Wikipedia talk:Motto of the day/Archive 1
Motto of the weekThere are so many interesting and diverse candidates here that I think we should have a "motto of the week". That would be fun and really get people to think. If we could get the list up to 52 we could have one motto for every week of the year! A wikimotto template could be created that would be updated on a weekly basis. That would be quite handy. - Pioneer-12
Couldn't we do one of those "fortunes" files like they do on mediazilla? - Omegatron 11:44, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
By that logic the wikilogo should change every week as well. Wiki isn't a commercial entity and as such dosn't need the same "branding" as corporate companies - I do, however, believe that consistency in name, logo and motto is important if we want to "spread the word" efficiently. In addition, how do you propose we deal with paper-editions of wiki? (Celcius 03:10, 13 August 2005 (UTC)) Personal preferencesI personally prefer these:
— Stevey7788 (talk) 23:46, 8 August 2005 (UTC) Not a jokeOkay, I cop to adding my own funny to the list -- but -- A motto is not a joke; it is the condensation of a community's deepest values. It does not speak well for us that we cannot agree on one. The current motto, "The Free Encyclopedia", is perhaps the worst of the bunch -- well-intentioned, but useless, in that it says nothing -- or says all different things to all people, which may be fine for a brand of soda pop but is terrible for a scholarly project. "Free" means so many things that its only consistent meaning is little more than "what I want to do"; "encyclopedia" means something only to those who have seen one. Since Wikipedia is fast becoming the only general-purpose encyclopedia that most readers have ever seen, the word says nothing about who we are or what we do here. I daresay our failure to display a motto that states and reveals our most cherished principles is both a cause and a symptom of our failure to have a cornerstone goal any longer. — Xiong熊talk* 22:42, 2005 August 15 (UTC)
WikiquoteCan I suggest a Wikiquote official motto as well? It should be "Quanto magis admiraremini, si audissetis ipsum" (from Cicero) David | Talk 23:02, 15 August 2005 (UTC) No 47
I think its important not to become too serious about almost everything, anything in which people are overly protective of or serious would deserve lampooning. If you can't approach everything with a bit of humour, especially yourself, then you end up in a place nobody will want to go. CompromisePerhaps we could have a compromise:
Official?Is an offical motto ever going to be chosen out of these? Or is this just a page for whimsical wikipedians? —Bannus 21:32, 25 October 2005 (UTC) I've got a complaint about this.10. Just because we're amateur encyclopedia editors, doesn't mean we have to be humourless drones.
Mottos' CommitteeI will soon change the name of the page to Wikipedia:Mottos' Committee; as stated in both main and talk pages, this is not an official purposal. --ShiningEyes 00:01, 9 February 2006 (UTC) RevivalI hope to revive the initiative. It would be a shame to loose 100 funny taglines. So I will be implementing the old "motto of the week" idea. I think there is plenty of good stuff to start with. So far the idea is to create a template and put it on the community portal. Ideas & suggestions are welcome! Renata 03:36, 21 February 2006 (UTC) Motto LengthI'd like to say that I think motto #9 on the rejected mottos page ("You don't understand! I coulda had class. I coulda been an admin. I could've been somebody, instead of a vandal, which is what I am.") is a cool quote. It says it was rejected for reasons of length, but it isn't really that long. Is there a specific size limit? Kerowyn Leave a note 19:56, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
POV scheduled mottos?Just stubbled across this... User:THE KING has added several mottos to Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Schedule, many of which are manifestly inappropriate, as they do not bear on Wikipedia and/or manifest a political ideology. Who manages this schedule, exactly, and how? Sandstein 11:06, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
Organizing the NominationsTo make the nominations more organized, perhaps each new propsed motto should be placed on the page as a heading, and then underneath, comments can be posted about it. ....(Complain)(Let us to it pell-mell) 04:24, 7 June 2006 (UTC) Missing motto!Today (11:47, 2 July 2006 (UTC)), we ran out of mottos! Yes, the box on my userpage displayed a red link, so I hastily added a new one. Please keep on top in the future - I'll help with the project if you don't have enough staff. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 11:47, 2 July 2006 (UTC) The same today, i just added an old one Childzy (Talk|Contribs) 11:05, 22 July 2006 (UTC) I hope nobody minds, i wen ahead and added some for the next two days, i took them from the aproved list and they were unused. Can somebody involved in the project get back to me, i wouldnt mind helping out. Childzy (Talk|Contribs) 11:17, 22 July 2006 (UTC) Overseeri am willing to be an overseer.Geo. 20:32, 26 July 2006 (UTC) /Under review
being reviewed.
links to referenceShouldn't the mottos contain (or be) link to the article that describes the quote/thing referenced/parodied by the motto? Samohyl Jan 10:19, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Overseer candidateUser:Hunterd has expressed interest in being a overseer. Please comment below.
Installed as Temp. Overseer. Geo. 22:34, 1 August 2006 (UTC) Overseer applicationMight as well offer up my services. I'll administer to some stuff, comment on proposed mottoes, and sometimes I can come up with one or two gems myself. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 16:13, 4 August 2006 (UTC) Today's motto misspelledTargeting not targetting!! Pedant 02:28, 12 August 2006 (UTC) |