text:
Wikiquote talk:Requests for adminship/Archive 2

Candidate qualification
Regarding a current incident, I would propose we set some qualification for sysop candidates. Those qualification should be applied us current sysops too.

That is
 * Sysops should registered and valid wikiquote email address in preferences, or an email address indicated on their user page

In my opinion sysops are accountable for their deeds using their right, and communication channel should be therefore open.

Currently I don't have a reason to add other requirements to it, but you may expand ... --Aphaia 03:20, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

 * I agree with the email requirement. I'd swear that I had read that this already was a requirement somewhere in Wikipedia or Meta. I couldn't find it during a quick survey of relevant WP pages, but I believe it had something to do with evolving privacy concerns, to allow sysops to handle some of these issues away from wiki pages that are open to predators and identity thieves. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 06:57, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

 * It is either mentioned on a page or heavily suggested. A candidate would normally get yelled at if they had no e-mail enabled.  Cbrown1023  talk  15:17, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

 * I copied it from Administrators :) -Aphaia 16:57, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I also support the addition of that requirement.  Cbrown1023  talk  17:11, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

 * We might also want to add some general expectations, like a terse version of selected bullets from w:Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship. In fact, we might want to supplement this policy/request page with a Guide to requests for adminship modelled on the Wikipedia one. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 06:57, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

 * I would support this.  Cbrown1023  talk  15:17, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

 * Seconded. --Aphaia 16:57, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure I've come across admins on Wikipedia without e-mail enabled but it's a very bad idea.--Poetlister 19:49, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

 * I support requiring admins and adminship candidates having valid emails.--Jusjih 22:24, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

How to apply
If we are going to that direction, we need to ensure all existing sysops are able to receive mails. I checked some inactive admins, and they haven't confirmed their mail addresses (the authentification was lately introduced ... in the late of last year). Since they cannot be reached by email, it is nice of us to give them time to enforce it (in some months?) and to make efforts to reach them in other ways, like on other wikis etc. It may imply we remove inactive admins, while I am not sure if it is also on community's consensus. --Aphaia 16:57, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I would stray away from that. I do not think removing inactive admins is a good idea (at least for this project).  Everything else that you proposed, though, is a good idea, and I support.  Cbrown1023  talk  17:10, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

 * I'm also reluctant to remove inactive sysops without first communicating with them, but it is not unreasonable for a project to choose to do so. Some of our absent folks are at least semi-active elsewhere, so we might reach them via those other projects. For the rest, we could either:
 * Have a grandfather clause for inactive sysops, so they need not register an email unless they become active again. (In this case, we should probably might mention, in any policies that suggest emailing a sysop, that users should just try another if the email doesn't work. I can easily imagine the frustration of a wikian who is told they should email a sysop only to find the one they chose is unreachable, "proving" that Wikiquote is just like any modern "customer service" organization — call us and we'll ignore you.)
 * After Aphaia's delay (I'd suggest at least 1 month but no more than 3), de-sysop any unreachable folks, with the provision that they may be speedily re-sysopped if they eventually return to request it and register an email.
 * ~ Jeff Q (talk) 21:36, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I see that the list of sysops is already split into active and inactive ones. Presumably, anyone wishing to call a sysop would go for the active ones.--Cato 22:42, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

 * WP does not de-sysop inactive admins, and I can't see anything useful would be achieved by doing so. Users have been known to return after 2 years even, so a maximum of 3 months leeway seems rather tight. I'm also against formally enforced email enablement. There's no reason why an admin should not be able to restrict their activities to the wiki site and still be viable. Email opens people to various potential problems, including spamming and abuse. I am not against it being a consideration during RfA, but it should not be a sole determining factor. Admins who wish to retain anonymity might consider a googlemail address, which does not reveal the IP in the header, unlike yahoo for example. Gmail might require an invite, but I can issue one to anybody on request (I have email enabled). Tyrenius 04:19, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

 * WP may not, but meta does. We have to understand the difference between the projects.  Meta does it because there are many and it is a secondary project, you only keep it whilst you need it.  Quote is different, it is a primary project, people may come back after a long 'break and it is smaller, we need all the sysops we can get. :-P  Commons reconfirms because it is a large thing to be a commons sysop, they control a lot of different projects.  If you delete an image there, it disappears from a large number of sites.  Meta also controls the sites like , the write the code and update them.  It could cause a lot of damage if someone messed up.  Cbrown1023  talk  15:36, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * It is slightly hard to spam someone with e-mail from WQ via the e-mail user function. I am sure that there are certain restrictions on the amount of times a user can e-mail another.  If one cannot handle abuse from a blocked vandal (the vandal's last and only resort is to yell at you), then one may not be a blocking-sysop material.  It definitely won't be the sole-determing factor, but those without it may get scolded.  I don't belive anyone expect the e-mail to be the user's primary one, it could even be something like tyrenius.wikiquote@gmail.com.  Cbrown1023  talk  15:36, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

 * I agree with Tyrenius; we are not like some projects (Commons for instance) who confirm their admins each year. The number of continually active Wikiquotians is small and most of those who continue to be active are the sysops. Wikipedia does normally expect sysops to have email enabled for matters such as blocked users contesting their blocks and I don't see the problem with strongly encouraging sysops to enable their email. Fys. “Ta fys aym”. 09:02, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

 * One major benefit of removal of inactive admins is to avoid stealing sysop password. English Wikisource removes flags from inactive admins mainly in this reason. The benefit of annual review has its benefit, but I admit currently we might have not to implement these systems.
 * As for mail reachability, we seem to reach the agreement "sysops and candidates should be reached by wikimail" with some reservation for oldbies? The sysop flag was basically given on the community consensus (except mav, see below), so theoretically community consensus can determine how to handle them, and our common sense seems to say "have them keep their flag for now" - and already pointed out, it is unlike to happen someone tries to contact first them, not active sysops. We can try to contact him outside of the project a/o leave a note on their talks about the new requirement and recommendation to the time they are back.
 * As for mav (Daniel Mayer). I think we cause no problem if we remove sysop flag from mav, since it was apparently for his emergent need. Once I asked his opinion about that, but he didn't give a special interest. I have no problem to let him hold the flag too. --Aphaia 07:27, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Password theft is extremely unlikely (even less so than WP with a number of long inactive admins) and bad actions would soon be spotted and reversed. Tyrenius 01:35, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

But Daniel Mayer is the only user here who can remove the sysop flag - you have to be a steward.--Cato 22:09, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Um, yes, we know, but there are never local stewards and I think we all know about desysopings needing to be carried out by stewards. :)  Cbrown1023  talk  00:26, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * It is obvious we need ask a steward for help. As for desysopping a steward, I see no problem, since 1) it seems actually for emergency need and 2) we see some stewards removed their flags due to inactivity (e.g. English Wikisource), so it is primarily up to us.
 * Another way is to count those people outside of the local sysop team either active or inactive, like English Wikinews. On thier list, we don't see the people who retain their sysop access not through the community vote. I think it make some sense since those people are not sysops in the ordinary meaning, hence not a part of sysop team who serve the daily needs of the project with their mops. --Aphaia 13:56, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Proposal revised
Regarding the discussion on the above, I hereby proposed again the rule as following:

 * Definition
 * Active sysop
 * Users who have sysop privileges and edited within three months one month
 * provised through the discussion below.

 * Inactive sysop
 * Users who have sysop privileges and made no edit within three months one month
 * provised through the discussion below.
 * Currently they are described "have sysop privileges here, but are now seldom involved as editors" as well the people on the below

 * Guest sysop
 * Users who have sysop privileges due to technical/operational reasons, not through the English Wikiquote community process.

Here we are concerns the first two administrators who have been voted by the community, and leave the guest (I mean Brion and mav) alone for a while.

As for mail reachability requirement,
 * Active sysops must make their wikimail active. Sysop candidates too. Instead of activation, they may put their email address on their userpages.
 * -> In principal, sysops should registered and valid wikiquote email address in preferences, or an email address indicated on their user page. For active sysops, as well sysop candidates, it is mandatory.
 * Inactive sysops including guest sysops are recommended to make their wikimail on the talk. If they are back and become active again, they are expected to activate their mail preferences.
 * In this moment, we are not going far to distinguish guests from inactive sysops as a whole; it may be a topic someday (in a month later, as JeffQ suggested?), but not for now.

Your comment will be appreciated. --Aphaia 04:14, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Support completely.  Cbrown1023  talk  19:51, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Support, except I feel the "inactive" period should be at least three months. Wikibreaks (or at least Wikiquote-breaks) of more than a month are not unusual even among sysops here. I don't think we should consider them "inactive" until they've been gone for a while (in Wikiquote terms). ~ Jeff Q (talk) 22:57, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I would not be opposed to this.  Cbrown1023  talk  22:59, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

 * Unopposed : I've never really been too concerned about this, but I do feel a three month period is more appropriate than a one month period. I myself have contemplated the possible need for my being absent for a month or more, and out of contact with the internet, but have not thus far needed to be out of contact for more than a few days at a time. ~ Kalki 23:34, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Clarification Requested We are just talking about the definition of guest, active, and inactive, correct? Not what happens to a sysop when (s)he reaches that threshold (i.e. sysop status removed...)?  Cbrown1023  talk  23:48, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * That is my understanding. I would be opposed to de-sysoping anyone merely for any period of absence. ~ Kalki 00:05, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Ditto re not de-sysopping.
 * I didn't see anything in Aphaia's proposal about de-sysopping, which strikes me as a separate issue. Given the contention elsewhere on this issue, my support above is purely for the active/inactive distinction and the expecations of email contact that go with it. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 04:07, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I know, I was just making sure because it was discussed above.  Cbrown1023  talk  04:12, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for making it clear, as Jeffq and Kalki pointed out, my proposal is mainly concerned with active/inactive sysop distinction and requirement for those two. I left the problem when we see someone inactive in my first proposal, and proposed term is therefore a tentative idea. Now I think lack of three months activity a sensible measure. --Aphaia 04:17, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

 * Support listing after 3 months.
 * Alternative - bands, i.e. admins edited within 1 month | 3 months | 1 year | more than 1 year |
 * Alternative - bot created refreshable list of last edit time.
 * Alternative - admins sign in to a special page when they start editing and erase their last sign in. Tyrenius 00:16, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * These alternatives all sound like technical solutions in search of a non-apparent problem. With all things about Wikiquote, we should never add complexity unless it directly and simply solves a clear problem (and is easy for everyone to maintain). ~ Jeff Q (talk) 04:07, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Support with the three-month proviso. - InvisibleSun 11:47, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Support, using the three-month period. ~ UDScott 13:14, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Support All seems eminently sensible. People do take short breaks; this is my first edit for a few days.--Poetlister 19:34, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Support seems reasonable, we may adjust the time periods in the future but let's go with it. Fys. “Ta fys aym”. 10:47, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Support The proposed email reachability requirement and inactive definition (3 months) seem good to me. iddo999 12:21, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Support listing after 3 months, but please specify what you plan with regard to inactive admins.--Jusjih 22:01, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

 * Thank you for your additional support, currently we seem to decide to do nothing for active fellows. I left a message about mail confirmation on their talks. That may be all we agreed on that we would do for them. --Aphaia 22:08, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

text revised, please review
With the power of your support, I revised the document([ diff]). Changes are found at the top (rule part) and at the bottom (sysop list parts). I colored the rule parts so that new inserts are colored and easily distinct from the former part. Please check the current revision if it is okay for you. --Aphaia 05:32, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I have made some changes in wording, but other than that, it looks good.  Cbrown1023  talk  18:32, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Poetlister proofread it too, thanks you two. Now I removed color and merge it into the existing parts completely. --Aphaia 17:50, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

List of admins
Would it be neater, rather than having separate lists of bureaucrats and checkusers, just to put (bureaucrat) or (checkuser) after their names? It's not as if we're ever going to have so many bureaucrats and checkusers that it's worth having separate lists?--Poetlister 11:47, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

 * I like the idea of a more concise (and compact) list, now that we're getting a decent number of admins. n:Wikinews:Administrators has a structure worth looking at, although I'm not sure format-coding is the best thing to help our new users (the folks I'd normally expect to want to look up this information). Perhaps we can use a 2- or 3-column form with Poetlister's parenthetical notes? (I can implement something that's still easy to edit, if we decide we'd like a change. See my current User:Jeffq for a another, slightly fancy columnar form whose list data is ordinary wiki markup.) ~ Jeff Q (talk) 15:01, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Ya but can you do it as a Venn diagram ?? :) ++Lar: t/c 23:38, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

 * Guys, I believe Poetlister means to do something along the lines of what Commons does.  Cbrown1023   talk   19:15, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
 * That's completely confusing! I think the present arrangement is very clear and easy to use. Tyrenius 00:56, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

I have a related question: why do we have a list of admins here anyway? Shouldn't we just have the one at WQ:ADMIN, which is already noted at the very top of this page? With two lists (not even counting other user and system-generated lists), we have to maintain them both, which is usually a bad idea. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 19:55, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I forgot the page had also that list, even under a different construction ...... and it looks logical to keep the list on WQ:ADMIN and only. It gives a general information about admins and the list (who's who) is such info definitely. --Aphaia 20:46, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Regardless of the form of list, everyone seems to support to have one sole list, I removed the lists from WQ:RFA and put list of admins instead. The former lists could be merged into the template, if you prefer. I have no strong preference about its format currently. --Aphaia 10:28, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Looks good. Would it be worth making the inactive ones less conspicuous (smaller font, say)?--Cato 11:49, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

 * I agree with Cato. I think there is a distinction between active admins who users may find it useful to contact and those who are inactive or indeed guests/stewards or the like.  I've no time now but if no one else does I may try altering this to see what people think -- Herby  talk thyme 12:08, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I've done what I had in mind, but of course if people don't like it, please revert!--Cato 14:01, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

 * Ok - I've tried an alternative? In a sense I would separate out the inactive/guests but not sure what others think.  Feel free to revert mine back to Cato, I do not feel strongly -- Herby  talk thyme 07:05, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Requests for adminship
Isn't this title the same as "Nominations for adminship", which could have a note that you can nominate yourself in this section? At the moment it's not clear what the Reqests title is for. Tyrenius 00:04, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I have a question too. Why do we separate "nomination" and "self-nomination"? --Aphaia 01:40, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

 * It's Nanobug's fault ☺, when he created the original WQ:RFA page. No doubt he based it on the then-current w:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship. But I suggest that we don't need to hold to this tradition, any more than Wikipedia has, especially if we feel it unnecessarily causes confusion or inhibits editors from volunteering to take on more responsibility. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 05:08, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

 * I've changed it per this discussion. Tyrenius 05:10, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

 * Support. --Aphaia 06:39, 15 September 2007 (UTC)


text:
User talk:62.252.0.5

All proverbs be shite
I see you posted the following comment on Talk:All proverbs be shite:
 * I have heard this - although it seems vulgar. It is used as a response to the inappropriate use of a proverb in the UK.

The problem is not whether this is a legitimate proverb. It's that the format is wrong. Wikiquote pages contain sets of proverbs from various sources and on various topics. This should go into an appropriate page, not be a page all by itself. I'm not sure where one would put a proverb about proverbs, but Anonymous is perhaps the best place to start. (This may also give it some exposure, so that someone may be able to identify its source.) — Jeff Q (talk) 10:30, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

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

title: User talk:62.252.0.5


text:
User:Gumba ad verbatim

James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!James Bond From Wikiquote

hello there!

title: User:Gumba ad verbatim


text:
Jane Jacobs

Jane Jacobs (4 May 1916 – 25 April 2006) was an American-born Canadian urbanist, writer and activist, most famous as author of The Death and Life of Great American Cities (1961), a powerful critique of the urban renewal policies of the 1950s in the United States. In 1968, Jacobs moved to Toronto, where she lived until her death.

Quotes

 * I would spend a nickel on the subway and go arbitrarily to some other stop and look around there. So I was roaming the city in the afternoons and applying for jobs in the morning. And one day I found myself in a neighborhood I just liked so much…it was one of those times I had put a nickel in and just invested something. And where did I get out? I just liked the sound of the name: Christopher Street — so I got out at Christopher Street, and I was enchanted with this neighborhood, and walked around it all afternoon and then I rushed back to Brooklyn. And I said, "Betty I found out where we have to live."
 * Interview in Toronto Canada (6 September 2000), by Jim Kunstler, Metropolis Magazine (March 2001)
 * I did have an inkling that I was going to be a writer. That was my intention.
 * Interview in Toronto Canada (6 September 2000), by Jim Kunstler, Metropolis Magazine (March 2001)

Political questionnaire response (1952)

 * Response to a U.S. Department of State questionnaire about her political beliefs and affiliations (1952)

 * I was brought up to believe that there is no virtue in conforming meekly to the dominant opinion of the moment. I was encouraged to believe that simple conformity results in stagnation for a society, and that American progress has been largely owing to the opportunity for experimentation, the leeway given initiative, and to a gusto and a freedom for chewing over odd ideas.
 * I was taught that the American's right to be a free individual, not at the mercy of the state, was hard-won and that its price was eternal vigilance, that I too would have to be vigilant. I was made to feel that it would be a disgrace to me, as an individual, if I should not value or should give up rights that were dearly bought. I am grateful for that upbringing.
 * We must demonstrate that it is possible to overcome poverty, misery and decay by democratic means, and we must ourselves believe, and must show others, that our American tradition of the dignity and liberty of the individual is not a luxury for easy times but is the basic source of the strength and security of a successful society.
 * The other threat to the security of our tradition, I believe, lies at home. It is the current fear of radical ideas and of people who propound them. I do not agree with the extremists of either the left or the right, but I think they should be allowed to speak and to publish, both because they themselves have, and ought to have, rights, and once their rights are gone, the rights of the rest of us are hardly safe. Extremists typically want to squash not only those who disagree with them diametrically, but those who disagree with them at all. It seems to me that in every country where extremists of the left have gotten sufficiently in the saddle to squash the extremists of the right, they have ridden on to squash the center or terrorize it also. And the same goes for extremists of the right. I do not want that to happen in our country.

The Death and Life of Great American Cities (1961)

 * Great cities are not like towns, only larger. They are not like suburbs, only denser. They differ from towns and suburbs in basic ways, and one of them is that cities are, by definition, full of strangers.
 * p. 30
 * It may be that we have become so feckless as a people that we no longer care how things do work, but only what kind of quick, easy outer impression they give. If so, there is little hope for our cities or probably for much else in our society. But I do not think this is so.
 * p. 71
 * A region is an area safely larger than the last one to whose problems we found no solution.
 * p. 410
 * As for really new ideas of any kind—no matter how ultimately profitable or otherwise successful some of them might prove to be—there is no leeway for such chancy trial, error and experimentation in the high-overhead economy of new construction. Old ideas can sometimes use new buildings. New ideas must use old buildings.

Dark Age Ahead (2004)

The subject itself is gloomy. A Dark Age is a culture's dead end. We in North America and Western Europe, enjoying the many benefits of the culture conventionally known as the West, customarily think of a Dark Age as happening once, long ago, following the collapse of the Western Roman Empire. But in North America we live in a graveyard of lost aboriginal cultures, many of which were decisively finished off by mass amnesia in which even the memory of what was lost was also lost. Throughout the world Dark Ages have scrawled finis to successions of cultures receding far into the past.
 * This is both a gloomy and a hopeful book.
 * Chapter One, The Hazard, p. 3
 * The salient mystery of Dark Ages sets the stage for mass amnesia. People living in vigorous cultures typically treasure those cultures and resist any threat to them. How and why can a people so totally discard a formerly vital culture that it becomes vitally lost?
 * Chapter One, The Hazard, p. 4
 * Writing, printing, and the Internet give a false sense of security about the permanence of culture.
 * Chapter One, The Hazard, p. 5
 * While politicians, clergy, creators of advertisements, and other worthies assert stoutly that the family is the foundation of society, the nuclear family, as an institution, is currently in grave trouble.
 * Chapter Two, Families Rigged To Fail, p. 29
 * Credentialing, not education, has become the primary business of North American universities.
 * Chapter Three, Credentialing Versus Educating, p. 44
 * To science, not even the bark of a tree or a drop of pond water is dull or a handful of dirt banal. They all arouse awe and wonder.
 * Chapter Four, Science Abandoned, p. 64-65
 * One wonders at the docility of the students who evidently must be satisfied enough with the credentials to be uncaring about the lack of education.
 * Chapter Four, Science Abandoned, p. 79
 *  Subsidiarity is the principle that government works best — most responsibly and responsively — when it is closest to the people it serves and the needs it addresses. Fiscal accountability is the principle that institutions collecting and disbursing taxes work most responsibly when they are transparent to those providing the money.
 * Chapter Five, Dumb-Down Taxes, p. 103
 * Virtually all ideologues, of any variety, are fearful and insecure, which is why they are drawn to ideologies that promise prefabricated answers for all circumstances.
 * Chapter Five, Dumb-Down Taxes, p. 115
 * Advanced cultures are usually sophisticated enough, or have been sophisticated enough at some point in their pasts, to realize that foxes shouldn't be relied on to guard henhouses.
 * Chapter Six, Self-Policing Subverted, p. 131
 * In wretched outcomes, the devil is in the details.
 * Chapter Seven, Unwinding Vicious Spirals, p. 153
 * Redundancy is expensive but indispensable.
 * Chapter Seven, Unwinding Vicious Spirals, p. 159
 * Beneficent spirals, operating by benign feedback, mean that everything needful is not required at once: each individual improvement is beneficial for the whole
 * Chapter Eight, Dark Age Patterns, p. 175
 * I have learned yet again (this has been going on all my life) what folly it is to take any thing for granted without examining it skeptically.
 * Notes And Comments, p. 179
 * Privately run jails are a mark of American "reinvented government" that has been picked up by neoconservatives in Canada.
 * Notes And Comments, p. 189

Quotes about Jacobs
But her personal support of any individual cause was always based on her absolutely unbending principles.
 * Jacobs has never been political in the sense of supporting one ideology or party over another. Larger ideologies, she firmly believed then and continues to believe, only obscure the realities, which are to be found by looking around, paying attention, and trusting your eyes over what people are merely saying. In that spirit, she always supported the right of labor unions and grass roots movements to exist. "I think it is good for us to have vociferous political minorities and to know how to live with them," she wrote.
 * Alice Sparberg Alexiou, in Jane Jacobs: Urban Visionary (2006), Ch. 1 : From Scranton to New York, p. 31

title: Jane Jacobs


text:
User talk:Jni

Category:Japanese poets
Risto hot sir has requested that I ask the community about what should be done regarding the numerous articles listed under Category:Japanese poets. You will know what I mean after you read a few and start to see the trend. They are all a possible copyright violation, they are all of non-notable people who don't even have a Wikipedia article, they are all from one source and they all clog up this category. You can read more about this here, here, here, and here. Just A Regular New Yorker (talk) 22:52, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Request for comment on User:MonsterHunter32's massive censorship of sourced quotes without discussion
I am asking the community to comment about the censorship of this user that I have already alerted about here Talk:India and at other places, but it didn't help. What should be done about the continued massive removal of sourced quotes by  when he refuses to even move the quotes to the talkpage with full reasoning for each quote as was asked by multiple users many many times? You can read more about it at the link above, and at the other discussions linked in that discussion. Thank you. --Jedi3 (talk) 14:18, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

The user User:Jedi3 keeps falsely blaming me of censorship and keeps edit-warring. He is only engaged in POV-pushing and adding statements just so they agree with his view. He doesn't care if his claims are made up like he did at Sikandar Butshikan, indirectly admitting to verbatim to verbatrim copying from Wikipedia before checking the source. He also added a quote at Muhammad bin Qasim that wasn't about the topic.

Or making up a false reason to remove a quote at Muslim conquest of the Indian subcontinent. Or he keeps making up his quotes eloquent, poignant, witty etc despite the "quotes" not even falling at all within the definition. He does this just to have his edits there at all costs. I've told him several times about this including here.

He falsely keeps saying I'm censoring him when all I've done is remove those quotes which aren't notable in any manner. Not those which are notable and i've preserved many of the quotes he has added. also removed the subsection of my complaint here. He himself censors me here and here in the past.

I've warned him several times including here, here and here. He doesn't listen and has removed my comments several times from his talk page.

Not to mention this person has also insulted me by terming me annoying after another user called me so, besides also calling me a vandal, when he himself can be indicted for edit-warring and vandalism. please block this user. I've been trying to cooperate with him, but it is clear he only wants his ideology imposed here. Their is no bar on any person of any ideology, even though Wikiquote is about neutrality but he doesn't care about anything and is being unprofessional. and it is clear he doesn't care what he does to get his edits here at all costs.

Right after his block expired, Jedi3 is back at edit-warring before even waiting for a discussion and made 3 reverts at 3 articles. See his recent reverts, here, a sly attempt to befool others in edit summary at Aurangzeb of "article under construction", at Malabar rebellion. He proceeded to make additional subtractions and additions at Aurangzeb, even though a revert is a revert whether partial or complete. He is trying to fool others. And just after his block expired, he has started edit-warring again and made three reverts. I would first like to check all his quotes and then discuss them one by one.

I am discussing even right now all quotes one by one who Jedi3 says must not be removed, has is not cooperating. I have already complained him at Administrators' noticeboard. I ask you comment there and take action against him for his disruptive edits. I have already complained him at Administrators' noticeboard. I ask you comment there and take action against him for his disruptive edits. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 15:13, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

 * The first of your points is a content dispute, the place to discuss these is the article talkpage (but since you refuse to move the quotes to the talkpage for discussion...) I have never before even heard from you about the issue at Muhammad bin Qasim. I don't know if what you claim is true but I will look into it as soon as you move the quote to the talkpage of Muhammad bin Qasim with your reasoning. But since you refuse to do this.... The quote from the conquest article is ambiguous, to say the least, it is not strictly about the conquest (and in your edit you were adding 2 different quotes). These are all content disputes, which should be discussed on the talkpage after you moved the quote there with your reasoning (which you never do). I have also not reverted all of your removals, in some cases I have kept your changes, or I have at least made the quotes shorter (it is you who always refuse to make the slightest concession).  But this is just 5 percent  of the quotes. The rest is just undiscussed blanking of articles.
 * When you claim I am censoring you I was just restoring the previous version of the article. In most cases, I took the trouble to add your other changes back to the article, but when you were censoring so many articles at once, I couldn't be expected to do this every time. The rest of your comment is just poor excuses and deliberate misrepresentations. I was not edit warring and I was discussing all of my edits on the discussion page, unlike you. --Jedi3 (talk) 15:41, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

 * There is a discussion ongoing at Talk:Aurangzeb. But like other articles you stop discussing. I haven't opposed discussion. It is you who is refusing to cooperate. Let's discuss it one after another. I don't want to discuss everything at once as that will cause huge amount of time wastage and confusion. And you don't even move beyond a single quote for long.
 * You keep repeatedly making false claims. Oh and I have not said I will never discuss. It is you who is refusing cooperation by making false claims again and again. It is you who has added or removed quotes under false reasons. Removal of quotes is censorship. Didn't you first realise those quotes will be removed? Anyone can. Add that to your already made false claims regarding quotes, it is clear you are only interested in disruptive edits with malafide intent.
 * While you claim I censored you, I have already said i am not removing anything because of your views but simply because your quotes are not memorable and in some cases added under false claims. I added the quotes at Talk:Aurangzeb and you picked one from Will Durant. We are discussing it. If you refuse to continue discussion, then that is your fault.
 * Also please note that User:Jedi3 has tried to wriggle out of any attempts at discussion by demanding an interaction ban. I can understand a block. But it is clear this person is making all attempts to stifle discussion so he gets what he wants. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 16:20, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

MonsterHunter32 should be blocked
should be blocked for his massive vandalism and mass blanking of quotes without even discussion on the talkpage, which other editors have also called a massive and almost indiscriminate removals and which as disruptive vandalism are surely a blockable offence.

He has been warned enough already.

He has been told enough times already that he should at the very least observe this rule:

'''All quotes removed by User:MonsterHunter32 must always be moved by him to the article talkpage with a note that they were removed from the article, giving full reasoning (for each removed quote), as required by Template:Remove. Otherwise, the status quo (uncensored) version should be kept and/or restored.'''

Other editors have noticed the same, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Bishonen#Need_your_help_again and https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/User_talk:UDScott#MonsterHunter32 and other places.

Also see Daniels' latest comment here https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=prev&oldid=2391342

Do the admins think that the editors’ time is so worthless that users like MH32 will continue creating problems one by one, and each time others will take the pain to go to various noticeboards to seek a justice only to find that MH32 is back again with his problematic behavior? How many times do we have to come back here before we decide that this is a net negative to the project? How much time does he have to waste before enough is enough? --Jedi3 (talk) 19:03, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Please block disruptive Jedi3
User:Jedi3 keeps on falsely claiming I am "censoring him" despite me leaving intact many of his notable quotes no matter what they are. I've already explained to him that I won't remove any notable quotes. He must stop with his false bad-faith accusations

Jedi3 has been constantly edit-warring despite being warned by admins and told plainly some of his quotes aren't memorable and seem to be only meant for POV-pushing. While criticising me, Kalki criticised Jedi3 as well tating the biases are leading to "lapses of both logic and fairness".

Also after he failed to prove his quotes as notable, he keeps on falsely calling them eloquent, poignant, witty, pithy etc despite me already explaining to him at Talk:Somnath temple as well as Talk:Aurangzeb that his quotes don't even fit within the dictionary definition of what he keeos calling them.

Also persistent history of Jedi3's edit-warring from the history of these articles:, , , , , , ,.

Jedi3 again reverted me with false claims. Despise the argument over even one of his quotes never being resolved, he used the false reason "see talk" to add back his non-notable content. He could only add it back, because I decided to let it go. However, he used false claims like he had some victory in the argument over the quotes.

Here are his reverts,, , , ,.

In some of these cases there were only one quote or the quotes were not as Jedi3 had added them. Despite pointing out so, he doesn't accept it.

He has edit-warred even after being warned and blocked in the past. Right after UDScott warned him, he still kept edit-warring at multiple articles:, , , , ,.

Jedi3 was blocked by UDScott for a week. But he resumed edit-warring:, ,.

This is not his first time making false claims, his made-up and unrelated quotes:, ,. Despite me pointing out with original sources and teh quotes themselves about his false claims in these edits, he still refuses to accept it, see his denials despite being exposed: ,

His vandalism has caused a lot of disruotion especially as it prevents me from adding quotes and making useful contribution. :Here are the quotes I added at Aurangzeb:, , and. Also at the same time, Jedi3 kept edit-warring, sapping most of my time in dealing with his constant edit-warring. I told him not to edit-war while calling for cooperation. He didn't listen. See, , , , , , ,. Also same thing has happened at Noakhali riots. He kept edit-warring over one non-notable quote that i removed and in the process also kept removing the notable quotes I added. these are my additions:, and. I went away for some time as I can't keep editing forever. Then Jedi3 tried to edit-war here as well, impacting my quotes in the process as well.: and. This despite his removed quote only being one in number.

Also Jedi3 keeps claiming Template:Remove: "Quotes should never be removed without a comment in the edit summary, and should almost always be moved to the Talk page with a note that they were removed from the article, giving full reasoning."

It is also clear, that Jedi3 hasn't bothered to verify his quotes from the original sources, and is just adding based on whjetevr he reads especially from hindutva-leaning authors. just recently he showed thew truth of his edit process, when at Babur, I couldn't find the quote Jedi3 added I simply shifted it to disputed before it could be verified. Only after I said so, Jedi3 bothered to verify it, however it isn't exactly the book of the Hindutva-leaning SR Goel claimed:. He has shown the same behavior of not verifying his claims: In the last part of my comment here, I pointed out with the original sources he used for a quote that it is not about Muhammad bin Qasim. He however has refused to accept his wrongdoings about it:,. Similarly, at Talk:Sikandar Butshikan, he indirectly admitted to copying quotes from Wikipedia without checking if they're true when I pointed out his quote doesn't exist in the orignal source.

It says almost always should be moved. Regardless I tried to move and discuss in the past but there was no result. He even abruptly stops discussion in the middle. Notice the time difference between his subsequent comments at Talk:Somnath temple (24 days), Talk: Aurangzeb (6 days), Talk:India (4 days). The last article India wasn't even related to our dispute, yet he started repeating the same claims he made at the noticeboards and other talk pages there.

Please block this disruptive vandal immediately. And it is ironic that Jedi3 is himself lecturing the admins when he berated me for arguing with them. His disruption must stop. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 19:12, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Wp-links
Hei Jniǃ Have you noticed This?w:Wikipedia talk:External links--Risto hot sir (talk) 22:12, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Interesting. Thanks for notifying me. jni (talk) 09:32, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Several vandals afoot...
Aside from the Toy Story/Shrek vandal, we have 68.201.9.142, 86.179.83.52, Stopthebuyers, Wewillbuythisplace, etc.
 * 68.201.9.142-- Absolute nonsense, changing certain networks to PBS without explanation.
 * 86.179.83.52, Stopthebuyers, Wewillbuythisplace-- Redoing vandalism, unlawfully bullying Tegel, spamming, trying to defend other vandals, the works. I request all of these users be blocked infinitely and the pages they vandalized be protected indefinitely, as well as my talk page, GreenMeansGo's talk page, etc. WikiLubber (talk) 02:21, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Protection
I recommend you and all admins involved in the IP vandals' vandalism protect their pages for at no less than a year (and mine, too, just in case, since it is my messages they keep trying to remove without explaining why). WikiLubber (talk) 18:27, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

User talk:86.148.237.221
Please revoke TPA. -- CptViraj   (📧) 14:03, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users
Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Village pump
Greetings! Your name has come up in the discussion at Village pump, if you would like to comment there. Cheers! BD2412 T 07:57, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jni


text:
User talk:Gumba ad verbatim

Hi, I'm sorry that your latest edits. It seems not so nice, and I should have blocked you to stop you. You can't edit any page during a day. I hope you will be nice and don't repeat such things when you are back. Cheers, --Aphaia 17:18, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Gumba ad verbatim


text:
User:ABCD/monobook.css

@import "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Monobook.css&action=raw&ctype=text/css"; @import "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:ABCD/monobook.css&action=raw&ctype=text/css";

title: User:ABCD/monobook.css


text:
User:ABCD/monobook.js

document.write('<\/script>');

title: User:ABCD/monobook.js


text:
User:ABCD

See w:User:ABCD.

title: User:ABCD


text:
User talk:ABCD

See w:User talk:ABCD.

title: User talk:ABCD


text:
User talk:131.111.8.102

kerblanksky :-P

title: User talk:131.111.8.102


text:
User talk:131.211.51.113

thank you for your reverting, I'm Aphaia, one of sysops on here. I'll care for those vandalism, so please feel free to your own works.

By the way, would you like to register yourself on this project? We are always waiting for a good editor like you!

title: User talk:131.211.51.113


text:
User talk:Andrew Walkingshaw~enwikiquote

Welcome again to Wikiquote, and thank you for your cooperation and complement ;-)

I'm honored to have you as a part of our community. Here I list some useful stuffs.
 * Community Portal a bit rough, but fine links.
 * Village pump same to Wikipedia ... not so complicated.
 * Votes for deletion alike Wikipedia, but now we are drafting our own policies.

Hopefully you enjoy Wikiquote. --Aphaia 17:32, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * P.S. Please take this flower as token of my appreciation: [[Image:WikiThanks.png|WikiThanks.png]] Aphaia.

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 Andrew Walkingshaw. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Andrew Walkingshaw~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 23:18, 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) 05:41, 19 April 2015 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Thunderbrand

--Aphaia 17:33, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Thunderbrand


text:
User:Jdcope~enwikiquote

I haven't done much with Wikiquote, and don't check this page often. See my Wikipedia user page for more about me.

title: User:Jdcope~enwikiquote


text:
Talk:Animorphs

Cleanup
Cleanup tag: Extra lines between lines of dialogue, no half-width dividers. ~ UDScott 21:37, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Added half-width dividers.

I completed the cleanup that I was looking for with the cleanup tag. I removed the extra lines,indented the text properly, and added an External links section, with a wikipedia link. ~ UDScott 23:25, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Ok, but I was wondering why this article about the books is formatted like a TV show? It even has stage directions and other interpolations that seem more appropriate for describing a dramatic production than for quoting the text of a book. Are the books actually written that way, or is this actually a TV article? ~ Ningauble 12:31, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

 * The books are not written like this. The first contributor must have used the format for TV shows and the rest probably built on that. I can't correct all of them though because I only have a couple of these books for reference. Raisin56 08:59, 19 September 2010 (UTC) EDIT: Well, I've done what I can, which isn't much. I just hope someone else can do the rest. Raisin56 20:04, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Quotes
I have added some parts of quotes to #23 the pretender and #54 the beginning. Please do not delete them without stating it here. 65.223.58.226 00:04, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

That goes for all quotes on this page, methinks. Asmodeus Draconis 18:20 20 November 2007

title: Talk:Animorphs


text:
User:Clotten~enwikiquote

I edit Errol Morris information and not much else.

title: User:Clotten~enwikiquote


text:
Raising Helen

Raising Helen is a 2004 American comedy/drama film about a young woman who, after her sister and brother-in-law die in a car accident, becomes the guardian of their three children.
 * Directed by Garry Marshall. Written by Jack Amiel and Michael Begler.

Helen help us.

Pastor Dan Parker

 * I'm a sexy man of God, and I know it.

Henry Davis

 * [Helen lights a cigarette] It's going to be hard to take care of us if you're dead, too.

Other

 * Landlord: I am only available between eight thirty and nine in the morning because I have a life.

Dialogue

 * [Helen starts to read Jenny's letter from Lindsay]
 * Helen Harris: Dear Jenny, If you're reading this, you know that I'm gone. And I asked Helen to be the guardian for the kids.
 * Lindsay Davis: [voiceover] And you're probably freaked about it. Yes, it's a surprising choice, considering that you are the most incredible mother I've ever known. If you find this letter odd, understand that my "always be prepared" Paul convinced me to write it now while our children are young. You must know from experience that when it comes to picking somebody else to raise your kids, no one seems right. No one is you. And so you choose someone who is most like you. Someone that will give the kids a taste of their real mom, the mom they lost and never really got to know. In so many ways, we are so much alike, that's why I chose Helen. Of course, she'll have lots of fights with the kids, yet she'll find a way to make up. I know sometimes she messes things up and makes big mistakes. On the other hand, she also makes big comebacks. Respect her Jenny. Give her a shot. We're family and I'm counting on you to keep everyone together. I know, Helen will certainly need some help learning how to be a mother to my kids, but I've got you for that. And who could be better? After all, you raised Helen, you'll teach her how to be a mom. Just like you taught her how to tie her shoes. I can still hear you telling her, "The bunny goes around the tree, and into the burrow...
 * Helen Harris: [watches Sarah tie her shoe] Pull tight.

 * Jenny Portman: [Being kicked by her unborn child] Ooh, ooh! Sweetie, what did mommy say about kicking while she's having a conversation? You need to wait until she's finished. Thank you very much.
 * Helen Harris: Did you just boss around the unborn?
 * Jenny Portman: It's never too early to learn good manners.

 * Jenny Portman: [as she examines the new apartment] I bet this is lead paint. Kids, no chewing on the window sills!
 * Helen Harris: Yeah, stick to the table legs like I taught you.

 * Helen Harris Audrey sweetie can you do me a favor and get me your wallet?
 * Audrey Davis: Why?
 * Audrey Davis: Could you just do it please?
 * [Audrey closes the closet door, gets the wallet in her backpack and shows it to Helen]
 * Helen Harris: Open it up and give me your fake I.D.
 * Audrey Davis: Why?
 * Helen Harris: Because I said so. That's why.
 * Audrey Davis: I'm not gonna give it to you, I am not a child!
 * Helen Harris: Yes, you are. You are a child, Audrey. And you have a right to a childhood and you should fight for it but if you won't, then I will. Now give me your I.D.
 * [Audrey gets fake I.D. out of her wallet and throws it at Helen]
 * Helen Harris: That was very adult of you.
 * Audrey Davis: [shouts] You tricked me! I thought you were on my side, but you're just like her. [points at Aunt Jenny] I hate you, do you hear me, I hate you!
 * Helen Harris: Well, I guess we are just gonna have to learn to live with that.

 * Audrey Davis: What is the matter with you? Don't you remember what it's like to be young?
 * Helen Harris: Of course I do... it was last Wednesday!

 * Audrey Davis: [after Jenny bursts into the motel room she is in with BZ] Aunt Jenny? What are you doing here? How did you find...
 * Jenny Portman: You have ten seconds to get your things together and get in the car. [to BZ who has just come out of the bathroom] Stay. Ten...
 * Audrey Davis: You're not my mother, if you haven't noticed.
 * Jenny Portman: No. But I love you very much, and I will be your worst nightmare if you don't get in that car now. Seven, six...
 * BZ: But we're not ready to go yet.
 * Jenny Portman: Oh, you're not ready? Well... Well, are you ready for this? [Jenny who is pregnant motions to her stomach] I don't think so. Are you ready to be a parent? I don't think so. Four, three...
 * Audrey Davis: Are you happy? You've just ruined my entire life.
 * Jenny Portman: Well, we'll fix it later. Two... [to BZ] You.
 * BZ: Chill out, Mommy.
 * Jenny Portman: Hey.
 * BZ: It's all good.
 * Jenny Portman: Don't you talk to me like that.
 * BZ: It's just a prom.
 * Jenny Portman: You listen to me. If you ever so much as blink in her direction again, I can and will bury you so far in the ground that the heat from the earth's core will incinerate your sorry ass. Do you understand me?
 * "'BZ'": Yes, ma'am.
 * Jenny Portman: By the way, you're not a bad person, but this is very bad behavior. Very bad behavior.

 * Pastor Dan Parker: Let's talk about some things you could do at home.
 * Helen Harris: You wanna know what I've been doing at home? I've been doing the best I can. Do you have any idea what this has done to my life?
 * Pastor Dan Parker: Hey, Helen, you have any idea what it's done to theirs?
 * Helen Harris: Hey, Pastor Dan? Mr. Self-righteous? I'm hanging on by a thread here. I lost my sister, my social life, my disposable income, my ability to fit into a size 2, and - this just in - my job. Pretty much the only two things that haven't disappeared are my nicotine fits and a few pounds that have recently taken up residence on my ass. So forgive me if I'm not too thrilled about being lectured, in Queens, about being a lousy legal guardian to three kids who maybe shouldn't have been given to me in the first place.

 * Helen Harris: See you at Vespers.
 * Pastor Dan Parker: Do you know what Vespers is?
 * Helen Harris: Some kind of scooter?
 * Pastor Dan Parker: Close enough.

 * Helen Harris: Pastor Dan just asked me out.
 * Audrey Davis: That is so weird.
 * Pastor Dan Parker: I can hear you. I'm still here. Go inside and do that.

Cast

 * Kate Hudson - Helen Harris
 * John Corbett - Pastor Dan Parker
 * Joan Cusack - Jenny Portman
 * Hayden Panettiere - Audrey Davis
 * Spencer Breslin - Henry Davis
 * Abigail Breslin - Sarah Davis
 * Helen Mirren - Dominique
 * Sakina Jaffrey - Nilma Prasad
 * Kevin Kilner - Ed Portman
 * Felicity Huffman - Lindsay Davis
 * Sean O'Bryan - Paul Davis
 * Amber Valletta - Martina

title: Raising Helen


text:
Talk:Dune

Tleilaxu Epigram
Can anyone explain me this one? I dont get it, maybe because i am not a native speaker.

 * If you're referring to this:

Here lies a toppled god — His fall was not a small one. We did but build his pedestal, A narrow and tall one. I believe the writer is disclaiming any responsibility for the fall of the toppled god, despite having built the god's pedestal in such a way (narrow and tall) that it was likely to fall over. Ed Fitzgerald 05:42, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I thought the pedestal refered to a monument build after the fall. But that way it makes sense. --85.179.49.128 12:51, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

On some level the epigram is a warning: "If you want adulation and worship and glorification, it will be given to you - be careful with it!" A hero may be destroyed by the very forces he himself sets in motion. Rather than absolutely disclaiming responsibility, I believe the Tleilaxu here are telling us that ordinary people can wreck even the most terrible ruler even under the guise of working in his best interests. Further, this seems a desirable thing. --65.213.77.129 15:02, 4 March 2008 (UTC) Completely wrong. The "God" in the epigram is metaphoric for ANY leader, up to and including the "Gods" that are created by their "worshipers". When constructing a pedestal for the created Leader/God to stand upon (over the governed), one important quality to build into the "pedestal" is the ability to topple it over (along with the God/Leader), i.e. making it very narrow.

Credit should not go to Herbert for this quote- it was written by H G Wells in a "Short history of the World" in 1922. He was referring to Alexander the Great. It goes as follows: Here lies a toppled God His fall was not a small one We did but build his pedestal A narrow and a tall one.

It is an admonishment to the collective, to always make sure to retain the ability to revoke whatever power that is given over for the purposes of government. The US Constitution's 2nd Amendment is a perfect example of the "narrow" quality of the US Government's pedestal.
 * That doesn't at all fit into the general attitude of the Duniverse, which is considerably more cynical when it comes to power, and certainly doesn't leave it confidently in the hands of the people. At least, not until after The Golden Path was achieved. This is a pre-God-Emperor maxim. From the Tleilaxu, no less, who sought to manipulate Muad'Dib for their own purposes, via Hayt. No, I'd say that, rather, this is a declaration of intention on the part of the Tleilaxu. "We will destroy Muad'Dib by seeming to give him everything the people expect him to assume for himself. We will raise him to the status of a God, and then, due to an intentional flaw in our construction which only we can exploit, he will fall to ruin, and what will be left... is us." Muad'Dib spent two books assiduously trying to avoid doing what Leto II ended up having to do as God-Emperor, and it was with this that the Tleilaxu tempted him. The temptation to Godhood. Instead Muad'Dib walked into the desert, as any blind Fremen is supposed to do. --216.145.71.230 16:25, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

A minor nitpick: the Tleilaxu Epigram is indeed attributed to H.G. Wells by certain sources; wrongly. There is no such fragment in "A short history of the world". Feel free to check.

Wait a minute. I think the interpretation is apparent: Here lies a toppled God      (Someone has failed who we put our faith and admiration in, and who we empowered) His fall was not a small one (His failure was profound) We did but build his pedestal (We put our hopes, dreams in his hands) A narrow and a tall one      (Our idealistic expectations were so great, that when he didn't measure up precisely, he, and we, came crashing down to  reality) This is a sobering lesson for limiting our expectations of our leaders. Our expectations can cause us to idealize another human, projecting our hopes onto him/her. It's important to consider what it reveals about the Tleilaxu. It implies that they use technology and subterfuge to accomplish their goals, rather than brute strength. My interpretation of this witty little poem is slightly different. It's about a leader who had an epic fall from power, and the author is saying slyly that they put the man up as high as he could possibly go (even letting himself convince himself he was a GOD), so that the fall would be all the bigger. Ie, they partially set him up for the fall. They did worship him, but at the same time *wanted* to see him fall. Hence building a very tall, *but very thin* pedestal...

It's very transparent. Read it from the middle out. A God was created, a God was toppled. It is a sardonic assertion that the Face Dancers created the circumstances for a God to fail, and gave the pillar a shove.

I think it's more a rather literal reference to Muad'Dib. His Godhead was his narrow and tall pedestal, and eventually he fell from Godhood and became the Preacher.

Separate Page for Dune Chapter Openings?
Great books, lots of quotes already, and certaintly many more that could be added. I'm wondering if it might be prudent to put the chapter openings on a different page. It's already getting cluttered, and most readers know that they are chapter headings if they are looking for one, and nonreaders will be able to further appreciate Herbert's writings and quotes that are actually present in the storyline.

Format
Is there rhyme or reason to the bolding and attribution of these quotes? --Maru
 * The specific character attributions, for the most part, seem to those given within the books. The bolding is a form of emphasis permitted to the users of wikiquote to denote quotes that someone has found for some reason to be more notable than others. This can be especially useful upon large pages, or in long passages, where more famous or notable statements can become "lost". Italicization is generally reserved for some passages of poetry, titles, and such italicization as occurs in the original works. As all selection of quotation is to a great extent a process dependent upon the assessments of individuals as to a statements significance bolding is but a minor extension of the user's options in editing the articles here, and the placing of quotations. ~ Achilles 18:54, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

Which quotes are notable is an arbitary thing to judge, personally i love 'A letter to CHOAM Attributed to The Preacher' from Children of Dune, which i just added, its been a great inspiration to me, thought about bolding it, but maybe its just myself who loves it.

Format
This page does not use the standard format for literary works quotations. This creates inherent accuracy problems: instead of adding "context" in subbullets, add enough context from the text itself. This will make it easier to verify quotations. Thanks ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 15:33, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Not sure if the right book
I added some quoted to the machine crusade but I'm not yet sure if they are from that specific book. I'll look it up as soon as I can.

Fixed some spelling errors in the last Children of Dune quote: changed "civilisation to civilization"

The spice must flow
Why isnt this here(15.203.169.124 14:12, 1 May 2007 (UTC))

 * Because it comes from the screenplay written by David Lynch for his film adaptation, and does not appear in any of the Dune books.

 * Potentially related is the repeated reference in the first book to maintaining the balance of power. Maybe that should be on there if it isn't already. -- M0llusk 18:05, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Separate Pages for each dune?
Reading the Dune books for the fourth time, I've bookmarked a bunch of pages with what I consider to be noteworthy quotes. Having something like 15-30 of them from each book, I added them to the wiki. Anyway, this page is getting quite large. Perhaps it should be a separate page for quotes from each book? I think that'd be much better. --Erauqssidlroweht 20:37, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

 * Your recent additions have been good ones, and though there are many more that could be added, I still prefer to keep the Dune series together on one page. I generally prefer keeping things by an author together as much as possible, though separating the Dune series was obviously a good idea for Herbert. Even larger listings occur for Discworld by Terry Pratchett, and I think they should also remain together. ~ Kalki 20:55, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

 * There are so many more that could be added. Heck, if I put down all my favourite quotes, you'd practically have the whole book up here. I do see the merit in having all the quotations of an author together. Perhaps, for ease of use, the quotations should be sorted, such as by alphabetical order by the person who says it? I might even do it myself in my spare time after exams. Also, like I said before, I'm rereading the entire series (the real series only). I'll be sure to put up the good ones from Heretics and Chapterhouse. --Erauqssidlroweht 21:20, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Random pictures?
What the hell is with them? They are not only unrelated, but are not needed either. They need to be removed. This article is absolutely ridiculous! You have a list of quotes, you dont need stupid pictures and to repeat the quotes with them. This article needs fixing, and if its not done I'll do it myself.

The images are certainly not merely "random" and often a great deal of thought and decision was used in their selection. Though the images are for the most part not directly related to the Dune universe or the desert ecology that dominates the planet of Arrakis (and to a great extent cannot be, given the limited nature of what can be made available at the commons), they all bear some relation to the quotations they illustrate, and, I believe, serve to make the page more interesting on the whole, and provide further avenues of assessing the broad applicability of some of Herbert's statements.

Within what limits exist, evocative images have been selected to illustrate such quotations as express some of Herbert's most oft-repeated ideas and themes. Among the primary themes which I believe are most evident in his works are those of Liberty, Justice, Truth, the limits of Perception, and many of the vitally important freedoms and virtues which many authors care to express themselves upon.

Eternal contests exist between freedom and influential growth such as Muad'Dib and those who attain wisdom in Herbert's stories stand for, live for, and die for, and such absolute confinement and control of others abilities and will as the most foolish regularly seek to obtain.

I contend the images for the most part augment the quotations they are used with, and in no case is detrimental to the meaning.

From the very first image used with what I believe to be fully relevant desert imagery, with the light of the sun on the edge of the horizon: "Deep in the human unconscious is a pervasive need for a logical universe that makes sense. But the real universe is always one step beyond logic."

From this there soon occurs an image of less obvious relevance, but I believe well indicates such mental imagery as arises in the mind in darkness, for the use of the mentat litany against fear; then comes an image of a higher dimensional figure in motion within a 3D perspective image on a 2D plane, involving the "folding" of spaces, such as is part of the abilities provided through the spice-visions. On this page as well as others I often also employ varied hued images that indicate patterns of vital and ever expanding processes of learning, as opposed to those of dogmatic presumption and stagnation. Also near the top is an image of a view through a cannon barrel to indicate some of the limits of prescience, even when genuine, and some of the potentials of it even when limited or flawed.

I will provide a few indications, but certainly not an exhaustive list of the rationale that was used in the processes of selecting some of the other images used with the quotes:

 * "You can't draw neat lines around planet-wide problems. Planetology is a cut-and-fit science" — this uses an image of a terraformed Mars, certainly highly relevant to stories so grounded in concerns of the planetary ecology of a desert planet.

 * "You have square thoughts which resist circles." — this uses the perspective of a 3D matrix formed of squares in perspective, which are clearly obstacles and constraints to any spherical or circular forms larger than the gaps within the matrix they define.

 * "The person who takes the banal and ordinary and illuminates it in a new way can terrify. We do not want our ideas changed." — Uses an image of the sword of Justice, which sometimes can be harshly wielded, but in only in defense of what is valuable, and never for the sake of mere destruction.

 * "Much depends on what people dream in the secrecy of their hearts. I have always been as concerned with the shaping of dreams as with the shaping of actions." — an image of an adult dancing with fire upon the water, repeating the use of metaphors of circles, immediately following an image with similar metaphors involving the playful action of a child with a sparkler on Guy Fawkes Night.

 * "He was warrior and mystic, ogre and saint, the fox and the innocent, chivalrous, ruthless, less than a god, more than a man. There is no measuring Muad'Dib's motives by ordinary standards" — this is illustrated by an image of a moon, such as inspired Muad'Dib's choice of his public name, which is that of a humble and capable mouse well honored by the Fremen, which I also later make passing indication of with the image of a desert mouse and the quote "You do not take from this universe. It grants you what it will."

 * "He taught a balanced way of life, a philosophy with which a human can meet problems arising from an ever-changing universe." — Uses an image of the Whirlpool Galaxy, one of the classic images of galaxies available to us.

 * "Transient life, even the self-aware and reasoning life which we call sentient, holds only fragile trusteeship on any portion of the wholeness." — uses an interesting image of the blackhole at the center of the Whirlpool Galaxy.

 * "In all of my universe I have seen no law of nature, unchanging and inexorable. This universe presents only changing relationships which are sometimes seen as laws by short-lived awareness." — uses an image of a sphere containing plasma arcs of electricity being touched by a hand illuminated by its light, and sensitive to its presences through the electrical impulses of its nerves, and those within the brain which guides it.

 * "Give me the judgment of balanced minds in preference to laws every time." — uses the image of a figure balancing between sunlight and shadow on top of a dune's ridge.

 * "When strangers meet, great allowances should be made for differences of custom and training." — uses an image of symbols from several of humanity's most popular religious traditions.

 * "Live the best life you can. Life is a game whose rules you learn if you leap into it and play it to the hilt." — uses an image of a woman doing her exercise routine with a sword.

 * "The wise person ... views history as a set of lessons to be learned, choices and ramifications to be considered and discussed, and mistakes that should never again be made." — uses an image of a nuclear explosion with the appearance of a sunset.

 * "The future of prescience cannot always be locked into the rules of the past. The threads of existence tangle according to many unknown laws." — uses an evocative image of a person in whom energies from diverse sources seem to converge.

 * "You will learn the integrated communication methods as you complete the next step in your mental education." — uses an integrated image of the entire fractal form known as the Mandelbrot set.

 * "There exists no intransigent opposites except in the beliefs of men. Anyone can rip aside the veil of Time." — uses a black and white image of the Cosmic Tree Yggdrasil, with its roots and branches extending white into black and black into white.

 * "This universe cannot be seen, cannot be heard, cannot be detected in any way by fixed perceptions." — uses a moving image of a simple fractal.

Even the apparently incongruous image of a surfer, does not come until very late on the page, to illustrate the quote "There's no secret to balance. You just have to feel the waves" after the limits of the desert realms have been alluded to in previous images and quotes, as well as the stories Herbert created.

I am very aware that it nearly always takes more effort to create than to destroy, and I know my own and others people's efforts to build pages of interest remain vulnerable to criticism, but I hope that the the approval or acceptance of others of such efforts will more than balance these.

Of course some might wish to totally ignore or remain totally oblivious to the very essence of much that Herbert says throughout his works, and instead defend such a sterile and fruitless absence of inspiration and imagination as he continually expresses himself against, but I hope and trust that such minds are not in the majority, though a few of them may occasionally be among the most vociferous and insulting to those who wish to maintain and defend creative freedoms and to guard against the most wantonly controlling and destructive impulses of others. ~ Kalki 19:44, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

 * You're a bunch of sad fucks. Pull your head out of your arse, Frank Herbert and Dune arent the only things in existence. Those picture ARE random, they ARE useless. Do you morons need a pretty picture to be able to understand a quote? Obviously theres nothing I can do to disuade you sad assholes, so keep your shitty pictures then, keep your sad fucking loves, and have fun re-reading Dune for the rest of your lives. You people are NOT Frank Herbert, so done presume to speak of him, and don't for a second try to tell everyone else what his novels are about, and no matter how much you try, you will always only be pretentious wankers, but you wont be able to even see that will you..

'''The levels of perception and eloquence you have exhibited by your words are truly stupefying. Even so, I will make what is sure to be a sadly inadequate attempt to address some of these clearly astounding complaints:'''

In my response, I indicated some of my own insights and thought processes, and no one else made any comment, so addressing your response to anyone else but me is rather inappropriate. Many of the insults you seem ready to sling broadly at anyone clearly cannot be applied well to anyone beyond yourself, save in your own mind.

You assert despite my extensive indications of some thought behind them that "Those picture ARE random, they ARE useless." You obviously need to go to the dictionary and find out what "random" actually means, and if they do nothing more to instruct your mind than prompting you to do this they might not be totally "useless" even to someone so willing to label them so as you.

I have never made any indication that I held Frank Herbert or Dune anything close to "the only things in existence." Though I have read a few of Herbert's works, and hold them in high esteem, I certainly have not bothered to read all of them thoroughly, and even with the first Dune novel, I believe that I have only read the work from start to finish once, though I might be mistaken and could perhaps have read it twice, and I have browsed through it many times, though never more than a few times in a year.

It is one of many works I am acquainted with of good worth, but I would never go so far as to say that it or any other single work is indispensible to anyone's vital awareness; and though there are certainly many works that can be helpful, not everyone can be easily helped.

I have certainly never said anyone "needs" a "pretty picture" to understand a quote. I did indicate that I believe that images generally make the pages and quotes more interesting to the casual observer, and that very the thoughtful might appreciate some of the indications and evocations that are awakened or referred to by their presence. And I am quite aware that no mere abundance of words or images, however well chosen can suffice to make everyone fully insightful about anything. I have always been very aware that others would not be greatly appreciative of my own or others efforts, and that many people will be extremely hostile to presence of anything that indicates there might be things they are not fully comprehending, or to anyone who does not bow down abjectly to their efforts to condemn and damn all that they cannot fully understand or control.

I do not presume to speak "for" Frank Herbert in regards to anything, but I do speak for myself, and I must state that I am inclined to believe he would be more appreciative of my observations and comments than of yours. I have certainly not spent any great amount of time trying to limit anyone's notions of what Herbert's novels are about nor constrain their own imaginative capacities in any way. I have spent some time and effort in opening up potential avenues of interest, and indicating to others that his works are worthy of at least some attention. I do believe there is a great deal of wisdom shown in them, but each person must always gather for themselves what they can from what is shown to them by others.

I am hardly the first to observe that those who go about spending much of their time complaining, insulting, and accusing people of being pretentious, are usually the most pretentious and shallow people of all. Those who are not so interested in bitterly criticizing people or works which they cannot appreciate have far better things to do, like actually appreciating and cherishing what things they can, and defending them from such attacks as can often come from those with little capacity or inclination to do so. ~ Kalki 04:30, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

 * I notice you removed my observation of you being a pretentious wanker, saying its vandalism.. how mature. When in fact it is actually a considered opion. Wanker.

This above troll also added this message to my talk page:

 * Buddy.. you truly are a pretentious wanker, and, dont remove my opions on things from discussion pages, nothing gives you that right. Suppose you'll remove this anyway though, being the weak tosser you are though. Wanker.

To which I responded:

I am not your "buddy", troll.

I do not presume to know what all your problems are, but plainly you are a person who has problems with both comprehension and civility. Your earliest comment at "Talk:Dune" was both presumptive and indeed pretentiously threatening, and yet I addressed it with a rational and detailed response. Your second was far fouler, and seemed primarily aimed at hurling insults rather than making any lucid or coherent arguments or reply, which I still responded to with a respectful answer, and the third one was simply a brief remark which was clearly meant as an insult, and nothing more, and was removed as nothing other than a mere personal attack by a troll. It is common practice to remove postings which are merely personal attacks as mere vandalism and trolling, as I could easily and rightfully do even with this one.

There are many anonymous cowards, who would probably not risk loosing their teeth and whatever shreds of dignity they might possess to say such things to a person's face as they regularly say with casual and safe abandon over the internet to others they are unlikely to ever meet.

'It is not "pretentious" to express one's thoughts with precision and validity; it is very'' pretentious to presume either precision, validity of argument or anything resembling true courage, where they do not exist. And simply going around calling people "wankers" is an argument commonly used by shallow minded and pretentious cowards who are very little more than that.'''

I have just returned to the internet, seen your message, and replied to it with a typed response. Further messages merely to insult me or anyone else will be treated with the contempt they fully deserve, and flushed away as mere troll-droppings ~ Kalki 08:18, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

 * The pictures do not pertain to the subject matter. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and it is debatable whether or not the pictures are at all informative. it is totally a matter of opinion.
 * If you will look at the left hand corner of your page you might notice this is NOT Wikipedia, and it is NOT an encyclopedia. It is a place where quotations are gathered, investigated, selected, and presented in ways that, hopefully, for the most part, will be both interesting and pleasing to most people. Though there can be and have been debates on how best to do this, the use of images that have relevance to the ideas expressed in some of the more impressive quotations, in order to enhance the pages, is a long practice here. ~ Kalki 09:29, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * If you will look at the left hand corner of your page you might notice this is NOT Wikipedia, and it is NOT an encyclopedia. It is a place where quotations are gathered, investigated, selected, and presented in ways that, hopefully, for the most part, will be both interesting and pleasing to most people. Though there can be and have been debates on how best to do this, the use of images that have relevance to the ideas expressed in some of the more impressive quotations, in order to enhance the pages, is a long practice here. ~ Kalki 09:29, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I can see the relevance of certain pictures but most them seem totally random, and mostly I don't grasp the connection between picture and quote. Would I be incorrect in saying that all the pictures were gathered and added in by 1, single person? I don't see a great deal of variety in the pictures themselves.

i don't have an account at Wikiquote, though i do at Wikipedia, and so i wanted to say that i for one think the pictures add greatly to the "atmosphere" of the entry, despite the trollspeak in the air. anyhoo, i was skimming through, and thought that an image of a "desert chameleon" would fit nicely under your section for "Children of Dune". the only species of desert dwelling chameleon i know of is this one, at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namaqua_Chameleon. i will leave it to others to post it, or not. take care! --Metanoid

 * Now, I must admit the troll has a point. I has progressed further down, I was thinking, "nice images and atmophere, but what does that have to do with the quote?"

Only after I read the explanations was I able to grasp the concepts. I think that if you want to add images unrelated to the canon work, you should have a debate or something, instead of choosing images based on your thought processes. That way, we might get pictures that might be a bit more understandable to the general public, although most of them are well chosen. For instance: "In all of my universe I have seen no law of nature, unchanging and inexorable. This universe presents only changing relationships which are sometimes seen as laws by short-lived awareness." — uses an image of a sphere containing plasma arcs of electricity being touched by a hand illuminated by its light, and sensitive to its presences through the electrical impulses of its nerves, and those within the brain which guides it. I can see now real connections between the quote and your exploanation for the picture. Another one is the one with the Sierpinsky tetrahedron.

---

I agree the pictures seem to be only loosely related to the text, especially the kid with the sparkler. If a consistent set of images cannot be found they all should be removed.

Pictures not appropriate
This is apart from the "random" accusation thread which seems to serve no purpose, possibly in part because of the tone.

The pictures on this page are not appropriate. There are too many and they are too big, so limited bandwidth connections end up slowly downloading what should just be a big page of text with maybe some illustrations for the most relevant material. What we have instead is a kind of picture magazine. There is probably a good context for that, but Wikiquote is not it. The word "quote" implies some kind of direct relevance, while many of these pics are abstractions with tenuous links to the material. Some may even distract from the point that the quotes are about!

I am adding my own review of the pics here and hope others will build on it. We should try to provide some reason for each pic. If there is agreement among contributors which pics are wrong or don't belong then someone might fix that. I am especially concerned about a couple of pics that seem to introduce gender bias or unrelated or contradictory ideas.

By my (rough and quick) count there are 61 illustrations here, of which good 12 + great 10 + perfect 1 = 23 or only 38% (look good) meh 10 or 16% (not good, but not doing much harm) pretentious crap 17 + unrelated 4 = 21 or 34% (this is junk and a distraction, especially with so much) seriously flawed 7 or 11% which is significant by most measures (please let us address these concerns!)

Several images are also repeated in alternative forms including religious symbols and fire circles. Combine them somehow? Skip one? It doesn't work as it is.

01 early sun on sand - unconscious need for logic : pretentious crap 02 sunrise on sand - the beginning : great 03 abstract electric sheep - fear : pretentious crap 04 whirling geometry - process : good, but big, maybe a smaller version 05 geometric abstraction - trained to learn : pretentious crap 06 desert - maker prayer : meh 07 eye-ish abstract - seeing the future: great 08 lattice - nature of the future : great 09 whirling galaxy or odd desert storm portrayal - nature of Arrakis : pretentious crap 10 knife with horse handle - knives on Arrakis : with a horse handle?! WRONG. 11 moon - nature of Muad-Dib : perfect 12 planet - planetology: great 13 planet - ecology : great, but do we need two of these? 14 symbols - religion : great 15 light in haze with halo - proper teaching : great 16 nebula - senses : unrelated? any connection or relevant? 17 symbols - building shadow : meh 18 mist, branches, light effects - looking forward : meh 19 bright odd thing - where you dare not look : good 20 nebula - Muad'Dib myths : pretentious crap 21 woman in abstraction? - power of individuals : WRONG AND SEXIST 22 Hoag's object - Muad'Dib's vision : WRONG, the other one was better and correct: his visions always gravitated to the falling moon 23 beauty of life thing : meh 24 mouse - from the universe : good 25 nebula - teaching changing nature of the universe : WRONG, ITS NOT MOVING 26 transient life thing : good 27 universeglass - genetic memory : pretentious crap 28 mushroom cloud - atrocity : good 29 mouse neuron - inspiration : pretentious crap 30 energy discharge art - change and power : unrelated? 31 electric tree - probability : meh 32 buddha - mental education : pretentious crap 33 faces abstraction - no guilt or innocence : no meaning either--pretentious crap 34 woman abstraction - nature of prescience : WRONG AND SEXIST 35 galactic love abstraction - liberation : pretentious crap 36 tree and shadow abstraction - no opposites : meh 37 eye hole in the sky - God's command : pretentious crap 38 kalachakra - no end or beginning, observer : good 39 buddha abstraction - free will : pretentious crap 40 electricsheep abstraction - trance state : pretentious crap 41 thor's hammer - prophets and language : arguable, but I think that is WRONG and distracts from the point and context of the quote 42 sunset - awareness : good 43 centered abstraction - danger to stewardshp : arguable, but I think that is WRONG and distracts from the point and context of the quote 44 square matrix - squares resisting circles : meh, where are the circles? they got resisted? 45 hand on plasma ball - nature of the universe : awful pretentious crap 46 fire circle - who plays god: meh 47 more fire circle - dreams : pretentious crap, and we already had a fire circle 48 explosion - power : good 49 burning man - defiling a god : pretentious crap -- isn't there anywhere else to post burning man pics? 50 tree of life - plot layers : meh 51 fractal - magic : unrelated? 52 animated fractal - perceptions and the universe : unrelated, and animations make that file big 53 religious symbols again - when strangers meet : meh, but we already had the symbols! 54 fencing advance - living life : pretentious crap 55 the sword - illuminating the banal : great 56 MIRV - power corrupts : great 57 dune top walk - balance : great 58 plants and shadow in the desert - limits : good 59 surfer - balance on waves : good 60 light in tunnel - thinking machines : good 61 sunset - lessons learned : good

-- M0llusk 18:00, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Finally, someone who agrees! Also, finally someone on this talk page who isn't a pretentious fuckass. I agree, a lot of these pictures are useless pretentious crap.58.106.110.5 02:03, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Well first I would wonder if it's possible to ban the potty-mouth. I love this book series, and the existance of this person's words discourages me from even reading (much less participating in the development of) this wiki. Is there some way to report this and effect some permanent solution ? Better to have the worst wiki imaginable than even one of this person's crude sentiments expressed.

I think the pictures are distracting, too. Makes me feel like I'm in a Spencer's Gifts looking at the "mellow out" tchotchkes. Norvy 01:42, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

title: Talk:Dune


text:
User:HiFlyer

"May the Source be with you."

title: User:HiFlyer