my
fellow editors. Long have I
lusted for power desired to serve my empire the community better by being in a position of authority. Now that MotD is under
my jurisdiction, there are going to be sweeping changes. To start with, I'm promoting La Pianista to Demigod, Empress, Queen, First Lady and Administrator-for-Life and awarding her 2 of every
Barnstar. Pjoef's is hereby promoted to Minister of Culture and Literature, but quotes are now limited to sources written after 1900 CE. Chamal is hereby promoted to Minister of Film and Grand Duke of Film Quotes; I further decree that mistakenly refering to Chamal as the wrong gender is punishable by the
Death of a Thousand Edits. Simply South and Queenie are promoted to my co-Prime Ministers, and are responsible for all the actual work done in
my dominion (of course, they do most of it anyway). Juliancolton is promoted to Minister of
Creative Veterinary Science, Technology and Culture, and is responsible for the health and grooming of all felines in
our realm. The second Thursday of every month is declared to be "Slow News Day." Everyone gets a flying car. The term "consensus" shall be redefined to mean "the Mercurial Whims of
Fate." Every Wednesday is "Free Ice Cream Day." The talk page shall be redesigned to include continuous screenings of any movie that Chamal has put a quote up from. Every Sunday, the motto of the day shall be "All Praise to Our
Glorious God-Emperor and Editor-in-Chief, and may he live forever." ... I think that about covers the basics. I'm going to go find some attractive women to feed me grapes, and maybe go put in an RfA based on my newly acquired power here. La Pianista's in charge until I get back.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
14:00, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Support - Looks fine to me. –
Juliancolton
Tropical
Cyclone
03:33, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
-
Support
Icy //
♫
21:39, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- Support - though not before hitting Nutik with one of these for trying to
order us mortals around... ;)
—
Ed 17
(Talk /
Contribs)
09:33, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
- Support. A well-deserved mention of an area of Wikipedia I've never heard of. Why are you turning this entry into a community forum? ;-) ~
A
H
1(
T
C
U)
00:09, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Approved edit 1 per
WP:SNOW.
Simply south (
talk)
16:48, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
The encyclopaedia that never sleeps
Possibly bland.
Simply south
is this a
buffet?
00:56, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose - It has potential, but the lack of links makes it rather bland. –
Juliancolton
Tropical
Cyclone
05:11, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose, and I can't think of any good links. Sorry. —
La Pianista
Speak ·
Hear
05:17, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
- A similar motto was used last year (it was "
Wikipedia: the website that
never sleeps" then), but I still like it and strongly support this motto's future use. That it "never sleeps" really gets the point across that we've got people here 24/7, all day-every day, creating, editing, building this reference work.
wodup
06:20, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose - Since it was used already.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
14:06, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Declined - withdrawn.
Simply south (
talk)
18:10, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
Simply south
is this a
buffet?
16:56, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
-
- I am a man with few words. ;)
Simon
KSK
16:19, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Approved for
Wikipedia:Motto of the day/April 5, 2009.
Queenie
16:31, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
→ It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of
wisdom, it was the age of
foolishness, it was the epoch of
belief, it was the epoch of
incredulity, it was the season of
Light, it was the season of
Darkness, it was the spring of
hope, it was the winter of
despair, we had
everything before us, we had
nothing before us, we were all going direct to
Heaven, we were all going direct
the other way...
I'm pretty happy with this one. It shows (among other things) the dichotomy of opinions that can exist about any facet of Wikipedia, between its supporters and detractors. I considered trying to find links for the best and worst of times, but I thought it stood better on its own. No need to link them; the rest of the quote has enough links to establish clear relevance, and the purpose of that first part is just set up anyway. I am also not 100% happy with the link for "
Heaven," so if someone can think of a better suggestion, I'm all for it.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
15:34, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support - As long as it is, this is an excellent motto. I agree that the link to "Heaven" is a bit weak, but I can't think of anything else. –
Juliancolton
Tropical
Cyclone
17:04, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support - Excellent motto, but I agree that the link to "Heaven" is weak. I also would not advocate a link to
WP:ADMIN or
Special:Contributions, as these are equally weak. —
La Pianista (
T•
C)
07:04, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support. So glad you were happy with this one :). –
pjoef (
talk •
contribs)
11:36, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose
It's
extremly wordya nd may not look very good in tables, userboxes, ect.--
Ipatrol (
talk)
00:57, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support - I like it, but it would be best if the link ti Heaven was removed and not replaced.
Simon
KSK
14:22, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Approved per consensus.
Simply south (
talk)
16:10, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm not 100% satisfied with this set of links, though I think they work OK. I am open to further suggestions, though.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
13:44, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Approved for
Wikipedia:Motto of the day/April 6, 2009.
Queenie
16:43, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Mr Spock
Simply south
is this a
buffet?
15:42, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- Weak oppose - We shouldn't be associating edit count with experience or longevity on Wikipedia. –
Juliancolton
Tropical
Cyclone
16:53, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
- Question - Why not? In general, people with a high edit count have been at Wikipedia for a long time. How does that not fit with "Live Long"?
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
17:42, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
- Well, Nutiket, I've only been here for just over a year, and my contribs are around 19,000. I don't consider myself experienced - tools like Huggle exaggerate that. I also believe that that link can encourage
WP:ITIS, if only subtly. —
La Pianista (
T•
C)
17:58, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- I've never used huggle (or any other tool that matter) in the never-ending fight against vandalism; I just do it the old fashioned way- with my
fists rollback button. I'll admit to not really understanding how such things work. Regardless, I don't think it is eroneous to draw the comparison. Incidentally, I have 2920 edits, and I do consider myself experienced. Not as experienced as some, but whatever.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
19:47, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- Weak oppose per Julian. —
La Pianista (
T•
C)
17:58, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Rejected per consensus.
Queenie
16:34, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Christopher Marlowe (1564–1593),
The Jew of Malta, Act I (1589) –
pjoef (
talk •
contribs)
08:46, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support interesting. Why the A at the start?
Simply south
not SS, sorry
11:26, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Weak Support - I like the quote, but I don't like the "little room" link to
Knowledge. It doesn't seem to fit.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
15:06, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- Suggested links: "
Wikipedia:
infinite riches in a
little room". I suppose it's kind of stating the obvious, but the link to
knowledge in the original version doesn't seem to fit. –
Juliancolton
Tropical
Cyclone
22:13, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- I'd support Julian's links, although this wiki is anything but a small room. —
La Pianista (
T•
C)
05:31, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
- Re2Juliancolton: I thought it was clear and that there was no need to explain it. Well, that link is related to the humyn knowledge because it's little good. Think to Physics and the theory of relativity, or to Quantum physics and the uncertainty principle. Also, think to Psychology, the mind and the function of a brain, the deep-sea animals, the universe and the infinite, gods and goddesses, diseases... it's an infinite list. We all really know nothing or just a little part of the whole. But, WikipediA can help with its infinite riches in a little room. I think it is good as it is, simply and to the point. Anyway, it's just my humble opinion. –
pjoef (
talk •
contribs)
11:26, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
- Regardless of what the logo says, it's called "Wikipedia", without the bizarre and arbitrary capitalization. –
Juliancolton
Tropical
Cyclone
00:46, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Reopened - needs more discussion.
Queenie
Talk
17:29, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
- Comments Love the first two links, but how is Knowledge=Little room?
Icy //
♫
21:55, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
- Re2Icy: everything is less than infinite (excluding infinite to the power of infinite to the power of infinite ...), so everything is scarce, and humYn knowledge is certainly finite and comparable to a vErY lItTlE rOoM (^__^). This is an issue that belongs to philosophy, mathematics, logic, physics, theology, etcetera, etcetera. Our knowledge is not a small room but a cupboard or just a small memory box, because it is very poor. –
pjoef (
talk •
contribs)
10:08, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Then, on those grounds, I change my vote to Strong Oppose. I can't bring myself to support a motto that denigrates the vastness of human achievement and human potential in this manner.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
12:43, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Rejected per consensus.
Queenie
17:07, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
William Shakespeare (1564–1616),
Antony and Cleopatra, Act IV, Scene i (1623) ~ I'm always late /o\ ... have a great
Valentine's Day ...
2010 (^___^)! peACE & LuV 2 All –
pjoef (
talk •
contribs)
08:35, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
- Clarification Request - I'm not up on my Shakespeare; could you explain the context of the quote? I'm afraid I can;t figure out what its trying to say without the context. The wording is too obscure for my poor, addled brain.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
13:39, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
- Summary: Act IV, Scene i: Before Alexandria. OCTAVIUS CAESAR's camp.
Octavius Caesar receives Antony's challenge at his camp near Alexandria. His friend, Maecenas, counsels him to take advantage of Antony's rage, for "[n]ever anger / Made good guard for itself" Octavius Caesar prepares his army and plans to crush Antony.
Enter Octavius Caesar (One of the three men who rule Rome), Agrippa (Military commander and advisor of Octavius), and Mecaenas (Octavius' friend), with his Army; Octavius Caesar reading a letter
Octavius Caesar: He calls me boy; and chides, as he had power
To beat me out of Egypt; my messenger
He hath whipp'd with rods; dares me to personal combat,
Caesar to Antony: let the old ruffian know
I have many other ways to die; meantime
Laugh at his challenge.
Mecaenas: Caesar must think,
When one so great begins to rage, he's hunted
Even to falling. Give him no breath, but now
Make boot of his distraction: never anger
Made good guard for itself.
Octavius Caesar: Let our best heads
Know, that to-morrow the last of many battles
We mean to fight: within our files there are,
Of those that served Mark Antony but late,
Enough to fetch him in. See it done:
And feast the army; we have store to do't,
And they have earn'd the waste. Poor Antony!
Exeunt
Antony and Cleopatra is available online for free. The quote is about "anger" or, more precisely, it is about "rage" and how to take advantage of it. But, my interpretation is different. I first thought to link it to the opposite meaning, the antonym of "anger"/"rage" but I prefered to link it to
WP:LOVE because LuV is the answer to every question!!! Also, I think that the combination, quote+link, is very intriguing and it will push people to click it (that is not so bad after all). –
pjoef (
talk •
contribs)
13:33, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you for the context and explanation, but I must Oppose. The interpretation is too obscure, and without context I never would have figured it out, made worse by the fact that your interpretation is not the one supported by the context, so even if someone were interested enough to look up the source of the quote, or enough of a Shakespearean to know it off the top of their heads, they still would not likely see the connection between it and the link.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
13:47, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Rejected per consensus.
Queenie
16:46, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Simply south
not SS, sorry
16:52, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Weak Support - I guess letting people know that the watchlist exists is a good message for those who don't know about it already, but the message is very blase. Maybe on a (drumroll, please) slow news day.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
17:48, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Weak support, per Nutiketaiel. <insert random profanity here> —
La Pianista (
T•
C)
18:13, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Weak oppose It's nice, but (IMHO) is it really worth putting up a motto to notify people of the existence of the watchlist? From my own experience - other editors feel free to disagree - once I started editing kind-of steadily, getting to the watchlist really wasn't something people had to tell me.
Icy //
♫
20:37, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Weak oppose - I'm pretty sure most people who know about MOTD also know about their watchlist. –
Juliancolton
Tropical
Cyclone
17:54, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Reopened - no consensus.
Queenie
Talk
21:06, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Rejected per consensus.
Queenie
Talk
14:24, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Me like
pie
I've seen this across the internet and also on
Sabrina, said by Salem. Yes i'm sad.
Simply south
is this a
buffet?
12:36, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose - While the link is funny, the quote really has no relevance. It might be passable as an April Fool's Day motto, but not a normal one in my opinion.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
13:40, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose - After seeing
this, I change my stance to Strong Oppose. We should not be trying to use mottos to further our own arguements in other parts of the Wiki. :-(
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
13:59, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
- That is something completely different and i was not intending it to further mine or anyone else's opinions. Yes i used it thre but as a separate thing as a random title to show there not to take things seriously. I thought it would make a good motto over here as it is quite funny (even contradicting itself). I'll change the title over there.
Simply south
is this a
buffet?
14:19, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Rejected per
WP:SNOW.
Queenie
Talk
13:53, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
It just came to me after I saw an article that DESPERATELY needed cleanup.
SAVIOR_
SELF
.777
19:26, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- Comment. Is this a quote from something? If it is, it should be linked to it with a little arrow.
Queenie
Talk
19:30, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- Reply - Yeah! SRS is here. The thing is that it is from many movies and shows, so it's kinda hard to link it...
Simon
KSK
21:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
-
Rejected in favour of Edit 1.
Queenie
Talk
17:39, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Edit 1 per
the male version of me. —
La Pianista (
T•
C)
23:02, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Sorry jklhikhjiojiop
Simply south
is this a
buffet?
13:48, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Approved for
Wikipedia:Motto of the day/April 3, 2009.
Queenie
Talk
17:39, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
→ Everyone
be quiet, including me. Shhh! Who's
making that noise? Oh, it's me again.
So we are out of motto noms again, which reminds me that I should find something.
Chamal
talk
12:49, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
- Strong Support - This one sends a great message, and has the added benefit of being hilarious.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
13:18, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
- Strong Support: the amusement of it catchs one's attention, and the message stays with us
Spitfire
Tally-ho!
13:22, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support - heh –
Juliancolton
Tropical
Cyclone
16:54, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
- Strong Support - I love it!
Simon
KSK
17:36, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support. Shhh! lol –
pjoef (
talk •
contribs)
12:01, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- Tacit strong support. ;) And hey, is it just me, or has Chamal spent a lot of time with Disney and Pixar lately? —
La Pianista (
T•
C)
17:56, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Approved per
WP:SNOW for 2nd April.
Simplysouth
is this a
buffet?
21:04, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Success comes in cans. Failure comes in can'ts.
I just saw this somewhere on a poster, I don't know where it's from exactly.
Wikiert (
talk)
15:49, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Rejected in favout of Edit 1.
Queenie
Talk
15:56, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
Edit 1, per me above.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
20:30, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Approved for
Wikipedia:Motto of the day/March 31, 2009.
Queenie
Talk
15:56, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
→...those values upon which our
success depends on
hard work and
honesty,
courage and
fair play,
tolerance and
curiosity,
loyalty and
patriotism - these things are old. These things are true. They have been the quiet force of progress throughout our
history.
From Barack Obama's very long speech. Suggestions are open.
Simon
KSK
22:49, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
- Support. Describes Wikipedia quite well, although a bit long, and I'm not sure about starting the quote with "...But". ~
A
H
1(
T
C
U)
00:41, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
- Weak support with comment Nice, but I don't like the link to
WP:TRUE.
Icy //
♫
02:52, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
- Weak oppose - Admirable motto, excellent links in almost all of them, but too long for my liking. I also think the link to
WP:TRUE should be removed, not replaced, since there is a lot of blue there in the first place. —
La Pianista (
T•
C)
07:15, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
- Conditional Weak Support - It's an OK motto, though it rambles a little. It has my weak support on the condition that the link wo
WP:TRUE is removed and not replaced. In its current form, I oppose.
Nutiketaiel (
talk)
14:02, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
- Done
Simon
KSK
20:22, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
- Comment: The loyalty and patriotism links don't make any sense to me. --
Jeandré, 2009-02-02
t13:58z
Reopened - not enough discussion.
Queenie
Talk
17:26, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- Weak oppose - It's alright, but a bit too long. –
Juliancolton
Tropical
Cyclone
06:14, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
- Suggestion. What about removing the first and the last parts of it???
our success depends on hard work and honesty, courage and fair play, tolerance and curiosity, loyalty and patriotism
Also, patriotism may be linked to
Wikipedia#Wikipedia_community,
Wikimania, or
WP:FB. –
pjoef (
talk •
contribs)
12:09, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
- Strong Supporty: to my mind that's just perfect for wikipedia, sure to make everyone who really see's it stop and think about the project, and just what it means,
Spitfire
Tally-ho!
20:44, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Approved per weak consensus for
Wikipedia:Motto of the day/March 30, 2009.
Queenie
Talk
20:14, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Another one from Putin. The rest of it goes "...and is not about to listen to anyone" but I guess we can't add that.
Chamal
talk
14:23, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Reopened - no consensus.
Queenie
Talk 19:33, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Rejected per consensus.
Queenie
Talk
20:08, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
edit 1. This quote looks to me like it should be another vandalism one so it is so.
Simply south
not SS, sorry
15:23, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Rejected per consensus.
Queenie
Talk
20:08, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Humorous (?) motto from the depths of Wikiquote. Interesting question here - is it superfluous to link "man" to WP:EDIAN? I notice we've been doing this very often, but it's just a thought to ponder. —
La Pianista (
T•
C)
17:40, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Rejected in favour of Edit 1.
Queenie
Talk
16:52, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Edit 1 - not so humorous, but conveys a message. —
La Pianista (
T•
C)
17:41, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Approved for
Wikipedia:Motto of the day/March 29, 2009.
Queenie
Talk
16:52, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Often used when showing the final result of a thing they made.
Simply south
not SS, sorry
16:48, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Reopened - no consensus.
Queenie
Talk
16:39, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Rejected per consensus.
Queenie
Talk
17:08, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Matty4123's suggestion. —
Jake
Wartenberg
20:49, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Reopened - no consensus.
Queenie
Talk
16:39, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Rejected per consensus.
Queenie
Talk
17:08, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
This should be more suitable i hope, as it links to a tool which shows all previously moved\made articles, lists, disambiguation pages and redirects of a user once entered.
Simply south
not SS, sorry
Reopened - no consensus.
Queenie
Talk
16:39, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Rejected - no consensus.
Queenie
Talk
17:08, 18 February 2009 (UTC)