Jump to content

Wikiquote:Simple talk/Archive 1

From Wikiquote

Missing things

We are missing two things here: content and infrastructure. Since that is about all that a Wikiproject is, I guess I could say we are missing everything. Much of our content can be imported (with some simplification) from English Wikiquote. Any and all help is appreciated. --Cromwellt|talk 16:25, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requested sysop access on Meta. Archer7 20:46, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps you would like to mention that at Wikiquote:Administrators under the appropriate section? --Cromwellt|talk 21:26, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry about it. I added you there, supported your request, and supported it over at Meta (with a link back to the admin page here). --Cromwellt|talk 21:56, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Unfortunately, I won't have a lot of time over the next few weeks for any project, but I'll help out when I can. Archer7 22:17, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm now an admin, although this project may not last long, I'm sure you know why. Archer7 17:00, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
We do have infrastructure! Some was made before it was abandoned. See here. Archer7 17:36, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I know this is early, but what do you think about turning this into a WikiReader eventually? This project could really work well, and it would only take a couple of months once all the content is on. It would also be fantastic for Wiktionary (publishing all the BE850 and BE1500 seperately, maybe VOA), and perhaps PDF versions of completed Wikibooks? I'd be happy to do a lot of the work, like exporting to PDF, managing the download site. What do you think? Archer7 07:52, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have a problem with the idea. You sound really enthusiastic about it, which is great. I don't know exactly how it would work or how much I'd be able to help with it, but I certainly won't stop you! Of course, the main thing we need on all these sites right now is content. Happy editing! --Cromwellt|talk 00:30, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Layout and stuff

Few things I need to know:

  • Simple English for 'Sourced' and 'Attributed'.
  • Where we are going to fit in the Simple English explanations? See Wikipedia for an example page layout.
  • Are we allowed to bite, kick or otherwise attack developers trying to close this project? One of the most fundamental rules: Wikipedia is not a democracy... ignore the project closure voting! Archer7 17:49, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Hi, I am user meta:user:Walter. I respectfully request this community to consider my following request; I write a newsletter about what is going on in the Wikimedia projects in all languages. It is my hope that every community, like this one, has some people who read Wikizine. Then I can maybe receive some news from those readers about your project and in the other direction the can inform there community in your own language about the Wikimedia news possibly. I would like to ask this community to include on this page on the top and/or a relevant page a small banner for Wikizine.

If a banner is placed here on the correct page the change that someone here will think about Wikizine and report some local news will increase highly I suspect. Or that people will take a look and read the Wikimedia news. And maybe even share it locally. Here are the banners; meta:Wikizine/banners

If there are questions please ask it here. I will be watching this page for at least two weeks from now on frequently. Greetings, --Walter 14:52, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How to find existing pages? Category structure?

All pages should be linked somehow from the Main Page so we know they exist. Wikipedias use Categories to do that. How will we do it here? --Copertwig 04:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I am not very good at comming up with a simple meaning of quotes. I need someone else to do that for me. Thanks.--Sir James Paul 20:25, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Copyright violations

I recently tagged a few articles that were created as copyvios, but was then asked how a quote could be copyrighted. I tagged the articles because they were direct copies from http://www.brainyquote.com/. Their terms and conditions say that content cannot be copied for public or commercial use without permission. Are the articles copyright violations? J Di 15:37, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Right, I'll start tagging the other articles if they haven't already been deleted. J Di 16:32, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, some of these aren't. Blatant copies where it's formatting and other things copied as well as the quotes are copyvios. Things where people have copied just the quotes can't be copyvios. Archer7 13:22, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Which ones aren't? J Di 14:51, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My opinion: Taking one (short) quote from a website or other source, or selecting a very small number, would not be copyright violation. But copying a list of quotes from a source which provides a list of quotes would be a copyright violation. They've done the work of selecting and compiling the list of quotes and we would be simply copying that work. --Coppertwig 16:32, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For some pages (e.g. Barbara Amiel), I have deleted most of the quotes because they are a copyright violation (copying a whole list of quotes from a website). However, I have left a small number (approximately two or three) of selected quotes as "fair use/fair dealing", and sometimes also translated them into Simple English. The copyright violation remains in the page history. I assume this is OK: On wikipedia:en:Wikipedia:copyright problems it says "Revert the page to a non-copyrighted version if you can ... The infringing text will remain in the page history for archival reasons unless the copyright holder asks the Wikimedia Foundation to remove it." I may continue to do this with other pages unless somebody tells me to do something different. An alternative would be to rename the page to "Barbara Amiel (please delete)" and put it on a list of pages to be deleted and create a new page Barbara Amiel with the small selection of quotes. Or, maybe that wouldn't work: I forget whether the page history moves when you move a page. Someone with admin privileges would be able to completely delete the page and create a new page. Anyway, maybe it's good enough to edit the page to remove the copyright violations. --Coppertwig 13:52, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure that the reversion/change is sufficient as long as the copyright holder doesn't ask for its removal from the history, just like it says on the Wikipedia copyright problems page. --Cromwellt|talk|contribs 13:52, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pages that were not made with care

We have a lot of pages that were not made with care. I think this is good; all wikipedias have pages that are not good yet, but any one can change them and make them good, and that's how they grow into good pages... That being said...

The easy thing is to find quotes. The hard thing is to make the quote simple. If no one has changed a text dump page after a long time, then I think its fair to move that page from the mainspace, or even delete it.

We could make a template for talk pages that says something like, "It looks like you took a break or left before the article you worked on, [[somebody]], was translated. We moved it [[out of the way]], but you can still move it back and translate it!"

-Haikon 22:06, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps that's a good idea. You can make a template like that yourself. Just create a new page with name beginning "Template:". Or, if there are some pages you think should be deleted, you can list them at Wikiquote:Administrators in the "requests for Administrator attention" section. --Coppertwig 23:11, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think that is a good idea, or we can just work on simplifying what is there.... I hope other people feel like I do: this project is worth keeping. --Cromwellt|talk|contris 05:10, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Motion at meta to end discussion of closing project

See the motion at meta:Proposals for closing projects, (near the top of the page on closing Simple English Wikiquote), where user Johannes Rohr proposed on 28 July 2007 that the discussion on closing Wikiquote be closed 14 days from then. --Coppertwig 16:56, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for bot flag : DragonBot

Hello, I am operator of a bot, DragonBot, and would like to have the bot flag. Here are some details about the bot, feel free to ask any questions!

  • Operator : Chtit draco
  • Purpose : Adding interwiki links.
  • Script used : pywikipedia
  • Already has the bot flag on : fr,de,en,pl,sl,bg,hu,ja,no,gl,he,it,tr,sv,nl,bs,el,zh
  • I have run the bot for foolproofing, you can see its edits here!

As there is no bureaucrat here, I just need community approval before asking for the flag on meta. Thanks :-) Chtit draco 08:56, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Welcome to Simple English Wikiquote! Your bot is very good. Thank you for coming here. We are a very small wiki, so your bot does not need to run fast here. Maybe it's good to wait a week or two, to be very certain there are no problems, before getting the bot flag. --Coppertwig 00:31, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I shall run it from time to time at a slow pace then. Thanks for your answer! Chtit draco 06:33, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I ran my bot yesterday on the whole simple.wikiquote (main) namespace (as opposed to using a warnfile before). Consequently, there's no interwikis left to correct/add/remove at this time. My bot will have a lot less job to do on simple.wikiquote from now on, as only adding interwikis for new pages (either here or on other wikiquotes) and correcting/removing others for deleted/renamed pages is needed. So, do I have community approval for the botflag or should I continue using my bot without one ? Chtit draco 08:22, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is great that you're helping here (whether by bot or manually), and I recognize that the bot won't have too much to do until we're bigger and more active, but I still think it would be a good idea to request a bot flag. I think since Coppertwig and I make up a good percentage of the community at the moment, you've got the approval you need.  :) --Cromwellt|talk|contribs 21:12, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, please ask for a bot flag. Your bot helps us. --Coppertwig 16:01, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Pathoschild 17:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Bot policy

Hello. To facilitate steward granting of bot access, I'd like to implement the standard bot policy on this wiki. This will involve creating a redirect to this page from Project:Bot policy, and adding a line at the top noting that it is used here. In particular, this policy allows automatic acceptance of known interlanguage linking bots (if this page says that is acceptable), which form the vast majority of such requests.

Please read the text at m:Bot policy before commenting. If you object, please say so; it will be implemented in one week if there is no objection, since it is particularly written to streamline bot requests on wikis with little or no community interested in bot access requests. Pathoschild 17:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't object. Uswibèta 05:45, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Done.Pathoschild 23:04:46, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Site notice

The site notice still says "This project has been nominated to be closed down. Please comment here." but I can't see it on all the pages. I only see something about "Donate to Wikimedia!". How will people know that they need to vote? --Coppertwig 16:00, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please read this at the second paragraph user pathoschild says to have a AJAX solutions. Uswibèta 14:00, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I copied the AJAX solution into Mediawiki:Common.js and it seems to work! You might need to click "refresh" or look at a page you haven't looked at before to make it start working for you. I think it works for new users. --Coppertwig 17:49, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An attempt to close the project

Someone is attempting to close the discussion about closing the project, and is saying that Simple English Wikiquote should be closed within 2 days. See meta:Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Simple English Wikiquote. --Coppertwig 22:48, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I made some templates. See Wikiquote:Templates. I used them on [[Winston Churchill] and John Quincy Adams. Is it a good idea? I think other pages need these too. Then we can find the pages that need translation by clicking on "what links here" at Template:Need translation. --Coppertwig 23:58, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'll start using categories (groups of pages). --Coppertwig 16:30, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. Uswibèta 18:28, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Should the category be called "Occupations" or "Kinds of work"? (Now there are two, but they mean the same thing and should be made into one category.) Category:Occupations - Category:Kinds of work --Coppertwig 18:37, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kinds of work, I do not know what a occupations is. Uswibèta 18:02, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Who is a good contributioner to this project? I recent see just a few people working just a little bit. Uswibèta 18:04, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This project is very small! You can help it grow. --Coppertwig 02:52, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think my English is bad I think. --Uswibèta 06:26, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


As you have probably realized I am leaving Simple Wikiquote. --Z 17:58, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to see you leaving. I'm sorry if your time here was not very welcoming. I hope you feel welcome to come back here at any time that you want to. I wish you all the best, in other Wikimedia projects or in any place you go in life. --Coppertwig 01:45, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Page to delete

I think this page should probably be deleted – what do other people think? Looney Tunes: Back in Action --Coppertwig 02:09, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Garfield quote

Someone deleted this quote from the "anonymous" page because it's not anonymous. Maybe if we knew exactly what newspaper or other thing it came from maybe we could put it on another page:

  • "* I am not over weight, I am under tall

--Coppertwig 00:09, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Should this article Tekken be deleted as an advertisement-like article? . Coppertwig 01:29, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Simple English Wikiquote will not be closed!

The discussion at meta:Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Simple English Wikiquote has been closed as "keep". This means that Simple English Wikiquote will not be closed. The project will continue. Coppertwig 02:21, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess it's sort of late for me to comment, but it's awesome that it was kept.--TBC 03:24, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If no one minds, I'm going to try to redesign the Main Page here. Seems to be very inactive here, and it looks like the page is out-of-date. If you don't know me, I'm administrator on Simple Wikipedia. Cheers -- American Eagle (talk) 02:01, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thank you for changing it. I'm sorry I didn't answer before. It looks nice. Coppertwig 23:37, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Also, could you add something that emphasizes that Simple Wikiquote analyzes the meanings behind the quotes, instead of simply listing them like EN Wikiquote does? Thanks in advance.--TBC 03:29, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Global bots

Hello. The standard bot policy was updated to allow global bots, which are now technically possible. These are trusted bots that will be given bot access on every wiki that allows global bots (the local policy or request page must explicitly allow them, or they won't get access on this wiki). The current requirements for global bots are:

  • a global bot must only maintain interlanguage links or fix double-redirects;
  • a global bot must have already been active on several wikis, with long-term contributions demonstrating its trustworthiness.

Does anyone object to allowing global bots on this wiki? I'll update the local policy in a week if there are no objections. Thanks. —Pathoschild 16:59:49, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think global bots are all right. Thank you. Coppertwig 23:37, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done. —Pathoschild 14:16:01, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Hi! I'm fairly new at this project but a very active member on other projects such as Simple English Wikipedia. I have noticed at the new changes log that hardly anyone is editing. We have a small community! We need to work to become bigger. Any ideas? SwirlBoy39 13:51, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not surprising that Simple Wikiquote has such a small community. Of the 20-30 active users on Simple Wikipedia, only one or two are also active on here. Then again, a smaller community does make editing a lot easier, since we all know each other. :) --TBC 03:27, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should have a new logo, to distinguish this site from the EN Wikiquote. Sort of something like what Simple Wiktionary has.--TBC 03:23, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Darn, I was about to bring that up. :( Anyway, I like our logo, but it should have "simple" somewhere within it. -- RyanCross (talk) 03:29, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Simple English Wiktionary has a very nice logo that was made for all Wiktionaries. Some other Wiktionaries have it, too, for example wikt:fr:page d'accueil. We can try to find a nice logo for here. Coppertwig 03:33, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Asking the community

I'm sorry: I should have asked everyone before I unblocked Riana and before I asked Archer7 about still being an administrator. I think those were good things to do but I think I should have talked about it first, maybe here. I think it's good to be bold about most things. Go ahead and edit the main page if you want, etc. But for some more important things we need to talk first. All the contributors can say things. Administrators don't have a stronger voice. Coppertwig 13:59, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What happened to Z? Why did he block Riana?--TBC 06:02, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know why Z blocked Riana. I remember the name Riana, but I don't remember what happened. Maybe I was away for a few weeks at that time. Z was never a usual administrator. Z asked to be an administrator for a few weeks because there were no administrators active here at that time.
Later, Z left, maybe because Z didn't like the things Uswibèta said to Z and because Uswibèta reverted some of Z's changes. Coppertwig 12:46, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Z is gone now... so let's move on. The block log for Riana when she was blocked is the following: 19:47, 12 October 2007 Z (Talk | contribs) blocked Riana (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of infinite (account creation disabled) ‎ (Inserting nonsense/gibberish into pages) Looking at Riana's only two contributions, she was not adding nonsense/vandalism to Wikiquote. She simply created her user page and redirected her old account to her current one. Anybody want to check her deleted edits? Who knows, we might find something there. If she's clean from vandalism and nonsense, I would strongly advise an unblock. It's not right to block someone for something they didn't. Thanks, RyanCross (talk) 19:48, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
She's already unblocked. No vandalism (and nothing deleted), no reason for block. I've unblocked most blocked users here. We have basically no vandalism and Z shouldn't have done most of the blocks he did. — American Eagle (talk) 21:08, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Z blocked User:Fvasconcellos. I don't know why. Fvasconcellos has no contributions and no deleted contributions. I want to unblock Fvasconcellos. Does anyone want to say anything about that? Coppertwig 14:10, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock. — American Eagle (talk) 17:52, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree to an unblock also. Cheers, RyanCross (talk) 03:17, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Unblocked by American Eagle. The block log shows that the account was renamed, so maybe that's why it was blocked with no contributions. Coppertwig 01:59, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Changing block

Z also blocked User:Phaedriel for vandalism. I want to change it from infinite (indefinite) to one year starting 12 October 2007. Does anyone want to say anything about that? Coppertwig 14:10, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I say maybe even less than that. The user was never even warned. — American Eagle (talk) 18:01, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK, how about just unblock, then: the block has been long enough already. Coppertwig 19:49, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. — American Eagle (talk) 20:11, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think a bureaucrat should rename that account. Pheadriel is an administrator at the english Wikipedia and simple english Wikipedia. What if she wants to edit here but her username is taken by a vandal? She couldn't. I would rename that account first. -- RyanCross (talk) 03:16, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Unblocked by American Eagle. Coppertwig 01:55, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User Ninja gaiden

Spacebirdy blocked User:Ninja gaiden indefinitely for vandalism on 22 January 2008. The user was not warned. Maybe this one has been long enough too? Coppertwig 20:56, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would unblock and give an only warning. If the user vandalized again, and indef block would be appropriate. -- RyanCross (talk) 03:14, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
unblocked by American Eagle. Coppertwig 01:54, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User Beev

Cometstyles blocked User:Beev indefinitely for vandalism on 7 December 2007. But it was a lot of vandalism. Maybe I don't want to unblock this user now, but we could put a message on the user's talk page telling them how to ask to be unblocked. What do people think about that? Coppertwig 20:56, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Personally, I would just unblock the user now and give him an only warning. I don't think it's right for a user to be blocked with no warning. If he vandalized after unblocked with an only warning given, and indef block would be suitable. I support an unblock and an only warning. Though, I doubt he will edit again since it's been a long time. Unless he has email enabled making him get the message that his talk page has been changed and then he comes back and vandalized. -- RyanCross (talk) 03:13, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
unblocked by American Eagle. Coppertwig 01:51, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User U235

Pathoschild blocked User:U235 indefinitely for vandalism on 24 November 2007, with no warning. I think the block was long enough and I want to unblock. What do people think about that? Coppertwig 20:56, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure he even vandalized? It says when you edit the user page that the account isn't even registered, thus, it never existed. -- RyanCross (talk) 03:10, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, it was "U-235", not "U235". unblocked by American Eagle. Coppertwig 01:50, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, no wonder. Thanks, RyanCross (talk) 01:59, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User Blob0987

Archer7 blocked Blob0987 indefinitely for vandalism on 22 November 2007, with no warning. I think the block was long enough and I want to unblock. What do people think about that? Coppertwig 20:56, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

*Still retired* - but I must say, unblock them all. There has been no vandalism is the last several weeks, maybe one of them may contribute? No need for their blockings now. — American Eagle (talk) 05:05, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I support the unlock. Seriously, a block with no warning? Well, it makes sense since vandalism warning templates haven't been created here yet as far as I know, but we Archer could have left a hand written warning. It seems unfair for the user to be blocked without knowing what he did wrong, or at least got a warning of what he did. That reminds me, shouldn't we create warning templates now? We could surely use them. -- RyanCross (talk) 09:27, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
unblocked by American Eagle. Coppertwig 01:47, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New formatting

I propose that Simple WQ entries are formatted in a way as to distinguish itself from the EN WQ. Unlike EN, which typically lists the quotes, we'll be both simplifying them (using Template:Simple) and analyzing their meanings (using Template:Meaning). A good example of this is the Pablo Picasso entry.--TBC 06:05, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking something like that, to create consistency. — American Eagle (talk) 19:19, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good idea. Maybe sometimes we only need the "simple" part, and sometimes only the "meaning" part. Coppertwig 15:18, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This user was recently renamed. But it is to an untypable name! Can we re rename him? SwirlBoy39 16:33, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You mean "re-rename" him? :P I'm not so sure, I think it has been done a few times on en, not sure if we should keep it the same. -- RyanCross (talk) 19:39, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You can still type "User:Computer", because there's a redirect. I hope that will work in all situations where you would need to type the username. See [1]. Coppertwig 02:18, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

20 new quote pages in 4 weeks!

We have 20 new quote pages between July 20 and today! Thanks to everyone who wrote pages; and thanks to everyone who wrote many other things, like policy pages, gadgets, templates, categories etc. So many things are happening! I put a list of the new pages on the Main Page. (Also, I took away the list of "pages with English and Simple English". All the pages are supposed to have English and Simple English, except the pages with simple quotes. I had put that list there when there were only a small number of good pages, and I was trying to show people that they don't need to close this project.) Well, it's so nice to have so many new pages! Coppertwig 00:33, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's great to hear! Let's keep at it and keep up with our big brother next door, but simpler! Nice job everyone. :) -- RyanCross (talk) 21:13, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I'm making some changes in the policy pages. But one person doesn't write official policies alone. Some of the policies come from English Wikiquote, Simple English Wikipedia or English Wikipedia. We can work on the policies together. Coppertwig 13:52, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote a new proposed policy: User:Coppertwig/What Wikiquote is. I think it's important to have a policy like this because the discussion to keep or close the project was using the ideas about what Simple English Wikiquote is. What do people think about it?

It's looking good, but I think we can expand it. I was thinking of adding something like, "Simple English Wikiquote is for everyone to read, for children and even adults who are learning or even starting to learn English." We should tell people that the Simple English WIkipedia is for children and even adults who are learning English. Come to think of it, I think we can attract more readers if that was on the Main Page (is it already there?). :) -- RyanCross (talk) 21:28, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I forgot to say: everyone can edit the proposed policy. Thanks for your ideas.
I think there are many reasons why people may want to read Simple English. The project is for everyone who can read Simple English, not only children and adults who are learning English. I think people who want to read Simple English know who they are, and it may not help much to list all the kinds of readers on the Main Page; but go ahead if you want to, as long as you keep it open: i.e. include all people who can read Simple English, not only a list of all the kinds of people you've thought of who can read it. (There could be other groups we haven't thought of.) Coppertwig 23:10, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, but I'll let more people comment on this first. Consensus is better reached with more people involved, almost all of the time. ;) -- RyanCross (talk) 23:15, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
People who can read Simple English include some Deaf people; also some people who are native speakers of other languages and know Simple English but are not interested in learning all of English; and maybe other groups of people too. Translators and people with learning disabilities might be interested in reading this project. Coppertwig 23:25, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In other words, everyone can come and read Simple English Wikiquote. :) -- RyanCross (talk) 23:27, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


We now have gadgets!! Or really, for now we have a gadget. Thanks to American Eagle, Chenzw, TheDJ and anyone else who helped develop HotCat, and the Mediawiki developers who wrote the software that lets us put in gadgets. You can now click "my settings" and then click "gadgets" to turn on gadgets. I put in HotCat. Should we put in recentchangesbox and lastdiff? (See User:American Eagle.) Should we put in any other gadgets? Administrators can add gadgets by editing MediaWiki:Gadgets-definition, as Chenzw told me. Have fun! Coppertwig 17:52, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Those could be really useful. Do we have popups or rollback yet? Those could be pretty handy. :) You know that Simple English Wikipedia doesn't allow rollback, but we are our own project, so if we decide to use rollback, we'll use rollback (and I think we could use it, IMO ;)). But let's see what the community thinks. Thanks, RyanCross (talk) 21:31, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I need a button which inserts a link to Simple. Something like this button but with a default [[w: .... ]] rather than just [[ ... ]]. --Gwib -(talk)- 01:47, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh that... not sure how we can add that. I'm pretty sure it's a MediaWiki page though, not sure which one though. :/ -- RyanCross (talk) 01:48, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If anyone finds out how to add that button, please at the same time add a button to put in a link to Simple English Wiktionary, [[:wikt: ... ]]. I think links to show the meanings of words should be to Simple English Wiktionary most of the time. Links to show more information about something can be to Simple English Wikipedia. Coppertwig 13:02, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I put in a clock gadget. I hope that's OK. Coppertwig 23:29, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Enabling rollback permissions

Hi there, User:Coppertwig and me have been chatting, and I think we should enable the non-admin rollback feature here. Administrators would be able to grant rollback rights to those who would like to have it and for those who will not misuse it. I think it can be pretty useful here, since we are a small community. If everyone is offline and then someone comes online, and there's vandalism on multiple pages, people that one user can revert it quickly so our readers won't have to read misinformation and vandalism. We would first need community consensus wheather we should enable it or not. What do you all think? -- RyanCross (talk) 00:37, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support(01:42, 24 August 2008 (UTC)). I'm not sure if we need it, but I don't think it can do much harm. Coppertwig 00:50, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support Really, why not? It may be useful sometime! SwirlBoy39 01:34, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - meh. --Gwib -(talk)- 01:47, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support. Useful for trusted editors to make vandal-fighting easier.--TBC 05:07, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Popups doesn't work over here. Chenzw  Talk  06:03, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
On the wall, but will support - Because Popups is broken, and even though we have no need for it... yet, and unless there is no developer problem (resources), I will support. — AE (talk) 07:13, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, should we ask to enable it now? This seems good enough... -- RyanCross (talk) 20:39, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, we don't really need it. No vandalism here, much. SE:WP doesn't even have it, they are covered with vandalism. I say wait until it is needed. — AE (talk) 23:40, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What's the cost, if anything? Developers' time it takes to set it up? Switching to neutral for now. Coppertwig 01:42, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Hello community. Currently, we have one flagged bot that has stopped operations since May. I have brought my bot over here and did a (slightly overdone) trial. It will be doing interwikis, linking mainly this Wikiquote and our big brother. So, what do all of you think of this bot? Chenzw  Talk  12:09, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's excellent. It did much work for us and should be flagged as soon as Coppertwig is granted Bureaucratship (tomorrow). I'm glad we have a working bot. — AE (talk) 02:28, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've given ChenzwBot the bot flag. Coppertwig 02:05, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Establishing MoS

Hello all, I think we need to Establishing some MoS things. (1) Where should {{stub}} be? (see also) (2) With headers, (2a) should we just have "== Unsourced ==" and "== Sourced ==" or (2b) should we have a "== Quotes ==" section with "=== Unsourced ===" and "=== Sourced ==="? I think "2b" is best one. Thoughts? — AE (talk) 20:03, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We have Wikiquote:Manual of Style. I think it needs to be made much shorter and simpler. It needs simple instructions how to write a quote page. It should tell about the {{Tl:simple}} and {{Tl:meaning}} templates. Maybe it should tell a bit about where to find quotes, about copyright, and how to say where the quotes are from. Here on English Wikiquote I think someone is showing me how to use the "unsourced" part. The manual of style could tell when to do that. And we need links from the Main Page and other pages so that people can find the Manual of style.
I usually put stub at the bottom, just before the categories and interwikis.
Should the quotes have quotation marks around them? Or can the writer of each page decide whether to put quotation marks or not? 21:47, 19 August 2008 (UTC) (That was me. You can tell by the smiley.) Coppertwig 00:13, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Along with Template:Meaning and Template:Simple, I think we should also have templates for a quote's background/context and a quote's source (if it comes from a book, movie, or any other medium).--TBC 01:38, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm working on User:American Eagle/MoS at the moment, then we can work out those things. — AE (talk) 01:39, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done I completed my draft. It may need tweaking/expanded, and we may need to discuss a few things, but I just wrote that all out. — AE (talk) 02:23, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I would prefer to put {{stub}} at the end of the lead. For a separate Quotes section with subheading, I disagree, as the heading is redundant. Another thing I'd like to point out is that at the en quote, inline cites are NOT used. They are used right below the sourced quote. And another, thing when adding a quote, I don't believe that quotation marks are needed, since the quote is on its own line, and all other have either simple or meaning in bold. Maxim 02:36, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Repies: Heading: we should establish what the section is. People reading may say "what is unsourced?" - I think we should just avoid the situation and explain what it is, quotes. References: I chose a while back to use {{Cite web}} and references because we use {{simple}} and {{meaning}} is that spot. It keeps it organized and clean. Quotation marks: I believe we should use them to show that is the direct quote. To establish that that is what was said, and the next sections are just SE:WQ interpretations. Interpretating quotes (as we are doing) is a dangerous job, I think we should use them to divide from what the person said, and what we said. — AE (talk) 04:01, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Here, InvisibleSun, an administrator at English Wikiquote, has answered some questions I asked about how to do things on Wikiquote. Some of the ideas I had before seem to be wrong. I'm sorry for the times that I told people the wrong things.
Thank you for writing the manual of style, American Eagle. I started reading it and I'll probably have some changes later. Thanks for your ideas about format, Maxim. I think you have some good ideas.
I don't feel strongly about where the stub tag goes, but Maxim, could you please tell why you think the stub should go after the lead? I like it at the end because then the page is still easy to read. If no one ever reads far enough to come to the stub tag, then the page is long enough anyway! (Not a complete argument, because maybe some people but not others would read that far.) But it's not important to me where the stub tag goes.
Maybe we can just have some quotes with a citation template after them telling where they come from, and other quotes with no citation template. The unsourced ones are the ones with no citation template. I think that's a simple way to do it. Then we don't have to explain what the word "unsourced" means. If we use quotation marks, then maybe we don't need a section heading "quotes". If we have a section heading "quotes" then we don't need quotation marks, but it could still be all right to use quotation marks anyway.
Maxim, I'm sorry, I don't know what you mean by inline cites. I used footnotes on some pages; should I stop doing that?
We can do things differently from English Wikiquote if there's a good reason. Maybe we should put citations under each quote, like English Wikiquote. But maybe it's simpler to use footnotes: then the reader can easily find the quote and its meaning. The citation might not be in Simple English and the reader might not be as interested in it; it might get in the way. I'm not sure which way is better. Coppertwig 16:56, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Admin and bureaucrat templates

I would like to show to the community the new {{admin}} and {{bureaucrat}} templates I created. I assume these templates would be of good use around the wiki fir administrators and bureaucrats. It's somewhat similar to the {{user}} template, but the admin template shows administrative info and the bureaucrat template shows bureucratic info about users. To use it properly, simply add something like {{admin|RyanCross}} which turns into RyanCross (talk changes blocks protects deletions moves) . I just wanted to bring this up. Thanks! -- RyanCross (talk) 02:21, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great job. Speaking of templates, I finished the {{B}} and {{BD}} templates. They are so complex and have many options for use. It could get even more complex, as I am trying to expand them with {{BD-Test}}, a feature that uses #switch. I have a very complex problem with it and I asked Creol about it. About the current template, most options are not needed, but the main purpose of it is to (1) add links to Wikipedia (as we don't have the date articles), and (2) add it to the right date categories. But, I may have gone overboard with it :) - it's so complex, it blows by mind it turned out alright. Cheers! — AE (talk) 02:42, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Beautiful templates, both of you! Thanks! But I don't understand why in Coppertwig (rights renames bots changes) I have an entry in the rights log showing giving the bot flag to ChenzwBot, but no entry in the bots log. Coppertwig 12:49, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's probably because you used Special:UserRights instead of Special:MakeBot... ;-) Maxim 12:58, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh. Did I do it wrong? Coppertwig 13:04, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you did do it wrong and you didn't. You gave the bot rights, but since you were using Special:UserRights, it appeared in the rights log. If you used Special:MakeBot, it would appear in the bot logs. I'm sure the bot flag still works properly though, not sure. -- RyanCross (talk) 01:26, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's about as easy to understand as many things on Wikipedia that may or may not have consensus: m:Talk:Bureaucrat#Update instructions on how to grant bot flag? Coppertwig 02:15, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations page for selected quotes

Well, shouldn't we have one? If you already do have one, can someone show me a link? Thanks! -- RyanCross (talk) 05:26, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Try, Wikiquote talk:Selected quote, I just added one from there. — AE (talk) 05:38, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Eh... that works. :-) -- RyanCross (talk) 05:43, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quote of the day instead of quote of the week

Hi there! I think the quote of the week should be switched to the quote of the day instead. Our wiki is pretty slow if it's just the quote of the week, and more users would participate editing this wiki since it would be updated everyday instead. The only reason why wikis like Simple English Wikipedia has article of the week instead of article of the day is because there are only a few FAs. But there are tons of quotes here, so it should be updated everyday, IMO. Visitors would most likely like to see new quotes everyday rather than having to wait one week. Also, I think a the selected quote of should have the simple version of it on the Main Page also. We are Simple English Wikiquote. ;) Thanks! Thoughts wanted. -- RyanCross (talk) 06:36, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. How do we choose the quotes? How do we remember to change them? (It would be nice to make a list of quotes, and have a bot change them.) Coppertwig 14:43, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure someone will be around to change them. I usually am around at 23:00-04:00 (UTC) on weekdays so I'll probably be around to do that. Anyone can choose really any quote around that they think sounds good and then the community will decide what quotes should be put up on the nominations page. I think we should try this. Thoughts? -- RyanCross (talk) 18:29, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have an idea! At any time, if no quote has been selected for a day that is less than 7 days in the future, then anyone who wants can just put a quote in for that day. But for days more than 7 days in the future we will usually use a system of nomination and voting.
That way, at times when people are less interested in choosing quotes, it's very easy to do it, so one person can do it. But at times when many people are interested, then everyone has a chance to help choose. Coppertwig 22:11, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
American Eagle, I see you've deleted some older selected quotes. Maybe it would be better not to delete the old selected quotes. People might want to see what they had been. One reason would be so we don't use the same quote again by accident. Or people might just want to look at them for fun. I'm not sure. Coppertwig 02:17, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Coppertwig makes a point... editors and readers would probably want to see the previous quotes of the day/week. Also, it would remind us which quotes we have and have not used. Should they be undeleted? I would be more than happy to do so (I haven't done much admin actions here either...). -- RyanCross (talk) 02:19, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

<--- I have not deleted anything. It is all saved, just moved. Check out my archiving of the quotes, on the page. I think it looks good. I will be gone all tomorrow, but you guys try to go ahead and start of quotes for the future. Into September should be done. Have fun and be back soon, I get to see my now married sister!!! (and *in-laws*). I cannot wait. Bye all! — AE (talk) 06:08, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry. I didn't understand what you were doing. Yes, it looks very nice. Coppertwig 15:23, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if we have enough simplified quotes for all 365 days...--TBC 00:52, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then we'll write some more!! Coppertwig 01:11, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sourced and unsourced quotes

The message from InvisibleSun tells how the English Wikipedia calls quotes "sourced" and "unsourced". A website like thinkexist.com is not called a "source" on English Wikipedia. Quotes from there are called "unsourced". An example of a "source" is the name of a book written by the author of the quote, and the page number of the book etc. I think we should do the same thing here. We might or might not have the word "unsourced" at the top of part of a page, because it might not be simple enough, but we can show a difference somehow between "sourced" and "unsourced" quotes, and use the same kids of sources that English Wikipedia uses. I'm sorry again that I did this wrong before. What do other people think about this? Coppertwig 12:46, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds logical, websites like thinkexist could be getting their quotes from anywhere.--TBC 18:44, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for Birth/Death Dates

Due to the number of articles we have on Simple WQ (or rather, the lack of), I think it would be more appropriate if categories for birth and death dates were done by decades instead of individual dates (ex: Category:1790s deaths instead of Category:1799 deaths. Any objections?--TBC 01:20, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you could fit it into {{B}} and {{BD}} somehow, I'd be for it, for now. American Eagle (talk) 01:23, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

200th article milestone!

I'm glad to say that Simple English Wikiquote has hit its 200th article with the creation of Roberto Clemente by me. I was just doing an article creation spree and noticed I hit 200 while looking at Special:Statistics. This wiki is growing pretty quickly. Keep up the good work everyone! -- RyanCross (talk) 09:13, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Establishing MoS Part 2

<Continuing from discussion Here and somewhat here>

As we have been working on establishing our own Manual of Style, see the draft Here, I've noticed two major issues we need to resolve first. One: Whether to use "Quotes" in the sections headers. I think that having it could be best, but I am wavering with it. If discussion shows most like it without it, I will follow it. Two: Whether to use citations/references with <ref></ref> tags. I understand why some users think that the source should go underneath the quote, and why EN:WQ would do that. I think that some of these sources should be swapped to use only {{meaning}}, for example, "This quote was quoted by him in The Book." Maybe. But I think that all web sources should be at the bottom, when you have a quote, a source section, a simple version, and a meaning, it clutters the page and doesn't look very professional. EN:WQ may do it this way, they do not have the add the "simple" and "meaning," but we do. I think we should discuss this and see if there are any reasons beside "English Wikiquote does it." A much smaller thing, TBC told me we don't like to Thinkexist or Brainyquote because "they don't provide info on where they get their quotes from" (which is true). But I think we should, if we used that logic, Wikipedia should never link to IMDb or other such sites. They can be useful as "other websites," but not really references. Thank you for reading this and please discuss what you believe so we can establish our own MoS. -- American Eagle (talk) 18:09, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it would be good to have sources at the very bottom. And, we have to establish another (new) guideline for external links if we are to clear up the problem brought up by TBC. Chenzw  Talk  01:52, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad we agree on that. About the external links other websites problem, I don't think that untrusted quote sites (Thinkexist, Brainyquote, etc.) should be used as references, but they are fine, IMO, as other websites. They're good links that give quotes about the person. We have an {{Imdb title}} template which links to IMDb quotes (as does Wikipedia link there), and IMDb is edited randomly. I say they should be allowed, but not as inline-citations. Thanks -- American Eagle (talk) 02:44, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why so few edit buttons?

How come you guys have so few edit buttons over here? Is there something I can stick in my .js to increase the number (like an equivalent of w:en:User:MarkS/extraeditbuttons.js)? It Is Me Here 07:49, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recent updates

As you all can see from recent changes at this moment I'm posting this, you should see a lot of work I've been doing. I just wanted to point out what I have recently done:

  1. I was bold and moved Wikiquote:Selected quote to Wikiquote:Quote of the Day along with the page's subpages. I think "Quote of the Day" is much more easier to understand than "Selected quote". The word "Selected" is a bit complex, IMO. Since we are now having one featured quote each day, why not name "Selected quote" to "Quote of the Day"? I see no harm in doing so, so I just did it all myself. I then deleted the not needed pages that started with "Wikiquote:Selected quote..." as QD G7: Housekeeping. Speaking of QD G7 housekeeping, look at #4.
  2. I reverted American Eagle's addition to Wikiquote:Quote of the Day/September 11, 2008 so I could add a special quote to remember the September 11, 2001 attacks. This quote update will also be the first one to have a picture featured along with the quote. Oh, and could someone review the next quote update for Wikiquote:Quote of the Day/September 11, 2008? This one should be checked carefully, as it is about an important event.
  3. I created Wikiqoute:Main Page alternative (Next QOTD). It should be used to test how new featured quotes will look like on the Main Page, so it is basically a page that previews what the real Main Page would look like before it is automatically updated. This is used so we can tell if the quote somehow "breaks" something on the Main Page so we know what it looks and what happens beforehand. Therefore, if there are any found problems, we'll be able to fix it before it hits the Main Page, a widely viewed page. All you have to do is something like what I did here as an example.
  4. I've added another delete reason to MediaWiki:Deletereason-dropdown which is (as pointed above) QQ G7: Housekeeping. So it is now at WQ:DELETE.
  5. I also cleaned-up and updated this (Wow, that took me a while!).

Thoughts on these would greatly be appreciated. Thanks! -- RyanCross (talk) 07:57, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RyanCross, thank you very much for all the work you're doing for Quote of the Day. I think it was fine that you were bold and changed the name of the page. Here are some ideas for quotes for September 11. People can add more suggestions: Coppertwig 01:10, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quote 1

(the quote that American Eagle chose, that RyanCross reverted. I can't find it.)

Quote 2

(RyanCross suggested it)

"This enemy attacked not just our people, but all freedom-loving people everywhere in the world. The United States of America will use all our resources to conquer this enemy. We will rally the world. We will be patient, we will be focused, and we will be steadfast in our determination.... we will not allow this enemy to win the war by changing our way of life or restricting our freedoms."
George W. Bush on the terrorist attacks of 11th September 2001

Quote 3

(Coppertwig suggested it)

Terrorism threatens every society. As the world takes action against it, we have all been reminded of the need to address the conditions that permit the growth of such hatred and depravity. We must confront violence, bigotry and hatred even more resolutely. The United Nations' work must continue as we address the ills of conflict, ignorance, poverty and disease. Kofi Anan [2]

Quote 4

(Coppertwig suggested it)

  • Our best destiny, as planetary cohabitants, is the development of what has been called "species consciousness" — something over and above nationalisms, blocs, religions, ethnicities. During this week of incredulous misery, I have been trying to apply such a consciousness, and such a sensibility. Thinking of the victims, the perpetrators, and the near future, I felt species grief, then species shame, then species fear.
    • Martin Amis in "Fear and loathing" - The Guardian (18 September 2001)
    • (Quote of the day on English Wikiquote, September 11 2007)
      • I was going to suggest this anyway, though, I saw Quote #2. I guess I'll go with this. -- RyanCross (talk) 03:16, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Here's my attempt at simplifying it:
          • The best way for us to live together on this planet, is to start something that has been called "species consciousness". This species consciousness refers to knowing more about each other, and going beyond the differences in our beliefs and cultures that divide us. During this very sad week, I have been trying to use my belief in this consciousness. When I think of the people who were hurt, the people who harmed others, and the things that may happen soon in the future, I feel a sadness, shame, and fear for our species.
        • Any thoughts?--TBC 05:15, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • That sounds fine. Here's another simple version, partly based on yours:
            • The best way for us to live together on this planet is to start something that has been called "species consciousness" (thinking all the time about what it means to be human). Species consciousness is higher than belonging to one country, group, religion or culture. During this week when we are very sad and when we almost can't believe what happened, I have been trying to use species consciousness. When I thought of the people who were hurt, the people who hurt others, and the things that may happen soon in the future, I felt part of the sadness, shame, and fear that our species feels.
            Coppertwig 13:48, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quote 5

(Coppertwig suggested it)

Only tragedy allows the release of love and grief never normally seen. ~ Kate Bush
    • (Quote of the day on English Wikiquote, September 11 2003)


I oppose quote 2. It's from one side of a war. Choosing this for the main page is too far from neutral point of view. We have to follow policy en:Wikiquote:Neutral point of view. Quotes don't have to be neutral on Wikiquote, but choosing a quote for the Main Page with a strong point of view on one side of a war is not a good idea, I think. I like Quote 3 best (Kofi Anan). It gives a strong message, but is a world point of view, not just one side. See also English Wikiquote September 11 Quotes of the Day and English Wikiquote quotes about the September 11 attacks. Everybody, what do you think about this? Coppertwig 01:10, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. Remember, the quote for that day is useless we have the simple version. And having long quote, with the extra stuff, is not really doable. And the picture both doesn't match and breaks the page on small monitors. I say we pick a fairly short quote, add the simple version and drop the image. About your replacing my September 11 quote, I didn't noticed that was the date. So you should've done it, but should've moved my quote to September 12, as I just did. -- American Eagle (talk) 03:47, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't think of that. Thanks! :) -- RyanCross (talk) 04:27, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]