Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/Archive 22

Archive 15

←

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

Archive 23

Archive 24

Archive 25

Curiosity may have killed the cat, but satisfaction brought it back.

Not sure about the last link. Any thoughts are welcome, as always. —La Pianista ^{♫ ♪} 21:24, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

• This idea as been done before, twice at Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/Archive 9#Curiosity killed the cat and Wikipedia:Motto_of_the_day/Nominations/Archive_2#Curiosity_only_kills_cats.2C_it_makes_us_wikipedians_smarter.. Oppose per FUI. Simply south (talk) 09:25, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support I like the links. I like the message. I don't think the fact that "It's been used before!" is any reason to not use this. --I dream of horses (T) @ 16:19, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose per simply south. Kayau Wuthering Heights VANITY FAIR paradise lost 01:34, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
• Weak Support ~ It has been used before, but it isn't the same "thingY" and I like it. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:07, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
• Withdrawn per SS. Can't remember where to find the ol' withdrawn template. Dammit. —La Pianista ^{♫ ♪} 05:09, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

 Declined - withdrawn\FUI. Simply south (talk) 22:00, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

→ Where men are the most sure and arrogant, they are commonly the most mistaken, and have there given reins to passion, without that proper deliberation and suspense, which can alone secure them from the grossest absurdities.

Any link improvement is welcomed. —La Pianista ^{♫ ♪} 23:14, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose It's a little too dense for my liking. I dream of horses (T) @ 17:41, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
• Strong Support + WELCOME BACK La Pianista!!! ~ I take the liberty to change the 1st link from David Hume to An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals (Section IX, CONCLUSION, Part I) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:50, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Strong "Whoa Nelly." My very own plaque. :O —La Pianista ^{♫ ♪} 21:04, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
    • Re: Silver on gold [plated of course (^___^)] because you deserve it. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:15, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
• Strong Support - Excellent quote with very good linking. Missed you, Pianista. Good to have you back.  :-) Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:33, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Thanks, Nutiket. It's great to see you guys again, too - especially you, Artie! You were supposed to be retired, for goshsakes. ;P Only crazy people would un-retire like that. —La Pianista ^{♫ ♪} 21:04, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support. I like this one a lot. It is a little densely-liked, but the links are great, especially the last one.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 17:02, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support, but the quote is a bit long. —MC10 (T•C•GB•L•EM) 21:50, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
  • I think we need some dense quotes every now and then. The way I see it, the more time you spend reading over a quote, the longer it stays with you. —La Pianista ^{♫ ♪} 05:22, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support Eh, it is a bit long - but not nearly as long as some mottoes I've liked in the past. Good linking. Icy // ♫ 20:26, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Approved per consensus. Simply south (talk) 13:25, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

There are no stupid questions, just stupid people.

I've thought this quote was funny. I tried to make the message of the quote more positive with the linking, though. The original message was that there are no stupid questions, just stupid people for asking those questions. I wanted to make it say that there are no stupid questions, just stupid people who criticize them (biting).  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 00:38, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose - Ay yi yi. I like it, but it potentially sends the message that noobs are stupid people. —La Pianista ^{♫ ♪} 04:27, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose per above. I don't think you really succeeded in making it positive. Maybe just drop the "just stupid people" all together. --I dream of horses (T) @ 18:00, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
• Strong oppose per Piano, find better linking. Simply south (talk) 23:16, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

*Support: I like it (^___^)! Anyway, I think that it has little chance of being approved. How about using WP:Q→Wikipedia:Trolling? –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:49, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

• Oh no...too many opposes! Ay ai ai! Okay...let’s see here. I don’t want to take out the "just stupid people" line altogether, because the motto than risks sounding too unexciting. Pjoef, could you elaborate on your linking suggestion? You think I should change the first link to WP: Q and the second to WP: TROLL, right?  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 14:47, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
• Strong Oppose any motto that links stupidity to our precious newbies. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:37, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Hold on...I thought "Noob" was the term used to describe those who bite newbies! I would never say that newbies are stupid! How about this: "There are no stupid questions, just stupid people."  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 17:23, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

• Strong Oppose No insulting comments, please. —MC10 (T•C•GB•L•EM) 21:49, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

 Declined in favour of ;edit 1. Simply south (talk) 13:25, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

There are no stupid questions.

Edit 1 - It's a little bland in this form, but I think it sends a good message and reminds everyone of an important resource, without calling anyone stupid. It would be good for a slow news day. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:37, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

• Weak support Still insulting, but no one is stupid here. --I dream of horses (T) @ 16:27, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Question - In what way do you see it as insulting? Nutiketaiel (talk) 11:59, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support ~ Now it has a chance of being approved. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:09, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Approved per weak consensus. Simply south (talk) 13:25, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

→ Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.

I was about to use this in special nominations, but realized this can be used any day of the week. This is Romans 13:10. --I dream of horses (T) @ 04:10, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support - I like this one. The message is good and the links are well chosen. Nutiketaiel (talk) 13:06, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
• Weak Support. A tad confusing, but the second link is really good.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 18:19, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:09, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Approved per consensus. Simply south (talk) 13:25, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

→ It may be glorious to write
Thoughts that shall glad the two or three
High souls, like those far stars that come in sight
Once in a century.

James Russell Lowell (1819–1891), "Incident in a Railroad Car", Miscellaneous Poems (1843). –pjoef (talk • contribs) 06:55, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support - I like the linking in this one. Nutiketaiel (talk) 11:29, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

• Weak support It kind of implies that featured articles are the result of groupthink. I hope this isn't the case. --I dream of horses (T) @ 03:20, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Approved per weak consensus. Simply south (talk) 13:25, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

→ It may be glorious to write
Thoughts that shall glad the two or three
High souls, like those far stars that come in sight
Once in a century.

Edit 1: 2nd interpretation. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 06:55, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened (too few opinions) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:58, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

• Neutral for the second and support for the first. Kayau David Copperfield MOBY DICK the great gatsby 02:52, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose Eh? What? The links relate to each other how? --I dream of horses (T) @ 03:20, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose - How does WP:AFP fit in there? —La Pianista ^{♫ ♪} 21:16, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

 Declined in favour of original. Simply south (talk) 13:25, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

→ acta non verba
("actions, not words")

Motto of the United States Merchant Marine Academy. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 06:55, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

• Strong Oppose because of the second link. We should not be highlighting an arbcom case in a motto. Nutiketaiel (talk) 11:33, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose per Nutiketaiel. Kayau David Copperfield MOBY DICK the great gatsby 12:17, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened (too few opinions) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:58, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

• Strong oppose, per Nutiketaiel. Highlighting an ArbCom case is just not appropriate for a motto. Even at that, I honestly don't get how the contrast "act vs. speak" quite makes sense with those links. JamieS93 21:00, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
• Redo links and then I'll support per above. --I dream of horses (T) @ 03:16, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

 Declined in favour of edit 1. Simply south (talk) 13:25, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

→ acta non verba
("actions, not words")

Edit 1 Better? —La Pianista ^{♫ ♪} 21:17, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

• Support Much better. --I dream of horses (T) @ 16:29, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:52, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support - Indeed, this is an improvement. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:01, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Approved per consensus. Simply south (talk) 13:25, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

→ I didn't put my name in that cup...I don't want eternal glory. I just want to be...

I was watching the Goblet of Fire movie a few days ago and I thought that it could be an interesting motto about WP:RFA, feel free to tweak as is needed being that this is my first motto submission ;). All the Best, Mifter (talk) 17:05, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

• Strong support The links work well and it's a good message! Smaug123 (talk) 10:41, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support - Not bad. I'm not that keen on referring to Adminship as "eternal glory," but a little poetic exageration isn't necessarily a bad thing, and it does fit in very well with the quote. Nutiketaiel (talk) 17:53, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support ≡Wyatt915✍ 18:19, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support ~ IMHO it may be better to link "to be..." to WP:EDIANS. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:20, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
• 'CommentI don't like the link for 'to'. I'm sure it's good to have a link to edit, but why 'to'? Kayau David Copperfield MOBY DICK the great gatsby 12:21, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support You know, I like the opinion this conveys. Adminship isn't a big deal, after all. --I dream of horses (T) @ 02:49, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

 Declined in favour of edit 1. Simply south (talk) 13:25, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

→ I didn't put my name in that cup...I don't want eternal glory. I just want to be...

Edit 1 per Artichoke-Boy 18:29, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

• Weak support nicer, but really I don't think adminship is eternal glory either. It is simply an addition of rights, so you can view deleted edits, block users and protect pages. Kayau David Copperfield MOBY DICK the great gatsby 14:10, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment - eternal glory → eternal glory? —La Pianista ^{♫ ♪} 23:21, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
    • That's just using an opposite idea -- I prefer to change the link to something else apart from adminship. Kayau David Copperfield MOBY DICK the great gatsby 11:27, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:33, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support I think this does a nicer job of stating the above. I dream of horses (T) @ 02:25, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support - I think this linking is a slight improvement over the original. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:49, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Approved per consensus. Simply south (talk) 13:25, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

→ As living jewels dropped unstained from heaven

Robert Pollok (c. 1798–1827), The Course of Time, Book V (1827) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 06:55, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

• Support Featured content can never get enough attention. I dream of horses (T) @ 00:20, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support - Not bad, not bad. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:24, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support. Can't argue with this one!  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 16:49, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support - Good quote. —MC10 (T•C•GB•L•EM) 21:47, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support per above. Kayau Wuthering Heights VANITY FAIR paradise lost 04:28, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/August 19, 2009 (per WP:SNOW) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:25, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

→ Ad maiorem Dei gloriam
("For the greater glory of God")

Motto of the Society of Jesus. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 06:55, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

• Weak oppose I have two objections. One is that the link is outside of wikipedia (I know, rigid, but I'm not used to it), and the other being that the Wikipedia community isn't God. I know you aren't being literal, but that kind of makes us look arrogant or something. However, this is a good quote in general. I'll redo it.I dream of horses (T) @ 00:26, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
• Strong Oppose - I don't work for the glory of any deity, no matter how it is linked. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:26, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose - no interwiki links, please. —MC10 (T•C•GB•L•EM) 21:48, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

 Declined (per WP:Snow) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:21, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Ad malorem Del gloriam

Edit 1 per I dream of horses ~ A "redo" of the above. We are editing Wikipedia for the glory of Wikipedia itself. I dream of horses (T) @ 00:26, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

• Strong Oppose - I don't work for the glory of any deity, no matter how it is linked. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:26, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

• To BOTH versions: Hmmm....this is a tricky one. I’m all for the message of working together towards a greater purpose (Wikipedia), but this will undoubtedly strike a bad note with those who don’t believe in God or a god. I also think that many will interpret this as saying that Wikipedia is a god, which may also strike a bad note with the God-believers. Sorry, but I’m going to have to say oppose.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 16:57, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose again, does it bring out a meaning? Kayau Wuthering Heights VANITY FAIR paradise lost 01:17, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

 Declined (per WP:Snow) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:21, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

→ ad astra per aspera
("to the stars through difficulty")

Virgil (70 BCE–19 BCE), sic itur ad astra ("thus you shall go to the stars") Aeneid book IX, line 641, and opta ardua pennis astra sequi ("they choose hardship that follow the stars on wings") Aeneid book XII, lines 892–893. Many Latin sayings use the expression Ad astra ("to the stars"): per ardua ad astra ("through struggles to the stars"), Royal Air Force's motto; ad astra per aspera ("to the stars through difficulties"), Kansas' motto; per aspera ad astra ("through adversity to the stars") or ("a rough road leads to the stars"), which is on the memorial plaque for the astronauts of Apollo 1; Sic itur ad astra ("thus one goes to the stars"); Ad astra per alia porci ("to the stars on the wings of a pig"), Motto on John Steinbeck's personal stamp; per herbam ad astra ("from grass to the stars"). –pjoef (talk • contribs) 06:37, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

• Strong Support - I can't believe that we haven't used this one before; assuming that we haven't, it is a great motto. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:23, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened (no consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:32, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

• Strong support Wonderful! No further comment necessary. Smaug123 (talk) 10:39, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
• Strong support Great idea! --I dream of horses (T) @ 03:24, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
• Strong support - just the type of motto we're looking for. —La Pianista ^{♫ ♪} 21:14, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/August 18, 2009 (per consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:55, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

The early bird catches the worm

Simply south (talk) 21:24, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

• Question- The first two links make sense, but I don't get the last one. Nutiketaiel (talk) 11:33, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
  • I was trying to do, if a new user is able to create an article, they could submit (a fact) to DYK. Simply south (talk) 17:40, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
    • Weak Support - Oh, OK. Little bit of an odd statement, I guess, but there's nothing wrong with it. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:23, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
• Comment: I thought it's like only newbies create DYK articles... That makes me a newbie!!!! :P ≈ Chamal ^talk 07:06, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, me too! Kayau David Copperfield MOBY DICK the great gatsby 14:04, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

*Support ~ good one ... I like it. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:12, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

• What has it to do with early birds? Doesn't seem to quite bring out a meaning, and therefore doesn't sound like a motto. Please correct me if I'm wrong because I am a newbie at the MOTD. Kayau David Copperfield MOBY DICK the great gatsby 14:04, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
  • There is a phrase that goes "The early bird catches the worm", sort of meaning first come first serve. I am meaning what i said above with Nutiketaiel. It is also saying, or trying to say, if the newbies create an article, if they are early enough they can submit a fact to DYK. Simply south (talk) 22:25, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
    • My point is, this has little to do with newbies. We all submit DYKs, but we are not newbies. Kayau David Copperfield MOBY DICK the great gatsby 02:30, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened (no consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:48, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose I am a new page patroller. Nearly all articles that are made by newbies' aren't even Wikipedia-worthy, never mind DYK-worthy. --I dream of horses (T) @ 03:14, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

 Declined (in favour of edit 1) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:49, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

The early bird catches the worm

Here is a less confusing alternative. edit 1 Simply south (talk) 14:53, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

• Strong Support - This version is a significant improvement over the original suggestion and sends a much better message, in my opinion. Nutiketaiel (talk) 19:18, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

• Weak support I like this a lot better. At least it encourages newbies to get help before writing an article from scratch. --I dream of horses (T) @ 03:14, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
• Weak support per I dream of horses. I also agree that most newbie articles are horrible. Kayau David Copperfield MOBY DICK the great gatsby 07:55, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
• Weak Support. It's okay.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 15:00, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:49, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/August 17, 2009 (per consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:49, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

→ ad captandum vulgus
("to win over the crowd")

To do something to appeal to the crowd/masses/common ppl/listeners/readers. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 06:55, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Added link to Wikipedia. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 11:36, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose - It seems to have no relevance to Wikipedia. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:29, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
  • I forgot the link /o\. How about linking it to Wikipedia? –pjoef (talk • contribs) 11:36, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
• Strong oppose Why should we win over a crowd? It also seems to be a random, cool sounding latin phrase. --I dream of horses (T) @ 03:06, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
• Strong oppose. The goal of Wikipedia is not to win over anyone. Kayau Wuthering Heights VANITY FAIR paradise lost 10:20, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
• Strong oppose All the reasons above! Smaug123 (talk) 11:25, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

 Declined (per WP:Snow) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:15, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

He who speaks in anger makes his anger heard, but his words are forgotten.

A motto about edit warring/anger on wikipedia. Mifter (talk) 17:43, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

• Strong Support - Excellent motto, excellent links. My one complaint is the double-linking to WP:DISRUPT, but I can't think of a better one off the top of my head just now. Nutiketaiel (talk) 19:41, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support ~ per Nutiketaiel. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:45, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
• Comment I don't think the first link is necessary. Kayau David Copperfield MOBY DICK the great gatsby 02:44, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support I thought the same thing as Kayau even before I read his comment, though. You can safely remove the first link and the message will still get through. --I dream of horses (T) @ 03:00, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
• Affectionate support. This is a really good one...great message with great links.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 18:22, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/August 16, 2009 (per consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:10, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

He who speaks in anger makes his anger heard, but his words are forgotten.

Edit 1 per Kayau and I dream of horses.

• Support This one is a lot better, in my opinion. I dream of horses (T) @ 02:26, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support I love it this time, and a very nice message too. Kayau Wuthering Heights VANITY FAIR paradise lost 10:13, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

 Declined (in favour of the original) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:10, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

To make this work, just add water

--90.201.164.97 (talk) 22:07, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose ironically per my above edit. It takes more than merely "just adding water" (or a peer review) to make an article featured. This may give new users the wrong impression. --I dream of horses (T) @ 00:05, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose per above. Bad linking.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 18:18, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

 Declined in favour of edit 1. Simply south (talk) 19:20, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

To make this work, just add water

Edit 1 Perhaps? —La Pianista ^{♫ ♪} 04:42, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

• Support Ooo! Ooo! I get it! Water is cool. Creative. --I dream of horses (T) @ 18:02, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support ~ better version. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:05, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support. About 1000x better than the first version. Well done!  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 15:03, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support Original and pithy! Smaug123 (talk) 10:37, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support - Excellent linking, very original. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:40, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Approved per Walking in a Winter Wonderland. Simply south (talk) 19:20, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Seeing is believing

Simply south (talk) 20:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support I would've linked to WP:IMAGE, but I like this link, too. --I dream of horses (T) @ 23:25, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support. Nice one...makes you think!  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 15:33, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support. A bit sentimental, but gushiness is good every once in a while. —La Pianista ^{♫ ♪} 04:28, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support per above. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:50, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/August 14, 2009 (per WP:SNOW) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 11:48, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Don't rush towards the finish line,
Spend time with your fellow runners.

This one just sort of came to me.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 18:43, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

• Strong support It may have just "come to you", but this quote really emphasizes that wikipedia is, in fact, a very urban and dense city (metamorphic ally speaking). --I dream of horses (T) @ 23:27, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
• Strong support - very nice message. —La Pianista ^{♫ ♪} 04:37, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
• Strong Support ~ good one, well done! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:54, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/August 13, 2009 (per WP:SNOW) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 11:46, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

→ Autobots – transform and roll out.

From the words of the great Optimus Prime. I think that the links are pretty self explanatory. Certainly not the greatest motto in the world, but nothing wrong with the occasional simple pop culture reference. Nutiketaiel (talk) 13:56, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support ~ It is a good one. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 06:57, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened (no consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:32, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support - good quote. —MC10|Sign here! 18:50, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support Nothing like a good pop culture reference once in a while. --I dream of horses (T) @ 03:22, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support. Nothing wrong with this one.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 18:20, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/August 12, 2009 (per consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 11:40, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

→ The blue dye extracted from indigo is bluer than indigo

Chinese idiom. The story behind it is a teacher who has the courage to treat his former student as a teacher without feeling embarrassed, so adopters can actually learn from graduated adoptees. Kayau David Copperfield MOBY DICK the great gatsby 02:40, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

• Strong Support ~ I like this one very much, well done. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:28, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support - The links were clever for this one. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:31, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support and suggestion Is there a notable example for this that you can link in the last "indigo"? --I dream of horses (T) @ 03:02, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
  • The indigo is the same indigo as the first indigo, so there is no need for a link. Kayau David Copperfield MOBY DICK the great gatsby 03:59, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
    • I meant, like a notable example of an adoptee teaching an adopter. --I dream of horses (T) @ 21:12, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
      • No, that's an individual case most users don't know about. Kayau David Copperfield MOBY DICK the great gatsby 11:24, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support. It's always nice to get a reference to the Adopt-a-user program.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 21:47, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/August 11, 2009 (per WP:SNOW) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:40, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

The only stupid question is the one that isn't asked

Read this in a book recently, can't remember which. The links are absolutely open for edits, I'm pretty tired right now and can't think of any that would fit. GrooveDog (talk) 04:12, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support - Nice idea, but the first link could definitely use some work. I'll try to think of something. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:14, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support ≈ Chamal ^talk 13:02, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
• Neutral ~ It has been used before. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:32, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
• Strong Oppose - We should not be reusing mottos. Nutiketaiel (talk) 13:25, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose doesn't seem to bring out a meaning, and the first one is an individual case because as far as I know only one admin has ever deleted the main page. Kayau David Copperfield MOBY DICK the great gatsby 02:45, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
• OpposeI don't like the implication of stupidity. --I dream of horses (T) @ 02:48, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

 Declined (not consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:27, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

→ You can never know everything, and part of what you know is always wrong. Perhaps even the most important part. A portion of wisdom lies in knowing that. A portion of courage lies in going on anyway.

A quote from the character Lan Mandragoran in the 9th book of Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series. I thought this quote spoke better for itself without alot of links. After all, we don't always need to flood a quote with links to make it relate to Wikipedia. What I'm trying to get across with this quote is that, even when you don't know everything, you just have to recognize your ignorance and are bold in writing about what you do know. As I said, I think the quote largely speaks for itself without links. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:30, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support ~ good one. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:19, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened (no consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:39, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

• Comment The courage link is excellent, but will you link wisdom to something? Kayau David Copperfield MOBY DICK the great gatsby 02:47, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Reply - OK, like what? Nutiketaiel (talk) 11:39, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
    • Reply Common sense, perhaps? --I dream of horses (T) @ 02:37, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
      • The best idea I've got is to Wikipedia:Wikisloth... Although wikisloths don't have to be wise. (This reminds me of the fish you gave Unschool, Nutiketaiel. Perhaps the use of humour is wisdom? It certainly sorted things out.) Kayau David Copperfield MOBY DICK the great gatsby 04:03, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

 Declined (in favour of edit 1) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:17, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

→ You can never know everything, and part of what you know is always wrong. Perhaps even the most important part. A portion of wisdom lies in knowing that. A portion of courage lies in going on anyway.

Edit 1- I can't believe I forgot that there is a perfect link for "wisdom"- WP:WISDOM. Hope this works for you guys. Nutiketaiel (talk) 13:21, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support Kayau David Copperfield MOBY DICK the great gatsby 07:58, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support I like this a lot better. I dream of horses (T) @ 17:47, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support. Simply south (talk) 23:18, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/August 10, 2009 (per consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:17, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

→ All things must pass

To remind people that FA status doesn't last forever Kayau David Copperfield MOBY DICK the great gatsby 13:58, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support - It is an excellent reminder to people, I think. I also took the liberty of inserting a space between the arrow and the quote. Nutiketaiel (talk) 19:44, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support ~ I like it.

  "And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet." ~ The Bible, Matthew 24:6-8 (King James Version)

  I changed the arrow's link because it was a red link. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:30, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support Yeah, it's a nice reminder. --I dream of horses (T) @ 02:56, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support per above.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 18:23, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Approved per WP:SNOW. Simply south (talk) 23:12, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

→ A beautiful battle is one you don't have to fight.

A quote from the character Mat Cauthon in the 11th book of Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series. I'm a little concerned with referring to war as beautiful in any context, but I think the balance of the quote defuses any negative impression. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:30, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support - Seems fine to me. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:15, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support ~ It's a good motto. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:30, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support I like it. Kayau David Copperfield MOBY DICK the great gatsby 02:48, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened (no consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:39, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support Nice concept! --I dream of horses (T) @ 02:35, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Comment we have lots of supports. I think someone should mark this as approved. Kayau David Copperfield MOBY DICK the great gatsby 07:59, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

• Well, here's one more! Support.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 18:30, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/August 8, 2009 since nobody objects. Kayau David Copperfield MOBY DICK the great gatsby 14:26, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

All work and no play make Jack a dull boy

This one has been done befre with similar links (see Archive 7) but got rejected so here is a resubmission. Simply south (talk) 22:25, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

• Could you link directly to the section? there are 150 noms in archive 7. Kayau David Copperfield MOBY DICK the great gatsby 05:40, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
  • I did when i submitted it. Just click on the link. Simply south (talk) 14:31, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support ~ good one. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:34, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support ~looks good to me Gingerjoos (talk) 10:29, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support - Good message and good links. Nutiketaiel (talk) 13:07, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support - good message for all Wikipedians. —MC10|Sign here! 18:52, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Approved per WP:SNOW Simply south (talk) 22:22, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

→ Legend tells of a legendary warrior whose kung fu skills were the stuff of legend.

≈ Chamal ^talk 13:02, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

• Legendary Support - OK, that statement uses the word "Legend" way too much, but it's just hilarious all the same. Perfect linking, too. Chamal, your legendary motto-fu is truly legendary. Nutiketaiel (talk) 13:23, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
• Legendary Support too ~ useful & stimulating set of links, very well done! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:24, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/August 6, 2009 (per "legendary" consensus (^___^) ... I'm sorry, but it is summer and we are running dry, so I take the decision to approve some mottos with few supports and without oppositions.) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:47, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

→ Whether the charmer sinner it, or saint it,
If folly grow romantic. I must paint it.

Alexander Pope (1688–1744), Moral Essays, Epistle II (To a Lady), "Of the Characters of Women" (1735). –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:41, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support - While I'm not entirely comfprtable with linking "sinner" to stubs, it fits in the greater context of the quote, which is very poetic. Go for it. Nutiketaiel (talk) 11:44, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support - Sure. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:17, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened (no consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:39, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support –pjoef (talk • contribs)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/August 5, 2009 (per bland consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:39, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

→ acta est fabula plaudite
("The play has been performed; applaud!")

Probably Augustus' last words. Applied by Jean Sibelius (1865–1957) to the third movement of his String Quartet No. 2. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:41, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

• Weak Support - It's not bad, and the fact that Suetonius claims they were Augustus' last words means it can't be called a random latin phrase. Nutiketaiel (talk) 11:48, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support: This is an area we haven't gone into recently. Chamal ^talk 12:10, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened (no consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:39, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support –pjoef (talk • contribs)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/August 4, 2009 (per bland consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:37, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

→ Abstruse and mystic thought you must express
With painful care, but seeming easiness;
For truth shines brightest thro' the plainest dress.

Wentworth Dillon, 4th Earl of Roscommon (ca. 1630–1685), Essay on Translated Verse (1684) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 06:37, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support - I'm not that happy with the last link, but I can't think of anything better, so it'll do. The rest of it is quite good, though. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:19, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:32, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/August 3, 2009 (per very-very bland consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:32, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

→ We are one people.

Has been awhile since I've submitted one. BW21.--BlackWatch21 01:05, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support - Looks good to me. Nice and simple, with a good message. Nutiketaiel (talk) 13:51, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support ~ One people, one world, ... and billions of chessboards. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:07, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/August 2, 2009 (per very-very bland consensus... we need more upcoming mottos) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:28, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

→ How may days' walk?
Oh, about two years.

No comments :( ≈ Chamal ^talk 12:07, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support - I have mixed feelings about this one, but I ultimately came down on the "support" side. My concerns revolve around the second link- I think it may be discouraging to link article development to "about two years," especially since an article can become a FA alot faster than that. However, on further consideration, I remembered that the encyclopedia is never finished and that article development is an ongoing process; in that context, the linking made alot more sense, and seemed less discouraging. Nutiketaiel (talk) 14:22, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support ~ I think it should work. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:13, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/August 1, 2009 (per very bland consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:20, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

→ None but an author knows an author's cares,
Or Fancy's fondness for the child she bears.

William Cowper (1731–1800), The Progress of Error, Poems by William Cowper, of the Inner Temple, Esq. (1782). Umm, I think there could be a better set of links. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 06:42, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

• Support - Not bad. This linking is a little... awkward, but it works. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:21, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened (no consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:55, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

• Weak Support per Nutiketaiel.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 18:23, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support ~ I don't like to post my opinion on my own nominations, but we are running dry! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:17, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/July 31, 2009 (per bland consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:18, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

→ Accipe Hoc
("Take this")

Motto of 848 Naval Air Squadron, Royal Navy. It could be also linked to WP:ADOPT. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 06:42, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose - Just seems like a random Latin phrase. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:22, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened (no consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:55, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

 Declined (no consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:08, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

'They did what?'........ 'No, stay calm. This may be a better solution.'

This motto is how to stay cool and not start anything. Noneofyour (talk) 15:20, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

• Question - Is this quoting something? Nutiketaiel (talk) 17:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Reply - Somebody is saying something to somebody that got their page vandalised. Probably should of mentioned that. Noneofyour (talk) 17:42, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
    • Weak Oppose - I see what you're going for, but the statement doesn't seem very... motto-y, if that makes sense. Nutiketaiel (talk) 18:59, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
• Weak Support ~ Not so bad, but not so good either. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 06:47, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened (no consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:53, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

 Declined (no consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:07, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

In a war, he who laughs last...laughs best?

I wanted to incorporate the idea of WikiViolence in here somewhere. Hopefully I did it okay.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 01:14, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

• Weak Oppose - I see what you were going for, especially using the elipses and the question mark, but I think the meaning of this one is too easy to misunderstand or misconstrue. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:21, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened (no consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:46, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

• Weak Support ... not the best one, but we are running dry. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:46, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

 Declined (no consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:06, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

→ abusus non tollit usum
("misuse does not remove use")

Paracelsus (1493–1541), speaking about drugs. Abuse does not justify denial of use, or, the possibility of misuse does not preclude right use. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:13, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

• Question - I'm curious why you chose to link "abusus" in that manner. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:29, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Reply: Well, you are right, it does not fit completely. I interpreted "misuse/abusus" as a "bona fide error", a mistake in good faith. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:41, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
    • Weak Support with that interpretation. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:26, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened (no complete consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:53, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support ~ we are running dry. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:04, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/July 30, 2009 (per very bland consensus but we are running dry) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:04, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Do you want to spend the rest of your life selling sugared water or do you want a chance to change the world?

The line Steve Jobs used to lure John Sculley as Apple's CEO, according to Odyssey: Pepsi to Apple, by John Sculley and John Byrne Monkey Fox Contributes! . 04:03, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support - It's certainly interesting. A little wierd, though. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:16, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:22, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support ≈ Chamal ^talk 13:02, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
• Strong Support - One of those mottos that makes you think "Wow, cool." (if that makes sense) GrooveDog (talk) 22:25, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Approved per WP:SNOW. Simply south (talk) 10:50, 26 July 2009 (UTC) (should have been yesterday :o)

→ A man who trusts everyone is a fool, and a man who trusts no one is a fool.

A quote from the character Lews Therin Telamon (well, he's sort of a character) in the 9th book of Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series. In the first link, we remind everyone that vandalism does exist and will always exist, so we must be watchful for it. In the second link, we remind everyone that just because there is vandalism doesn't mean you can start assuming that everyone is editing in bad faith. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:30, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support –Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:14, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support: Good one. ≈ Chamal ^talk 07:07, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support ~ This is fine. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:16, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/July 28, 2009 (per consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:41, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

→ Papa's got a brand new bag

Simply south (talk) 21:03, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

• Weak Support - It's not bad. I'm not entirely comfortable with referring to adoptees as "bags," but that's a very minor issue. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:18, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support ~ good one! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:48, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
• Weak Support per Nutiketaiel. Chamal ^talk 12:08, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
• Weak support - I don't really see the co-relation between the quote and the links, but alright. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:21, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • I was trying to show the relation between the adopter as a parental figure and the adoptee as a child, or bag in this case. Simply south (talk) 13:26, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/July 27, 2009 (consensus reached) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:34, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Never reveal your sources!

I thought i would try reverse Psychology. Or could someone think of a better link? Simply south (talk) 17:11, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose; some newer users might not recognize it as reverse psychology, which may cause some problems. --UberScienceNerd _{Talk Contributions} 21:06, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
  • That is with the link it makes it reverse psychology. Otherwise it seems to be a common journalism saying (it itself is not reverse psychology). Simply south (talk) 21:20, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
• Strong Oppose - I agree with UberScienceNerd, people who are not yet fully familiar with wikipedia policies may misinterpret and not get the joke. We can see that the link is what makes it reverse psychology, but reverse psychology doesn't always work, and I'm worried about sending the wrong message. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:20, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose per above. It's needlessly confusing, in my opinion.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 14:30, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

 Declined (in favour of edit 1) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:20, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Always reveal your sources!

Well, go for a play on the saying above with one of my own. Also, why does no one get that i was saying with the link in the version before this it is reverse psychology? Anyway, edit 1. Simply south (talk) 20:05, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

• Weak Support ~ I prefer the reverse psychology version, because it was more intriguing. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 11:25, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
• Very Weak Support - We're not idiots, South. We all get that it was reverse psychology. You said it explicitely in your explanation of the quote, and two of us referenced in our opposition that we saw that it was reverse psychology. My concerns (I can't speak for the others, but their comments are up there so you might as well read them) were that users who are not yet familiar with Wikipedia's policies (which we, obviously, are) may have been confused by it. At best, they would have missed out on the subtext, and at worst they would have been confused about those policies. This motto obviously alleviates those concerns; it is just very dull. Save it for a slow news day. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:03, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose: Too bland for my liking. Chamal ^talk 12:07, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support: Nothing wrong with it really, it brings up an important aspect of content building that we don't get many motto's about, Spitfire^Tally-ho! 12:12, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/July 26, 2009 (per consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:20, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Love the sinner; Hate the sin.

First off, I do NOT want you to take this the wrong way. I do NOT, in all honesty, what this to be saying that you should love vandals. I'm simply trying to say, through this famous proverb, that you should treat vandals with the same respect and courtesy as regular wikipedians, and deal with the vandalism separately. I realize this motto might be a bit of a risk, but I'm going to take it.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 14:27, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

• Weak Support - I see what you're going for with this. However, I don't think WP:Do not insult the vandals is the best link for "love the sinner." What do you think of linking to WP:REHAB instead? By working with troublesome users, they bring them around to constructive editing. That seems like a better way of expressing "love the sinner" in a Wikipedia context. Nutiketaiel (talk) 17:33, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

• I agree 100% with this change. It brings a much better and more encouraging message than before. If I'd had known about WP: REHAB to begin with, I probably would've incorporated it in the beginning.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 19:06, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

 Declined (in favour of edit 1) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:51, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Love the sinner; Hate the sin.

Edit 1 per Nutiketaiel.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 19:06, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

• Support ~ Better version. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:12, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
• Strong Support per my above. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:23, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/July 25, 2009 (consensus reached) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:50, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

→ Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da, life goes on.

This is the main line in The Beatles song Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 20:23, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

• Weak Support - I'm not a big fan of nonsense words (well, except when Lewis Carroll uses them), but the links are just perfect, which was enough to garner my weak support. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:18, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
• Support. ~ Well done.... And if you want some fun take Ob-la-di-bla-da. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:23, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/July 24, 2009 (bland consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:47, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Independent minds make a strong community.

Noneofyour (talk) 17:46, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

• Strongest Possible Oppose - Putting aside my philosophical objections to the phrase "There can't be peace with independent minds," your links are saying that we need vandalism to have a community. Not even close to a good message. Nutiketaiel (talk) 19:07, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
• Strong Oppose per Nutiketaiel, and it sounds to me like saying the community is vandalizing. Chamal ^talk 11:20, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose. The links and the saying just don't work at all.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 18:44, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
• Reply - No, I'm try to say if everbody thought peace then there would be no vandalism. But if everybody thought the same, nobody would have idea's to improve a community. Noneofyour (talk) 12:28, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Reply - That's what you're trying to say, but the quote and the links don't get that across at all. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:30, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
    • Reply - You got any ideas? Noneofyour (talk) 12:38, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
      • Reply - Not with this quote; I couldn't be more opposed to it. I'm sorry, but I can't think of any motto that get's that message across doesn't make it seem like vandalism is desireable. Sorry. If I think of anything, I'll let you know. Nutiketaiel (talk) 17:36, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
        • Reply - How about this? Noneofyour (talk) 06:16, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

 Declined (no consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:41, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

As a military general, there are always troops to clean threats off the globe, but in wikipedia, we have to do it ourselves.

I just got bored and thought of this, Noneofyour (talk) 17:20, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

• Weak Oppose: I generally oppose motto's that link to the CVU, there are huge numbers of editors who patrol the recent changes but aren't members, but also I just don't really think the motto is too great, as a general rule I like motto's which are a bit more subtle: (ie the reason isn't clear without the links) Spitfire^Tally-ho! 16:21, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
• Support - This one looks good to me. I don't have anything against a simple, plain-spoken motto that says exactly what it means. I also like that it reminds users that we are all responsible for cleaning up vandalism, and that we cannot just leave it for others. Nutiketaiel (talk) 18:46, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Caveat - It should be "there are always troops," to be grammatically correct. Nutiketaiel (talk) 18:49, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
• Reply - Fixed Noneofyour (talk) 19:32, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
• Support per Nutik. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:48, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened - no complete consensus. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:39, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/July 23, 2009 (per bland consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:39, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

The best edits aren't to the subjects of popularity, however big the edit is, the best edits are to the subject that needs it.

I didn't have much time to make it, so links are welcome. Noneofyour (talk) 11:55, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

• Weak Support - I'm fine with it linked as it is- I really don't think the mottos need to be drowning in links. I just think the statement itself is a little meh. Maybe on a slow news day. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:04, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
• Idea - How about now? Noneofyour (talk) 17:00, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Reply - It retains my weak support. The statement is just... blah. There's nothing wrong with it. It can work as a motto. I'm not opposed to it. It's just... meh. It has that... slow news day quality. Nutiketaiel (talk) 18:52, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened - no complete consensus. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:39, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

• Weak support. It's okay. A bit wordy, but okay.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 15:41, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
• Weak oppose, as I do not believe that the quality of an edit is inherent based on the article edited. --UberScienceNerd _{Talk Contributions} 14:08, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/July 22, 2009 (per bland consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:35, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

→ Why did I write? what sin to me unknown
Dipped me in ink,—my parents', or my own!

Alexander Pope (1688–1744), Epistle to Dr. Arbuthnot: Prologue to the Satires (1735). –pjoef (talk • contribs) 06:34, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

• Support - I must confess I don't fully get the "my parents" link, but otherwise it looks pretty good. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:06, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
• Weak Support - I don't really get it, but I'm probably just being dense. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:39, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
• Weak Support - per Julian. Noneofyour (talk) 16:42, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Reply - If I'm interpreting it correctly, the speaker is trying to determine why he is driven to write. I think a translation into more modern verbage would read something like "Why did I write? What actions caused me to desire to write, and did my parents cause it, or did I?" That's how I interpreted it, anyway. Care to jump in, Pjoef? Nutiketaiel (talk) 11:29, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
    • Reply - Thanks, I get it now. Noneofyour (talk) 18:02, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
      • Reply - No prob; that's what I'm here for. I am the God-Emperor, after all. Nutiketaiel (talk) 19:00, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
        • Re:2Nutik: In my humble interpretation, the question is: Why do/did I/you/we all write on WikipediA? ... but the first link I used was not the best one for getting it righ. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:10, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
• It's good, but the link to "my parents" kinda bugs me for some reason. I'll try to think of an alternative link to suggest. But for now, you have my Weak Support.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 20:19, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened - no complete consensus. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:39, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/July 21, 2009 (per bland consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:31, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

→ Wine, Women and Song

I think this is a good idea, sorry if it's been done. I also have some idea for alternate links if you think they need changing strdst_grl (call me Stardust) 13:23, 24 May 2009 (UTC).

• Comment. Just out of interest, what were the alternative links you had thought of? Wikiert ^{T S C} 14:16, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
  • The other set of links I considered was Wine, Women and Song, but I felt that they didn't fit together as well. strdst_grl (call me Stardust) 09:11, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
• Support – Bacchus, tobacco and Venus [burn men into ashes]. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:26, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
• Weak Support - I'm not entirely comfortable with the second link, as it may be construed as saying that only women are capable of love, but that's a minor quibble and I'm sure most people won't interpret it that way. The link from wine to WP:TEA was particuliarly clever, I think. Nutiketaiel (talk) 11:54, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened - no consensus. Simply south (talk) 20:43, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened - no consensus. please vote (for approval). –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:04, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

• Question - "Vote?" What is this "vote" of which you speak? Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:25, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Reply: Anyone can vote for approval. Simply vote Support or Oppose, and, if possible, leave a reason.!!! I added for approval (^_______^) ... I hope that it is now reasonably good for you. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:00, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
• Support. I interpret the second link as saying that women can act as a symbol for love, or wikilove (in this case).  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 01:22, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/July 20, 2009 (per bland consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:26, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Do your homework!

~AH1^(TCU) 21:59, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

• Weak Support - It's a little bland, but it works. Nutiketaiel (talk) 11:21, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
• Weak Oppose - I don't think the link goes with the saying. Noneofyour (talk) 17:58, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
• Weak oppose per Noneofyour. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:03, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Reply- The link is to WP:VERIFIABILITY, and I think it makes a certain amount of sense to link finding reliable sources with homework. It makes sense to me, anyway. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:08, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
    • Reply - Not all homework requires reliable sources to be listed. Noneofyour (talk) 15:56, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
      • Reply - Well, of course it doesn't. And if we were looking for a motto for www.homework.com, I would agree with you.  :-) But we're looking for a motto for Wikipedia, and wikipedia does require reliable sources, and I think that can be accurately described as a form of homework for Wikipedia. It's a nice, simple little motto that I like more and more each time I see it (changing my position to "support," btw) that reminds everybody that, even though looking for them can be onerous (like homework is), reliable sources and verifiability are vital, critical and essential for Wikipedia to function, and we all have to do our part for that. Nutiketaiel (talk) 18:59, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
• Weak Support ~ not the best one, but it could work. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:54, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened - no complete consensus. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:39, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

• Suggestion: to comment on Noneofyour's and Juliancolton's issues with the linking, do you think the motto would be better if the whole thing were linked to WP: V?  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 01:46, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Reply: there is not a big difference. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:38, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

 Declined (no consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:23, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Make Your Mark!

A motto on Wiki-signatures.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 20:00, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

• Weak Oppose - I see what you're saying, but I don't think we should be encouraging people to make their mark on wikipedia through signatures; I think we should encourage them to make their mark through excellent editing. Nutiketaiel (talk) 19:50, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
• Weak Oppose - per Nutiketaiel Noneofyour (talk) 16:02, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
• Weak Support: Why not? [unsigned ~ lol (^_______^)]!!!!!!!
  It was just to show (you) how important signatures are. My signature ... (^______________^) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:37, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Reply - OK, funny I suppose, but your signature would be nice who we know who we're talking to and so your opinion is considered when we check for consensus. Nutiketaiel (talk) 11:33, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened - no complete consensus. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:39, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

 Declined (no consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:21, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

→ May this new saxophone bring you years of—D'oh!

~AH1^(TCU) 21:59, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose - As much as I enjoy Simpsons references, the links are non-sensical. Nutiketaiel (talk) 11:20, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
  • I think i do understand the links. Its saying if you vandalise Criticism of Wikipedia, you will be rollbacked, which 75% is true. But there does need to be new links. Simply south (talk) 09:09, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
    • Comment. Not exactly: it means that the vandal is saying, may this vandalism bring you years of criticism. However, the "D'oh" part means that this isn't going to happen, because it is easily reverted (in this case, rollbacked). The moral: don't vandalise; it will be more quickly reverted than one can imagine. ~AH1^(TCU) 01:35, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
      • Reply - OK, I understand now what you were going for, but I don't think the quote does a good job of expressing that. My position remains "oppose." Nutiketaiel (talk) 11:40, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened - no complete consensus. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:39, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

• I actually like what you're going for here. Maybe if you remove the second link (disregarding the arrow, or course), it'll look better.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 16:08, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

 Declined (in favour of edit 1) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:18, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

→ May this new saxophone bring you years of—D'oh!

Edit 1. I took the liberty of changing around a few links, and relinked the arrow to Lisa's Sax (more specific).  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 14:02, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support - It makes alot more sense linked this way. Nutiketaiel (talk) 17:26, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose both - to me the way they are linked, it seems like vandals are invited to Wikipedia so that they can be rollbacked. Simply south (talk) 19:48, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

• To me, this is told from the VANDAL'S point of view. I view it as the vandal talking to Wikipedia, saying that his vandalism will be with Wikipedia for years...right before having it rollbacked.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 20:14, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:18, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/July 19, 2009 (we are running dry) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:18, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

→ Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer.

Written by strdst_grl (call me Stardust) 13:47, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

• Support. Good, assuming good faith is always important even when speaking to disruptors, vandals and the like. Wikiert ^{T S C} 14:13, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
• Support. Good one! Artichoke-Boy (talk) 16:32, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
• Weak Support – I like the Sun Tzu quote, but not the set of links. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:07, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose - The last link seems to be mis-interpreting the original context and meaning of the quote, in my humble opinion. It throws off the entire motto for me. Nutiketaiel (talk) 11:51, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment - If you don't like the links, I'm open to suggestions. strdst_grl (call me Stardust) 08:24, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion: We may use WP:ANI for closer. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:11, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

• Comment - That could work. Nutiketaiel (talk) 17:34, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

 Declined (in favour of edit 1) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:07, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

 Reopened - no complete consensus. Simply south (talk) 20:43, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

→ Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer.

Edit 1. per me and Nutiketaiel. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:14, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

• Support per my above. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:27, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/July 18, 2009 (bland consensus, but we are running dry) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:07, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

→ Wikipedia, the free, multilingual encyclopedia to which people of all ages and cultural and social backgrounds can contribute.

Another excerpt from the Wikipedia Wikipedia:About page. I know it is not a "motto" and I don't know if it's a good one, but here it is. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:13, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

• Weak Support - I'm fine with this one. They don't all have to be literary gems, and it does get the point across. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:28, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

 Declined (in favour of edit 1) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:00, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

→ Wikipedia, the free, multilingual encyclopedia to which people of all ages, cultures, and social backgrounds can contribute.

Edit 1. I just wanted to make this a little...easier to read. Without all those "and"s and such.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 20:18, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

• Weak Support per my above. Nutiketaiel (talk) 11:25, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:00, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/July 17, 2009 (bland consensus) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:00, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

→ abundans cautela non nocet
("abundant caution does no harm")

There is no wrong in abundant caution. So, when we are editing an article or discussing with other editors, abundans cautela non nocet! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 06:55, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose - The link is about not using disclaimers in articles, and doesn't make any sense applied to this phrase. Nutiketaiel (talk) 11:14, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose: Abundant caution would be if we included it in the article. Chamal ^talk 14:05, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose; inconsistent use of "caution". How about linking WP:BOLD#...but please be careful or WP:REASON RULE instead? --UberScienceNerd _{Talk Contributions} 15:01, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment - The first one's not bad. Nutiketaiel (talk) 17:52, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
• Comment ~ Sorry ... I have not seen that WP:CAUTION is a redirect to Wikipedia:No disclaimers in articles /o\! lol How about: Wikipedia:Candor, Wikipedia:Etiquette, Wikipedia:WikiProject Time to Think, Wikipedia:WikiPeace or Wikipedia:WikiLove? –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:47, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Reply - Wikipedia:WikiProject Time to Think makes the most sense to me. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:33, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

 Declined (in favour of edit 2) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:50, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

→ abundans cautela non nocet
("abundant caution does no harm")

Edit 1 per UberScienceNerd and Nutiketaiel. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:49, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

 Declined (in favour of edit 2) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:50, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

→ abundans cautela non nocet
("abundant caution does no harm")

Edit 2 per Nutiketaiel and my above. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 08:49, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

• Weak Support. Sure...it's okay.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 20:16, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
• Weak Support per my above. Nutiketaiel (talk) 11:26, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/July 16, 2009 (we are running dry) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:50, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Edit mercilessly, critique mercifully.

Sometimes I say this on an article talk page when I do some sort of major edit while on random page patrol. I made it up myself, and the links represent the "gist" of what I'm saying (be bold in reversing my edits, but love me). --I dream of horses (talk) 00:40, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

• Support! ~ I like it! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 10:43, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support - It makes for an excellent motto. If I saw it on a talk page, though, I wouldn't think much of the editor who put it there. You really add that to article talk pages after every major edit? Why? It's like you're assuming that the rest of us would act in bad faith unless you came along and reminded us to be nice to each other, floss twice a day and wash behind out ears. Yeah, if I saw that on a talk page for an article I was working on, I would feel insulted. Makes for a good motto, though. Nutiketaiel (talk) 11:51, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support: that's how Wikipedians do it :P Chamal ^talk 12:13, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support –Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:20, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Approved per WP:SNOW. Simply south (talk) 22:55, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

→ One love, one heart
Let's get together and feel all right.

I wanted to go for a positive and uplifting message here about the joys and love of working in Wikipedia. I've always thought these lyrics addressed the ideals of love and joy so nicely, so here they are.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 14:30, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

• Support - Looks good to me. Nice, positive message. I love you guys. Nutiketaiel (talk) 17:30, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
• Support yup, I agree with Nutiketaiel Spitfire^Tally-ho! 17:39, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
• Strong Support!!! ~ ...There is one question. I'd really love to ask: is there a place for the hopeless sinner, who has hurt all mankind just to save his own beliefs? One Love! What about the one heart? One Heart! What about? Let's get together and feel all right as it was in the beginning; so shall it be in the end, All right!.... I'm a hugeeeee fan of Bob "Rasta" Marley! Awesome lines and good set of links. Well done! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:09, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/July 14, 2009 (per WP:SNOW) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 11:40, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

What You See Is What You Get

I was inspired and thought this would work. Then i discovered that i had proposed this 5 months ago, but with a different link. However, as it was rejected\declined, i thought i would try again. Simply south (talk) 21:07, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

• Support. We don't get many mottos centered on the watchlist. I tried to do so once…but I don't believe it's going to make it (judging by how many "opposes" it got slapped with!). I'm thinking MAYBE a better linking option would be if you just link special: watchlist to "see," and link "get" to something else. I'm not sure what you'd link it to, though, so this is fine as is.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 23:02, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

If i did WIAA like last time, but on the get only, I'm sure there would be many opposes as not all te pages are articles. This is an example. Simply south (talk) 14:13, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

• Support - I'm fine with this motto as is. Motto is nice and simple, link is nice and simple. Nutiketaiel (talk) 12:16, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
• Support ~ it looks fine to me. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:14, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Approved for Wikipedia:Motto of the day/July 13, 2009 (per WP:SNOW) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 11:37, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

→ The house is on fire!
No, mother. It's just the Northern Lights.

I'm not that happy with the links, but the idea is AGF before you jump to conclusions... or something like that. Chamal ^talk 02:19, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

• Strong Support - Actually, I think the links are perfect. ANI is where you go if someone is causing a problem, but AGF tells you not to assume that the person is doing it on purpose- try to resolve it by talking to the editor first. I think this quote sends a great message. Incidentally, in the original Simpson's episode, was the house actually on fire? I remember the quote (Seymour and his mother, right?), but I can't remember the circumstances behind it. Nutiketaiel (talk) 13:37, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
  • It was where Seymour was giving Super Nintendo Chalmers a dinner and through various incidents lead to the house being ablaze with the Northern Lights as a cover. Simply south (talk) 17:08, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
• Support. I like this one. I also like the 22 Short Films About Springfield reference (great episode). However, I didn't like it quite as much as Nutiketaiel...partly because the last link sort of portrays ignoring the problem as a way of assuming good faith. But that’s just overanalyzing it.  ARTICHOKE-BOY  (Talk) 01:19, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
• Support. ~ I like this one too! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:44, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
• Support I actually find this quote kind of humorous, and it has a good message. --I dream of horses (talk) 00:42, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Approved per WP:SNOW Simply south (talk) 20:13, 4 July 2009 (UTC)