text:
Darth Vader

Darth Vader is a main character from Star Wars.

Star Wars: Episode I—The Phantom Menace (1999)

 * "I'm a person, and my name is Anakin!" (to Padmé when she asks if he's a slave)
 * "Mom, you said that the biggest problem in the universe is that no one helps each other." (trying to convince his mother to help Qui-Gon Jinn)

Star Wars: Episode II—Attack of the Clones (2002)
[uncomfortable pause] Anakin: "If you are suffering as much as I am, please, tell me." Anakin: "Well, I should be! Some day I will be... I will be the most powerful Jedi ever. I promise you. I will even learn to stop people from dying." Anakin: "Padmé!! Put the ship down!" Obi-Wan: "Anakin! Don't let your personal feelings get in the way. Follow that speeder. Anakin: "Lower the ship!" Obi-Wan: "I can't take Dooku alone, I need you. If we catch him, we can end this war right now. We have a job to do!" Anakin: "I don't care, put the ship down." Obi-Wan: "You will be expelled from the Jedi Order!" Anakin: "I can't leave her!" Obi-Wan: "Come to your senses! What do you think Padmé would do were she in your position?" Anakin: "She would do her duty." Dooku: "Brave of you, boy. I would have thought you had learned your lesson." Anakin: "I am a slow learner."
 * Anakin (to Padmé): "From the moment I met you, all those years ago, not a day has gone by when I haven't thought of you. And now that I'm with you again... I'm in agony. The closer I get to you, the worse it gets. The thought of not being with you- I can't breathe. I'm haunted by the kiss that you should never have given me. My heart is beating... hoping that kiss will not become a scar. You are in my very soul, tormenting me... what can I do? I will do anything you ask."
 * "I killed them. I killed them all. They're dead, every single one of them. And not just the men, but the women, and the children, too! They're like animals, and I slaughtered them like animals! I hate them!" (after slaughtering the Sand People that captured/killed his mother)
 * "It's all Obi-Wan's fault! He's jealous! He's holding me back! (to Padmé)
 * Padmé: "You're not all-powerful, Ani."
 * (Padme falls from the ship)
 * (Anakin ignites his lightsaber, shouts, and leaps to Count Dooku, but blocks his lightsaber, and carries the blow before it hits Obi-Wan, who is injured, and losing his lightsaber, and not knowing his apprentice has survived, hoping to save his injured master)

Star Wars: Episode III—Revenge of the Sith (2005)
Anakin: "I would certainly like to." Palpatine: "I know you would. I can feel your anger. It gives you focus, makes you stronger." Anakin: "I'm going to turn you over to the Jedi Council." Palpatine: "Of course, you should. But you're not so sure of their intentions, are you?" Anakin: "I will quickly discover the truth of all this." Palpatine: "You have great wisdom, Anakin. Know the power of the Dark Side. The power to save Padmé." Windu: "Skywalker, we've just received word that Obi-Wan has destroyed General Grievous. We're on our way now to make sure the Chancellor returns emergency power back to the Senate." Anakin: "He won't give up his power. I just learned a terrible truth. I think Chancellor Palpatine is a Sith Lord." Windu: "A Sith Lord?" Anakin: "Yes, the one we've been looking for." Windu: "How do you know this?" Anakin: "He knows the ways of the Force. He's been trained to use the Dark Side." Windu: "Are you sure?" Anakin: "Absolutely." Windu: "Then our worst fears have been realized. We must move quickly if the Jedi Order is to survive." Anakin: "Master, the Chancellor is very powerful. You'll need my help if you're going to arrest him." Windu: "For your own good, stay out of this affair. I sense a great deal of confusion in you, young Skywalker. There is much fear that clouds your judgment." Anakin: "I must go, Master." Windu: "No. If what you told me is true, you will have gained my trust. But for now, stay here. Wait in the Council Chamber until we return." Anakin: "Yes, Master." Anakin: "You cant! he must stand trial." Windu: "He has control of the Senate and the Courts! He's too dangerous to be left alive!" Anakin: "It's not the Jedi way. He must live. (Windu raises his saber to kill Palpatine) "I need him!" (Windu still tries to kill Palpatine) "NOOOOO!" (activates lightsaber and severs Windu's lightsaber hand) Palpatine: "You're fulfilling your destiny, Anakin. Become my apprentice. Learn to use the Dark Side of the Force." Anakin: "I will do whatever you... ask." Palpatine: "Good." Anakin: "Just help me save Padmé's life. I can't live without her." Palpatine: "To cheat death is a power only one has achieved. But if we work together, I know we can discover the secret." Anakin: "I pledge myself to your teachings." Palpatine: "Good... good. The Force is strong with you. A powerful Sith, you will become. Henceforth, you shall be known as Darth... Vader."
 * "He was an unarmed prisoner." (about Count Dooku after Anakin chopped his head off)
 * "Something is happening. I'm not the Jedi I should be. I want more, but I know I shouldn't." (to Padmé)
 * "You're the Sith Lord!"
 * Palpatine: "Are you going to kill me?"
 * Anakin: "Master Windu."
 * Mace Windu: "I am going to end this, once and for all!"
 * Anakin: "What have I done?!" (after assisting Palpatine in killing Mace Windu)

Star Wars: Episode VI—Return of the Jedi (1983)
Luke: But you'll die. Anakin: "Nothing... can stop that now... Just for once... let me... look on you, with my own eyes." [Luke removes Vader's mask and looks at the aged Jedi] Now... go, my son. Leave me." Luke: "No, you're coming with me. I'll not leave you here, I've got to save you!" Anakin: "You already have, Luke. You were right. You were right about me. Tell your sister, you were right." (Before dying in Luke's arms)
 * Anakin: "Luke, help me take... this mask off."

Star Wars: Episode III—Revenge of the Sith (2005)
Padmé: "I was worried. Obi-Wan told me terrible things." Vader: "What things?" Padmé: "He said you turned to the Dark Side, that you killed younglings." Vader: "Obi-Wan is trying to turn you against me." Padmé: "He cares about us." Vader: "Us?" Padmé: "He knows, he wants to help you. Anakin, all I want is your love." Vader: "Love won't save you, Padmé, only my new powers can do that." Padmé: "But at what cost? You're a good person, Anakin, don't do this." Vader: "I won't lose you the way I lost my mother. I am becoming more powerful than any Jedi has ever dreamed of. And I'm doing it for you, to protect you." Padmé: "Come away with me, help me raise our child. Leave everything else behind while we still can!" Vader: "Don't you see, we don't have to run away anymore. I have brought peace to the Republic. I am more powerful than the Chancellor, I can overthrow him. Then together, you and I can rule the Galaxy, make things the way we want them to be." Padmé: "I don't believe what I'm hearing. Obi-Wan was right, you've changed." Vader: "I don't want to hear anymore about Obi-Wan. The Jedi turned against me. Don't you turn against me!" Padmé: "I don't know you anymore. Anakin, you're breaking my heart. You're going down a path I can't follow." Vader: "Because of Obi-Wan?" Padmé: "Because of what you've done, what you plan to do. Stop! Stop now! Come back! I love you!" Vader: (discovers Obi-Wan) "Liar!" Padmé: "No!" Vader: "You're with him! You brought him here to kill me!" (force-chokes Padmé) Obi-Wan: "Let her go, Anakin!" Padmé: (weakly) "Anakin..." Obi-Wan: "Let her go!" Obi-Wan Kenobi: "You have done that yourself!" Vader: "You will not take her from me!" Obi-Wan: "Your anger and your lust for power have already done that!" Darth Vader: "Don't lecture me, Obi-Wan. I see through the lies of the Jedi. I do not fear the Dark Side as you do. I have brought peace, freedom, justice and security to my new empire!" Obi-Wan: "Your new empire?" Vader: "Don't make me kill you." Obi-Wan: "Anakin, my allegiance is to the Republic, TO DEMOCRACY!!" Vader: "If you're not with me, then you're my enemy!" Obi-Wan: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes. I will do what I must." Vader: "You will try." Vader: "I should've known the Jedi were plotting to take over!" Obi-Wan: "Anakin, Chancellor Palpatine is evil!" Vader: "From my point of view, the Jedi are evil!" Obi-Wan: "Well, then you are lost!" Vader: "This is the end for you, my master." Vader: "You underestimate my power!" Obi-Wan: "Don't try it." Vader (screaming): "I hate you!" Obi-Wan: "You were my brother, Anakin. I loved you." Vader: "Yes, Master. Where is Padmé? Is she safe? Is she alright?" Palpatine:"It seems, in your anger, you killed her." Vader: "I... I couldn't have. She was alive! I felt it!" (screams violently and destroys many medical droids) "NOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!"
 * "Thank you... my master."
 * "I agree, the Council's next move will be against the Senate."
 * "What about the other Jedi spread across the Galaxy?"
 * "The Separatists have been 'taken care of', my Master."
 * Darth Vader: "I saw your ship. What are you doing out here?"
 * Darth Vader: "You turned her against me!!!"
 * Obi-Wan Kenobi: "You have allowed this Dark Lord to twist your mind, until now you have become the very thing you swore to destroy."
 * Obi-Wan: "I have failed you, Anakin. I have failed you."
 * Obi-Wan: "It's over, Anakin! I have the high-ground!"
 * Obi-Wan: "You were the Chosen One! It was said that you would destroy the Sith, not join them! Bring balance to the Force, not leave it in darkness!"
 * Palpatine: "Lord Vader, can you hear me?"

Rogue One (2016)

 * "Be careful not to choke on your aspirations, Krennic."

Star Wars: Episode IV—A New Hope (1977)
Vader: "As you wish..." (Vader releases Motti)
 * "Where are those transmissions you intercepted? What have you done with those plans?"
 * "If this is a consular ship, where is the ambassador?" (while holding an officer serving under Captain Antilles and choking the officer to death)
 * "Commander, tear this ship apart until you've found those plans, and bring me the passengers, I want them alive!"
 * "You are a part of the Rebel Alliance, and a traitor. Take her away!" (first sentence to Leia, second sentence to the Stormtroopers)
 * "Don't be too proud of this technological terror you've constructed. The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of the Force." (to Admiral Motti)
 * "I find your lack of faith disturbing." (while Force-choking Admiral Motti)
 * Tarkin: "Vader, release him!"
 * "Escape is not his plan. I must face him, alone." (to Grand Moff Tarkin)
 * "Your powers are weak, old man." (to Obi-Wan Kenobi)
 * "When I left you I was but the learner, now I am the master." (to Obi-Wan Kenobi)
 * "This will be a day long remembered. It has seen the end of Kenobi, and will soon see the end of the Rebellion."
 * "The Force is strong with this one." (about Luke Skywalker)
 * "I have you now!" (attempting to shoot down Luke Skywalker)

Star Wars: Episode V—The Empire Strikes Back (1980)
Boba Fett: "As you wish." Luke: "I'll never join you!" Vader: "If you only knew the power of the Dark Side. Obi-Wan never told you what happened to your father..." Luke: "He told me enough... he told me you killed him." Vader: "No... I am your father." Palpatine: "There is a great disturbance in the Force." Vader: "I have felt it." Palpatine: "We have a new enemy: Luke Skywalker." Vader: "Yes, my Master." Palpatine: "He could destroy us." Vader: "He's just a boy, Obi-Wan can no longer help him". Palpatine: "The Force is strong with him. The son of Skywalker must not become a Jedi." Vader: "If he could be turned, he would become a powerful ally..." Palpatine: "Yes. Yes. He would be a great asset. Can it be done?" Vader: "He will join us, or die, Master." Luke: (lying in the Millennium Falcon's med bay) "Father?" Vader: "Son, come with me."
 * "Apology accepted, Captain Needa." (after Force-choking him to death)
 * Vader: "There will be a substantial reward for the one who finds the Millennium Falcon. You are free to use any methods necessary, but I want them alive. No disintegrations."
 * "The Force is with you young Skywalker... but you are not a Jedi yet."
 * "All too easy."
 * "Perhaps you are not as strong as the Emperor thought."
 * "Impressive... Most impressive."
 * Vader: "Luke, you do not yet realize your importance. You have only begun to discover your power. Join me, and I will complete your training. With our combined strength, we can end this destructive conflict, and bring order to the galaxy."
 * "Join me, and together we can rule the galaxy as father and son!"
 * "What is thy bidding, my master?"
 * "You have failed me for the last time, Admiral."
 * "Obi-Wan has taught you well."
 * "Don't make me destroy you."
 * "Asteroids do not concern me, Admiral. I want that ship, not excuses."
 * Vader: "What is thy bidding, my Master?"
 * "Alert my Star Destroyer to prepare for my arrival."
 * Vader: (through the Force) "Luke."

Star Wars: Episode VI—Return of the Jedi (1983)
Luke: "I've accepted the truth that you were once Anakin Skywalker, my father." Vader: "That name no longer has any meaning for me." Vader: "There is no conflict." Luke: "You couldn't bring yourself to kill me before, and I don't believe you'll destroy me now." Vader: "You under estimate the power of the dark side. If you will not fight, then you will meet your destiny!"
 * "You may dispense with the pleasantries, Commander. I am here to put you back on schedule."
 * "He is most displeased with your apparent lack of progress."
 * "The Emperor is not as forgiving as I am."
 * "He will come to me?"
 * "Give yourself to the Dark Side. It is the only way you can save your friends. Yes, your thoughts betray you. Your feelings for them are strong."
 * "What of the reports of the rebel fleet massing near Sullust?"
 * "I see you have constructed a new lightsaber. Your skills are complete."
 * "Indeed you are powerful, as the Emperor has forseen."
 * Vader: "So, you have accepted the truth?"
 * "It is too late for me, my son."
 * "You don't know the power of the Dark Side. I must obey my master."
 * "You are unwise to lower your defenses!"
 * Luke: "Your thoughts betray you, father. I feel the good in you, the conflict."
 * "So... you have a twin sister? Your feelings have now betrayed her, too. Obi-Wan was wise to hide her from me; now his failure is complete. If you will not turn to the dark side, then perhaps she will." (referring to Luke's sister, Leia)

About Darth Vader

 * "Twisted by the Dark Side, young Skywalker has become. The boy you trained... gone he is... consumed by Darth Vader." —Yoda (to Obi-Wan)
 * "You will not stop me, Darth Vader will become more powerful than either of us!" - Darth Sidious (to Yoda)
 * "Your father was seduced by the Dark Side of the Force. He ceased to be Anakin Skywalker, and became Darth Vader. When that happened, the good man that was your father was destroyed." - Obi-Wan Kenobi (to Luke Skywalker)
 * "He's more machine now, than man. Twisted and evil." - Obi-Wan Kenobi (to Luke Skywalker)
 * "... the person who you thought was the villain, is really the victim." - George Lucas in the documentary, The Chosen One

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

title: Darth Vader


text:
Federico Fellini

Federico Fellini (20 January 1920 – 31 October 1993) was a highly esteemed and influential Italian film director. Fellini's films typically combine memory, dreams, and fantasy. Among the best known of his films are La Strada, La Dolce Vita, 8½, and Amarcord.

Quotes

 * All art is autobiographical; the pearl is the oyster’s autobiography.
 * On the autobiographical nature of his films, in The Atlantic (December 1965)

 * Even if I set out to make a film about a fillet of sole, it would be about me.
 * On the autobiographical nature of his films, in The Atlantic (December 1965)

 * Cinema is an old whore, like circus and variety, who knows how to give many kinds of pleasure. Besides, you can’t teach old fleas new dogs.
 * As quoted in in The Atlantic (December 1965)

 * Talking about dreams is like talking about movies, since the cinema uses the language of dreams; years can pass in a second and you can hop from one place to another. It’s a language made of image. And in the real cinema, every object and every light means something, as in a dream.
 * As quoted in Rolling Stone no. 421 (1984)

 * What is an artist? A provincial who finds himself somewhere between a physical reality and a metaphysical one... It’s this in-between that I’m calling a province, this frontier country between the tangible world and the intangible one — which is really the realm of the artist.
 * "Every Time We Say Goodbye" in Sight and Sound [London] ( June 1991)

 * There is no end. There is no beginning. There is only the infinite passion of life.
 * Fellini on Fellini (1976) edited by Anna Keel and Christian Strich; translated by Isabel Quigly.

 * Cinéma-vérité? I prefer 'cine-mendacity'. A lie is always more interesting than the truth...Fiction may have a greater truth than everyday, obvious reality.'''
 * Fellini on Fellini (1976) edited by Anna Keel and Christian Strich; translated by Isabel Quigly.

I'm a Born Liar (2003)

 * I'm a Born Liar: A Fellini Lexicon (2003) Edited by Damian Pettigrew ISBN 0306805200

 * I don't believe in total freedom for the artist. Left on his own, free to do anything he likes, the artist ends up doing nothing at all. If there's one thing that's dangerous for an artist, it's precisely this question of total freedom, waiting for inspiration and the rest of it.
 * "Artistic Freedom"

 * I discovered that what's really important for a creator isn't what we vaguely define as inspiration or even what it is we want to say, recall, regret, or rebel against. No, what's important is the way we say it. Art is all about craftsmanship. Others can interpret craftsmanship as style if they wish. Style is what unites memory or recollection, ideology, sentiment, nostalgia, presentiment, to the way we express all that.''' It's not what we say but how we say it that matters.
 * "Craftsmanship"

 * A created thing is never invented and it is never true: it is always and ever itself.
 * "Creation"

 * Everyone knows that time is Death, that Death hides in clocks. Imposing another time powered by the Clock of the Imagination, however, can refuse his law. Here, freed of the Grim Reaper's scythe, we learn that pain is knowledge and all knowledge pain.
 * "Death"

 * The public has lost the habit of movie-going because the cinema no longer possesses the charm, the hypnotic charisma, the authority it once commanded. The image it once held for us all — that of a dream we dreamt with our eyes open — has disappeared. Is it still possible that one thousand people might group together in the dark and experience the dream that a single individual has directed?
 * "Decline of Cinema"

 * Experience is what you get while looking for something else.
 * "Experience"

 * It's easier to be faithful to a restaurant than it is to a woman.
 * "Fidelity"

 * No critic writing about a film could say more than the film itself, although they do their best to make us think the opposite.
 * "Film Critics"

 * Nietzsche claimed that his genius was in his nostrils and I think that is a very excellent place for it to be.
 * "Genius"

 * God may not play dice but he enjoys a good round of Trivial Pursuit every now and again.
 * "God"

 * Hype is the awkward and desperate attempt to convince journalists that what you've made is worth the misery of having to review it.
 * "Hype"

 * If I'm a cruel satirist at least I'm not a hyprocrite: I never judge what other people do. Neither a politician nor a priest, I never censor what others do. Neither a philospher nor a psychiatrist, I never bother trying to analyze or resolve my fears and neuroses.
 * "Hypocrisy"

 * Money is everywhere but so is poetry. What we lack are the poets.
 * "Poets"

 * A good opening and a good ending make for a good film provided they come close together.
 * "Recipe for a Good Film"

 * The young watch television twenty-four hours a day, they don't read and they rarely listen. This incessant bombardment of images has developed a hypertrophied eye condition that's turning them into a race of mutants. They should pass a law for a total reeducation of the young, making children visit the Galleria Borghese on a daily basis.
 * "Younger Generation"

 * I think television has betrayed the meaning of democratic speech, adding visual chaos to the confusion of voices. What role does silence have in all this noise?
 * "Television"

About Fellini

 * I've always written at the top of my lungs and from some secret motives within. I have followed the advice of my good friend Federico Fellini who, when asked about his work, said, "Don't tell me what I'm doing, I don't want to know."
 * Ray Bradbury, "Author's Introduction" to 2003 Folio Society edition of Fahrenheit 452 (1953)

title: Federico Fellini


text:
User talk:218.76.105.107

This IP has been blocked from editing at Wikiquote because it has been used by a persistent vandal to post unwanted commercial advertisements here. Wikiquote is a non-profit, non-commercial, public service site, not a place for gratuitous advertising. If you are not this vandal, you can notify your Internet service provider of this activity, so that this violation of ethical standards, internet etiquette, and in some places the legal statutes can be addressed by the proper authorities. If you are this vandal and this behavior persists much longer, notifications WILL be sent to the contacts available to the Internet service providers at the CHINANET Hunan province network and complaints to anti-spam@ns.chinanet.cn.net. If this behavior ends, no notice will be sent to any ISP by me, and after a period of two weeks these notices that have been posted here will be removed. ~ Kalki

title: User talk:218.76.105.107


text: Template:Lit-stub

title: Template:Lit-stub


text:
Category:Literature stubs

This category is for Literature stubs. You can help Wikiquote by expanding them

To add an article to this category, use lit-stub in the article.

title: Category:Literature stubs


text: Template:People-cleanup

title: Template:People-cleanup


text:
User talk:GK~enwikiquote

Greeting from gK [[User talk:GK|¿?]]. I just put this here 'cause I hate seeing red links in any of the Wikis. gK [[User talk:GK|¿?]] 08:30, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called GK. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name GK~enwikiquote that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:23, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 05:47, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:GK~enwikiquote


text:
Category:People cleanup

This category lists people articles that need cleanup. You can help Wikiquote by expanding them.

To add an article to this category, use   in the article.

NOTE: The following pages are included here for maintenance reasons and do not themselves need to be cleaned up:
 * Template:People-cleanup
 * User:RoboAction/templates
 * Wikiquote:Template messages/Clean-up

__HIDDENCAT__

title: Category:People cleanup


text:
Wikiquote talk:Guide to layout

Old thread
Maybe I haven't found it yet, but I haven't found anything that explains what "Attributed" means. My first assumption is that it means "attributed to XXX, but probably not a quote from XXX", but that would mean that there should also be a separate category for "False attributions" (or maybe "Proven false") where it is known that thorough searches have been done and no version of the quote has been found, where it has been proven that someone falsified the quote, or where it has been shown the quote is by someone else. For some major figures (Abraham Lincoln for example) there really needs to be some way to keeping track of all the false quotes for them (if just on a special subpage), if for no other reason than to have a list to check against when people add new quotes. gK [[User talk:GK|¿?]] 09:04, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * A discussion occurred here about name designations, and a bit earlier on the same page. "Sourced" was suggested for all quotations with citations, with a recommendation to abandon "Verified" as too strong a word, far too casually applied, too easily, by too many. "Attributed" to be used on quotes known to be attributed to an individual or source, but without definite citations, and various options for more dubious quotations were proposed or suggested at various places: "Misattributed" for quotes that were known to be wrongfully attributed to a source, and "Probably spurious" where the evidence indicates that they were probably fabricated quotations (sometimes even with fabricated citations). "Quotations by others about ________" is also a recommended heading. "Almost certainly spurious" has sometimes been used, where the evidence of falsehood is especially strong, and occasionally such quotations, or misattributions have been removed to the talk page, because they are not considered worthy of considiration as even possibly genuine, or correctly attributed. It is not recommended that even such quotes as are commonly misattributed to a source be deleted entirely, because we should aim at providing information that debunks false quotes, as well as that which confirms the true ones. Any more precise information or speculation about a particular quotation's origins than the various headers provide can be made in the comments beneath the quote, or sometimes on the talk page. ~ Kalki

Sections
"Quotations should be divided into two sections, Verified and Attributed." - so said, but there are some exceptions or a group of articles following different convention; Sourced and Attributed. I am not sure the reason, but somehow I feel the latter pair preferable. And we are better to say other habits (even if they are not rules yet), like Misattributed or sections dedicated to particular works. Any comment is welcome. --Aphaia 05:50, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * After reviewing the discussion Kalki alluded to in the section above, and concurring with Aphaia, I changed "Verified" to "Sourced" in the article. This appears to have been an oversight after a community feeling (if not formal consensus) that the term "verified" is too ambiguous and too easily abused, whereas "sourced" is obvious — the source can and should be provided, so it may be checked, corrected, and/or argued if necessary. We should probably add some additional guidance based on that old discussion (elements of which are in use in some articles), and synchronize this article with Templates. — Jeff Q (talk) 11:23, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * I support Jeff's rewrite. In case there is someone who have different opinion, I'll put a note on WQ:VP.
 * Let me summarize Kalki's suggestion, we will have (or already have) a set of labels

I am however not sure we need Almost certainly spurious, since it seems to me two classes for spurious quotes too fine and I haven't remember to see this label ACS has been used. If anyone could let me know the usage example, I would easily concur. --Aphaia 13:47, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Basic
 * Sourced - if we can provide the source information like following:
 * Faust, Act I, l. 1024.
 * Critique of the pure raison, 121A.[1st ed. of the German original, p.121],
 * Address to the U.S. Congress, 12 September, 1956
 * Attributed - attribution is sure, but without source information.
 * Optional
 * Misatrributed - either frequently or sometimes, that were known to be wrongfully attributed to a source, like:
 * (for Marie-Antoinette of France): "If they have no bread, they can eat briosh."
 * This phrase already appeared in Jean-Jacques Rousseau, attributed to "a certain Tuscan archdutchess".
 * Probably spurious - the evidence indicates that they were probably fabricated quotations (sometimes even with fabricated citations)
 * See discussion on WQ:VP (or I misunderstood).
 * Quotations by others about ________: [not used in articles classified under Category:Themes ]
 * Almost certainly spurious
 * That is.

Article headings
This guide says: "The person should be shown in a header at the top of the page, followed by their birth and death year (if any), and their profession. See the template." However the template follows a completely different style (name in bold, followed by dates, then description). I only see this page's style on old pages while most newer pages follow the template's style. I have been converting many pages to that style as well. Is this page's instructions just an unchanged relic or was the style change never debated? -- Rmhermen 17:49, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Aphaia started a discussion about this at Wikiquote talk:Templates. She and I have opposing views, so I think we're off to a good start for a debate. Interested parties are encouraged to join the conversation. — Jeff Q (talk) 07:23, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Moved discussion from draft
I've noticed I poured much of Manual of style into this guide. I know why I did it: I wanted a one-stop-shop for directing people to see how to write better articles. I don't feel it is long enough that we do need the split up: quite possibly, when this is moved out of draft, I'll check if the MoS has anything not in this, move it over and redirect. ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 17:04, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Moshe: Comments on the draft guide
Moshe: Thanks for the invitation to review this. I have just a few minor comments.

 * First, in the Films section, I'm not sure why you specified that quotes under Others would follow the formatting of theme quotes. This implies that they would be grouped alphabetically, and would contain quote marks. I wouldn't be inclined to have them follow that formatting, instead listing them chronologically as they appear in the film (as we would dialogue quotes). I would also not use quote marks for any film quotes.

 * Second, under Theme quotes, you might want to specify that the quotes should be alphabetical by source.

 * Third, I haven't been listing the stars of a film at the top of the page, limiting myself to Director and writer(s). Since they are listed below, under cast, I didn't list them. Which brings me to another comment: shouldn't Cast be a section to be included, right above External links?

 * Finally, (although this really isn't directly about the guide, but something I've seen discussed elsewhere) should film quotes be shown the way we are currently showing them? In other words, should they be done like they are for TV shows, instead of grouping sections with the character, separate from dialogue quotes? The reason I ask is that if someone is reading through a TV show's page, they can usually follow an episode along, since the quotes are ostensibly laid out in chronological order as they appeared in the episode. On film pages, this is not really possible, since to follow through a movie chronologically would require the reader to jump back and forth between dialogue and individual quotes.

OK, I'll stop rambling, but that's my input. I do think the guide is a great idea and I would have liked to have such a one-stop guide when I was starting out. UDScott 21:46, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks a lot for the comments.
 * 1. The Others quotations have two styles: theme-like and TV-like. I have updated the text to allow for both styles.
 * 2. Theme quotes, AIUI, are alphabetical by content. At least, that was how I always did thing, and how I saw others do things. I've written the guideline to be more specific.
 * 3. I've made it clear that the stars aren't mandatory. They are sometimes useful: I think if I wrote a page for Terminator, I'd put in Ahnold's name. It's ok not to do it, but I want to specifically allow addition of the stars to the intro, especially for an actor's "seminal work".
 * 4. I've worked hard to make sure the guideline reflects current consensus and established practices. Mostly, it's an explanation of what is shown in Templates. So, you're right: this isn't a question about the guide. Now, to the actual content of your complaint: I pretty much agree, but I am not really important, as I've never written a movie page from scratch, only did some random cleanup as part of my usual patrols. If you want this changed, and like I said, I sympathise, you will need to gather a wide consensus to make this change. As you may have seen in my "no quote marks" crusade, this takes time and effort.
 * Any further comments (or direct edits to the guide) would be appreciated. ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 08:44, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Comic book formatting
So far, most comics articles have been formatted with a variant on the TV style. Please add here any comments you have regarding comic book formatting. Thanks ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 16:29, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Is that going to be 'official' now? --InShaneee 19:46, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Copyediting and formatting changes
I've just finished a copyediting sweep through the entire page, rewriting certain bits to flow and/or look better. There were only a few edits I was uncertain about; most are simply cosmetic, but you might want to check the history "diffs" to make sure if you regularly watch this page. I'm not married to the "typewriter type" I've used on the various wikicode snippets, but I think they did need some kind of special formatting to set them off from the rest of the text. - dcljr 07:08, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh, BTW, I would also be willing to give up the unique section header names now that I see that there's a MediaWiki feature to deal with that problem (see "If multiple sections have the same title" in the table I've linked to). I mainly kept the headers that way while I was editing to make it easier to keep track of the various internal links. I still think using unique names is a good idea since links based numbering are easily broken when significant changes are made... but it does make the TOC look rather annoying. - dcljr 07:15, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Theme pages
With Theme pages I don't understand why we don't do it by author because speaking at least from my experince when looking for quotes I'm more likely to know who said it then the first word. ~ DFA 00:29, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

TV show episode header format
It says we should use the form  ===Italicized Name [n.m]==, where n is the season, and m is the episode number. Is this really necessary? Seasons are a level 2 header, so it's obvious what season the episode is in. As for the episode number, you can determine that from the TOC. From what I've seen, only about half of the shows (that don't require massive cleanup) stick with this guideline, including large articles with a high number of editors. The rest of them just use ===Episode Name===. Would it be better to drop this guideline, or at least have it say use one of the two styles I mentioned, since it would seem that many people (including me) prefer it without the numbers. Koweja 18:10, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

 * We decided to add episode numbers a while back because most TV-show articles (including, by definition, any ongoing series) do not have headings for all episodes, so the table of contents will not number the episodes correctly. Even when all episodes are are included, there is nothing to stop someone from mixing up the order of episodes. (This happens with some frequency. I had to reverse an entire season of Smallville only a few months ago.) Ep numbers themselves are not essential to Wikiquote purposes, except to provide chronological order. Including them makes it easier for editors to verify and make corrections. (Allowing editors to organize, source, and verify information in quote articles is essential to Wikiquote.)

 * Many articles that do not use ep numbers are completed series, making it possible (and often highly desirable) to implement custom tables of contents to avoid 10-page-long TOCs. In this situation, one or more editors commit to verifying and establishing an episode order, based on sourced information, then create a TOC that is not expected to be modified, and indeed is often rather hard to edit without breaking the TOC. This barrier allows us to forego the ep numbers, as the order has been established by experienced editors, and vandalism or even innocently wrong attempts to edit are easy to spot. But this system has its own problems, and is based on assumptions that are becoming increasingly invalid for the current Wikiquote community.

 * The guidelines could make this situation clearer. They serve two purposes: to define the desired styles for articles, and to help new editors create articles. For the latter purpose, it's important to keep the information as simple as possible, since new editors are having to learn the entire wiki system as well, and shouldn't be overburdened by too many options and variations. (I think the current style guidelines are already uncomfortably complex, but they are the direct result of other ongoing problems in article creation.) Like much of Wikiquote practice, the more sophisticated styles are typically learned through experience, as we don't have enough experienced editors who are willing and able to commit the time to develop, discuss, amend, review, and ratify guideline and policy changes. It's far from perfect, but has the advantage of putting the burden of learning the complexities squarely on the editors in the best position to handle it.

 * For the time being, episode numbers are the most practical means to aid most editors in organizing the articles. Of course, other ideas are always welcome, but be prepared for boring Wikiquote history lessons from verbose editors to explain the downsides. ☺ ~ Jeff Q (talk) 19:01, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Ideal Example
There should be a link on this article sending the reader to an exemplary(sp?) article. 207.179.172.220 15:57, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Good idea, but it has some practical challenges. First, we'd really need one example for every kind of formatting (people, theme, TV show, film, books, etc.), as each has its differences (some very visible, others more subtle, but all for established reasons). More importantly, each example would have to be stable. Finally, formatting issues are still somewhat in flux, especially given that they have been mostly determined by a handful of active editors (i.e., folks who edit more than, say, 100 times a month). If these folks were the same over time, this might not be an issue, but as it is, our frequent-editor list has tended to change dramatically, being an almost completely new set of 4-8 people every half-year or so. This makes it hard to lock down any layout issues, let alone examples. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 17:11, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

 * This is the best and easiest way for people to learn. I don't read the instructions (if I can help it) - I look at the articles and follow precedent. The simple way to provide examples is to construct some ideal articles in project name space purely as a model to follow. Tyrenius 22:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * You might take a look at Good articles, which is a work in progress to identify articles which might be viewed as examples of good formatting and content. ~ UDScott 22:36, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * They could be cited in layout guides etc as models. Tyrenius 22:52, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, eventually maybe. But this page is an attempt to identify which articles could serve that purpose - I don't think the process is nearly finished. ~ UDScott 23:03, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Conflict in policies Templates and Guide to Layout
The Templates page states on specific style for themes pages, while this page states another, which one is authoritative? It seems to me like templates is more up-to-date and should be followed and its policy copied here.

On this policy page:
 * Quotes should appear alphabetically, sorted by content in a bulleted list. Here quotes should be surrounded by double-quote marks ("); if quotation marks are used inside the quote itself, they should be single-quote marks ('). The quotation should be followed by a tilde (~) and then a link to the source (usually a person, but sometimes a book, television show, etc.). This can be followed by sub-bullets giving context and more information, although unless relevant to the specific themes these are discouraged. It is highly recommended to add the quotation to the source's page, and add comments and context there instead.

On the templates page: Theme is (a short description of the theme).

Sourced

 * QuoteA.
 * Author, source

 * QuoteB.
 * Name of Book or Play by Author

 * Foreign language quote.
 * Translation: English translation
 * Author and source

Unsourced

 * UnsourcedQuoteA.
 * Author

On of these two policies needs to be adopted and standardized or we're all just going to keep going around reformatting over each others reformats of articles. Personally, I like the templates format better simply because it's more straight forward and less wishy-washy. --Imjustmatthew 20:38, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Imjustmatthew, I apologize that no one has addressed this issue yet. As you suspected, Templates and its subpages have been the de facto guidelines for formatting articles of all genres for about two years. Most of the efforts by regular editors to standardize formatting for each genre in this time have focused on these for several reasons:
 * They are succinct, and follow the general wiki principle of instruction through example.
 * They are used as boilerplate by the "add new article" input boxes at Help:Starting a new page.
 * The genre subpages have provided a means to discuss the genre-specific issues without cluttering the main page.
 * Of course, we've been using Guide to layout all this time to provide guidance to new users in our standard welcome message, so it's important that we bring these two into sync. If someone doesn't beat me to it, I'll see about fixing this. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 14:28, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your announced initiatives :) I agree on that now Templates is our standard, and synch is needed. --Aphaia 07:32, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Unsourced
There is no mention of this in the guide. "Attributed" is defined in a way which would apply to "unsourced", but the former seems to be used in articles where "misattributed" should be the term. Tyrenius 22:20, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * This change had been made a while back to the template, but it yet to be changed here (which I have just done). ~ UDScott 22:33, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Time to return to this subject. In the "People pages" and "Theme pages" sections here we are giving advice on how to add attributed or unsourced quotes.  This is also true of the templates accessed via the input boxes at Help:Starting a new page.  I would have thought we should end this but I'm not bold enough to do it myself. --Antiquary 21:49, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I think the "Theme pages" section is completely wrong and didn't try to rewrite it. I did add a warning as you suggested to to "Unsourced".  121a0012 05:16, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree about "Unsourced," and endorse the changes made by 121a0012. Templates and Sourced and Unsourced sections need to be updated in this regard as well. At the latter, I think the bit at the end about "a relatively new usage of the 'Attributed' heading" should be promoted to best practice, and integrated in all these pages. I will comment about "Themes" separately and draft some changes. ~ Ningauble 14:01, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Colon placement
I see several pages formatting television quotes as

 * Character: Quoted text.

Rather than as

 * Character: Quoted text.

The layout guide suggests that the latter is correct, and I have changed several pages accordingly. However, it occurs to me that the former might be better because it does not obscure the colon, which sometimes gets lost with the latter formatting. Was there a discussion of this somewhere, or is this open for discussion? Postmodern Beatnik 15:33, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

 * The discussions surrounding dialog formatting are so old that I'm having a hard time finding them at the moment. As soon as I locate them, I will link to them and summarize. Of course, formatting guidelines are always open to discussion, and there are rationales for either form. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 16:30, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Themes again
As 121a0012 remarked earlier today at Unsourced above, this section is completely wrong. (See also Theme pages and Conflict in policies Templates and Guide to Layout above.) While I confess that "consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds"— Ralph Waldo Emerson, I also confess an ulterior motive: giving greater prominence to authors and sources may nudge contributors to pay greater attention to providing citations. If nobody objects, I will revise this section accordingly. ~ Ningauble 14:15, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) As described at Templates and used in current practice, the format should be consistent with that of people articles: quote marks are superfluous and citations should be sub-bulleted beneath each quote.
 * 2) Recent practice has been fairly consistent in sorting quotes alphabetically by author (where they are sorted at all) rather than by the words of the quotation. (Chronological order has been used to good effect in a few cases, but is nonstandard.)

Undue weight to simple citations
From Franklin D. Roosevelt From Victor Borge In situations where we can give the context about where and when the quote was uttered, such as the Roosevelt quotation, it makes sense to give that information prominently. But when we don't have that context and are simply giving a citation, wouldn't it make more sense to put that in a footnote? When I look at the Victor Borge page, the names of the writers of the cited articles seem as prominent as the quotations themselves. That's just an example, but it's true across the project. Could we subordinate mere citations to avoid giving them excess weight on a page? Will Beback  talk    21:11, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * We must be the great arsenal of Democracy.
 * Fireside Chat on National Security, Washington, D.C. (29 December 1940)
 * I learned to play the piano on my mother's knee - that was before we got a piano.
 * Richard Dyer, "Laughter Was at the Heart of Victor Borge's Many Talents", Boston Globe, 29 December 2000, p. D17

 * That Victor Borge one should stand out, since it's a secondary-source citation and therefore missing information. 121a0012 05:01, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Right, but there are plenty of pages like this. I agree that the context is important, when we have it. But the citations aren't.
 * (In the case of Borge, he probably delivered that line more than a hundred times - it was part of his act. I suppose we could say that it was part of his act, but I'm not sure the sources say that explicitly.)
 * So I'm suggesting that context-less citations would be better presented in footnotes instead of mixing them in with the content.  Will Beback   talk    05:46, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Interlinear citation is standard format in most quotation compendiums, including this one. The prominence of the relatively obscure "Richard Dyer" which is presented in the citation of the Victor Borge quote is one of the many possible drawbacks of using standard forms of footnote formatting in the interlinear ciations. I have always tended to use, and thus promote more straightforward format of citation akin to that used in many quotation collections; in this case it would be presented in either the form "As quoted in "Laughter Was at the Heart of Victor Borge's Many Talents" by Richard Dyer, in The Boston Globe (29 December 2000), p. D17" — or, more likely than not, I would drop the print-page number, as relatively irrelevant in the current electronic age, and even a report's author is usually relatively unimportant data in a citation of an newspaper article for a quote of someone, which is not even always provided by news sources. The author or editor of either a book or of an article within a book containing a quote I normally would recommend citing, if available. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 07:03, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The style of interlinear citation here and at major print compendia of quotations is different from other types of works in which quotes may be included incidentally, because it reflects a focus on the act of quotation, of which citation is an integral part. The quotations themselves do not "pop" as much as they might because the page rendering is a bit dense. A few contributors have occasionally experimented with additional whitespace between quotes, and with a smaller font for citations. Modern print compendia use this sort of typography to very good effect, but it is hard to get it right with wikimarkup. I think our pages would look really nice with an extra 1/2 linespace before level 1 bullets (when lower level bullets follow, not in flat lists), with 90% font size for bullets below level 1, and perhaps with 50-100% greater indentation for level 2 bullets. Unfortunately, I am just dreaming. Regarding the amount of detail in citations, I will only remark at this time that, when it comes to secondary source attributions, I think who says so is an important consideration. (Newspapers use bylines to ascribe both credit and responsibility, and at many papers the omission of a byline indicates a finding or opinion of the paper itself, i.e., the editorial "we".) ~ Ningauble 17:22, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the helpful responses.
 * Regarding formatting: In the Franklin D. Roosevelt page I see that many portions or entire quotations are in bold text. I don't see any discussion here or on other pages that gives guidance on when to use emphasis. In the FDR article, it seems editors have decided that some passages are more important than others. In any case, putting the quotations in bold text while leaving the cites/context in plain text would do more to highlight the quotes.
 * Regarding citations: It's not clear how to handle multiple citations: should they be added in a bulleted list, run together in a single bullet, or restricted to the single best source (if that can be determined?)
 * How much extrapolation is appropriate? In the case of Borge, it seems like it would help readers to say that these quotations were part of his stage act, even though the sources may not say that in so many words. Anyone who's seen one of his shows, live or on video, could confirm that though. Thoughts?  Will Beback   talk    01:55, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * So many questions, such ambiguous answers:
 * There is no official guidance on the use of boldface. It is left to editor discretion, which sometimes leads to editorial disputes. People have tried bolding all the quotes on a few pages, but the result is not pretty. Typographers aver that boldface is harder to read, and should only be used to draw attention to a very few words.
 * There is no consistency in the format of multiple citations of a single quote. I favor using a bullet list when the sources disagree (e.g., as to wording or origin) because each "makes a distinct point," otherwise I usually run them together with a full stop (.). When the original language and an English translation are both quoted, the two sources might be bulleted separately, but this is not done consistently.
 * I think an ideal choice of multiple sources is to include (1) the primary source or, failing that, the earliest known secondary source, (2) the most reliably accurate source if the earlier attribution is questionable, plus (3) a notable secondary or tertiary source that indicates it is widely quoted, such as a compendium of famous quotes. (Cf. an essay on Primary, secondary, and tertiary sources that I drafted recently.)
 * Regarding the amount of explanation or context for a quote: only enough, if it is really necessary, to clarify what the quote refers to. As I always say: quotes by their very nature are taken out of context – if it doesn't speak for itself, it probably isn't a very good quote.
 * Thanks for the helpful questions! ~ Ningauble 14:57, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

I tried this: putting the citation details into a footnote and making the interlinear citation more prose-like. However the superscript footnote forces the citation down a fraction making the problem worse. The citation should be closer to the quotation, not further away.
 * I only know two pieces, one is 'Clair de Lune', the other one isn't.
 * From the obit in The Independent.
 * When I was a little boy and played Liebestraum, my father used to hit me on the head with a newspaper every time I slopped the cadenza . . . I hate Liebestraum.
 * From the obit in The Independent.

Maybe there's a trick to force the footnotes into a subscript, which would solve two problems in one fell swoop. Will Beback  talk    11:11, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * To cite multiple quotations from a single source, one approach that works well is to provide a full citation for the first instance and an abbreviated citation (but not just "ibid.") for subsequent ones. ~ Ningauble 15:00, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * PS – The problem with superscripts spoiling line spacing lies in Internet Explorer. Other browsers handle and  correctly, and Microsoft may figure it out in a future release. ~ Ningauble 15:12, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Your answer about citations is useful. However I mean to ask about quotations that have multiple sources, not sources that have multiple quotations. IE isn't the only browser that adds extra space because of superscript. What do you think about the use of bold text?  Will Beback   talk    23:50, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * (See numbered responses to your previous post, above the "outdent" in this thread.) ~ Ningauble 00:07, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * (I missed those - thanks for the pointer).  Will Beback   talk    00:59, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

I just came across a page with formatting which is simple but still lowers the over-emphasis on citations: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. It is formated like this:
 * They think democracy -- I used to say "damn the democracy", because it's not a stable government.
 * Quoted from: Larry King Weekend, Interview With Maharishi Mahesh Yogi (2002-05-12)

The citation is indented with two colons: "::". That seems a lot easier to read, especially in a page of quotations, than the more conventional format: The second bullet point seems unnecessary and distracting. Will Beback  talk    10:17, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
 * They think democracy -- I used to say "damn the democracy", because it's not a stable government.
 * Quoted from: Larry King Weekend, Interview With Maharishi Mahesh Yogi (2002-05-12)

True List, Blockquote, Template
The current style guide says to use lists for quotes, i.e. reduced to the barebones: Alas, it also suggests to separate quotation blocks from each other, like so:
 * quote
 * source
 * quote 1
 * source 1

Lists are not an appropriate markup choice in the first place, but if we must use them, can we at least make then consecutive? Or let us use definition lists:
 * quote 2
 * source 2
 * quote 1
 * source 1
 * quote 2
 * source 2
 * quote 1
 * source 1

 * quote 2
 * source 2

Better yet would be to use some kind of wiki markup that results in HTML markup that uses the <blockquote> (or inline <q>) element. or
 * "quote"
 * source
 * "quote"
 * source

or "quote" source or HTML5 "quote" source </ or something like that.

To enable an easy site wide change for such style issues it would really help if there was either a template for quotes (Template:Quote uses a deprecated style pattern) or if there was a Mediawiki add-on installed that provided markup for quotes. The current template source code could look something like this: 134.61.68.224 11:47, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Boldface
Just because I, as a new reader to Wikiquote, needed to do a bit of searching to confirm why some quotes are in bold, I suggest this link is put somewhere on the page and/or further explaination added. Markhurd (talk) 14:00, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * There was a more recent and broader discussion of the issue here. There may not be enough of a consensus to give clear guidance on this page. ~ Ningauble (talk) 17:11, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Theme pages: proposal to change the guideline
Currently the section on themes gives the following guideline, which was introduced Nov 17, 2005 by MosheZadka.

 * Unless there is a good reason, the introduction for a theme page may be nothing more than "Quotes about/related to Theme", where "Theme" is made a link to Wikipedia.

Now I wonder if this guideline is outdated? Wikiquote is in the process of growing up, and can act more independently. Every thematic article can have an average one to three line introduction about the topic, similar to Wikipedia, with one link to the Wikipedia article, and possibly more links to related topics in Wikiquote. -- Mdd (talk) 13:45, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

 * "Unless there is a good reason" is probably an infortuitous clause, but I think it is correct to say the introduction "may be nothing more than..."[emphasis added]. Two or three sentences to clearly identify the subject are certainly fine, and this is becoming the norm. I don't think you are proposing specific wording, but let me clarify my opinion about this by picking some nits: I would not say "similar to Wikipedia", because the purpose of a lede section there is different, and they often run to several paragraphs. It might be appropriate to say "similar to the first sentence or two of a Wikipedia article". I am afraid "introduction about the topic" could be taken as an invitation to essay upon the subject, albeit briefly. Let the quotes be about the topic that the introduction identifies. The advice I usually use when discussing introductions in general (not just theme articles) is:
 * two or three sentences to identify the subject and, if necessary, why it is notable
 * Wikipedia's advice at WP:LEADSENTENCE and Opening paragraph is good, but is much more involved than what we need. Perhaps parts of it could be adapted for use here. ~ Ningauble (talk) 17:02, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

 * I agree all along. I guess on second thought, the guideline is not outdated, but maybe incomplete. For example the latest new article today (see here) followed the current guideline to the letter. There seems to be two preferable options: the current one-liner and a two-to-three-sentences-intro. -- Mdd (talk) 01:26, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Film reviews
Are quotes from a critic's film review okay to be added to that film's quote page? Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 19:50, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Sorting of quotes
There seems to be an absence of guidelines on how to sort quotes on person pages. The practice I've been following is to sort the Quotes section by date, and the About [person] section by author.

However, thinks that on a page involving a current political candidate, the About quotes are better understood chronologically. Should we have a policy on how to sequence quotations, or handle it differently on a case by case basis? ~ Robin Lionheart (talk) 08:47, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

 * For theme pages as well (e.g. Rock and roll, Big Bang, Futurism, Management, Fallacy, Greeks, etc.). ~ DanielTom (talk) 08:57, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

 * With nothing personal, I really consider bulleted lists too ugly, but carefully phasing in sortable tables will accommodate different readers' preferences on ordering by author, date, or others. It is being tested on Chinese Wikiquote for theme pages, especially when quoting from edicts of governments that I love to quote due to much less copyright problems. To test it here, I prefer to start a brand new page to avoid disrupting existing pages.--Jusjih (talk) 03:19, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
 * There is an example of tabular format in the Advertising slogans article, though it is not configured as sortable. I think it only works tolerably well because in that context the quotes themselves are very short, by definition. Personally, I do not think bulleted lists are unlovely, and in most cases I think a tabular format would be very awkward. ~ Ningauble (talk) 13:51, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply. Without it I would not even know that table. Then we should acknowledge the use of sortable table in addition to bulleted list.--Jusjih (talk) 23:34, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

is sourced obsolete
re:
 * "Verified" heading. Use "Sourced" instead, and only include quotations from verifiable sources.

I don't see sections called 'sourced' anymore. I believe that only made sense in respect to a corresponding 'unsourced' which is now no longer allowed. "Sourced" is assumed for everything and verified/sourced would just be the basic "Quotes" primary section right?

I don't see an explanation for "Disputed" but I think I recall seeing that used somewhere... 70.51.193.44 08:08, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

title: Wikiquote talk:Guide to layout


title: Template:1


text:
Alain Badiou

 Alain Badiou (born January 17, 1937) is a contemporary French philosopher, Badiou has written about the concepts of being, truth, event and the subject in a way that, he claims, is neither postmodern nor simply a repetition of modernity. Badiou has been involved in a number of political organisations, and regularly comments on political events. Badiou argues for resurrecting the practice of communism.

Being and Event (1988)
Being and Event, transl. by Oliver Feltham; (New York: Continuum, 2005)

 * … necessitating the unilateral choice of one of three orientations […] I would summarize the disjointed temporal multiple which organizes our site in the following manner:

_1. We are the contemporaries of a  third epoch of science after the Greek and Galilean. The caesura which opens this third epoch is not (as with the Greek) an invention - that of demonstrative mathematics - nor is it (like the Galilean) a break - that which mathematized the discourse of physics. It is a split, through, which the very nature of the base of mathematical rationality reveals itself, as does the character of the decision of thought which establishes it.

_2. We are equally the contemporaries of a  second epoch of the doctrine of the Subject. It is no longer the founding subject, centered and reflexive, whose theme runs from Descartes to Hegel and which remains legible in Marx and Freud (in fact, in Husserl and Sartre). The contemporary Subject is void, cleaved, a-substantial, and ir-reflexive. More over, one can only suppose its existence in the context of particular processes whose conditions are rigorous.

_3. Finally, we are contemporaries of a new departure in the doctrine of truth, following the dissolution of its relation of organic connection to knowledge. It is noticeable, after the fact, that to this day veracity, as I call it, has reigned without quarter: however strange it may seem, it is quite appropriate to say that truth is a new word in Europe (and elsewhere). Moreover, this theme of truth crosses the paths of Heidegger (who was the first to subtract it from knowledge), the mathematicians (who broke with the object at the end of the last century, just as they broke with adequation), and the modern theories of the subject (which displace truth from its subject pronunciation).

[from “Introduction,” Being and Event, p. 2-3]

 * The initial thesis of my enterprise - on the basis of which this entanglement of periodizations is organized by extracting the sense of each - is the following: the science of being qua being  has existed since the Greeks - such is the sense and status of mathematics. However, it is only today that we have the means to know this. It follows from this thesis that philosophy is not centred on ontology - which exists as a separate and exact discipline- rather it circulates between this ontology (this, mathematics), the modern theories of he subject and its own history. The contemporary complex of the conditions of philosophy includes everything referred to in my first three statements: the history of ‘Western’ thought, post-Cantorian mathematics, psychoanalysis, contemporary art and politics. Philosophy does not coincide with any of these conditions; nor does it map out the totality to which they belong. What philosophy must do is propose a conceptual framework in which the contemporary compossibilty of these conditions can be grasped. Philosophy can only do this - and this is what frees it from any foundational ambition, in which it would lose itself- by designating amongst its own conditions, as a singular discursive situation, ontology itself in the form of pure mathematics. This is precisely what delivers philosophy and ordains it to the care of truths.
 * Introduction, p.3-4

 * I then arrived at the certainty that it was necessary to posit that mathematics writes that which, of being itself, is pronounceable in the field of a pure theory of the Multiple. The entire history of rational thought appeared to me to be illuminated once one assumed the hypothesis that mathematics, far from being a game without object, draws the exceptional severity of its law from being bound to support the discourse of ontology.
 * Introduction
 * If the establishment of the thesis 'mathematics is ontology' is the basis of this book, it is in no way its goal.
 * Introduction
 * This book founds a doctrine which is effectively post-Cartesian, or even post-Lacanian, a doctrine of what, for thought, both un-binds the Heidegerean connection between being and truth and institutes the subject, not as support or origin, but as fragment of the process of a truth.
 * Introduction
 * If one category had to be designated as an emblem of my thought, it would be neither Cantor's pure multiple, nor Godel's constructible, nor the void, by which being is named, nor even the event, in which the supplement of what-is-not-being-qua-being originates. It would be the generic.
 * Introduction
 * Since its Parmenidean organization, ontology has built the portico of its ruined temple out of the following experience: what  presents itself is essentially multiple;  what presents itself is essentially one. The reciprocity of the one and being is certainly the inaugural axiom of philosophy - Leibniz formulation is excellent; 'What is not  a being is not a being - yet it is also its impasse; an impasse in which the revolving doors of Plato's Parmenides introduce us to the singular joy of never seeing the moment of conclusion arrive. For if being is one, then one must posit that what is not one, the multiple,  is not . But this is unacceptable for thought because what is presented is multiple and one cannot see how there could be an access to being outside all presentation. If presentation is not, does it still make sense to designate what presents (itself) as being? On the other hand, if presentation is, then the multiple necessarily is.'
 * Meditation One: The One and the Multiple: a priori conditions of any possible ontology
 * We find ourselves on the brink of a decision, a decision to break with the arcana of the one and the multiple in which philosophy is born and buried, phoenix of its own sophistic consumption.
 * Meditation One: The One and the Multiple: a priori conditions of any possible ontology
 * Everything turns on mastering the gap between the presupposition (that must be rejected) of a being of the one and the thesis of its 'there is'.
 * Meditation One: The One and the Multiple: a priori conditions of any possible ontology

Ethics: An Essay on the Understanding of Evil (2000)
transl. by Peter Hallward; (New York: Verso, 2000): ISBN 978-1-85984-435-9 (paperback); ISBN 978-1-85984-297-3
 * According to the way it is generally used today, the term 'ethics' relates above all to the domain of human rights, 'the rights of man'- or, by derivation, the rights of living beings. We are supposed to assume the existence of a universally recognizable human subject possessing 'rights' that are in some sense natural: the right to live, to avoid abusive, to enjoy 'fundamental' liberties (of opinion, of expression, of democratic choice in the election of governments, etc.) These rights are held to be self-evident, and the result of a wide consensus. 'Ethics' is a matter of busying ourselves with these rights, of making sure that they are respected.
 * Chapter One, "Does Man Exist?"
 * In the political domain, deprived of any collective politcal landmark, stripped of any notion of the 'meaning of History’; and no longer able to hope for or expect a social revolution, many intellectuals, along with much of public opinion, have been won over to the logic of a capitalist economy and a parliamentary democracy.
 * Chapter One, "Does Man Exist?"
 * The heart of the question concerns the presumption of a universal human Subject, capable of reducing ethical issues to matters of human rights and humanitarian actions. We have seen that ethics subordinates the identification of this subject to the universal recognition of the evil that is done to him. Ethics defines man  as a victim. It will be objected: 'No! You are forgetting the active subject, the one that intervenes against barbarism!' So let us be precise: man is  the being who is capable of recognizing himself as a victim.''
 * Chapter One, Section III: "Man Living animal or immortal singularity?"

Miscellaneous quotes

 * Truth is a new word in Europe (and elsewhere).
 * Original French: La vérité est un mot neuf en Europe (et ailleurs).
 * From L'être et l'événement. Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1988. ISBN 2020098628.
 * The quote is a variation on Louis de Saint-Just, "Happiness is a new idea in Europe".

 * Without mathematics, we are blind.
 * Original French: Hors les mathématiques, nous sommes aveugles.
 * From Court traité d'ontologie transitoire. Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1998. ISBN 2020348853.

 * It is thus quite simply false that whereof one cannot speak (in the sense of 'there is nothing to say about it that specifies it and grants it separating properties'), thereof one must be silent. It must on the contrary be named.
 * Original French: Il est donc tout simplement faux que ce dont on ne peut parler (au sens ou il n'y a rien à en dire qui le spécifie, qui lui accorde des propriétés séparatrices), il faille le taire. Il faut au contraire le nommer...
 * From Manifesto for Philosophy. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1999. ISBN 0791442209.
 * The quote is a commentary on Ludwig Wittgenstein, "Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent".

 * The cinema is a place of intrinsic indiscernibility between art and non-art.
 * From Considérations sur l'état actuel du cinéma (1999), translated as Philosophy and Cinema in Infinite Thought: truth and the return of philosophy. London: Continuum, 2003. ISBN 0826467245.

 * It must be said that today, at the end of its semantic evolution, the word 'terrorist' is an intrinsically propagandistic term. It has no neutral readability. It dispenses with all reasoned examination of political situations, of their causes and consequences.
 * From Philosophy and the 'war against terrorism' in Infinite Thought: truth and the return of philosophy. London: Continuum, 2003. ISBN 0826467245.

 * If there exists one unique great imperial power which is always convinced that its most brutal interests coincide with the Good; if it is true that every year the USA spends more on their military budget than Russia, China, France, England and Germany put together; and if that Nation-State, devoted to military excess, has no public idol other than wealth, no allies other than servants, and no view of other peoples apart from an indifferent, commercial and cynical one; then the basic freedom of States, peoples and individuals consists in doing everything and thinking everything in order to escape, as much as possible, from the commandments, interventions and interference of that imperial power.
 * From Philosophy and the 'war against terrorism' in Infinite Thought: truth and the return of philosophy. London: Continuum, 2003. ISBN 0826467245.

 * In my view, only those who have had the courage to work through Lacan's anti-philosophy without faltering deserve to be called 'contemporary philosophers'.
 * From Vérité: forçage et innomable, translated as Truth: Forcing and the Unnameable in Theoretical Writings. London: Continuum, 2004. ISBN 0826461468.

 * Art attests to what is inhuman in man.
 * Original French: L'art atteste ce qu'il y a d'inhumain dans l'humain.
 * From Le siècle. Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 2005. ISBN 2020579308.

 * I am surprised to see that today everything that does not amount to surrender pure and simple to generalized capitalism, let us call it thus, is considered to be archaic or old-fashioned, as though in a way there existed no other definition of what it means to be modern than, quite simply, to be at all times caught in the dominant forms of the moment.
 * From Can Change Be Thought? A Dialogue with Alain Badiou by Bruno Bosteels, in Alain Badiou: Philosophy And Its Conditions, edited by Gabriel Riera. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2005. ISBN 0791465047.

 * Let us say in passing that since (philosophical) remedies are often worse than the malady, our age, in order to be cured of the Plato sickness, has swallowed such doses of a relativist, vaguely skeptical, lightly spiritualist and insipidly moralist medicine, that it is in the process of gently dying, in the small bed of its supposed democratic comfort.
 * From Plato, Our Dear Plato!, Magazine littéraire, no. 447 (November 2005).

 * We live in a contradiction, a brutal state of affairs, profoundly inegalitarian – where all existence is evaluated in terms of money alone – is presented to us as ideal. To justify their conservatism, the partisans of the established order cannot really call it ideal or wonderful. So instead, they have decided to say that all the rest is horrible. Sure, they say, we may not live in a condition of perfect Goodness. But we’re lucky that we don’t live in a condition of Evil. Our democracy is not perfect. But it’s better than the bloody dictatorships. Capitalism is unjust. But it’s not criminal like Stalinism. We let millions of Africans die of AIDS, but we don’t make racist nationalist declarations like Milosevic. We kill Iraqis with our airplanes, but we don’t cut their throats with machetes like they do in Rwanda, etc.
 * From  by, 2009. ISBN 9781846943171 p.5

Quotes About Alain Badiou

 * Badiou is, by any criteria, one of the most significant and original philosophers working in France today and perhaps the only serious rival of Deleuze and Derrida for that meaningless but unavoidable title of 'most important contemporary French philosopher'.
 * Peter Hallward, Ethics

title: Alain Badiou


text:
Talk:John Kenneth Galbraith

"The shit hit the fan!" is a rather common expression, and though JKG might have said it, I don't see why it should remain here, unless some context is provided. ~ Achilles 14:25, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Given that 212.219.82.36 "contributed" only that I think it was a troll (strange argument from my position). Deleted.84.144.84.53 17:15, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It is hard to believe, but in fact there is decent evidence that JKG coined this wonderful phrase, on page 45 of "Ambassador's Journal". On p 274 of his memoirs, "A Life in Our Times", he recounts an anecdote of being approached in an airport by someone who wanted to congratulate him for having done so. I have reinserted it ... http://books.google.co.uk/books?q=galbraith+%22shit+hit+the+fan%22. I have also sourced a couple of the unsourced quotes and annotated a few apocryphal ones below in order to demonstrate a degree of good faith and that I am not a troll.

It looks like he did not coin it. For a discussion see. In particular, Norman Mailer used "[w]hen the shit hits the fan" in print in 1948. I think this quote should be deleted. Crust (talk) 16:27, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

"In consequence, neoclassical and neo-Keynesian economics regulates its players to the social sidelines."

It seems to me that the word relegates would fit much better here. Might this be a transcription error? --210.246.20.194 02:44, 2 May 2006 (UTC) (w:en:User:Ejrh)

Unsourced
Wikiquote no longer allows unsourced quotations, and they are in process of being removed from our pages (see Wikiquote:Limits on quotations); but if you can provide a reliable and precise source for any quote on this list please move it to John Kenneth Galbraith. --Antiquary 19:53, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Economics is extremely useful as a form of employment for economists.

 * Faced with the choice between changing one's mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everybody gets busy on the proof.

 * In economics, the majority is always wrong.

 * It would be foolish to suggest that government is a good custodian of aesthetic goals. But, there is no alternative to the state.

 * Meetings are a great trap. Soon you find yourself trying to get agreement and then the people who disagree come to think they have a right to be persuaded. However, they are indispensable when you don't want to do anything.

 * Money differs from an automobile or mistress in being equally important to those who have it and those who do not. (apocryphal in this form but common in books of quotations - have put the correct version in the main page)

 * Nothing is so admirable in politics as a short memory.

 * One of the greatest pieces of economic wisdom is to know what you do not know.

 * The conspicuously wealthy turn up urging the character building values of the privation of the poor.

 * The conventional view serves to protect us from the painful job of thinking.

 * The happiest time of anyone's life is just after the first divorce.

 * The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.

 * There are times in politics when you must be on the right side and lose. (appears credited to Galbraith in the Observer's "Sayings of the year" for 1968 but not elsewhere)

 * Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite (this does appear in "A life in our times", but Galbraith is quoting what he describes as an old Polish joke).

 * We all agree that pessimism is a mark of superior intellect.

 * Where humor is concerned there are no standards — no one can say what is good or bad, although you can be sure that everyone will.

 * You will find that the State is the kind of organization which, though it does big things badly, does small things badly, too.

 * The truth is not the average of right and wrong.

Old JKG Quote i believe
There was a article about John Kenneth Galbraith in a old Time Magazineback in the '70's I believe. There was a published quote, I believe that went something like "If you dont know what you want, but know what you dont want and if you get what you didn't want, then you got what you wanted". I haven't been able to find it. Is my wording accurate ...am I correct? 2quiet2 (talk) 01:50, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:John Kenneth Galbraith


text:
User:Przepla

See my account in English Wikipedia.

title: User:Przepla


text:
User talk:Przepla

Use: English Wikipedia to contact me.

title: User talk:Przepla


text:
Final Fantasy Tactics

"This is the Playstation version of the series. For the remake for PSP version, please refer to Final Fantasy Tactics: The War of the Lions."

Final Fantasy Tactics (often abbreviated as FFT) is a tactical role-playing video game developed by Squaresoft for the Sony PlayStation.

Ramza Beoulve

 * Names don't matter. What's important is how you live your life.
 * The moment "pride" is lost, "freedom" is also lost.
 * Surrender or die in obscurity!
 * If only you had lived an honest life, you wouldn't have died in obscurity.
 * Delita! We must away!
 * Delita, what're you scheming?
 * There's no 'justice' in using and deceiving people!
 * Change the world? You think anyone really can? I'm not that reckless!!
 * Beoulves must not fight for a defunct royal family, but only for noble rights!
 * You started this war! Was that the will of God?
 * I've taken my whole life for granted. When it came down to it, I dropped it all and ran.
 * I have to know. I must see it with my own eyes.
 * It sounds good when you say "For the People", but what you really want is... a stronger army than the Knights, and the evil power to control the people.
 * If you need someone else to fulfill your dreams, it loses it's value, wouldn't you agree?
 * Your actions have meaning only if they hold true to your ideals.
 * You don't know the truth. You don't realize you're just pathetic puppets, dancing for the bad guys!
 * [To Balk] A real human being? Don't make me laugh!! How valuable is a 'freedom' you didn't earn yourself? The moment 'pride' is lost, 'freedom' is also lost!! You lost your freedom when you lost your pride and confidence!! 'Equality's' not something you're given. It's something you fight for! Any 'freedom' gotten from Lucavi isn't true freedom!
 * [To Delita] Delita.... I....can't breathe.

Delita Hyral

 * Don't blame us. Blame yourself or God.
 * [To Ovelia after she ask who is he] Human, just like you!
 * [To Ramza after meeting in Warjilis Trade City] Me and you are caught up in the same flow...I'm just going against it.
 * The best ways, don't always lead to the best results.
 * Treason's a serious crime, minister.
 * [To Ovelia] You and I are the same... miserable people forced to live false lives.
 * Only those close to the top are rewarded without trying. It's the way of the world.
 * Most people have to act the roles given to them. Then again, most of them haven't even noticed they're acting.
 * I won't be used. I'll be the one using! Those who used me must pay for what they've done!
 * Disrupt the "order"? This "order" you talk about is just a matter of your own convienence!! Using "God" as an "order" to control the people is absurd. You have no right to take advantage of the innocent.
 * [To Goltana] Nobody wants you to be king!
 * Damn it, who the Hell am I? Who...
 * A 'heretic' coming to church... pretty bold...
 * I won't betray you. I swear by my dead sister Teta...
 * Ramza... What did you get? I...

Alazlam Durai

 * But we also know that what we see with our eyes alone isn't necessarily the truth.

Algus Sadalfas

 * Never believe in "never".
 * Absurd! Why they're nothing more than knaves, I say!
 * Animals have no God!!

Balbanes Beoulve

 * Never shame your name... never tolerate injustice... living true to your heart is the warrior's way... the Beoulve way.

Gaff Gafgarion

 * Unless you make it to the top you're just going to get used, so you're better off dead!
 * [To Agrias] I'm being more than kind to the guard captains here. Besides, we're mercenaries hired by the Hokuten. I'm not obliged to show respect to you.
 * Betraying you? C'mon, this is business!
 * I don't know what's going on, but it's in the contract!

Gustav Margueriff

 * Your revolution can never succeed! What we need is food and a place to sleep, not ideas!

Vormav Tingel/Hashmalum

 * [To Ovelia] Listen carefully. You're not Ovelia.
 * [To Alma] Your brother has the devil's own luck.
 * [To Duke Barinten] Don't underestimate us. Killing you is easy...
 * I won't let you interfere! Bloody Angel!! I offer... my own life...for your resurrection!!

Miluda Folles

 * Ignorance itself is a crime!
 * My brother.... His views are too optimistic.
 * What you think is right is only what you can see. But, that's not everything.
 * I can't die now! Not during the revolution! I'm a Death Corps soldier!! I'll never run away!!

Ovelia Atkascha

 * God, please help us sinful children of Ivalice.
 * I was always surrounded by the convent walls... and I have only seen the sky through them.
 * My ancestors were Atkaschas! No one can control me!

Wiegraf Folles

 * "God" is an image created out of man's insecurities.
 * A small stone may only make a small ripple at first, but someday it will be a wave.
 * You'll never know the feeling of the 'Meager'. You may think you know it, but you've never lived it!
 * "Reality" is far harsher than you can possibly imagine!
 * Two lions are fighting for power after the king dies... Both want to know who their allies are. But, it's hard to read strangers' minds. So, why not kill 'em all and bring in your own people?
 * Governments falsify history only so it favours them. But you can't blame them. Because people always hope for a 'miracle'. Endlessly complaining, lazy, nuisances... that's what the masses really are. Governments give the people what they want... and history repeats itself. Governments might well have taken advantage of their insecurity... but then again, people are satisfied being used... 'God' is nothing but an image created out of their insecurity. It's their fault for knowing they're comfortably numb, and not doing anything about it.
 * You don't understand how hard it is to fulfill your ideals. Even if your ideals are great, they're just dreams if you can't fulfill them! So how can you fulfill them? You need power! That's the politics of the world! I can see it clearly now! You can't fulfill your dreams without power! You say I'm a dog of the church! Go ahead!! I don't care. You can all despise me, but I'll be laughing at the end! You'll all submit to me!

Zalmo Ruznada

 * Opposing us is the same as blasphemy!
 * Repent! And your life will be saved!
 * You heretics don't fear God! I'll fix you!
 * Your actions will disrupt the world order and oppose 'God's' natural providence. Are you trying to rebel against 'God'?

Others

 * Izlude Tingel: We want to guide people by God's miracle.
 * Death Corps Fencer: How are we different? Birth? Status? What the hell is rank?
 * Barinten: This castle's built for war. It's far more beautiful than one built for government.
 * Cidolfas Orlandu/T.G. Cid: Pledging life-long loyalty, that's the Orlandu way.
 * Aeris Gainsborough: In a place like this... not a lot of people buy flowers around here. When is my knight in shining armour going to take me away from here?
 * Velius: I am Velius... the devil. Your wish is granted.
 * Olan Durai: [Summing up Delita's story] Delita married Ovelia. A commoner brings peace to a chaotic kingdom, marries the princess, becoming king. A legend that will be passed down for centuries. Delita may be a good person as you said... He made it look like he killed her, then let her go, when her identity was clear. I guess he identified with her, having been used by Vormav.
 * Olan Durai: Did my father die fighting heroically?
 * Zalbag: Don't you have any 'justice', Brother!? The Beoulve name is only for the brave! You aren't worthy of it, Brother!
 * Dycedarg Beoulve: 'Justice'? I'm embarrassed to think you even said that! You think such pretty ideals can govern the people!? Why are you able to use that sword? Why do you think the people call you a hero? It's all because of me!! Because I dirtied my hands you're here! You should be thanking me, not despising me!!
 * Dycedarg Beoulve: If only you hadn't interfered... Ivalice would've been ours, the Beoulve's... You fools...
 * Cidolfas Orlandu: Our nation exists because of the people! We exist because of them.
 * Cardinal Draclau: [To Ramza] Ha ha ha... You're the one holding the stone. You can change not only the world, but the truth of everything with it's power.
 * Bandit Boss: We're no bounty hunters, but what the Hell... let's kill him for the gil!
 * Priest at Alma's funeral: With the Father's blessing, you shall return to Heaven.
 * Alma's mourners: Farlem.
 * Deserter: We're tired of fighting! We want to go home! We'd rather be poor and covered with mud than this! We're sick of killing! We want to return to our families!
 * Agrias Oaks: Evanescence... what a sad word...
 * Ending narration: Since then,
 * no one has caught sight of the two.

 * Olan Durai reminisces in such a manner...

 * Where does one find good fortune?
 * What possesses them to live for the present?
 * What treasures will they leave behind?

 * The only thing certain, is that
 * he is the true hero, indeed.

 * Years later,
 * Olan Durai collected his experiences over
 * a period of 5 years into a single syllabus.

 * This collection, know as the 'Durai Papers'
 * were to be presented at Prince Clemence's
 * meeting during which the new possessor of
 * the throne was to be selected.

 * But the Church, which feared public
 * disclosure of the truth, decided to
 * arrest Durai and burn him at the stake
 * for the crime of heresy.

 * The retrieved Durai Papers were then
 * confiscated by the church for several
 * hundred years.

 * But I have uncovered the truth...
 * Let me now revive his honour.
 * Let his way of life be absorbed by
 * the next generation.
 * Author of the Brave Story,
 * Alazlam Durai

Unsorted

 * I got a good feeling! - Proposition Report, as told to player by returning units
 * This is the way! - Proposition Report, as told to player by returning units

Dialogue

 * Miluda Folles: Who do you think we are!? We're not animals! We're human, just like you! There's no difference other than our families! You ever been hungry? With only soup to eat for months? Why do we have to suffer? Because you nobles deprive us of our right to live!
 * Algus Sadalfas: Human? Hmph, ridiculous! From the minute you were born you had to obey us! From the second you were born you were our animals!
 * Miluda Folles: Says who!? That's nonsense! Who decided all this?!
 * Algus Sadalfas: It is the Will of Heaven!
 * Miluda Folles: Heaven? God would never say such things! In his eyes, all are equal! He'd never let this happen! Never!
 * Algus Sadalfas: Animals have no God!
 * Miluda Folles: !!!

 * Agrias: Don't you have any pride?
 * Gafgarion: What's the use? I gave mine up long ago!

 * Delita: A former squire, now in control of the knights, and restoring order to the world. It's easy to understand. This is the 'hero' the people have been demanding.
 * Olan: For that, you're going to take advantage of everything?
 * Delita: Is that wrong?

title: Final Fantasy Tactics


text:
User:Armaced~enwikiquote

I am a fan of Neal Stephenson, Neil Gaiman, several other Neils, Jim Dodge, Robert Heinlein, Math, Water Polo, Drums, Aaron Sorkin, Joss Whedon, The Action Request System, some other geeky stuff, and my family.

title: User:Armaced~enwikiquote


text:
Category:Literature by genre

Most quotes from literary works are listed in articles on the author of the work, and may be found in Category:People. This category lists works that have separate articles, usually due to the size of the author page.

title: Category:Literature by genre


text:
Category:Satire books

hy:Կատեգորիա:Երգիծական գրքեր

title: Category:Satire books