March 6

March 6 Quotes of the day from previous years:


 * 2004
 * The mind is its own place, and in itself, can make heaven of Hell, and a hell of Heaven. ~ John Milton
 * selected by Kalki


 * 2005
 * Earth's crammed with heaven, and every common bush afire with God: but only he who sees, takes off his shoes, the rest sit round it, and pluck blackberries, and daub their natural faces unaware... ~ Elizabeth Barrett Browning (born 6 March 1806)
 * selected by Kalki


 * 2006
 * Give thought to life and liberty. ~ Cyrano de Bergerac (born 6 March 1619)
 * proposed by Kalki


 * 2007
 * For all eternity has God not occupied His intellect with the cabbage's birth as well as yours? It also seems that He has necessarily provided more for the birth of the vegetable than for the thinking being... Will anyone say that we are born in the image of the Sovereign Being, while cabbages are not? ~ Cyrano de Bergerac
 * proposed by Kalki


 * 2008
 * You imagine that what you can't understand is either spiritual or does not exist. The conclusion is quite wrong; rather there are obviously a million things in the universe that we would need a million quite different organs to understand … someone blind from birth cannot imagine the beauty of a landscape, the colors of a painting or the shadings of an iris. He will imagine them as something palpable, edible, audible or olfactory. Likewise, if I were to explain to you what I perceive by the senses you do not have, you would interpret it as something that could be heard, seen, touched, smelled or tasted; but it is not like that. ~ Cyrano de Bergerac
 * proposed by Kalki

Who watches the Watchmen? ~ Juvenal ~ (release date of the Watchmen film)
 * 2009
 * Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
 * proposed by Kalki <!--


 * 4 Kalki 15:33, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * 2 Zarbon 19:17, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I actually am curious as to what rationale you rank what I believe is the single most famous and striking quote of the great satirist Juvenal (whose birth and death dates are both unknown), which is here perfectly appropriate for a unique event (the opening of the movie adaptation of Alan Moore's ground-breaking, critically acclaimed, Hugo award winning work Watchmen), "unnaceptable"' as a Quote of the Day? It is not like this rather low-profile non-profit project is actually providing this movie (or any other that comes along) any significant benefit at all by such a selection, relative to the massive commercial engines behind the movie, but we might possibly benefit slightly by attracting the interest of a few fans of the books and film our way by using it. This was also one of my own and many other people's favorite quotes long before Moore ever dreamed up the work which TIME magazine hails as one of "the 100 best English-language novels from 1923 to the present" and though I might possibly find use for it on some other date, I simply cannot think of any day in all of Eternity better to actually use it than on this one. I consider it absolutely, hands down, without a doubt, the coolest possible quote to use for this date. ~ Kalki 23:23, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I am not judging Watchmen nor your liking for it, or your knowledge of it. To me, Dragon Ball is the best series; but you won't see me bringing it up as a good quote of the day. Also, "who watches the watchmen" doesn't seem like something thought-provoking. That's why I can't judge it highly. If you were to inspect the dialogue of the movie, I'm sure you could find something more notable that I might be compelled to rank a 1 or a 2. Movies are a harder medium in that they have less compelling quotations, and if I were to rank something highly, it would require my actual loving it. For example, the only quotes I submitted from movies as suggestions are by Two-Face from Dark Knight and/or Sidious/Maul from Star Wars. In both cases, I'm sure you will rate most if not all of my movie-dom selections low based on your train of thought. But why would I rate highly a basic none-thought provocative saying as "who watches the watchmen"… - Zarbon 02:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * If you follow the links for Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? you will find that it has long been considered one of the most thought provoking questions of history, in various aspects. I learned of it as a very young child, and found it a very profoundly cautionary question, and continue to do so. I believe there is nothing else by Juvenal, and very few things by most other authors quite so notable as this simple query. ~ Kalki 02:42, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I suggested a few other nice quotes for the day (as most days). But I still don't feel a surge of energy inside to give this one a rating of 1. And even if I were a die-hard fan of either Juvenal or "Watchmen" overall, I don't think I would give it a rating higher than 0. Earlier, a suggestion was made similarly from "Calvin and Hobbes"; I'm sure you remember my reasoning as to why I felt that was a poor quotation as well. I am interested in your childhood escapades and furthermore, how this has left a lasting impression on you, my dear, but I myself don't see how your love for the series or the creator of the work makes that quote a legend. For one, it's too basic and simplistic (simple query) to be as noteworthy as you have described it. A simple query, yes. But thought-provoking; sadly not. If I were to examine Watchmen and extract something that I found extraordinarily nice, I'm sure you wouldn't like it based on the fact that it wouldn't be a slogan/tagline of the flick. - Zarbon 02:57, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


 * 4 Ningauble 14:32, 3 March 2009 (UTC) — Now is a propitious time to use this venerable formulation of a fundamental conundrum. The depth of fundamental ideas tends to be obscured by apparent simplicity, yet this quote's radical simplicity carries a notable punch.
 * 4 UDScott 15:29, 4 March 2009 (UTC) - Despite the arguments that have occurred regarding this quote (see above and below), two facts remain: this is a famous and thought-provoking quote and the much anticipated film is being released on this date. I cannot think of a better time to use the quote and I heartily endorse its use. This does not even imply that I like or dislike the film, but rather that I like the quote and that I think it is a good time to use it when it coincides with the film's release.
 * 4 InvisibleSun 23:29, 5 March 2009 (UTC)



Furthermore, any of these quotes from the Watchmen series holds better meaning; query or not:

A live body and a dead body contain the same number of particles. Structurally, there's no discernible difference. Life and death are unquantifiable abstracts. Why should I be concerned? ~ Doctor Manhattan from Watchmen
 * 3 Zarbon 03:05, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 1 Kalki 04:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC) this is a mundane and obtuse observation if ever there was one, and I was slightly surprised Moore placed such a statement in Dr. Manhattan's mouth. Manhattan's own experiences, while leaving him somewhat fatalistic in many ways, testified heavily of the insufficiency of particle based assessments of either time, life, or Reality itself.
 * 1 UDScott 15:29, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 2 InvisibleSun 23:29, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

We're all puppets, Laurie. I'm just a puppet who can see the strings. ~ Doctor Manhattan from Watchmen
 * 3 Zarbon 03:05, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 0 Kalki 04:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC) I already used this very profound insight on Moore's birthday, on the 18 November 2005, and any of the others might eventually be used upon that day.
 * 2 UDScott 15:29, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Once you realize what a joke everything is, being the Comedian is the only thing that makes sense. The Comedian from Watchmen
 * 3 Zarbon 03:05, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 2 Kalki 04:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC) I like this one much, and might eventually rank it a 3 or 4 on some other day, but I don't necessarily accept or condone the type of character or comedian the Comedian became.
 * 2 UDScott 15:29, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 2 InvisibleSun 23:29, 5 March 2009 (UTC)



Though all of the above suggestions are somewhat respectable, I certainly don't believe that even Alan Moore himself, who is not exactly famous for his modesty, would rank any of them as anywhere near so significant a statement as that of Juvenal, upon which he based the entire concept of the Watchmen — and the very complex interplay of various notions of what is right and best that is constantly at play throughout the work.  Juvenal has no particular date on which to reliably propose his quotes and he has actually not yet even been quoted in a QOTD, and this quote possesses exceptional merit. Though you have made good suggestions at times, and I have changed my own once strong preferences for 4 March to one you have recently suggested, your arguments of this quote's lack of interest or significance, like that of many other statements you criticize, seem rather vacuous, and your rankings, as usual, to a great extent simply contrarian. To continue to insist that this quote is not not merely one you can't happen to desire, thus meriting merely a 1 (and which seems to be your most common ranking of other people's suggestions), but rather deserves a ranking of "0" as one to be found "unacceptable" seems to me to be simply ludicrous. I and many other people can't see much merit in many of your tastes and preferences, or the cartoon series with the villain you seem to admire so much you have adopted his name as your username, but I don't rank any suggestions by you or anyone at 0 merely because they are things I don't find appealling, I rank things a 0 only when they have already been used, or possess such foul character or implications as to not to even deserve consideration as a quote of the day. ~ Kalki 04:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I want to make it clear that I never stated I had any strong love of Juvenal's satires — I stated the simple fact that the quote in question has long been one of the most noted political statements of history, as is strongly indicated by the fact that it actually has had a Wikipedia entry for over three years, which actually traces some of it's significance.


 * Be it foul or not, that is your opinion. Practically all the characters I love are villains in the conventional sense, so if you disqualify the notion of respecting villain characters, then you practically do away with an entire train of thought merely based on your facet of opinions; no more, no less. I only like villains. That is my dogma, as your dogma seems to be the ever-lasting unacceptance of the fact that I don't consider your favorite Watchmen query to be worth a QOTD. I don't think everyone would disagree with me, although I'm sure there would be those that do. But I also believe you should never ever, and I mean never disqualify any characters based on your own opinion; antagonists/villains are the only reason a story even makes sense. Without them, it's not even worth it, the story would not work. I proposed my favorite character quotations as QOTD, Zarbon's "Beauty is only skin deep." is one of the most enigmatic quotes of all time, it doesn't seem to matter to you how much thought provocation that quote entails, neither do you seem to care to understand it, for example. When it comes to the actual quote from Juvenal, if it was "Who shall guard the guardians?" I may have given that a rating of 2 even. - Zarbon 06:58, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Though that is one of my favorite translations, there is far less of a tie-in to the date in that form. I present nothing to anyone as dogma which simply must be accepted, but I usually try to be rational even to those with very poor capacities for reason, and use such terms as most people actually do have common and useful understandings about. I quite accept the fact that you prefer to oppose the quote, and that your behavior and arguments often seem quite incoherent and irrational on this and many other matters, I simply refuse to accept as if it were a fact that many of your arguments make any cohesive sense at all. I actually respect the need for there to be ignorance and confusion within Reality, and that these qualities, of necessity, give rise to various forms of villainy and evil. As I stated previously in other conversation with you, evil might be well defined as wanton harm or destruction such as occurs for merely personal satisfaction rather than vital needs, and I have long acknowledged that even it can still sometimes yet play a vital role: in showing many people how profoundly dangerous and stupid some forms of ignorance and confusion can be. Yet, I myself am not so ignorant and confused as to therefore either accept or approve of villainy and evil as in any way desirable or commendable, nor to accept such designations as merely opinion, nor that any opinion is as good or bad as any other. I actually do accept that the irrational and nonsensical does need to often be considered, but vigorously reject the absurd notion that all absurdities need to be given anything close to equal consideration, which would result in ranking those which are wildly incoherent, nonsensical and idiotic on an nearly equal level with those which are cogent, coherent, considerate, wise and able to be convincing to most people. ~ Kalki 15:55, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Except I don't see the version as "Who watches the Watchmen" to be coherent, wise, nor convincing of anything except your own personal love for the phrase. The rather awkward appearance of Ningauble in this case is also remarkable as he practically almost never participates alongside this process, or even when he does, rather rarely; and gives this query a 4 no less...I find that a bit hard to swallow. It also has a lot to do with your persistence. I wouldn't say that the simplicity of the selection is a bad thing, nor a negative...a detraction, if you will. It's fine. It's just that I don't see it as a good qotd. In a very short timeframe from this day, one of my favorite movie phrases is coming up (that of Two-Face from the Dark Knight; the movie itself was groundbreaking and is ranked as the 4th highest movie of all time.) I am not questioning your love for Watchmen nor your knowledge of the saga, but I do declare that it's popularity is not anywhere near that of Dark Knight nor Star Wars. And dare I say Dragon Ball. But, we aren't here to judge popularity as this isn't a popularity contest. I am hoping however that you will see it in your heart to vote kindly when it comes to other movie quotations. For example, that of Two-Face [my favorite DC character]. I don't expect you to love what I love. I merely expect you to show the same consideration and respect I try to show towards your selections. And yes, even to villains as they are an integral part of the puzzle and the fabric that binds the story together. In hindsight, maybe "0" is a bit harsh for your favorite query. I will move my vote of your Juvenal selection to a 2. If it were the "guardian" verse, I'd have given it a 3. - Zarbon 03:34, 4 March 2009 (UTC)


 * How dare you object to my participation!? What has persistence, or lack thereof, got to do with anything? I have indeed ceased participating daily after a brief time last year, and now seldom make suggestions or vote. I explained my reason for this when Kalki made an appeal at the Village Pump for wider participation last October–November. Still, QotD is open to everyone in the community to participate as often or as seldom as they wish. To claim or insinuate that infrequent participation per se is inherently disruptive conduct is completely inappropriate. To direct such insinuation at an individual for making an otherwise unobjectionable comment is uncivil, and I take umbrage.


 * What could you possibly find objectionable about my comment above? I only remarked that the radical (i.e. going to the root of the matter) simplicity of the quote is particularly meritorious. You are perfectly entitled to disagree with my opinion. You are entitled to do so with or without stating your reasons. You are not entitled to object to the manner of my expressing an opinion without good cause, such as irrelevance, incivility, or disruption. In objecting to my expressing an opinion at all, or even casting a vote, you go too far: this is disruptive conduct.


 * You owe me an apology for uncivilly rebuffing my participation; and you owe Kalki an apology for disrupting the forum he administers. ~ Ningauble 15:07, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't owe you an apology as I didn't say anything constituting "incivility" or "disruption". Did I use negative terminology? No. Did I attack you verbally? No. The fact that I referred to your heavy absence and sudden appearance only magnifies what I said earlier; you should be voting because you want to: not because Kalki asked you to. What do you mean how dare I? You act as if it's criminal to ask someone why they vote on a March 6 date out of nowhere and don't cast votes for the rest of the month. It's as if Kalki pulls you to vote every time he needs to sway the vote in his favor. Any person would feel the same when you'd vote a 4 for the shortest given query, perhaps without much reason. In fact, I'd say you owe me an apology for actually saying that I brought up irrelevance, incivility, or disruption. The only thing I said was that your sudden appearance leads me to believe that Kalki asks you to vote. I'm not against your voting. The fact that you only voted for that one selection and never voted for any others is proof enough that you simply did it to sway Kalki's favor. It's as if you're ganging up along with him; as a group on a bandwagon. I DID NOT question your right to vote. I repeat! DID NOT. I question your sudden decision to vote for one quote and decide not to vote for others. In essence, doing what Kalki seems to have wanted; no more, no less. - Zarbon 15:42, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I want to state flatly that at this point, I don't believe I have ever asked any specific person to vote on the QOTD, and I didn't ask Ningauble to participate in this one. Many months ago I did make a general appeal for more participants, because of what I then considered, and still consider to have been your attempts to artificially skew results your way with sock-puppets. I am not looking for apologies from any one for their honest opinions, nor looking to give them for my own, but I don't have time right now to make more than this brief comment on matters, for I will be leaving soon, and likely be gone much of the day. I do wish to simply state that I do believe that the more valid participants in the process there are, the better it is for everyone. ~ Kalki 16:22, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * How many times can I say that I don't have any sockpuppets?! It's like you are purposely trying to instigate something. Let me be clear: I ONLY OPERATE WITH ONE USERNAME AND THAT IS THIS. On the matter of more people participating, I would love that myself. I initially asked a few other people here to join the process, but they stated that they don't want to; they aren't interested, etc. - Zarbon 16:33, 4 March 2009 (UTC)


 * In reply to Zarbon: Stating that you find an opinion hard to swallow based on the person who expresses it, rather than the merits of the opinion itself, is precisely what is meant by argumentum ad hominem. It is a personal attack by definition. If you were not aware of this, please be aware of it now.


 * Your allegation that I am complicit in improper canvassing activities is entirely baseless. Such accusations of misconduct ought not be made without substantiating evidence. Merely casting an infrequent vote is not "proof enough" of any such thing. In point of fact, I was not contacted by Kalki or anyone else to solicit particular votes, or votes for particular quotes. As it happens, my attention was drawn back to QotD by noticing large edits showing up on the Recent Changes list. Observing that there was a great deal of discussion but very few votes, I decided to cast votes for a couple quotes I liked. There is nothing reproachable in this action whatsoever.


 * I happen to agree with Kalki's observation at the Village Pump several months ago that there is scarcely enough participation to reflect community consensus. It was entirely appropriate for him to invite broader community participation by posting a request on the main bulletin board. I hardly know which I regret more: that I declined his invitation, or that I still drop in occasionally and it has only resulted in noxious abuse.


 * I can understand if you choose not to apologize, and will forgive that debt if your conduct is reformed. You need not reply unless you wish to. Escalating to baseless allegations of misconduct is a step in the wrong direction. ~ Ningauble 18:11, 4 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I believe that we are all civil in the end. I didn't mean to assert any of those things, I am in fact sorry that you may have initially gotten the wrong idea; I meant absolutely no vehement attack at your integrity nor your reasoning to your participation based on my own disbelief. the phrase "I find that a bit hard to swallow" means that I find that a bit hard to believe. I didn't incorporate any hidden messages in what I said. That is why I am glad you understood what I meant. I'm actually glad that you joined the voting process. The only dilemma I ever had (what left me in disbelief) was that I wish you would participate thorougly and rate all the suggestions for the date, hence what UDScott had done. Again, I always encourage the participation of other members. It's what I respect and it's something I've never been against. However, I would like to bring to people's attention that I am feeling rather disrespected because of how Kalki keeps accusing me of sockpuppetry. That I don't approve of and I find absolutely no reason to lie about. I worked very (and I mean very) hard in the past to clear my reputation. I would feel better to know that the people with whom I am working here are not of a negative opinion toward me. Hence, your opinion of me matters to me. To sustain my reputation as an editor and contributor matters to me equally as much as your opinion of me (along with Kalki, InvisibleSun, UDScott, etc.) In order for everyone to maintain their integrity, we need to show each other a certain respect; something I firmly believe we need to keep intact as fellow contributors. - Zarbon 23:51, 4 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't feel inclined to evaluate and rank all of the suggestions, just the ones that catch my interest one way or the other. I only have so many brain cells to work with, and some of them are busy with other things. I don't see that my laziness is any reason to doubt the propriety of my contributions.


 * I have not injected questions about you, yourself, your motives or your reputation, into discussion about the quotes. What I have objected to is injecting remarks about me, myself (a subject about which all of my brain cells have an interest, so it was a strong objection), into discussion about the quotes. You see, we both want to be treated with respect. If I may hazard an aphorism, the best way to earn respect is to show respect, but don't quote me on that—I am not sufficiently notable. ~ Ningauble 01:35, 6 March 2009 (UTC) -->


 * 2010
 * A man contains all that is needed to make up a tree; likewise, a tree contains all that is needed to make up a man. Thus, finally, all things meet in all things, but we need a Prometheus to distill it. ~ Cyrano de Bergerac
 * proposed by Kalki


 * 2011
 * Most men judge only by their senses and let themselves be persuaded by what they see... On top of that, insufferable vanity has convinced humans that nature has been made only for them, as though the sun, a huge body four hundred and thirty-four times as large as the earth, had been lit only to ripen our crab apples and cabbages. … Do people really think that because the sun gives us light every day and year, it was made only to keep us from bumping into walls? No, no, this visible god gives light to man by accident, as a king's torch accidentally shines upon a working man or burglar passing in the street. ~ Cyrano de Bergerac
 * proposed by Kalki


 * 2012
 * If people knew how hard I had to work to gain my mastery, it would not seem so wonderful at all. ~ Michelangelo
 * proposed by Zarbon


 * 2013


 * proposed by InvisibleSun


 * 2014


 * proposed by Kalki, after a suggestion by bystander


 * 2015


 * proposed by Kalki


 * 2016


 * proposed by Kalki


 * 2017


 * proposed by InvisibleSun


 * 2018


 * proposed by Kalki


 * 2019


 * proposed by bystander


 * 2020


 * proposed by Kalki


 * 2021


 * proposed by Kalki


 * 2022


 * proposed by Kalki


 * 2023


 * proposed by Kalki


 * 2024


 * proposed by Kalki


 * 2025 : Rank or add further suggestions…

Suggestions
The key to happiness is having dreams; the key to success is making them come true. ~ James Allen
 * initially proposed on the posting page (without author) by Tara who had "read it off a 'Hallmark e-card" 11:48, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 2 Kalki 21:24, 4 March 2006 (UTC) no clear linkage to the date, but the suggestion prompted me to do some research and create a page for James Allen.
 * 2 InvisibleSun 23:46, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 2 Zarbon 04:09, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * 2 UDScott 15:29, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

I seek no copy now of life's first half: Leave here the pages with long musing curled, And write me new my future's epigraph, New angel mine, unhoped for in the world! ~ Elizabeth Barrett Browning (born March 6, 1806)
 * 3 InvisibleSun 01:38, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 3 Kalki 23:23, 5 March 2007 (UTC) with a lean toward 4.
 * 1 Zarbon 04:09, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * 3 UDScott 15:29, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Some people think that friendliness is a sign of weakness, when in reality it is a sign of strength. ~ Wolfgang Singer
 * I just kike this quote and think someday it should be qotm.--McNoddy 14:24, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 2 Kalki 23:23, 5 March 2007 (UTC) This might fare better if placed on his birthdate (29 November), though I am assuming that Wolfgang Singer is Hans Wolfgang Singer.
 * 3, to be used on a more appropriate date. InvisibleSun 23:46, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 2 Zarbon 04:09, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * 3, but on a different date, as suggested above. UDScott 15:29, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

''Take from my head the thorn-wreath brown! No mortal grief deserves that crown. O supreme Love, chief misery, The sharp regalia are for Thee Whose days eternally go on! For us, — whatever's undergone, Thou knowest, willest what is done, Grief may be joy misunderstood; Only the Good discerns the good. I trust Thee while my days go on.'' ~ Elizabeth Barrett Browning ~
 * 3 Kalki 23:23, 5 March 2007 (UTC) with a lean toward 4.
 * 3 InvisibleSun 23:46, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 1 Zarbon 04:09, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * 3 UDScott 15:29, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

As when, O lady mine! With chiselled touch The stone unhewn and cold Becomes a living mould. The more the marble wastes, The more the statue grows. ~ Michelangelo
 * 4 Zarbon 02:37, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 1 Kalki 02:50, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Though I might rank it a 2 or even a 3 some other year.
 * 2 UDScott 15:29, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 3 InvisibleSun 23:29, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Yet I am learning. ~ Michelangelo
 * 2 Zarbon 02:37, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 3 Kalki 02:50, 3 March 2009 (UTC) with a lean toward 4.
 * 2 UDScott 15:29, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 2 InvisibleSun 23:29, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

A little work, a little play To keep us going—and so good-day!

A little warmth, a little light Of love’s bestowing—and so, good-night.

A little fun, to match the sorrow Of each day’s growing—and so, good-morrow!

A little trust that when we die We reap our sowing—and so—good-bye! ~ George du Maurier
 * 2 Zarbon 02:49, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 2 Kalki 02:53, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 3 UDScott 15:29, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 3 InvisibleSun 23:29, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Ah, brief is Life, Love’s short sweet way, With dreamings rife, And then—Good-day!

And Life is vain— Hope’s vague delight, Grief’s transient pain, And then—Good-night. ~ George du Maurier
 * 3 Zarbon 02:49, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 2 Kalki 02:53, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 2 UDScott 15:29, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * This is not by DuMaurier; as the article shows, it is by Léon Montenaeken. InvisibleSun 23:29, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Mortality, behold and fear! What a change of flesh is here! Think how many royal bones Sleep within this heap of stones: Here they lie had realms and lands, Who now want strength to stir their hands. ~ Francis Beaumont (birth unknown/date of death)
 * 3 and strong lean toward a 4. Zarbon 02:49, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 2 Kalki 02:53, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 2 UDScott 15:29, 4 March 2009 (UTC) - I like the quote, but I'm not sure what ties it to this date.
 * 3 InvisibleSun 23:29, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible. ~ Stanisław Jerzy Lec (date of birth)
 * 3 N6n 10:40, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
 * 2 Kalki (talk &middot; contributions) 16:04, 27 February 2011 (UTC) but I might eventually rank it higher.
 * 3 bystander (talk) 18:09, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

There were grammatical errors even in his silence. ~ Stanisław Jerzy Lec (born 1909 March 6)
 * 3 bystander (talk) 18:09, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * 2 ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki·⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 23:41, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Capitalism is based on self-interest and self-esteem; it holds integrity and trustworthiness as cardinal virtues and makes them pay off in the marketplace, thus demanding that men survive by means of virtue, not vices. It is this superlatively moral system that the welfare statists propose to improve upon by means of preventative law, snooping bureaucrats, and the chronic goad of fear. ~ Alan Greenspan (born 1926 March 6)
 * 3 bystander (talk) 18:09, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * 2 ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki·⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 23:41, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

If displeased with any man, do all you can to prevent his seeing it, for otherwise he will become estranged. And occasions often arise when he might and would have served you had you not lost him by showing your dislike. Of this I have had experience to my own profit. For once and again I have felt ill-disposed towards some one who not being aware of my hostility has afterwards helped me when I needed help and proved my good friend. ~ Francesco Guicciardini (born 1483 March 6)
 * 3 bystander (talk) 18:09, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * 3 ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki·⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 23:41, 3 March 2012 (UTC) with a lean toward 4.

I'm a little embarrassed about how long it took me to see the folly of most government intervention. It was probably 15 years before I really woke up to the fact that almost everything government attempts to do, it makes worse. ~ John Stossel (born 1947 March 6)
 * 3 bystander (talk) 18:09, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * 3 ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki·⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 23:41, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

How do I love thee? Let me count the ways ~ Elizabeth Barrett Browning
 * 3 DanielTom (talk) 09:35, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
 * This was already used, on 14 February 2009. ~ ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki·⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 22:42, 3 March 2014 (UTC)


 * 3 ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki·⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 23:23, 5 March 2016 (UTC)


 * 3 ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki·⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 23:23, 5 March 2016 (UTC)


 * 3 ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki·⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 23:23, 5 March 2016 (UTC) with a lean toward 4.


 * 3 ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki·⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 23:23, 5 March 2016 (UTC)


 * 3 ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki ⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 23:47, 5 March 2023 (UTC); with a lean toward 4.


 * 3 ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki ⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 23:47, 5 March 2023 (UTC)


 * 3 ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki ⚚⚓︎⊙☳☶⚡ 23:47, 5 March 2023 (UTC)