Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/Archive 18

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

→

Archive 25

Every action has an equal and opposite reaction

I have this strange feeling FUI but still worth a shot. Not sure which one to link to the last as they would both fit, thats why i did both. Simply south not SS, sorry 11:11, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• Weak support - There's nothing wrong with it, but we've had quite a few similar mottoes in the past. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 15:53, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
• Very Weak Support - It's OK, I guess, assuming it hasn't been used before. Maybe on the slowest of news days. Nutiketaiel (talk) 18:39, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
• Comment - I think it'd work better if the last link were changed to WP:BLOCK. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 07:01, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

• Comment. I think I remember about a year ago someone nominated this same quote and I supported it, saying "you stole my idea". So it might be FUI. ~AH1^(TCU) 00:50, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
• Conditional support if it is not FUI and using LaPianista's WP:BLOCK for the last link. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 11:17, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened - not enough discussion. Queenie ^Talk 18:05, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

 Declined - no consensus. Simply south not SS, sorry 23:54, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

→ ...when we fight each other, forgive us.
When we presume that our greatness and our prosperity is ours alone, forgive us.
When we fail to treat our fellow human beings and all the Earth with the respect that they deserve, forgive us.

From Rick Warren's tear-jerking speech. Tried to increase impact with WP:AGF 3 times. Simon^KSK 17:56, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support + comment - Great motto, but that huge chunk of blue is an eyesore. How about when we fight each other, forgive us.
  When we presume that our greatness and our prosperity is ours alone, forgive us.
  When we fail to treat our fellow human beings and all the Earth with the respect that they deserve, forgive us. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 18:02, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

 Done Simon^KSK 18:06, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

• Strong Support - An excellent motto. I normally dislike repetition of links, but in this motto it really serves to drive the point home. Well done, both of you. Nutiketaiel (talk) 15:17, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Jeez! Simon did all the work! :) —La Pianista ^(T•C) 05:52, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
    • I'm that good. ;) Simon^KSK 17:40, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
• Strong support per above. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 22:20, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
• Strong support: Brilliant, it makes a real point for me as I often spend my (limited) time on wikipedia patrolling the new pages or recent changes, and I know that I often could have been a bit kinder about who's edits I revert, or given a bit more time to explain to them what editing is really about, which is partly what we should do when we AGF, Spitfire^Tally-ho! 10:23, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support!!! Very good! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 11:38, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/March 28, 2009. Queenie ^Talk 21:13, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

I'd like a cup of coffee from a proper copper coffee pot

Okay, i know that tea is not coffee but this is just to spread the sentiment of being calm and cool. Oh if you are wondering where this is from, it is a common tongue-twister. Simply south not SS, sorry 17:03, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support - Well, now that my tongue is in a knot thanks to trying to say that, you have my support. Good message, amusing presentation. Nutiketaiel (talk) 17:47, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support - jovial presentation, love the message. Crap, another agreement with Nutiket. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 18:12, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
• Weak oppose - Sorry, but the the idea is to have a cup of tea, not coffee. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:42, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Reply - Whether tea or coffee, the motto does make a valid point, does it not? I'm sure our readers can make the conceptual stretch from one beverage to the other. Nutiketaiel (talk) 18:54, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
    • Reluctant accord. There's not much difference between the tea leaf and the coffee bean - it's the concept that counts. Besides, changing it to "tea" would ruin the tongue-twister that makes it so droll. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 20:33, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support - It's not you Pianista. It's all of us. We can't resist the Nukitel Simon^KSK 21:40, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Reply - My chi is at its peak; I am now unstoppable. Nutiketaiel (talk) 13:56, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
    • Nutiket, he was obviously referring to Nextel. He wouldn't misspell your name, would he? —La Pianista ^(T•C) 16:48, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
      • Oh. I'm sad now. Nutiketaiel (talk) 18:11, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
        • No, I was referring to Nuki. It's kind hard to spell a username that does make any sense. Simon^KSK 19:04, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
          • And now I'm happy again! As I said, my chi is at its peak; I am now unstoppable! And my username makes perfect sense if you're me. "Nutiket" is the Leni Lenape word for "Guardian" (I picked it up while I was in the Order of the Arrow when I was a kid). The "Aiel" are a race of desert dwelling warriors from Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series, my favorite novels, which I have been reading since I was just a lad. I've been using that username for well over a decade now on various different sites, since such an unusual combination is rarely already taken. The preferred abreviated form is "Nutiket," though many people shorten it further to just "Nuti." If that still causes you trouble, you can just call me Jim. Of course, "Slow News Day" also seems to be catching on... Nutiketaiel (talk) 19:41, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
            • So you're not a machine, used for various hot drinks or even water bottles, gone wrong? Simply south not SS, sorry 19:54, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
              • Nope, not even a little bit. And, incidentally, I totally don't understand the reference. Nutiketaiel (talk) 19:58, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
                • La! Guess who remembered that username history. :P and who was being sarcastic as to the Nextel ref. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 20:52, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
                  • News just in! Username can be interpreted in more than one way! It could be pronounced as nutty kettle (a machine if electric). Simply south not SS, sorry 21:28, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
                    • It's pronounced "nuː tɪ kɛt ɑː iːl" with the accent on the first syllable in Nutiket and the last syllable in Aiel (if I remember my IPA correctly) or, if this is easier to read, approximately "Nūtĭkĕt Ăēl" with the same accent. Though, if I recall correctly, a purer Leni Lenape pronunciation would put the accent on the second syllable in Nutiket, and it would sount more like "nuː tɛ kɛt ɑː iːl" or "Nūtĕkĕt Ăēl", but that is not how I originally learned it so I am stuck with the other pronunciation. In any case, no electric kettles. and I was aware of the sarcasm in your Nextel response, and was being sarcastic in reply. Nutiketaiel (talk) 18:07, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
                      • O.o No way. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 02:43, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
                        • :-P Yes way. Nutiketaiel (talk) 15:22, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
                          • Support. Good idea. By the way I spent 30 minutes choosing my own username. ~AH1^(TCU) 03:36, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
                            • Clarification Request - Wait, do you support the motto, or do you support my badass username? Nutiketaiel (talk) 15:30, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
                              • Reply. I support the motto, but I have no problems with your username either. ~AH1^(TCU) 02:47, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/March 27, 2009. Queenie ^Talk 21:09, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

This isn't Burger King, you can't have it your way.

Something my English teacher says to my class, constantly. Simon^KSK 21:03, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

• Strong oppose - actually, you can have it our way, through consensus. This motto seems to imply that consensus is one-sided. There is a way to come to a mutual conclusion, without completely compromising one side or the other. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 21:07, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
• Strong Oppose - However you link it, that is the wrong message for Wikipedia. Also, tell your english teacher to find new material. Nutiketaiel (talk) 21:13, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose: Sounds like saying "do it our way or get lost", which is POV itself (the idea I mean, not Simon :)) Chamal ^talk 12:41, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose - Somebody has to have it their way, otherwise there would never be consensus. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:40, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

 Declined per consensus. Simply south not SS, sorry 00:06, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

→ [I]t may be that he who bestows the largest amount of time [...] on the needy is doing the most by his mode of life to produce that misery which he strives in vain to relieve.

Written by Henry David Thoreau, but the book it's from is a more specific source link. -- Jeandré, 2009-02-02t13:43z

• Comment: I don't get it. A guy that works on BLPs creates drama through being civil? How can that happen? Chamal ^talk 13:50, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Changed "mode of life" to "mode of life", linked "produce", changed the last link to only "relieve". -- Jeandré, 2009-02-02t14:10z
• Oppose - The links still don't make sense. Nutiketaiel (talk) 19:35, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose - I'm confused. Though I'm uncomfortable opposing a motto simply because I don't understand it, this one is beyond me. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 21:08, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose - Quite confusing. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone}

 Declined per consensus. Simply south not SS, sorry 00:06, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

→ Some attitudes may be named... which are central in effective intellectual ways of dealing with subject matter. Among the most important are directness, open-mindedness, single-mindedness (or whole-heartedness), and responsibility.

Another score for Wikiquote. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 20:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

• Strong support - A support vote? For me? :D —La Pianista ^(T•C) 20:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support. ...a pragmatic (aka good) one.... –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:02, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
• Strong Support - Well, I'm not sure that pragmatic is really the word you're looking for there... but, anyway, the quote is excellent, and the links were very well chosen. Well done. Nutiketaiel (talk) 19:40, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
  • "pragmatic" was referred to John Dewey, one of the fathers of pragmatism. I have changed the John Dewey link to point directly to the Democracy and Education's article. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:38, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
• I don't really get it, but support for the well-chosen links. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:36, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/March 26, 2009. Queenie ^Talk 19:31, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Home is where the article is

Probably bland. Play on Home is where the heart is. Simply south not SS, sorry 14:30, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose - Too bland to even get a weak support, sorry. It doesn't really say anything, either, besides the fact that we have articles. Which is obvious. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 02:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose - Whoa, we have articles? Where? Why wasn't I told? What else have you been keeping from me? Nutiketaiel (talk) 19:47, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose - Kinda stating the obvious... –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:33, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Rejected per WP:SNOW. Queenie ^Talk 19:28, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Even impossible says I'm possible!

SobaNoodleForYou 02:52, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

• Weak support - There must be a greater meaning for this, and I'll AGF and assume there is one. But I don't really get it - the motto itself kinda makes sense, but the links don't fit in well. Perhaps it's just my oddities or the late hour, who knows? —La Pianista ^(T•C) 06:06, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose - The quote itself is supposed to be inspirational, but I think the links detract from it. Honestly, I don't think there are a set of links that could establish its relevance to Wikipedia without changing the meaning of the quote (though I'm open to being proven wrong, of course). Nutiketaiel (talk) 13:20, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
• Weak oppose - Rather bland, and I'm not really sure what meaning it's trying to convey. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:32, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

 Declined - no consensus. Simply south not SS, sorry 16:34, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

→ Anger begins with folly, and ends with repentance.

Another tentatively humorous motto (were those the right words?) —La Pianista ^(T•C) 17:45, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

• SS - perfect. How does she do it? Simon^KSK 22:00, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
  • How do I do it? Ask Nutiket on a slow news day. :P —La Pianista ^(T•C) 04:36, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
    • Reply - :O Simon^KSK 14:15, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
      • Reply - A gentleman doesn't discuss such things in public. We'll talk in the gentlemen's club. Nutiketaiel (talk) 15:25, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
• Weak Support: Good motto, but linking repentance to WP:PEACE doesn't seem to fit very well. Chamal ^talk 06:00, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Reply - how about linking it to WP:FORG? I'm off to bed now, though, so if you like the idea, feel free to add an edit 2. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 06:54, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support - Nice one. Although Simon is trying too hard... :P –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 06:19, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Reply - O RLY?!? Simon^KSK 14:09, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
    • Yarly –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 15:32, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
      • Oh noes, not another one... —La Pianista ^(T•C) 17:49, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Rejected in favour of Edit 1. Queenie ^Talk 16:16, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

→ Anger begins with folly, and ends with repentance.

Edit 1 with different link, per Chamal. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 17:49, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support (both versions) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:04, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
• Strong Support - The new linking is an improvement, though the original would also have had my support. Excellent message. Nutiketaiel (talk) 15:25, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support this one, as well. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 22:20, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support I was going to say that I didn't like linking to WP:PEACE on the first one, but then I see this. The first one is worthy of support, yes, but Ice thinks this is a little more perfect :) Icy // ♫ 22:22, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support Yup, this one's better. Chamal ^talk 14:29, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/March 25, 2009. Queenie ^Talk 16:16, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

→ Yo, I know Pi to a thousand places.

~AH1^(TCU) 18:02, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

• Support - It's not bad. Good to remind users of the dangers of Editcountitis, that most insidious of Wiki-phages. Nutiketaiel (talk) 18:38, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Btw, if Pi day you were hoping for, this cannot happen due to a special nom taking place, voted on in the past. Simply south not SS, sorry 19:02, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
• Weak support - it's okay, but I see a slight level of incompatibility between the WIAA link and the Editcountitis. Perhaps it would work better without the third link. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 05:50, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Reply - I think it is implying that, because someone has editcountitis (i.e., they make a lot of edits), they know very well what an article is. Or maybe its the other way around... either way, it seems to fit to me. Nutiketaiel (talk) 13:48, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
• Weak Support: Editcountitis is something that should not be here, but then again, a high number of edits mean you have a lot of experience. So net positive I guess. Chamal ^talk 14:20, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

• Weak support - Eh, I don't like the bit about editcountitis, but meh. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:52, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

• Suggestion. What about Special:Watchlist or Special:Contributions instead of Editcountitis??? –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:34, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/March 24, 2009. Queenie ^Talk 16:11, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

A genius is one who shoots at something no one else can see — and hits it.

~AH1^(TCU) 18:02, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

• Weak Support - I like the quote, and the link to backlog, but there must be a better link for "hits it" than WP:FA. Nutiketaiel (talk) 18:40, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Suggestion - how about WP:SOFIXIT? —La Pianista ^(T•C) 06:12, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
    • Reply - Perfect. The quote with La Pianista's suggested link would have my Strong Support. Nutiketaiel (talk) 13:49, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

• Support with La Pianista's suggested links. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:55, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Rejected in favour of Edit 1. Queenie ^Talk 18:21, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

A genius is one who shoots at something no one else can see — and hits it

Edit 1 - per La Pianista's suggestion ~AH1^(TCU) 19:52, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

• Support per...well, you know. ;) —La Pianista ^(T•C) 06:39, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
• Strong Support per my above. Nutiketaiel (talk) 13:23, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support. Both versions are ok. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:38, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support. Not a bad quote, the linking is very original. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Download (talk • contribs)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/March 23, 2009. Queenie ^Talk 18:21, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

→There is many a boy here today who looks on war as all glory, but boys, it is all hell.

William Tecumseh Sherman, General, Union Army; 1880. I personally like this one. Please suggest good links if possible :) DocDeel516 ^discuss 00:02, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• Comment. I have fixed the reference link. How about "There is many a boy today who looks on war as all glory, but boys, it is all hell"? ~AH1^(TCU) 00:48, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Response: I'd support AH1's suggestion, perhaps after the removal of the last link. A bit superfluous, imho, but its inclusion isn't a big issue per se. I'd support it either way. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 00:55, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Support of suggested links - I really don't have a problem with the last link, but the link for "all glory" doesn't really fit to me; I don't see how a reference to point of view fits in the quote. I would suggest removing that one. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:40, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
    • Response to prior comment - Yeah, I agree. --DocDeel516 ^discuss 00:15, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened - Queenie ^Talk 15:20, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Rejected in favour of edit 3. Queenie ^Talk 17:31, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

→There is many a boy today who looks on war as all glory, but boys, it is all hell.

Edit 1 per AH1. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 18:01, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened - Queenie ^Talk 15:20, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Rejected in favour of edit 3. Queenie ^Talk 17:31, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

→There is many a boy today who looks on war as all glory, but boys, it is all hell.

Edit 2 per me. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 18:01, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened - Queenie ^Talk 15:20, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Rejected in favour of edit 3. Queenie ^Talk 17:31, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

→There is many a boy today who looks on war as all glory, but boys, it is all hell.

Edit 3 per Nutiketaiel. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 18:01, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

• Support - yes, I support a revision other than mine. It's better phrased here. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 18:01, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support - I agree with La Pianista. As usual. Nutiketaiel (talk) 19:47, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Suggestion - I just thought of this. How about changing "all glory" to all glory? —La Pianista ^(T•C) 03:10, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
    • Reply - Brilliant. Nutiketaiel (talk) 15:15, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened - Queenie ^Talk 15:20, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support this one, weak oppose the others. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 22:15, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/March 22, 2009 . Queenie ^Talk 17:33, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

→There is many a boy today who looks on war as all glory, but boys, it is all hell.

Edit 4 per La Pianista Nutiketaiel (talk) 15:15, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

• Strong Support of La Pianista's suggested revision, as per above. Nutiketaiel (talk) 15:15, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
• SS - Damn it, Pianista! Why do you make so much good mottoes? Simon^KSK 01:24, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
  • For great justice and epic lulz. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 04:12, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
    • For atomic lulz and make benefit great nation Wikipedia. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 05:33, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Rejected in favour of edit 3. Queenie ^Talk 17:31, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

It's frustrating when you know all the answers, but nobody bothers to ask you the questions.

~AH1^(TCU) 18:02, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

• Weak Support - Great message, excellent link to the RD, but the first link just doesn't work with the message or the quote at all. Maybe... WP:MENTOR, WP:LIBRARIANS, or Category:Articles needing expert attention or... I don't know. Something like that. Nutiketaiel (talk) 19:01, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
  • I would Support Nutiketaiel's second link, to WP:LIBRARIANS. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 05:53, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
• Weak Oppose: The links don't match, and nor do any of the suggested ones. I can't think of a suitable combination either, sorry. Chamal ^talk 14:32, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Reply - WP:MENTOR and WP:LIBRARIANS both refer to groups of people who have (or are supposed to have) a great deal of knowledge at their disposal. Naturally they don't know ALL the answers, but barring a link a deity, or the concept of omniscience, it's as close as you can get, I think. Nutiketaiel (talk) 14:49, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

• Weak oppose - Quite bland. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:56, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Rejected in favour of Edit 1. Queenie ^Talk 21:21, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

It's frustrating when you know all the answers, but nobody bothers to ask you the questions.

Edit 1 per Somewhat Slow News Day. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 19:46, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support per my comment above. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 19:46, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support, better than before. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:51, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support per my above. Slow News Day (talk) 20:06, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/March 21, 2009. Queenie ^Talk 21:21, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Do not let what you cannot do interfere with what you can do.

~AH1^(TCU) 18:02, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

• Isn't this kind of POV-ish? –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:04, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose - It seems very POV, and frankly, I've never once seen an instance of ageism on Wikipedia, nor do I see the relevance of ageism to the quote. Nutiketaiel (talk) 19:02, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose - though I have seen some cases of ageism (Everyone remember DHM's RfA?) I think this motto is too POV to put out there. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 05:57, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Rejected per consensus. Queenie ^Talk 21:16, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

→Silence moves faster when it's going backward.

~AH1^(TCU) 18:02, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose - The quote seems non-sensical; what was the original context? Also, the link for backward really doesn't fit. Nutiketaiel (talk) 18:41, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose - It's lost on me, sorry. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 05:52, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
• Strong Oppose: Sounds to me like saying we are better off without those people. Chamal ^talk 14:25, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
• Comment. WP:MISSING does not link to Missing Wikipedians, it links to the Missing articles WikiProject. What this motto is saying is that with WikiProjects, we can make "silence" (hence missing articles) move "backward" (by creating these articles). How about WP:Requested articles instead of WP:MISSING? ~AH1^(TCU) 19:54, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Damn, I used only popups and thought it linked to missing wikipedians. My mistake, gimme a trout. Anyway, I still don't get the links. Chamal ^talk 00:22, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
• Neutral, thinking quote but I don't like the links. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:53, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Rejected per consensus. Queenie ^Talk 17:04, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

→ Yonder sits the Fourth Estate, and they are more important than them all.

A reference to the important role the Signpost plays in keeping Wikipedians abreast of important news like ArbCom rulings, new Admins, etc. Nutiketaiel (talk) 13:42, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support - I can see why there may be some concern about the wording of this quote, as it refers to the Signpost as "more important than them all." The original context of the quote, naturally, refers to the Fourth Estate as being more important than the other three (which is in many ways true). In our context, while I do not think that the Signpost is more important than all the other parts of Wikipedia, I think that it is an important facet of the Wikipedia community, and a little poetic exageration never hurt anything. Nutiketaiel (talk) 13:42, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Would supporting yourself skewer the result? Simply south not SS, sorry 16:52, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
    • Reply - Only if I'm the only one who supports me.  :-) In seriousness, I am sure those closing the quotes are attentive enough to discount my own support, and besides it's not as if we're voting here- we're looking for a consensus, and one person supporting more or less should not effect that. Nutiketaiel (talk) 17:49, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
      • Further Reply - You know what, strike that. You are the second person to ask me to do that (actually, you're technically the first person to ask, as the other fellow decided to just remove my comments on his own and then "suggest" that I not do so again, so kudos for being polite about it). I'm going to put this matter up on the MotD talk page. If there is consensus for me to stop, I'll stop. Nutiketaiel (talk) 17:57, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
• Weak support. Poetic license, I see. But it still could be seen as a bit too exaggerated. And it is a tad meh. Perhaps...let's try...on a slow news day. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 18:18, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Frightened Reply - Wow... now you're even starting to talk like me... Nutiketaiel (talk) 18:55, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
    • Well, all you have to do is learn some Beethoven and Liszt, and you'll start to sound like me. ;) —La Pianista ^(T•C) 20:53, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Rejected in favour of Edit 1. Queenie ^Talk 19:13, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Extra! Extra! Read all about it!

Perhaps a more attention-grabbing motto for the signpost. Does this count as an Edit 1? —La Pianista ^(T•C) 20:35, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support - It's a good motto, no doubt about it. I see no reason not to approve both this one and mine, though, provided they are placed two or more weeks apart (or so) on the schedule to avoid repetitiveness. Nutiketaiel (talk) 13:58, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support, tho there probably aren't many motto readers who don't know about the SP yet. -- Jeandré, 2009-02-04t15:43z
• Support –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 17:52, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support. Good for us to know we have our own internal news service! ~AH1^(TCU) 03:40, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:38, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support: 1 user given admin status, ArbCom asks about something nobody understands, themed main page for something.... We should know about this stuff :) Chamal ^talk 14:50, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/March 20, 2009. Queenie ^Talk 19:16, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

RVV, RVV, it's as easy as 1-2-3!

I was looking around at the anti-vandal tools, then I came up with this. _Soba^Noodle_For^You 22:00, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• Comment - forgive my useless scruples, but I'm a little uncomfortable with associating the number three with reversion in a positive way. Perhaps A-B-C would work better. :) —La Pianista ^(T•C) 22:04, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment - Ah, you're right. I have an edit below, now. SobaNoodleForYou 23:02, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose - Agree with La Pianista. We really shouldn't be encouraging three reverts. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 22:51, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened - needs more discussion. Queenie ^Talk 17:58, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

• Rejected per consensus. Queenie ^Talk 17:57, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

RVV, RVV, it's as easy as A-B-C!

Edit 1, that's a bit better. =] SobaNoodleForYou 23:02, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• Ummmmm... Weak Oppose - I know what you're trying to say, but just talking about how easy it is to revert without a reminder of what constitutes vandalism seems, to me, to encourage violations of WP:AGF. I'm probably in the minority interpreting it this way, but I just can;t shake it. It's a good concept, though. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:27, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose per above. We already know how easy it is to use tools, and it's even easier to abuse them. That is not to say that this motto encourages assuming bad faith, but it just emphasizes a bad point. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 17:49, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened - needs more discussion. Queenie ^Talk 17:58, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose - Now that the 3RR issue is out of the way, Nutiketaiel brings up a good point. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 22:10, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Rejected per consensus. Queenie ^Talk 17:57, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

→ As you are old and reverend, you should be wise.

William Shakespeare (1564–1616), King Lear, Act I, Scene iv (1623) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:21, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

• Weak support - I like the idea. Though, you can be wise without being a sysop –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 17:47, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support - It isn't saying that wisdom is exclusive to Sysops, but it is saying that Sysops should be wise and knowledgable, which is quite correct. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:25, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support - good advice. "Should" is used as an imperative (as in "you should do this"), not like a supposition ("that should be right"). —La Pianista ^(T•C) 17:47, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Approved per weak consensus. Simply south not SS, sorry 13:32, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

→ Let there be light, sound, drums, guitar! Oh! Let there be rock!

I am not sure about drums and guitar, but again, I love this song, so I hope this can pass. Suggestions are open. Simon^KSK 21:25, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

• Comment - how about drums, guitar? Also added space after arrow - more, shall we say, æsthetically pleasing. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 02:41, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support with La Pianista's suggested revisions. The initial idea is great, and La Pianista's links avoid linking to the stale FA link where it isn't strictly necessary. Nutiketaiel (talk) 15:14, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Rejected per edit 1 Simon^KSK 21:28, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

→ Let there be light, sound, drums, guitar! Oh! Let there be rock!

Edit 1 , with Pianista's links. You have to love this girl. She is so good that Nutiket has fallen to her charm. (I spelled it right!) Simon^KSK 15:56, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support. Awww... —La Pianista ^(T•C) 17:32, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support. Good idea. ~AH1^(TCU) 03:21, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support: Good one. Chamal ^talk 06:07, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support - Very clever. :) –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 06:15, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support! Let there be rock ... and there was rock (^_^)! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:18, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support - What choice do I have? Nutiketaiel (talk) 15:28, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Approved per consensus. Simon^KSK 21:28, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

→ War is what happens when language fails.

Not sure about this one, but hey, it's worth a shot. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 16:55, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose It is usually talk that sorts out war, not the other way round. Simply south not SS, sorry 17:04, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

• The motto suggests that disputes result from lack of discussion, thus encouraging editors to utilize the talk page before edit warring. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 19:12, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose: I have to agree with simply south here, maybe a motto about "talk" solving "war"? Although you may want to make it a little more subtle Spitfire^Tally-ho! 17:17, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
• Weak support: I see where you're coming from now. Spitfire^Tally-ho! 22:36, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
• Comment - how about WP:COLLAB or WP:CIVIL for language? —La Pianista ^(T•C) 22:47, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Rejected per edit 1 Simon^KSK 21:27, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

→ War is what happens when language fails.

Edit 1; per La Pianista's suggestion. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 22:52, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support per me. Good choice of motto, Julian. :) —La Pianista ^(T•C) 22:54, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support altered. Simply south not SS, sorry 23:26, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support nice, good idea Juliancolton, nice tweaking La Pianista Spitfire^Tally-ho! 02:34, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support The alteration is fine Vaishu2 15:32, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:58, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support - Good quote, good linking. Nice teamwork there, guys.  :-) Nutiketaiel (talk) 15:18, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Approved per consensus. Simon^KSK 21:27, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

→ "Charity begins at home" is the voice of the world.

A motto to encourage donations. Is the <span> tagging a problem? —La Pianista ^(T•C) 21:21, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support Works for me. I've fixed the <span> thingy, btw - no need to use it. We have the wmf shortcut. Chamal ^talk 13:28, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support - Nothing like a little pan-handling to start the day, eh? By the way, what are "<span>" and "wmf"? Nutiketaiel (talk) 17:50, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
  • <span> tagging refers to modifying font. In this case, it removes the little arrow that normally follows external links. For example, this is without span: search. This is with span:search. WMF stands for the Wikimedia Foundation - I wasn't aware of the fact that it could be linked like Chamal did. Yay Chamal. ;)
  • "Pan-handling"? I am hurt. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 02:04, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the clarification. And I didn't mean to be insulting, it was just a little joke. Wow, is this our first fight? Nutiketaiel (talk) 15:16, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
      • You were joking? I am hurt more. And I was kidding too, geezaloo! —La Pianista ^(T•C) 17:33, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 17:55, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support. Good idea. ~AH1^(TCU) 03:25, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support. Good motto and links. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:33, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Approved per consensus. Simon^KSK 21:27, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

→ A man must be excessively stupid, as well as uncharitable, who believes there is no virtue but on his own side.

Wikiquote is my new best friend. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 20:38, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose Seems to imply that whoever thinks that only their view counts is stupid. Simply south not SS, sorry 20:43, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Reply - But isn't that true? —La Pianista ^(T•C) 20:46, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
    • Comment: how interesting: if I support this I'm an idiot :P Spitfire^Tally-ho! 16:37, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
• STRONG SUPPORT!!! This is simply great! How true! Thanks, LP. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:52, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support: guess I'm an idiot Spitfire^Tally-ho! 16:37, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
• Strong Support - I have long held that POV pushing is one of the great dangers to Wikipedia (that and flagged revisions), and this motto exemplifies that. Nutiketaiel (talk) 19:39, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
• Strong support - Excellent. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:37, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
• Strong Support: True indeed. Chamal ^talk 13:25, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
• SS - Well, duh. Simon^KSK 21:16, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support. Humorous and anti-dickish. ~AH1^(TCU) 03:45, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Approved per consensus. Simon^KSK 15:44, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

→ When you win the toss – bat. If you are in doubt, think about it, then bat. If you have very big doubts, consult a colleague – then bat.

This is on Cricket. Is this confusing to someone who doesn't know the game? Chamal ^talk 13:26, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

• Strong Support - Cricket? Nobody understands cricket. You gotta know what a crumpet is to understand cricket. The message is clear there, even for those uncultured louts (like me) who don't know the first thing about crickets, and I especially like the link between thinking and WP:BOLD. Too often we seem to equate boldness with impulsiveness or a shoot-from-the-hip attitude in our mottos, and we need to remind people that bold does not mean reckless. Oh, and by the way, 50 points and a special prize to anyone who recognizes where my crumpet quote comes from. Nutiketaiel (talk) 13:48, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Reply: Crumpet quote comes from Raphael, in TMNT. Now where's my 50 points and special prize? Chamal ^talk 14:08, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
    • Booming Reply - I hereby decree, by the power vested in me by... myself... that Chamal how is in sole, undisputed posession of 50 Motto Points, to use at her discretion. The special prize will be on your talk page in a minute. Congrats, and I guess that reference wasn't as obscure as I thought.  ;-) (Or did you cheat and go to Wikiquote?  :-P ) Nutiketaiel (talk) 15:31, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
      • Her? :) Icy // ♫ 22:57, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
        • Him!!!!!! Does my name sound girlish? And no... I used that new thingy called google. I even found this RS :)Chamal ^talk 08:13, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
          • Doh! - Sorry, Chamal does look a little feminine to me. My bad. What is its root language? Nutiketaiel (talk) 19:51, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
            • Nutiketaiel, if you took the time to read his userpage, you'd know. ;) Chamal is Sri Lankan. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 21:11, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
              • And shame for me. Sorry, I'll be more attentive next time. Nutiketaiel (talk) 21:15, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support. Good idea, but isn't it kind of redundant linking to WP:DEV three times? ~AH1^(TCU) 20:30, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support Clever, nice message with the repeated linking to DEV. Icy // ♫ 22:57, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support - but I can't really decide about that repeated link. On the one hand, they re-enforce the point exceptionally well, but on the other, they can detract to a motto's flow and...is this the word? Interestingness. Bah, net positive. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 20:31, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support. It's not so bat bad (^_^)! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:14, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Approved per consensus and a Facepalm for Nuki for not knowing that Chamal was girl boy. Simon^KSK 15:43, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

→ I can resist everything except temptation.

Aaaaand another Wikiholism quote, also by Oscar Wilde. If there need be any explanation for it, I'm currently nomming this at 1:07 AM, my time. ;) If this gets accepted, I say we put it a little further down the calendar so these won't get old. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 07:08, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

• Support: So true ;D Chamal ^talk 13:10, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support - It works for me. Nutiketaiel (talk) 13:17, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support. Funny and humorous. ~AH1^(TCU) 20:35, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support!!! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:18, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
• Support - {{worksforme}} –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:33, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Approved per consensus. Simon^KSK 15:39, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

→ Regulation is of little effect, while persuasion has much more effect.

That's how he became Ashoka the Great I guess :) I was going to add something about policies/guidelines but couldn't find anything. So feel free to add better links. Chamal ^talk 06:25, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• Comment - how is harassment equated with regulation? —La Pianista ^(T•C) 06:34, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Bad Terrible link. That's why I'm asking for ideas :( Chamal ^talk 06:39, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
• Suggestion: WP:PG + WP:IAR??? –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:47, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Counter-Suggestion - Linking it to WP:PG implies that WP:PG has little effect, which is a bad message. I suggest linking Regulation to WP:NOTBUREAUCRACY and, as Pjoef suggested, persuasion to WP:IAR. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:32, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Rejected in favour of Edit 2. Queenie ^Talk 15:31, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

→ Regulation is of little effect, while persuasion has much more effect.

Edit 1 per pjoef and Nutiketaiel. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 17:52, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

• Strong support you fiendish geniuses. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 17:52, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose - I'm sorry, I just don't like the link to WP:PG. It implies that Wikipedia's policies and guidelines are of little effect, which is a bad message. Linking to WP:NOTBUREAUCRACY gets across the meaning that the quote is going for without putting down Wikipedia's own guidelines. Nutiketaiel (talk) 19:34, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Rejected in favour of Edit 2. Queenie ^Talk 15:31, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

→ Regulation is of little effect, while persuasion has much more effect.

Edit 2 per above. Nutiketaiel (talk) 14:05, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

• Support - per above. Nutiketaiel (talk) 14:05, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
• Strong support + Facepalm Shoot! That's what I meant to put down. Late night editing isn't going well for me... —La Pianista ^(T•C) 06:12, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Reply No more sleep-editing for you.  :-P Nutiketaiel (talk) 13:31, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support now it's OK! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 11:52, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/March 11, 2009. Queenie ^Talk 15:31, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

→ The war is over – the rebels are our countrymen again.

...if anyone can suggest better links? Chamal ^talk 06:07, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• Strong support as is - Can't think of better links and wouldn't want them anyhow. ;) —La Pianista ^(T•C) 06:09, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:48, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

• Strong support - Very nice. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 17:43, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

• Strong Support - No need for better links, those are excellent and send a great message and reminder to users. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:35, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/March 10, 2009. Queenie ^Talk 15:26, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

→ I eat two green berets for breakfast and right now, I'm very hungry!

Umm... weird? Chamal ^talk 05:58, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• Support - Actually pretty funny. :D —La Pianista ^(T•C) 06:09, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support! I think I'm addicted too (^__^), but I'm not sure if it's a good thing. lol –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:51, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

• Support - Quite humorous. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 17:40, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

• Support - Not bad. A little wierd, but not bad. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:36, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
• Why are people addicted to the consumption of hats? I suppose they might give you fibre but there are better things to eat out there. Support otherwise. Simply south not SS, sorry 17:01, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Reply - It's not the hats, it's the people! My God, Green Berets are people! Nutiketaiel (talk) 20:43, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
    • Methinks Nutiketaiel has taken up late-night editing, too, or at least with a margarita in hand. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 06:15, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
      • Hats??? In the original context, green berets refer to people as Nutiketaiel said. In other words, US Army Special Forces. Chamal ^talk 12:36, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
        • I sure hope I'm not, La Pianista. I do about 95% of my editing from work (which is why you don't see me much on the weekends) so... yeah, margaritas would get me pretty fired. Nutiketaiel (talk) 13:18, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/March 9, 2009. Queenie ^Talk 15:23, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

→I do not want the peace that passeth understanding. I want the understanding which bringeth peace.

Another one off Wikiquote. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 03:18, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• Support - and she's done it again. I say, what an amazing individual. Is she an admin? :P —La Pianista ^(T•C) 03:18, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support and someone bring in the washing machine - I smell dirty socks. Chamal ^talk 03:42, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
  • I? I was washed the other day. :P —La Sockista ^(My master) 04:00, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support - Good 'nuff. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 17:39, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
• Strong Support - Fantastic message, truly a good one. Bravo. Somebody, give the lady a medal! Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:38, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Thou hath done so, good sir. :) (I'd give the diff to my talk page, but it's lost somewhere in the archives) —La Pianista ^(T•C) 17:58, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
    • Awww, shucks, I know. That's why I asked for somebody else to do it; if I gave you another, everybody would think I had a crush on you. Nutiketaiel (talk) 19:45, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
      • For some reason (;D), I just had one of the best laughs in my entire life. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 06:05, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
        • :-D Nutiketaiel (talk) 14:39, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
          • And then I saw this and laughed some more... *whistles some Gerswhin* —La Pianista ^(T•C) 06:14, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
            • Whoops. *Turns beet-red and hides* Nutiketaiel (talk) 13:33, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
              • Back off, Nuk. I'm too lazy to find the link, but I dueled User:Bibliomaniac15 and vanquished him - and I won Pianista. :P —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 05:32, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
                • Don't worry, Nutiketaiel - this guy's a pipsqueak. ;P —La Pianista ^(T•C) 05:47, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
                  • Put 'em up, put 'em up! Which one of you first? I can fight you both together if you want. I can fight you with one paw hand tied behind my back. I can fight you standing on one foot. I can fight you with my eyes closed. Oh, pull an axe on me, eh? Sneaking up on me, eh? Why, I'll... Nutiketaiel (talk) 20:46, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/March 8, 2009. Queenie ^Talk 18:52, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

→WIKNERGY!!!

~AH1^(TCU) 18:02, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose - Not really a motto... –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:04, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose - Yeah, there's really no message there. Nutiketaiel (talk) 18:38, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose - and, I may add, pretty corny. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 05:51, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose - Again, I can feel the popcorn popping in my mouth. Simon^KSK 20:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Rejected per WP:SNOW. Queenie ^Talk 18:15, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

→ This We'll Defend

How about this to make it less predictable. BW21.--BlackWatch21 21:24, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• Support - Hey, those links are an improvement. I like it. Nutiketaiel (talk) 03:02, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support - though I am partial to Huggle. However, under no circumstances should the last link be changed to WP:REVERT, as that would send the wrong message. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 18:46, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened - not enough discussion. Simply south not SS, sorry 20:48, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose! I'm sorry, I like it... but I have to oppose. peACE!!! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:48, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
  • You like the motto, therefore you're opposing it? What a strange world we live in. Simply south not SS, sorry 12:17, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
    • Clarification Request - Yes, that does seem odd, even for us. Why do you oppose, Pjoef? Nutiketaiel (talk) 19:37, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support, although I would prefer a link to WP:HUG. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:38, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/March 7, 2009. Queenie ^Talk 16:52, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

→ Carry on, my wayward son
There'll be peace when you are done

A bit boring, I admit. But I like it. _Soba^Noodle_For^You 21:02, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

• Weak support - It's okay, but, as you said, a touch boring. No reason to oppose, though. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 00:56, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support! good one. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:12, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support - Rather interesting, IMO. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 17:33, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose with suggestion for improvement - I'm not fond of refering to editors in good standing as "wayward" sons. Perhaps if you linked "wayward son" to Wikipedia:BREAK#When_to_come_back or Wikipedia:Blocking_policy#Unblocking? It would send a message that, after people return to Wikipedia from an absence (whether voluntary or otherwise, depending on the link), they can jump right back in and start making substantive contributions. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:47, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Further suggestion - Along those lines, "peace" might be better linked to WP:AGF, reminding the rest of us to not jump on someone for past transgressions. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:49, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

 Declined in favour of edit 1. Simply south not SS, sorry 16:41, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

→ Carry on, my wayward son
There'll be peace when you are done

Edit 1. Changed per my suggestions above. I just didn't like referring to active Wikipedians as "wayward," and I think this one takes the basic idea of the quote and turns it around to form a more positive message- that editors who have been blocked for whatever reason can turn around and make great contributions, and that we should give them the benefit of the doubt when they're unblocked. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:53, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

• Strong Support - I think this version sends an important message that we don't touch on very much at MotD, as opposed to another simple WP:FA reference. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:53, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
• Strong support - novel message, much better than a hackneyed FA reference indeed. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 18:02, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
• Uber Support - Much, much better than mine. Great message, as said above. SobaNoodleForYou 02:28, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
• Strong support as well, per all above. —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 05:35, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Approved per consensus. Simply south not SS, sorry 16:41, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

→ He does make exceedingly good cakes

I thought i would get out of the usual thing and make it about pics. Hopefully no issues with gender. Simply south not SS, sorry 13:59, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

• • Comment. Changed 'exceendling' to 'exceedingly'. If the original quote said 'exceedling', I apologise. TopGearFreak 18:03, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
    • No that was a typo, thanks. Simply south not SS, sorry 18:06, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
• Strong support - Great motto, I like how we've lately been drawing attention to these projects. And no issues with gender at all. I'd submit a two-page rant about how modifying quotes to make them "gender-neutral" gets on my nerves, but this is not the place. :) —La Pianista ^(T•C) 00:59, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support - Looks fine to me. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 17:31, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support - It's not a bad quote, and it is good to link to a less well known section of Wikipedia. The only thing keeping me from giving Strong Support is that I want to see La Pianista's rant.  :-) Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:57, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Approved per consensus. Simply south not SS, sorry 16:41, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

It would be unfair to compare a simple mishap to outright vandalism, for it would be like comparing the luscious fruit of a peach to the poison in its pit.

~AH1^(TCU) 02:44, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

• Strong support - Wow. Instant favorite of mine. :) —La Pianista ^(T•C) 01:01, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• Weak support, for now. Will switch to full support if the last two links are changed to something more relevant. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 15:52, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• Amazingly Strong Support - Amazing quote with fantastic links that sends a very important message to wikipedians. Incidentally, do not change the last two links- they provide a little context for people not familiar with the qualities of a peach pit, and there is nothing wrong with linking to the mainspace in a motto. Nutiketaiel (talk) 13:03, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Approved per consensus. Simply south not SS, sorry 16:41, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

→ Mama always said life was like a box of chocolates.
You never know what you're gonna get.

One of my fav movies. Sorry if it's been done before. ₰imon^KSK 21:24, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

• Weak Support, assuming that it hasn't been done already. There's nothing really wrong with the motto and the links are appropriate for it. It's just a little... blah. Nutiketaiel (talk) 13:17, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
• I think I remember something similar to this, FWIW. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 15:14, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support ~ I like it. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 11:12, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
• Comment. I think I might have seen a similar quote on MOTD, but without the "mama said" part. It's a bit inconsistent. What about linking "Mama" to Jimbo Wales? ;-) ~AH1^(TCU) 01:17, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
• Reply - I like it, but ya know, it might not be the best thing to call Wales a "mama." Simon^KSK 01:20, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened - no consensus. TopGearFreak 18:25, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

• Weak oppose - nothing exceptionally bad, but too meh for a support. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 07:04, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
• Weak oppose per above. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 17:42, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Rejected per consensus. Queenie ^Talk 17:59, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

→ If at first, an idea is not absurd, then there is no hope for it.

~AH1^(TCU) 02:44, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

• Strong support - another excellent motto. But it's an absurd one in the first place. ;P —La Pianista ^(T•C) 01:02, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose - Unless I'm reading it wrong, it seems to imply that Wikipedia is absurd. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 15:50, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment - Yes, you are reading it wrong, dear Julian. Think about it; whenever a fresh idea comes along, there's always a band of people ready to nitpick. The Wright brothers were insane in their day, and, as everyone knows, Einstein was a famous crazy-haired lunatic. And, as we very well know, Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger are mentally compromised for having the nerve to create such an site that "only works in practice, not in theory." So whenever an idea is pushed away or even ostracized for its radical "absurdity," we can be pretty sure we're doing something right. It's all a matter of perspective and open-mindedness. :) —La Pianista ^(T•C) 18:13, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support! excellent motto and sufficient links. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:21, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support - It's not saying Wikipedia is absurd, it's saying Wikipedia seems absurd to its critics, which is why we need to work to make it succeed. Good inspirational message. Nutiketaiel (talk) 13:05, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/March 3, 2009 Queenie ^Talk 17:30, 5 February 2009 (UTC)