text:
Wikiquote:Votes for deletion archive/Category:Native Americans

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: Kept. --Aphaia 3 July 2005 14:53 (UTC)

Category:Native Americans
Nominated by Bennmorland, 07:12, 19 June 2005 (UTC)

 * Vote closed: Kept (4 keeps, some significant comments from an editor, not explicit dissent but apparent not in favor of keeping it). As a subsidiary result, Category:Amerindians should be deleted (3 deletes, no explicit dissent) --Aphaia 3 July 2005 14:53 (UTC)

 * Delete. Replaced by Category:Amerindians -- Benn M 07:12, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC) (The user who nominated the entry for deletion wishes to strike through his vote here. How does he do this? --Benn M 17:41, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC))
 * Comment: '' I stroke it . Use  or , further information is available on How to edit a page, I hope ... Aphaia
 * Thanks. --Benn M 23:53, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: Could you let me know why "Amerindians" is the better name? Native Americans sounds me more natural and Amerindians sounds strange and a bit unclear. --Aphaia 21:26, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Personally, I prefer the linguistic term "Amerind", which has sufficient separation from its erroneous English origins to be useful with less false implication. — Jeff Q (talk) 17:34, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep - I am long familiar with the term Amerindian, and have used it, but it does remain relatively unfamiliar to most people, while Native American is quite commonly used. I believe Native Americans should be preferred here, as it is on the Wikipedia, and Amerindian deleted as a category. ~ Kalki 21:37, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep, and delete the Amerindian category. Sams 22:30, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Comment: And the Pandora's box of categorization by nationality/geography/ethnicity is hereby opened. Not that I would stoop to saying I told you so, eh? ☺ — Jeff Q (talk) 02:18, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Native Americans is a more inclusive title than Amerindian which does not include Inuits and perhaps Na-Dene groups like the Navaho. See discussion at Talk:Native American. Rmhermen 17:18, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Rmhermen, your comment implies that we want to include Inuits and others in the category. Why shouldn't they be in a separate category? What is the intended subset of peoples to be represented by this category? Aren't we really talking about "people of the Americas whose ancestors arrived between 25,000 BCE and 1000 CE", or "people of the Americas whose ancestors weren't from colonizing European nations"? And where do we fit notable people who have ancestors in both the earlier and later populations? — Jeff Q (talk) 17:34, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Citing Rmhermen's citation. Delete Category:Amerindians. A note on the categorization by nationality/geography/ethnicity in this particular circumstance. I didn't want the term "Native American", often misconstrued as a native of the territory of the United States, to be so misconstrued. However, after reading this, I relent. -- Benn M 19:39, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: I don't think it is a good idea to begin another vote on a certain deletion vote (because every vote needs at least 14 days and it make the discussion unclear). --Aphaia 07:37, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: As a native American (i.e., someone born in America), I take offense to this categorization. (Not enough to vote one way or another on it; just enough to make inconvenient, probing comments.) My friend Magdalena is also a native American, having been born in Mexico, North America. Yes, our ancestors participated in the slaughter of the earlier residents (the so-called indigenous peoples, who themselves moved in from Asia and/or Pacific islands), but then again, some of our ancestors were probably from those very same earlier occupants, putting many of us on both sides of this classification divide. This is what I mean by arguing that such distinctions are inherently misleading, confusing, and therefore of dubious value. — Jeff Q (talk) 17:34, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * So you also take offense to wikipedia:Category:Native Americans? I don't see the value in making isolated decisions on issues that aren't related to quotations. Therefore, if it's important to you, since you're an active wikipedia user I suggest that you also raise this issue there. Sams 20:30, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Not to mention w:Category:Murdered Native Americans. -- Benn M 23:54, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, I object to both Wikipedia categories on the "Native American" part (not the murdered part, as long as it's supported by facts). But I've already said I'm on no crusade on categories, and this goes double for Wikipedia. I am mainly interested in preventing the importing of such crusades into an understaffed Wikiquote without good reason. It's like an "unfunded mandate" — we add complexity to WQ without the means to maintain it, except, of course, that we do it to ourselves voluntarily. — Jeff Q (talk) 01:03, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * It seems like a contradiction to me when you say "add complexity to WQ", because the simple option is to use the common "Native American", while you're making an argument that the common terminology shouldn't be used, thus introducing complexities. So how come that you say in this context that you're interested in preventing complexities? Sams 01:30, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * The complexity I refer to is adding the never-ending arguments that ensue from using inherently controversial classifications to our already overextended set of unresolved issues. I was not in favor of introducing categories by nationality, geography, or ethnic background. I realize that it's inevitable that we'll have these; I just didn't want to deal with it so soon. Every active user on Wikiquote has at least 5 or 6 things they feel we should add, modify, standardize, or otherwise change, and many of them are unique to each user. The resulting pile-up of administrative work is a real headache. But I'll shut up on this particular issue now. — Jeff Q (talk) 28 June 2005 05:19 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Wikiquote:Votes for deletion archive/Brand

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: no consensus. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 08:01, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Brand
Not sure if it's about the brand concept in marketing, or something called brand. If the former, the single quote (translated) does not really fit. If the earlier, I don't know what it is. There's Brand (play), and if someone can find a definite link to the article, it could be kept. ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 9 July 2005 07:47 (UTC)

 * Vote closed. Result: No proper consensus for action, so effectively Kept. (Rationale: 1 Neutral; 1 anon Keep w/o signature, which MZ took the trouble to add signature; inferred MZ's implicit Keep from his article improvement. All in all, a highly irregular vote which may establish bad precendents.) ~ Jeff Q (talk) 08:01, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete unless some context and evidence of notability provided. — Jeff Q (talk) 00:56, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutral. Ibsen is certainly notable, but I'm concerned about a proliferation of play stubs, when these can be easily added to the Ibsen article (à la Dean R. Koontz) unless and until they warrant their own articles. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 05:45, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Very strong Keep This is a quote from the Henrik Ibsen play Brand in its Norwegian original and English translation. It links properly from his quote page. I added a link to Ibsen and the play.
 * Unsigned vote by anon (User:84.48.129.34) -- but useful information! I've added links and intro to Brand (before the anon did, and then removed the anon's version which was malformatted -- see Brand history) ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 04:24, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Wikiquote:Votes for deletion archive/Bonus Stage

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: Kept.. — Aphaia 09:30, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Bonus Stage
No quote content. Expand or delete. jni June 27, 2005 06:06 (UTC)
 * Vote Closed: Result: Kept. (2 keeps, 1 expand or delete). --Aphaia 09:30, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 27 June 2005 09:09 (UTC)
 * Keep ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 27 June 2005 10:50 (UTC)
 * Keep for now. As long as Wikipedia supports the notability of these comics with articles with a significant history, and if they have quotes, I'm willing to go along with them. But I'd like to know if WP has addressed the general issue of web-comic notability. — Jeff Q (talk) 22:12, 9 July 2005 (UTC)
 * It did. See w:Wikipedia:WikiProject Webcomics/Notability and inclusion guidelines. And to parrot myself, I suggest we ape that policy :) ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 22:52, 9 July 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Wikiquote:Votes for deletion archive/Azerbaijani proverbs

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: merged into Azerbaijani proverbs. — Jeff Q (talk) 04:23, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Azerbaijani proverbs
I merged the data from this stub int Azerbaijanian Proverbs, but the former is the proper title, based on Wikipedia's spelling of the language, Azerbaijani. I would have moved the latter to the former, except the latter had significantly more material and history. Although the stub is now a redirect, it has a history, so I anticipate an error moving Azerbaijanian Proverbs to Azerbaijani proverbs. Meta-Wiki says that deleting the stub should clear the way for the move. — Jeff Q (talk) 07:24, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Support: I propose two resolutions; 1) once deleting "Azerbaijani proverb", after copying its history on talk of "Azerbaijanian Proverbs" and then move the latter to the former (the correct name) 2) manually copying the (merged) content of "Azerbaijanian Proverbs" to the correct one and making the latter a redirect to the  former (for preserving its significant history). --Aphaia 09:44, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't understand Aphaia second step. If the article is moved its history and talk page moves with it and a redirect is automatically created. Why would anything have to be moved manually? Rmhermen 00:56, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) is not the second step, I proposed two ways - we can choose one of them. The second way is helpful to preserv history (and I am sure most of editors don't care the differences between two): because if we delete one of them to move another, then the history of the former will be lost, and technically it is GFDL violation unless the history of the former won't be kept under the most strict analysis. To prevent this we can merge it technically like 1) but I don't prefer it generally because such history tends to be painful to read. Explanation: when we merge two article technically, (it follows those steps: 0) merging two article on title A manually 1) delete article A. 2) move article B into A. 3) undelete former A, their histories appear cumlatively: then it appear oldest revision of former A, oldest revision of former B, second oldest revision of fromer A ... and it is very painful to read as I say on the above. --Aphaia 04:03, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Resolved. Kalki expeditiously merged the cumulative article into Azerbaijani proverbs and redirected the bad name (Aphaia's 2nd resolution) on 27 March. — Jeff Q (talk) 04:23, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Wikiquote:Votes for deletion archive/Arthur C. Clark vs Clarke

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: keep as redirect. — Angela 04:30, 29 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Arthur C. Clark vs Clarke
Arthur C. Clark. It's a mistype. I've already moved the quotes to Arthur C. Clarke, but someone ought to delete it. Speaking of which, what's the mechanism for becoming an Administrator here? -- Gaurav 17:21, 11 Nov 2003 (UTC)
 * Keep as redirect. I expect it is a common mispelling. Angela 04:30, 29 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Wikiquote:Votes for deletion archive/Anything Goes

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: Keep. — Jeffq 09:55, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Anything Goes
Unclear what this is about, and a google search did not reveal anything useful. It's possible this could be rescued with more background information.
 * Vote closed. Result: Keep (4 Keeps; no dissent; article slightly improved). — Jeff Q (talk) 09:55, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete: MosheZadka 05:33, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep: Now that it's clear what it refers to, and has quotes. MosheZadka 13:32, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unless the author provides info/link to the movie or whatever that he's referring to. Sams 20:15, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Deserves at least a stub. Thanks for the info. Sams 22:20, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * This is a musical.
 * Keep. This is a famous 1934 musical whose Cole Porter songs are a notable part of Americana. I've added a brief intro line to the article and a stub message. I've also asked one of the anon editors to help us expand this and other musical theater articles. — Jeff Q (talk) 10:38, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Cole Porter musicals deserve articles - even stubby. --Aphaia 20:20, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Wikiquote:Votes for deletion archive/Ali Sina

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: Kept.. — Aphaia 00:57, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Ali Sina
Doubt of notability. This person seems to have a certain notablity on the Internet(See, removed "Ibn Sina", "Abu Ali Sina" (both mean to "Avicenna", an persian born philosopher and "Bu Ali Sina" [University]), there are  323,000 results and his own site came 9th. It is not a bad result. But I suspect if this person is also known in the "real world", and if not, he (or she) doesn't match my criteria (If so, I can't find any difference between "known" bloggers and this person). If someone shows me an evidence (like his books, or his activities in the real life), I would concur easily. --Aphaia 28 June 2005 09:00 (UTC)
 * Vote closed: Result: Kept. (3 keeps, no dissent; not including one vote without signature wasn't counted) --Aphaia 00:57, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep. Because there's a wikipedia article. Sams 28 June 2005 21:00 (UTC)
 * Comment: if you think that he's not notable, why don't you also issue a wikipedia VfD? You might get responses from a broader audience this way. Sams 28 June 2005 09:29 (UTC)
 * Comment: Because I am not an active part of English Wikipedia. I am principally a Wikiquoter. I spend usually little time on English Wikipedia -- and don't want to more involved. I have already many things to do (and somehow responsible), I am not therefore interested to wider my activites. Sorry for personal talk, but I would like you to realize it is not equal to be active on English Wikiquote to be active on English Wikipedia. And I don't imagine the latter is mundatory here.   --Aphaia 28 June 2005 09:33 (UTC)
 * Comment: Anyone else interested in issuing a wikipedia VfD then? I'm also not an active wikipedia user. Sams 28 June 2005 10:09 (UTC)
 * Notability does not mean likeability. Osama Bin Laden, Zaqawi, Pol Pot, or criminals like Son of Sam and Jack the Ripper are not likeable but they are mentioned in books and encyclopedias and are notable. I am fully aware that anyone who criticizes Islam is worthless for Muslims, Salman Rushie was given a death decree and his book was burned. Many bookstores carrying his book were bombed and a couple of translators of his book were assassinated. For Muslims, Rushdie is scum and his books are worthless. Whether Muslims are right about Rushdie or not is not the point. The point is that one does not have to be right or likable to be noteworthy. Many noteworthy people are just notorious. Anyone who has an opinion that is controversial and is read and discussed by a lot of people is noteworthy irrespective of the correctness or incorrectness of his views. Ali Sina is enough important at least for a group of Muslims to create an entire site, calling it after his site just to refute what he and other writers in faithfreedom.org say. Another Islamic site dedicated to Sina’s site and refuting what he says is Bismikaallahuma.com. There are at least two Islamic sites and tens of articles in other sites written by Muslims that are just to refute him and other writers in faithfreedom.org. So obviously he is not as insignificant as you claim. I have quoted the opinions of Sina’s critics and provided links to them, including those that are disparaging. Is Mr. Sina worth mentioning? A google search with “Faith freedom international” results in nearly 60,000 entries. Tens of thousands more entries can be found when search is done with faithfreedom  and “Ali Sina” . Several important sites such as AsiaTimes.com  WorldNetDaily.com and Frontpagemag.com have written about him and several other important sites have published his articles. The point is that he is noteworthy. This does not mean he is right. I did not say that he is. I did not say Rushdie is right either. However, those who criticize Islam do not become automatically insignificant just because Muslims don’t like what they say. An encyclopedia is to provide a balanced expose of people who are noteworthy. The very fact that Mr. Zakaria, Mr. Edip Yuksel, and other prominent Muslims debated with Mr. Sina and have published their debates in their sites shows that at least they think he is important enough to be refuted. Please do not confuse noteworthiness with likeability or correctness. Sina is noteworthy because he is read by millions. He is liked by some and disliked by others. He is a controversial personage. The job of Wikipeia is not to take side and list only people who are liked or precisely people who are liked by Muslims. In Islamic countries criticism of Islam is banned and critics are jailed or killed. In free societies we can’t tolerate his intolerance. The critics of Christianity, Judaism and all other religions have the same rights to express their views as the supporters of these religions have. I urge Muslims to exercise restraint and Wikipedia which is a free and unbiased encyclopedia to remain free and unbiased. Maybe you can start another Islamic encyclopedia where you control what goes in and censor all opposing views. But please let Wikepedia remain neutral. Thanks for your consideration. I don’t think the pretext that one is not known in the “real world” is a valid criteria. Ibn Warraq is world famous critic of Islam. Ibn Warraq is a pseudonym. I have not personally seen Sina saying Ali Sina is not his real name. If it is not, it is understandable for safety reason.  [User: 72.21.32.122]
 * "read by millions"? The above is a weird mixture of straw men and unsubstantiated claims. If you read Aphaia's original comment above, it has nothing to do with the likability straw man of yours - just a concern about notability, raising the precise issue that you choose to avoid, which is whether many online links imply notability in the real world, or whether it's some google bomb hoax spread by those right-wing websites that you mention, etc. If he had published a book, or some articles that receive peer reviews, or your claim that he's read by millions can be substantiated, then you could have skipped all of that likability nonsense, which no one has ever used on either wikipedia or wikiquote as reason to delete an article, as far as I know... Sams 28 June 2005 21:00 (UTC)
 * Comment: I created this because article Ali Sina on wikipedia was becoming a quote respository. I personally think he's rather unnotable but wikipedia is of a medium that we can have marginally notable people as long as we do not link them on prominent pages.  My only request is that there be consistency and if you want to keep here keep on wikipedia, and if you want to delete here delete on wikipedia. 68.82.51.76 28 June 2005 21:18 (UTC)
 * Comment: Your assertion about "marginally notable people as long as we do not link them on prominent pages" sounds very wrong to me, or at least it should be. As for your point about consistency, I completely agree with it, but unfortunately we don't control wikipedia. Would you like to raise a VfD there? (You must register an account, otherwise you cannot vote.) BTW my personal opinion is that both articles should be kept, but I don't plan to vote on wikipedia. Sams 28 June 2005 21:36 (UTC)
 * Even notable people should not be at times linked on prominent pages. Jerry Falwell (who is prominent enough for wikipedia definitely as a household name) is notable, but he should not be linked on Christianity.  That's what I mean... and I think that sounds reasonable?  I don't really think it's a matter of controlling wikipedia... I think reasonable editors will see that Ali Sina has very little impact on Islam and should not be linked from that article.  Just like Muslims like Rashad Khalifa shouldn't be either.  I will only raise the VfD on wikipedia if it's deleted here (which I don't think it will be). Oh, and I'm w:User:Grenavitar on wikipedia, I don't use quotes enough to make a name... (and, I'm 68.82.51.76 from above but I am at a different location) 128.175.20.75 6 July 2005 15:59 (UTC)

 * Comment: This is degenerating into another personality war. The Wikipedia VfD suggestion is a method en:Wikiquote has used successfully before to stimulate debate by the vastly-larger WP audience on the notability (not popularity) of a person or topic. Whether it results in a delete or a keep consensus, we can use the result here to help our much smaller audience determine whether an article is worth preserving. We are not obligated to follow any decision on WP, as we (A) have a different purpose, and (B) are our own community and make our own decisions. It's just an aid. That said, there are many other methods we use to attempt to determine notability. Google is one, but as I've pointed out in many other debates, it is not authoritative, as it merely registers current popularity (which is not necessarily the same as notability) and can be "bombed" (thanks Sams; I hadn't heard that term before). Print sources are always preferred. Telecast speeches are highly desirable. Websites are the least useful source, as anyone can create a website in a few minutes. In fact, websites more often provide evidence of self-promotion attempts, although each situation must be examined individually. I have no current position on this question; I just wanted to point out the reasons behind some of our existing practices. — Jeff Q (talk) 28 June 2005 22:34 (UTC)
 * Keep it- I like to learn both sides of Islam.
 * Added by Sagir, moved to std. fmt. by me ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 5 July 2005 06:51 (UTC)
 * Comment: '''This vote isn't counted into the result, due to lack of signature. --Aphaia 00:57, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Comment: I am not sure how keeping Ali's quotes allows anyone to learn about a "side of Islam" -- these are the standard ramblings against Islam, except said by a (purported?) ex-Muslim, giving it some supposed legitimacy. ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 5 July 2005 06:51 (UTC)
 * Even if these quotes are “standard ramblings against Islam” they are typical rambling of all ex-Muslims against Islam. They are not important because they are the views of Mr. Sina but because they are shared by the majority of ex-Muslims. We could delete this page; in that case I suggest we start a new page quoting Ibn Warraq or another ex-Muslim. To understand the views of ex-Muslims, we must read what they say. I have chosen quotes that make the reader see in a glance what a typical ex-Muslim says. [User: 72.21.32.122]
 * Keep for now. In the absence of a WP VfD to further discern notability, and despite some of the questionable arguments made above, I'm willing to accept this person's WP article as temporary evidence of notability, especially given the other problems Wikiquote is dealing with at the moment. — Jeff Q (talk) 22:22, 9 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep, but of course keeping the criticisms as well. If a person is notable enough for Wikipedia that seems a good criterion for inclusion here, and criticisms by people he enters into dialog with should also be notable enough for inclusion. If any of the primary quotations or the critical quotes are not founded upon clear evidence that too can be noted in the comments. ~ Achilles 10:31, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
 * As I have just explained elsewhere, no it cannot. Existence of evidence strengthening a quote, or lack thereof, is not part of wikiquote's mandate. That is up to scholars of current affairs, and perhaps up to wikipedia to summarize those scholars' works. Wikipedia has strict "no original research" policy -- but wikiquote's policy "no comments except those required for context", and those must be npov. Let us leave the debates to scholars, and summarization of the debates to encyclopedias, and let us be an accurate collection of quotes (and we have significant amounts of efforts to do here, as many know) ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 11:43, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Wikiquote:Votes for deletion archive/AFI's 100 Years...100 Movie Quotes

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: Kept. — Aphaia 8 July 2005 08:24 (UTC)

AFI's 100 Years...100 Movie Quotes
In my opinion
 * 1) if I recall correctly we have a policy "not to create a sort of favorite lists".
 * 2) and it can't be more than a dead copy of AFI's list. --Aphaia 08:06, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Vote closed: Result: Kept (4 keeps, 2 deletes) --Aphaia 8 July 2005 08:24 (UTC)

 * Delete: And I am afraid if it is copyvio too. --Aphaia 08:06, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete: ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 09:10, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep (Jeff's arguments persuaded me) ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 6 July 2005 07:54 (UTC)
 * Delete: Sveden 21:47, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Wikiquote is, by its nature, a "favorite quotes" list; recent objections to "favorite lists" were more about the Favorites article that was slated for deletion and about personal lists that don't belong in main article space, whereas this is a properly sourced published list. In the U.S., copyright protects the presentation, arrangement, and supporting material of lists (i.e., the 3-hour program presenting the AFI list), but not the list itself, if it's based on an obvious order, like poll data (see Feist vs. Rural); the EU's database rights law may or may not apply, and its sui generis rationale seems ambiguous in this situation, at least as presented in the WP article. Furthermore, this list is also available on Wikipedia, where basic lists of these types (i.e., produced within copyrighted programs) have apparently passed numerous deletion and copyvio tests. (See the WP village pump archive for the latest rehashing of this issue on other such lists.) This strikes me as an obvious article that I had expected someone to add within 24 hours of the program's broadcast (as it was) and would be an obvious thing for a reader to look up here. I say we keep it unless Wikipedia (which is much more likely to get this issue right) declares such lists as copyvios. — Jeff Q (talk) 23:23, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Nice links, thanks JeffQ. With regard to the copyvio issue, until a formal argument is presented on why copying this specific list is illegal, I don't see why it should be deleted. With regard to the other reasons given, I didn't really understand them - perhaps someone could elaborated? Sams 00:11, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's important! The greatest movie quotes of all time. Isn't that worth something? We are a collection of quotes and this is the most famous collection of quotes. We need to keep it.- B-101 16:39, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree that this list is important, but it can hardly be considered the "most famous collection of quotes", except in a Warholian sense, when it's only a few days old. ☺ — Jeff Q (talk) 17:07, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Wikiquote:Votes for deletion archive/Adult Swim

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: UNIDENTIFIED. NO SIGNATURE

Adult Swim
Salvaged from speedy candidates: a prospective form, but no quotes. Or just it should be deleted like the past candidates under the game companies or game platforms. I am not sure but it isn't obviously speedy candidate in my opinion at least currently. That is why I list it here. --Aphaia 3 July 2005 11:47 (UTC)

 * Vote closed: (Keep as category: 2 supporters, no dissenters)
 * Keep as a list article (possibly moving to "List of Adult Swim shows") ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 3 July 2005 12:17 (UTC)
 * Rationale: These shows have their own flavour, it seems, so a list of them would be interesting. ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 3 July 2005 12:17 (UTC)
 * Question: Can we redirect mainspace articles to Categories? If possible, we could move/copy this to Category:Adult Swim with a redirect, add a short blurb about what Adult Swim is, and add this category to each of its existing show articles. This is how one might expect a "List of..." article to be completely replaced by Category. — Jeff Q (talk) 4 July 2005 06:13 (UTC)
 * Comment: I've tested on a personal mediawiki project (with 1.4 installed), and it is possible. I hope it still is :) ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 5 July 2005 08:23 (UTC)
 * Move/copy to Category:Adult Swim, with redirect if possible. — Jeff Q (talk) 22:26, 9 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: to forestall arguments about missing show pages, I've created a stub for the only page there which did not have an article. Now moving should be relatively simple. ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 15:33, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Will Smith

Willard Carroll Smith, Jr. (born September 25, 1968), aka Will Smith, is an Academy Award nominated actor, multiple Grammy winning hip hop artist, and a former comedian from the United States. He is one of a small group of people who have enjoyed huge success in all the three major entertainment media in the United States: film, television, and the music industry.

Quotes

 * It's great to be Black in Hollywood. When a Black actor does something, it seems new and different just by virtue of the fact that he's Black.
 * "Will Smith" article in Halliwell's Who's Who in the Movies (2001 edition), p. 406

 * I feel like I could run for President. People often laugh, but if I set my mind to it, within the next 15 years I could be in the White House.
 * "Will Smith" article in Halliwell's Who's Who in the Movies (2001 edition), p. 406

 * Even Hitler didn't wake up going, "let me do the most evil thing I can do today." I think he woke up in the morning and using a twisted, backwards logic, he set out to do what he thought was "good." Stuff like that just needs reprogramming. … I wake up every day full of hope, positive that every day is going to be better than yesterday. And I'm looking to infect people with my positivity. I think I can start an epidemic.
 * As quoted in "Will Smith : My Work Ethic Will Make Me A Legend" by Siobhan Synnot in Daily Record (22 December 2007)
 * This was reported in various new stories as if Smith had declared that "Adolf Hitler was essentially a good person."
 * Smith responded to such misinterpretations in further statements:
 * It is an awful and disgusting lie. It speaks to the dangerous power of an ignorant person with a pen. I am incensed and infuriated to have to respond to such ludicrous misinterpretation. … Adolf Hitler was a vile, heinous, vicious killer responsible for one of the greatest acts of evil committed on this planet.
 * "Will Smith Explains Hitler Quote" by Karen Salkin in People (26 December 2007); Abraham H. Foxman, National Director of the Anti-Defamation League accepting Smith's clarifications stated: "If anything, this episode serves as a reminder of the power of words, and how words can be twisted by those with hate and bigotry in their hearts to suit their own world view."

 * The only thing that I see that is distinctly different about me is I’m not afraid to die on a treadmill, right? I will run. I will not be out-worked, period. You might have more talent than me, you might be smarter than me, you might be sexier than me, you might be all of those things you got it on me in nine categories. But if we get on the treadmill together, right, there’s two things. You’re getting off first, or I’m going to die. It’s really that simple, right?
 * "Actor-musician Will Smith" transcript from interview on The Tavis Smiley Show (13 December 2007)

 * Aaaah. It's Rewind time. If I could controlled Rewind I would want Fortnite and Marques Brownlee.
 * "YouTube Rewind 2018" (6 December 2018)

 * Keep my wife's name out [of] your fucking mouth!
 * Shouted to Chris Rock during their altercation at the 94th Academy Awards (27 March 2022)

 * That was a horrific night, as you can imagine. You know, there’s many nuances and complexities to it, but at the end of the day, I just, I lost it, you know? And I guess what I would say, you just never know what somebody’s going through. In the audience right now, you are sitting next to strangers, and somebody’s mother died last week, somebody’s child is sick, somebody just lost their job, somebody just found out their spouse cheated. You just don’t know what is going on with people. And I was going through something that night. Not that that justifies my behavior at all.
 * Will Smith's interview on Trevor Noah's “The Daily Show” Monday. (28 November 2022)]

title: Will Smith


text:
Stereotype

A stereotype is a generalization about a group and individual members thereof, based primarily on membership in that group. Stereotypes may be positive or negative, they may be accurate or inaccurate regarding average characteristics of a group, and may be used to justify certain discriminatory behaviors.

Quotes

 * Today, there are still political and social networks that seek to undermine full equality for all Americans. Their messages are spread using the standard tools: prejudice, fear, disdain, misinformation, trivialization, patronizing stereotypes, demonization and even scare-mongering conspiracy theories.
 * Chip Berlet "Into the Mainstream" in Intelligence Report (Summer 2003) at the Southern Poverty Law Center

 * To some extent we are all the prisoners of stereotypes; we see each other in terms of distorted and oversimplified images. Better communication in the realm of ideas, of the arts, and of science can help refashion these false images. And by seeing more clearly we may act more wisely.
 * Chester Bowles (1962) The Conscience of a Liberal. p. 255

 * All stereotypes turn out to be true. This is a horrifying thing about life. All those things you fought against as a youth: you begin to realize they're stereotypes because they're true.
 * David Cronenberg As quoted at "InFuze Magazine", 14 Dec 2011.

 * Can science ever be immune from experiments conceived out of prejudices and stereotypes, conscious or not?
 * Kay Diaz, in Z, (December 1992)

 * All members of the world community should resolutely discard old stereotypes and motivations nurtured by the Cold War, and give up the habit of seeking each other's weak spots and exploiting them in their own interests.
 * Mikhail Gorbachev (1991) Nobel Address

 * The historian... has to conform to official interpretations of the past, the philosopher to dogmas, the writer to stereotypes of human action, the craftsman to “production-schedules.
 * John Passmore (1971) The Perfectibility of Man

 * Javier: Alright. We got an ex-Triad member, looking for work.
 * Chris: Easy! "Genghis Carnage"! Come on!
 * Javier: You gotta quit with the racist stereotypes, Chris.
 * Chris: Archetypes. Keep going.
 * Jeff Wadlow, Kick-Ass 2, (2013)

title: Stereotype


text:
Brain

The brain is an organ that serves as the center of the nervous system in all vertebrate and most invertebrate animals—only a few invertebrates such as sponges, jellyfish, adult sea squirts and starfish do not have a brain, even if diffuse neural tissue is present. It is located in the head, usually close to the primary sensory organs for such senses as vision, hearing, balance, taste, and smell.

Quotes

 * BRAIN, n. An apparatus with which we think what we think. That which distinguishes the man who is content to be something from the man who wishes to do something. A man of great wealth, or one who has been pitchforked into high station, has commonly such a headful of brain that his neighbors cannot keep their hats on. In our civilization, and under our republican form of government, brain is so highly honored that it is rewarded by exemption from the cares of office.
 * Ambrose Bierce, The Cynic's Dictionary (1906); republished as The Devil's Dictionary (1911).

 * My brain is a piggybank. Drop your coins and feel happy because you’re contributing to my economy. Fundraiser, you are raising the funds to kill my soul every day a little more.
 * Giannina Braschi in the Postcolonial novel United States of Banana (2011)

 * We do have an organ for understanding and recognizing moral facts. It is called the brain.
 * Paul Churchland, in A Neurocomputational Perspective (1989).

 * Do we trivialize a sublime feeling if we appreciate its dependence on the brain? Not in the least. Its significance does not depend on its being a soul state or a brain state...Humility bids us to take ourselves as we are; we do not have to be cosmically significant to be genuinely significant.
 * Patricia Churchland, in Brain-Wise (2002).

 * Aristotle taught that the brain exists merely to cool the blood and is not involved in the process of thinking. This is true only of certain persons.
 * Will Cuppy, The Decline and Fall of Practically Everybody, 1950.

 * It is an article of passionate faith among 'politically correct' biologists and anthropologists that brain size has no connection with intelligence; that intelligence has nothing to do with genes; and that genes are probably nasty fascist things anyway.
 * Richard Dawkins, in The Economist, Vol. 328 (1993).

 * You have a brain, my friend; but I have a heart.
 * Laxmi Prasad Devkota, Lunatic

 * My brain is open!
 * Paul Erdős, in a standard greeting he would make when he was not contemplating some mathematical problem, as quoted in My Brain Is Open : The Mathematical Journeys of Paul Erdos (1998) by Bruce Schechter, p. 10.

 * In the Arena of Brains no more salutary thing can befall a man than to meet his match. The discipline is stern, but not of the most adamant.
 * Norman Gale, A June Romance (Rugby: George E. Over, 1894), p. 66

 * By the time a fetus is 6 months old, it is producing electrical signals recognizable as brain waves. And clusters of lab-grown human brain cells known as organoids seem to follow a similar schedule, researchers reported Thursday in the journal Cell Stem Cell. "After these organoids are in that six-to-nine-months range, that's when [the electrical patterns] start to look a lot like what you'd see with a preterm infant," says Alysson Muotri, director of the stem cell program at the University of California, San Diego.
 * Jon Hamilton, quoting Alysson Muotri in “After Months In A Dish, Lab-Grown Minibrains Start Making 'Brain Waves'”, Shots Health News From NPR, (August 29, 2019).

 * If... too much blood is supplied to the brain, congestion of the vessels takes place, and irregularity in its action is at once produced; if too little, the brain (and, therefore, the nervous system) becomes first irritable and then lethargic. The quality of the blood supplied is also of great importance. As it courses through the body it has two principal functions to perform — to supply oxygen and to provide nutrition to the different organs of the body; and if it be unable adequately to fulfill either of these functions, a certain disorganization will follow. If the supply of oxygen to the brain be deficient, it becomes overcharged with carbon dioxide, and heaviness and lethargy very shortly supervene. A common example of this is the feeling of dullness and sleepiness which frequently overtakes one in a crowded and ill-ventilated room; owing to the exhaustion of the oxygen in the room by the continued respiration of so large a number of people, the brain does not receive its due modicum, and therefore is unable to do its work properly.
 * Charles Webster Leadbeater in Dreams: What They Are and How They Are Caused (1898)

 * Anyone who claims that the brain is a total mystery should be slapped upside the head with the MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences. All one thousand ninety-six pages of it.
 * Tom McCabe.

 * My brain? It's my second favorite organ!
 * Miles Monroe, in Sleeper (1973) Directed by Woody Allen Written by Woody Allen and Marshall Brickman.

 * If we don't have good models to study the human brain, the potential for being able to address so much human suffering, disease, things that are very difficult to model in animals, we'll never reach.
 * Alysson Muotri as qtd. in “After Months In A Dish, Lab-Grown Minibrains Start Making 'Brain Waves'”, by Jon Hamilton, Shots Health News From NPR, (August 29, 2019).

 * If the human brain were so simple that we could understand it, we would be so simple that we couldn't.
 * Emerson W. Pugh, As quoted from George Edgin Pugh, The Biological Origin of Human Values (1977), Basic Books, New York, ch. 7, p. 154.

 * The brain is a mystery; it has been and still will be. How does the brain produce thoughts? That is the central question and we have still no answer to it.
 * Charles Scott Sherrington, as quoted in the article The Human Brain—Three Pounds of Mystery, in 'The Watchtower' magazine (15 July 1978).

 * A hidden spark of the dream sleeps in the forest and waits in the celestial spheres of the brain.
 * Dejan Stojanovic, in Circling, ”In Search of Spark,” Sequence: “A Warden with No Keys” (1993)

 * Because our minds need to reduce information, we are more likely to try to squeeze a phenomenon into the Procrustean bed of a crisp and known category (amputating the unknown), rather than suspend categorization, and make it tangible. Thanks to our detections of false patterns, along with real ones, what is random will appear less random and more certain—our overactive brains are more likely to impose the wrong, simplistic, narrative than no narrative at all.
 * Nassim Nicholas Taleb, The Bed of Procrustes: Philosophical and Practical Aphorisms (2010) Postface, p. 105.

 * I was taught that the human brain was the crowning glory of evolution so far, but I think it’s a very poor scheme for survival.
 * Kurt Vonnegut, As quoted in The Observer [London] (27 December 1987).

 * The brain, is the most complex thing we have yet discovered in our universe.
 * James D. Watson, Watchtower Online Library.

 * People who had damage to the right cerebral hemisphere were unable to recognise simple patterns, or enjoy music, but they could still speak normally. People with left-brain damage were able to recognise patterns, but their speech was impaired. Obviously, then, the left deals with language, and you would expect a split-brain patient to be unable to read with his right eye (connected, remeber, to the opposite side of the brain). Sperry's patient was also unable to write anything meaningful (i.e., complicated) with his left hand. They noticed another oddity. if the patient bumped into something with his left side, he did not notice. And the implications were very odd indeed. Not only did the split-brain operation give the patient two separate minds; it also seemed to restrict his identity, or ego, to the left side. When they placed an object in his left hand, and asked him what he was holding, he had no idea. Further experiments underlined the point. If a split-brain patient is shown two different symbols -- say a circle and a square -- with each eye, and is asked to say what he has just seen, he replies, 'A square'. Asked to draw with his left hand what he has seen, and he draws a circle. Asked what he has just drawn, he replies: 'A square'. And when one split-brain patient was shown a picture of a nude male with the right-brain, she blushed; asked why she was blushing, she replied truthfully: 'I don't know'. The implications are clearly staggering. The person you call 'you' lives in the left side of your brain. And a few centimeters away there is another person, a completely independent identity. Where language is concerned, this other person is almost an imbecile. In other respects, he is more competent than the inhabitant of the left-brain; for example, he can make a far more accurate perspective drawing of a house. In effect. the left-brain person is a scientist, the right-brain an artist.
 * Colin Wilson in Frankenstein's Castle, p. 20-21 (1980)

 * "How can one fix the brain when it is the device we use to seek the solution?"
 * -Dr. Jimmy Freud-Jung

title: Brain


text:
Reality

Reality in everyday usage means "the state of things as they actually exist." The term Reality, in a wider sense indicates the whole of which everything is a part, including everything that exists, has existed, or can exist, whether it is observable, comprehensible, or contradictory in regard to various sciences, philosophies, or any system of perception or analysis.

A

 * Any author who uses mathematics should always express in ordinary language the meaning of the assumptions he admits, as well as the significance of the results obtained. The more abstract his theory, the more imperative this obligation. In fact, mathematics are and can only be a tool to explore reality. In this exploration, mathematics do not constitute an end in itself, they are and can only be a means.
 * Maurice Allais, La formation scientifique, Une communication du Prix Nobel d’économie, Maurice Allais, address to the Académie des Sciences Morales et Politiques (1997).

 * She sowed in my mind the idea that reality is not only what we see on the surface; it has a magical dimension as well and, if we so desire, it is legitimate to enhance it and color it to make our journey through life less trying.
 * Isabel Allende Eva Luna (1987)

 * ... nowhere else in the world did reality have as much effective power as in the camp, nowhere else was reality so real. In no other place did the attempt to transcend it prove so hopeless and so shoddy.
 * Jean Améry, At the Mind’s Limits: Contemplations by a Survivor on Auschwitz and Its Realities (1966)

 * Shinji: I don't understand. I don't understand what reality is.
 * Rei: You can't bridge the gap between your own truth and the reality of others.
 * Shinji: I don't know where to find happiness.
 * Rei: So you only find happiness in your dreams.
 * Neon Genesis Evangelion, End of Evangelion written by Hideaki Anno, July 19, 1997.

 * Our No. 1 enemy is ignorance. And I believe that is the No. 1 enemy for everyone — it's not understanding what actually is going on in the world.
 * Julian Assange, quoted in Facebook Nation: Total Information Awareness by Newton Lee, (2014)

 * You have to start with the truth. The truth is the only way that we can get anywhere. Because any decision-making that is based upon lies or ignorance can't lead to a good conclusion.
 * Julian Assange, quoted in

B

 * The relation of the soul to the Oversoul is that of the part towards the Whole, and it is this relation and its consequent recognitions, which develop into that sense of oneness with all beings and with the supreme Reality to which the mystics have always testified.
 * Alice Bailey,  From Intellect to Intuition  (1932).

 * I would like to remind you that the fact that you see the world picture as one of outstanding chaos, of striving ideologies and warring forces, of the persecution of minorities, of hatreds which are working out into a furious preparation for war, and of world anxiety and terror does not really mean that you are seeing the picture as it is in reality. You are seeing what is superficial, temporal, ephemeral and entirely concerned with the form aspect.
 * Alice Bailey, The Destiny of the Nations (1949)

 * Suddenly the real was no longer merely a stepping stone to the possible. The real was all there was.
 * Elly Bangs at Clarkesworld Magazine Issue #144 (September 2018)

 * The Real – with its vast volumes of nothing between the planets, stars, systems and galaxies – was basically mostly vacuum; an averaged near-nothing incapable of true complexity due to its inescapable impoverishment of structure and the sheer overwhelming majority of nothingness over substance.
 * Iain M. Banks, The Hydrogen Sonata (2013), ISBN 978-0-316-21236-6, Chapter 8, p. 149

 * Nothing is wholly obvious without becoming enigmatic. Reality itself is too obvious to be true.
 * Jean Baudrillard, in The Perfect Crime (1993), as translated by Ian Michel and William Sarah (1995)

 * Nothing is more real than nothing.
 * Samuel Beckett, in Malone meurt (1951), translated by Beckett as Malone Dies (1956), p. 16

 * My God, how can you stand such things, children? They say, "Mom, don't you know it is only television, it is not real."
 * Dr. Lauretta Bender Testimony of Dr. Lauretta Bender Testimony of Dr. Lauretta Bender, senior psychiatrist, Belleveu hospital Newyork N.Y.

 * We live in a nightmare of falsehoods, and there are few who are sufficiently awake and aware to see things as they are. Our first duty is to clear away illusions and recover a sense of reality.
 * Nikolai Berdyaev, in "Political Testament", as translated by E. Lampert, in World Review (March 1949)

 * He who has the bigger stick has the better chance of imposing his definitions of reality.
 * Peter Berger, "The Social Construction of Reality", p. 109, 1966

 * REALITY, n. The dream of a mad philosopher. That which would remain in the cupel if one should assay a phantom. The nucleus of a vacuum.
 * Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary (1911).

 * I myself find the division of the world into an objective and a subjective side much too arbitrary. The fact that religions through the ages have spoken in images, parables, and paradoxes means simply that there are no other ways of grasping the reality to which they refer. But that does not mean that it is not a genuine reality. And splitting this reality into an objective and a subjective side won't get us very far.
 * Niels Bohr, in remarks after the Solvay Conference of 1927, as quoted in Physics and Beyond (1971) by Werner Heisenberg

 * Whoever believes that the only important reality is the realm of ideas, of the spirit, should not occupy himself with science. The scientist must be a realist, he must accept his sense impressions as more than hallucinations, as messages of a real outer world. In disentangling these messages he uses ideas of a very abstract kind, group theory in spaces of many or even infinitely many dimensions and things like that, but finally he has his observational invariants representing real things with which he learns to operate like any craftsman with his wood or metal.
 * Max Born, Physics in My Generation (1956), p. 106

 * I reject your reality and substitute my own!
 * Paul Bradford, The Dungeonmaster, 1984; popularized by Adam Savage of MythBusters

 * I have changed my definition of tragedy. I now think tragedy is not foul deeds done to a person... but rather that tragedy is irresolvable conflict. Both sides/ideas are right. Plot involves fragmentary reality, and it might involve composite reality. Fragmentary reality is the view of the individual. Composite reality is the community or state view. Fragmentary reality is always set against composite reality. Virginia Woolf did this by creating fragmentary monologues and for a while this was all the rage in literature. She was a genius. In the hands of the merely talented it came off like gibberish.
 * Rita Mae Brown, Starting from Scratch (1989)

 * Men seek for vocabularies that are reflections of reality. To this end, they must develop vocabularies that are selections of reality. And any selection of reality must, in certain circumstances, function as a deflection of reality.
 * Kenneth Burke, On Symbols and Society (1989), p. 158

 * Things and actions are what they are, and the consequences of them will be what they will be: why, then, should we desire to be deceived?
 * Joseph Butler, Human Nature and Other Sermons: "Sermon VII"; as quoted in Matthew Arnold's St. Paul and Protestantism

C

 * There's times to be real, and there's times to be phony. That's right, I said it, phony! You think I'm this nice in real life?
 * Dave Chappelle Chappelle's Show season 2 ep. 6

 * If... the powerful are able to fix the premises of discourse, to decide what the general populace is allowed to see, hear, and think about, and to “manage” public opinion by regular propaganda campaigns, the standard view of how the system works is at serious odds with reality.
 * Noam Chomsky, Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media, 1992

 * Sectors of the doctrinal system serve to divert the unwashed masses and reinforce the basic social values: passivity, submissiveness to authority, the overriding virtue of greed and personal gain, lack of concern for others, fear of real or imagined enemies, etc. The goal is to keep the bewildered herd bewildered. It's unnecessary for them to trouble themselves with what's happening in the world. In fact, it's undesirable -- if they see too much of reality they may set themselves to change it. p. 69
 * Noam Chomsky, What Uncle Sam Really Wants, 1993

 * Reality has a well-known liberal bias.
 * Stephen Colbert, at the White House Correspondents' Association Dinner (2006)

 * Normally, we take our reference frame for granted; we mistake it for “reality.”
 * K. C. Cole, The Universe and the Teacup (1998), p. 193

 * ... Is this world real? This is a venerable philosophical issue and I do not wish to be embroiled in the finely honed squabbles to which it has led. I merely state my own working hypothesis: that there is indeed an outside world, and that it is largely independent of our observing it. We can never fully know this outside world, but we can obtain approximate information about some aspects of its properties by using our senses and the operations of our brains. Nor, as we shall see, are we aware of everything that goes on in our brains, but only of some aspects of that activity. Moreover, both these processes—our interpretations of the nature of the outside world and of our own introspections—are open to error. We may think we know our motives for a particular action, but it is easy to show that, in some cases at least, we are in fact deceiving ourselves.
 * Francis Crick,

D

 * Already in 1948, observations... agreed with quantum mechanics, not with local realism.
 * R. H. Dalitz and F. J. Duarte, John Clive Ward, Physics Today 53, 99-100 (2000).

 * There's real poetry in the real world. Science is the poetry of reality.
 * Richard Dawkins, The Enemies of Reason, "Slaves to Superstition" [1.01], 13 August 2007, timecode 00:38:16ff

 * Il n'est rien de réel que la rêve et l'amour.
 * Translation: Nothing is real but dreams and love.
 * Anna de Noailles, Le Cœur innombrable (1901), IV, "Chanson du temps opportun"

 * Materialistically bound, traditional science assumes that anything that cannot be measured, tested in a laboratory, or probed by the five senses or their technological extensions simply doesn't exist. It's "not real." The consequence: all of reality has been collapsed into physical reality. Spiritual, or what I would call nonphysical, dimensions of reality have been run out of town.
 * Russell E. DiCarlo in the Foreword to  The Power of Now, by Eckhart Tolle (1997)

 * Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.
 * Philip K. Dick, in "How to Build a Universe That Doesn't Fall Apart Two Days Later" (1978)

 * Reality can be bent, but it will not break.
 * Brian Dolton, This is the Way the Universe Ends… in The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction, March-April 2015, p. 57

E

 * One reason why mathematics enjoys special esteem, above all other sciences, is that its laws are absolutely certain and indisputable, while those of other sciences are to some extent debatable and in constant danger of being overthrown by newly discovered facts.
 * Albert Einstein, Sidelights on Relativity (1922)

 * As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.
 * Albert Einstein, Sidelights on Relativity (1922)

 * All knowledge of reality starts from experience and ends in it. Propositions arrived at by purely logical means are completely empty as regards reality. Because Galileo saw this, and particularly because he drummed it into the scientific world, he is the father of modern physics – indeed, of modern science altogether.
 * Albert Einstein, "On the Method of Theoretical Physics". Einstein's essays in science. Translated by Alan Harris. Dover. pp. 12–21. (1934) ISBN 9780486470115.

 * One may say "the eternal mystery of the world is its comprehensibility."
 * Albert Einstein, in "Physics and Reality" (March 1936)

 * Physical concepts are free creations of the human mind, and are not, however it may seem, uniquely determined by the external world. In our endeavor to understand reality we are somewhat like a man trying to understand the mechanism of a closed watch. He sees the face and the moving hands, even hears its ticking, but he has no way of opening the case. If he is ingenious he may form some picture of a mechanism which could be responsible for all the things he observes, but he may never be quite sure his picture is the only one which could explain his observations. He will never be able to compare his picture with the real mechanism and he cannot even imagine the possibility or the meaning of such a comparison. But he certainly believes that, as his knowledge increases, his picture of reality will become simpler and simpler and will explain a wider and wider range of his sensuous impressions. He may also believe in the existence of the ideal limit of knowledge and that it is approached by the human mind. He may call this ideal limit the objective truth.
 * Albert Einstein, in The Evolution of Physics (1938) (co-written with Leopold Infeld)

 * One thing I have learned in a long life: that all our science, measured against reality, is primitive and childlike—and yet it is the most precious thing we have.
 * Albert Einstein, Letter to Hans Muehsam (9 July 1951), Einstein Archives 38-408, quoted in The Ultimate Quotable Einstein (2010) by Alice Calaprice, p. 404

 * People like us, who believe in physics, know that the distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion.
 * Albert Einstein, Letter to Besso's family (March 1955) following the death of Michele Besso, as quoted in Disturbing the Universe (1979) by Freeman Dyson Ch. 17 "A Distant Mirror", p. 193

 * One cannot help but be in awe when he contemplates the mysteries of eternity, of life, of the marvelous structure of reality. It is enough if one tries merely to comprehend a little of this mystery each day. Never lose a holy curiosity. ... Don't stop to marvel.
 * Albert Einstein, Death of a Genius," LIFE magazine (2 May 1955) statement to William Miller, p. 64.

 * My religiosity consists in a humble admiration of the infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality. Morality is of the highest importance
 * Albert Einstein, as quoted in Albert Einstein: The Human Side (1981) p. 66

F

 * We have always had a great deal of difficulty understanding the world view that quantum mechanics represents. At least I do, because I'm an old enough man that I haven't got to the point that this stuff is obvious to me. Okay, I still get nervous with it.... You know how it always is, every new idea, it takes a generation or two until it becomes obvious that there's no real problem. I cannot define the real problem, therefore I suspect there's no real problem, but I'm not sure there's no real problem.
 * Richard Feynman, in Simulating Physics with Computers appearing in International Journal of Theoretical Physics (1982) p. 471.

 * You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.
 * Buckminster Fuller, as quoted in Beyond Civilization : Humanity's Next Great Adventure (1999), by Daniel Quinn, p. 137.

 * Up to the Twentieth Century, reality was everything humans could touch, smell, see, and hear. Since the initial publication of the chart of the electromagnetic spectrum, humans have learned that what they can touch, smell, see, and hear is less than one-millionth of reality. Ninety-nine percent of all that is going to affect our tomorrows is being developed by humans using instruments and working in ranges of reality that are nonhumanly sensible.
 * R. Buckminster Fuller on Education (1979), p. 130

G

 * In reality there are as many religions as there are individuals.... Religions are different roads converging to the same point. What does it matter that we take different roads, so long as we reach the same goal. Wherein is the cause for quarrelling?
 * Mahatma Gandhi Hind Swaraj (1909)

H

 * Everything in this world is "PHURO" - transient. It has no reality. True reality is to proceed on the path of truth, to keep the company of saintly people, and to render service to men.
 * Haidakhan Babaji, The Teachings of Babaji, 31 August 1983.

 * The Universe is not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can suppose.
 * J. B. S. Haldane, Possible Worlds and Other Papers (1927), p. 286
 * Often paraphrased: The world is not only stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine.

 * We think that we have been alive since a certain point in time and that prior to that moment, our life did not exist. This distinction between life and non-life is not correct. Life is made of death, and death is made of life. We have to accept death; it makes life possible. The cells in our body are dying every day, but we never think to organize funerals for them. The death of one cell allows for the birth of another. Life and death are two aspects of the same reality. We must learn to die peacefully so that others may live.
 * Thích Nhất Hạnh in The Sun My Heart (1996)

 * Reality is reality. It transcends every concept. There is no concept which can adequately describe it, not even the concept of interdependence.
 * Thích Nhất Hạnh, The Miracle of Mindfulness (1999)

 * The foolish read to escape reality; the wise surrender to it.
 * Tom Heehler, Well-Spoken Thesaurus: The Most Powerful Ways to Say Everyday Words and Phrases, p. 176

 * I deny this reality. The reality is a computation matrix.
 * Doctor Who, "The Deadly Assassin" by Robert Holmes

 * “You ask if anyone has ‘tested the concept.’ But why would anyone test reality? Reality is not for testing, but for living with.”
 * Matthew Hughes, The Spiral Labyrinth (2007), ISBN 978-1-59780-091-4, pp. 86-87

I

 * Einstein's fundamental dispute with the Bohr-Heisenberg crowd over quantum mechanics was not merely about whether God rolled dice or left cats half dead. Nor was it just about causality, locality, or even completeness. It was about reality.
 * Walter Isaacson, (1st edition, 2007)

J

 * For the moment, what we attend to is reality.
 * William James, in The Principles of Psychology.

 * Pretending that the fake is real only makes the real seem fake.
 * Xia Jia, A Hundred Ghosts Parade Tonight in Rich Horton (ed.) The Year’s Best Science Fiction & Fantasy 2013, p. 403 (Originally published at Clarkesworld #65 February, 2012)

K

 * And he knew by what Plato called Divine madness, or a direct contact with nonphysical reality; myths were one result of this last kind of knowing.
 * Morton Kelsey, Myth, History & Faith: The Mysteries of Christian Myth & Imagination (1974)

 * Love is basic for the very survival of mankind. I’m convinced that love is the only absolute ultimately; love is the highest good. He who loves has somehow discovered the meaning of ultimate reality. He who hates does not know God; he who hates has no knowledge of God. Love is the supreme unifying principle of life.
 * Martin Luther King, Jr., Keep Moving From This Mountain, Sermon at Temple Israel of Hollywood (25 February 1965)

 * Reality can take a flying f. at a rolling doughnut.
 * Stephen King, in the introduction to Nightmares and Dreamscapes

 * She’d once told Devon, “I'm more interested in things that are real.” He’d been playing the game. Monitor-glow made his head a silhouette. He said, “What’s real is just an accident. No one designed reality to be compelling.” He gestured to the screen. “But a fantasy world is so designed. It takes the most interesting things that ever existed—like knights in armor and pirates on the high seas—and combines them with the most interesting things that anyone ever dreamed up—fire-breathing dragons and blood-drinking vampires. It’s the world as it should be, full of wonder and adventure. To privilege reality simply because it is reality just represents a kind of mental parochialism.”
 * David Barr Kirtley, Save Me Plz (2007) in Rich Horton (ed.), Fantasy: The Best of the Year 2008, pp. 311-312

 * You cannot search for reality, or for what you will, in isolation. It comes into being only in relationship, only when there is right relationship between man and man. So the love of man is the search for reality.
 * Jiddu Krishnamurti, The Collected Works, Vol. IV, p. 172

 * Reality does not discuss, it simply is.
 * Milan Kundera, Life is Elsewhere, translated by Peter Kussi, Alfred A. Knopf (1974), p. 57

L

 * It doesn’t have to be New York; it could have been Kokomo. I think the point is that having a fictional character come from a real place makes the character seem more real. When I was young, I loved to read Sherlock Holmes. And the fact that he lived on Baker Street in London, a real place, made me enjoy the stories more, with a greater feeling of authenticity.
 * Stan Lee "STAN LEE Talks Big Screen SPIDER-MAN Depiction" Jim McLauchlin, Newsarama, June 22, 2015

 * Reality leaves a lot to the imagination.
 * John Lennon, quoted in Sunday Herald Sun (19 January 2003)

M

 * Only true meditation can reveal the Real.
 * Murdo MacDonald Bayne, The Yoga Of The Christ,  p. 14,  (1956)

 * [R]ealism. You know, in a way, the realists are right, they are always right. Even when they are morally wrong.
 * Kanan Makiya, as quoted in "Regrets Only?" (7 October 2007), by Dexter Filkins, The New York Times Magazine, New York: The New York Times Company

 * Your goals, minus your doubts, equal your reality.
 * Ralph Marston, author and publisher of the Daily Motivator

 * It is not the form of things that must be attended to but their spirit. The real is what matters, not the apparent. In politics, reality is that which is unseen.
 * José Martí, in The Monetary Conference of the American Republics (1891)

 * In the real world, people die. And no self promoting asshole in a fucking leotard can stop it.
 * James Mangold, Logan (2017)

 * The scientific method — apart from a narrowly agnostic and pragmatist point of view — is therefore by itself incomplete and insufficient: it demands in order to make contact with reality the complement of some metaphysic or other.
 * Joseph Maréchal, S.J. quoted in From Intellect To Intuition, by Alice Bailey, (1932)

 * The first thing necessary for a constructive dealing with time is to learn to live in the reality of the present moment. For psychologically speaking, this present moment is all we have.
 * Rollo May, in Man’s Search for Himself (1953)

 * Consciousness is unquantifiable, a ghost in the machine, barely considered real at all, though in a sense this flickering mosaic of awareness is the only true reality that we can ever know.
 * Alan Moore in What Is Reality?

 * You will ask why I speak against magic when I myself discuss the cementing of space, the significance of the circle’s influence, and other conditions reminiscent of magic. The difference is that magic offers a substitute for life, while We teach people to make reality better by taking advantage of the possibilities that life itself provides. 195.
 * Morya, Leaves of Morya’s Garden II,  (1925)

 * Ideas, unlike solid structures, do not perish. They remain immortal, immaterial and everywhere, like all Divine things. Ideas are a golden, savage landscape that we wander unaware, without a map. Be careful: in the last analysis, reality may be exactly what we think it is.
 * Alan Moore in What Is Reality?

O

 * Sooner or later a false belief bumps up against solid reality, usually on a battlefield.
 * George Orwell, "In Front of Your Nose," Tribune (22 March 1946)
 * The past is a curious thing. It's with you all the time. I suppose an hour never passes without your thinking of things that happened ten or twenty years ago, and yet most of the time it's got no reality, it's just a set of facts that you've learned, like a lot of stuff in a history book. Then some chance sight or sound or smell, especially smell, sets you going, and the past doesn't merely come back to you, you're actually in the past.
 * George Orwell, Coming Up for Air, Part I, Ch. 4 (1939)

 * Every citizen... could be kept for twenty-four hours a day under the eyes of the police... The possibility of enforcing not only complete obedience to the will of the State, but complete uniformity of opinion on all subjects, now existed for the first time... They could be made to accept the most flagrant violations of reality, because they... were not sufficiently interested in public events to notice what was happening.
 * George Orwell in Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949)

P

 * Neither my deeds have any contents, nor, my gestures have sense of zeal, my days are walking forth in worthlessness. with this body deficient of heart and soul how can I come close to you O' Glorious! O' Lord Almighty!
 * Suman Pokhrel, How can I Come Close to You?

R

 * The jnani, following the path of knowledge, always reason about the Reality saying, "not this, not this." Brahman is neither "this" nor "that"; It is neither the universe nor its living beings. Reasoning in this way, the mind becomes steady.
 * Ramakrishna, in The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna (1942), p. 132

 * A fundamental value in the scientific outlook is concern with the best available map of reality. The scientist will always seek a description of events which enables him to predict most by assuming least. He thus already prefers a particular form of behavior. If moralities are systems of preferences, here is at least one point at which science cannot be said to be completely without preferences. Science prefers good maps.
 * Anatol Rapoport Science and the goals of man: a study in semantic orientation. Greenwood Press, 1950/1971. p. 224; Partly cited in: Book review by Harold G. Wren, in Louisiana Law Review, Vol 13, nr 4, May 1953

 * Hudson: Movies, television, video games...These days, it's hard to tell what's real and what's not.
 * Gargoyles (TV series), Deadly Force, November 18, 1994 written by Michael Reaves.

 * Some people think that we are stuck in physical reality like flies in flypaper or victims in quicksand, so that each motion we make only worsens our predicament and hastens our extinction. Others see the universe as a sort of theater into which we are thrust at birth and from which we depart forever at death. In the backs of their minds people with either attitude will see a built-in threat in each new day; even joy will be suspect because it, too, must end in the body's eventual death. I used to feel this way. When I fell in love with Rob, my joy served to double the underlying sense of tragedy I felt, as if death mocked me all the more by making life twice as precious. I saw each day bringing me closer to a total extinction that I could hardly imagine, but which I resented with growing vehemence.
 * Jane Roberts in The Seth Material, p. 123
 * It is important to show the reality of the Teaching, to prove to what an extent it can alter the character and life of a person. Long ago it was said, "Faith without deeds is dead." Thus, the Teaching without application to life will bring no benefit.
 * Helena Roerich, Letters I, 26 April 1934

 *  There is no reality but God, says the completely surrendered sheik, who is an ocean for all beings.
 * Jelaluddin Rumi, in The Essential Rumi (1995) translated by Coleman Barks with John Moyne, A. J. Arberry and Reynold Nicholson; "The Grasses" in Ch. 4 Spring Giddiness, p. 44

 * You knock at the door of Reality. You shake your thought wings, loosen your shoulders, and open.
 * Jelaluddin Rumi, in The Essential Rumi (1995) translated by Coleman Barks with John Moyne, A. J. Arberry and Reynold Nicholson; "The Gift of Water" Ch. 18 The Three Fish, p. 200

S

 * Witnessing such a sorry state of affairs is by no means a monotonous, monochromatic activity... There is something profoundly unsettling about an intellectual such as Chomsky who has neither an office to protect nor territory to consolidate and guard. There is no dodging the inescapable reality that such representations by intellectuals will neither make them friends in high places nor win them official honors. It is a lonely condition, yes, but it is always a better one than a gregarious tolerance for the way things are.
 * Edward Said, Foreword to Noam Chomsky, Fateful Triangle: The United States, Israel, and the Palestinians, Updated Edition (1999)

 * If you ever become fatigued from chasing your dreams, you are always welcome in my world of reality.
 * Sanu Sharma

 * When there is the moon, the night automatically becomes beautiful; there might be no need for extra light. Light must be saved for those moments when the night is dark, and the moon doesn't appear in the sky.
 * Sanu Sharma, Pharak

 * Things are entirely what they appear to be and behind them...there is nothing.
 * Jean-Paul Sartre, Nausea

 * Illusions will not last. Their death is sure, and this alone is certain in their world. It is the ego’s world because of this. What is the ego? But a dream of what you really are. A thought you are apart from your Creator and a wish to be what He created not. It is a thing of madness, not reality at all. A name for namelessness is all it is. A symbol of impossibility; a choice for options that do not exist.
 * Helen Schucman in A Course in Miracles Preface vi,  (1976)

 * Thoughts can represent lower-order or higher-order reality. This is the basic distinction between intellectualizing and thinking. One makes the physical and the other creates the spiritual, and we believe in what we make or create. p. 2
 * Helen Schucman in A Course in Miracles  (1976)

 * Fantasy is a distorted form of vision. Fantasies of any kind are distortions, because they always involve twisting perception into unreality. Actions that stem from distortions are literally the reactions of those who know not what they do. Fantasy is an attempt to control reality according to false needs.
 * Helen Schucman in A Course in Miracles, p. 7 (1976)

 * Children do confuse fantasy and reality, and they are frightened because they do not know the difference. p. 132
 * Helen Schucman in A Course in Miracles, (1976)

 * The true measurement of a person's worth isn't what they say they believe in, but what they do in defense of those beliefs. If you're not acting on your beliefs, then they probably aren't real.
 * Edward Snowden,  (2014)

 * Many things are narrated in Scripture as real, and were believed to be real, which were in fact only symbolical and imaginary.
 * Spinoza, Theologico-Political Treatise (1677), 6:98

T

 * Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality.
 * Nikola Tesla "Radio Power Will Revolutionize the World" in Modern Mechanics and Inventions (July 1934)

 * Finding Your Invisible And Indestructible Reality. our physical form is part of the illusion, so how can the body, the physical form, bring you to a realization of Being? The body that you can see and touch cannot take you into Being. But that visible and tangible body is only an outer shell, or rather a limited and distorted perception of a deeper reality. In your natural state of connectedness with Being, this deeper reality can be felt every moment as the invisible inner body, the animating presence within you. So to "inhabit the body' is to feel the body from within, to feel the life inside the body and thereby come to know that you are beyond the outer form. p. 72
 * Eckhart Tolle in The Power of Now: A Guide to Spiritual Enlightenment (1997)

 * All we can perceive, experience, think about, is the surface layer of reality, less than the tip of an iceberg. Underneath the surface appearance, everything is not only connected with everything else, but also with the Source of all life out of which it came.
 * Eckhart Tolle in A New Earth: Awakening to Your Life's Purpose, (2005)

 * Seize the moments of happiness, love and be loved! That is the only reality in the world, all else is folly.
 * Leo Tolstoy in War and Peace (1865-1869)

U

 * Each of us lives,dependent and bound by our individual knowledge and our awareness. All that is what we call reality, however, both knowledge and awareness are equivocal. One's reality might be another's illusion. We all live inside our own fantasies.
 * Itachi Uchiha, in Naruto: Shippūden

W

 * Cypher: You know, I know this steak doesn't exist. I know that when I put it in my mouth, the Matrix is telling my brain...that it is juicy...and delicious. After nine years, you know what I realize? Ignorance is bliss.
 * The Matrix (film) (1999), written by Larry and Andy Wachowski

 * The combination of these two facts — the longing in the depth of the heart for absolute good, and the power, though only latent, of directing attention and love to a reality beyond the world and of receiving good from it — constitutes a link which attaches every man without exception to that other reality.Whoever recognizes that reality recognizes also that link. Because of it, he holds every human being without any exception as something sacred to which he is bound to show respect.This is the only possible motive for universal respect towards all human beings. Whatever formulation of belief or disbelief a man may choose to make, if his heart inclines him to feel this respect, then he in fact also recognizes a reality other than this world's reality. Whoever in fact does not feel this respect is alien to that other reality also.
 * Simone Weil, Draft for a Statement of Human Obligation (1943)

 * It from bit.
 * John Wheeler, as quoted in Black Hole Computers by Lloyd Seth and Y. Jack Ng, in Scientific American (November 2004), p. 53

 * Reality... What A Concept!
 * Robin Williams, title of his 1979 comedy album

 * Recognizing that “reality” is not inevitable makes it more painful; subversive thoughts provoke the urge to subversive action. But such action has consequences-rebels risk losing their jobs, failing in school, incurring the wrath of parents and spouses, suffering social ostracism.
 * Ellen Willis "The Majoritarian Fallacy" in Don't Think, Smile!: Notes on a Decade of Denial (1999)

Z

 * Once Zhuang Zhou dreamed he was a butterfly, a butterfly flitting and fluttering around, happy with himself and doing as he pleased. He didn’t know he was Zhuang Zhou. Suddenly he woke up, and there he was, solid and unmistakable Zhuang Zhou. But he didn’t know if he were Zhuang Zhou who had dreamed he was a butterfly or a butterfly dreaming he was Zhuang Zhou. Between Zhuang Zhou and a butterfly, there must be some distinction! This is called the Transformation of Things.
 * Zhuangzi

 * It from qubit.
 * Paola Zizzi, quoted in Black Hole Computers by Lloyd Seth and Y. Jack Ng, in Scientific American (November 2004), p. 54

title: Reality