User:FisherQueen/Archive36

 {| style="text-align:center; border: 1px solid #000000; background-color:#3CB371; width: 100%" ! style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif; color: #000000; font-size: large; line-height: 1.3em;" colspan="2"|FisherQueen
 * - padding:1em;padding-top:0.5em;"

 User Page · Talk page · Archives · Sandbox · Patrol · Templates 
 * style="text-align:left; padding: 8px; background-color:#DCDCDC"|
 * style="text-align:left; padding: 8px; background-color:#DCDCDC"|



Did I delete your article? Try here first!

Wes Melcher Deletion?
Why have you suggested to delete Wes Melcher's profile?? Please let me know immediately what changes need to be made so that it is sufficient, but in the criteria he is considered notable. Thank you. Sarat13 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.116.157.33 (talk) 20:52, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * It was my opinion that Wes melcher does not meet Wikipedia's notability criteria, so it is under discussion. If you are aware of significant writing about his importance in reliable sources, it would be very helpful if you added them to the article and participated in the discussion.  Most of the sources in the article are published by Melcher himself, or contain only trivial discussion of him. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:48, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

This article has been edited so that the resources used are from a third party basis, and are from newsworthy places such as newspapers, and online news. Please note the printed "Your Business at Home," magazine reference in which Wes Melcher was featured on a two page spread. Wes Melcher is also in the process of publishing a book which will also be used to determine notability. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.116.157.33 (talk) 19:09, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No, I'm afraid I don't see anything that makes me think that this is a notable person. Are you Mr Melcher, or a personal associate of his?  One clue to notability is: do people who aren't his friends and relations think that he is notable, and feel independently inspired to write about him? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:50, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

To answer your question, yes...there are others who are not in relation to him who would feel inspired to write about him as he well-known in the marketing community. Although not a household name nation wide, he is still notable to a narrowed, yet massive demographic. If you Google Wes Melcher with quotations, you'll find over 5,000 references. He has spoken to over 100,000 people world-wide, and is a part-owner in a company which has over 200,000 customers in 8 countries. He has been featured in both print and internet publications which were not written by himself or me. They are newsworthy sources, and carry credibility with their name. I don't understand? What else needs to be said? There are others on Wikipedia with the same caliber or less? Please consider removing this flag. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.116.157.33 (talk) 23:06, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It would be against the rules for me to remove it, but if you're right, and the sources clearly show that he meets WP:BIO, then the other users discussing it will see that and say so in the deletion discussion. Wikipedians love finding the sources to save articles from deletion.  Pure google-count doesn't show notability, though.  Google my real name in quotes and I'll get 37,000 hits (far more than Melcher).  My Wikipedia name gets more than 63,000 hits.  And I'm certainly not notable. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 11:28, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Idle question,
Who was a sock of?—  Dæ dαlus Contribs  22:26, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't know, don't care. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 10:04, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

About Life Advice
"As I'm sure you've discovered before you ever joined Wikipedia, your opinions are widely rejected by just about everyone. This, I perceive, makes you feel that your viewpoint is being unfairly discriminated against. If you're able to do so, consider taking just a few minutes to consider the possibility that the reason that everyone to whom you describe these views recoils from you in horror is because these views are untrue in the factual sense and wrong in the moral sense. Maybe it isn't that the rest of the world is unfairly stigmatizing your truth. Maybe it's that you're badly, badly wrong. -FisherQueen"

I find it really hilarious to get "life advice" from somebody who is so naive that she thinks that majority is never wrong. According to your way of thinking Socrates was all wrong.

The convenient thing about taking popular opinion as your yardstick of truth is that it eliminates the need to examine any claim rationally, which I notice, in my case, you did not.

You are a credit to the ochlocratic ideal.

Hadding —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.35.151.114 (talk) 01:43, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I knew that holocaust deniars, like all racists and conspiracy-theorists, are usually simply mentally incapable of understanding how wrong they are. They get so deep into their pet theory that they stifle their own ability to evaluate facts in a rational way.  It's a sad glitch in the human brain.  But I had to try.  I'm blocking this ip, and I hope you'll accept that you are not welcome at Wikipedia. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 10:06, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

There you go again, assuming that the whole world thinks the way you do. I think that there just might be one or two rational people in the Wikipedia administration. That's why I appealed several times (before my ability to do so was disabled), and that's why I subsequently brought the matter to Jimbo_Wales' attention. This irrational groupthink that you represent is not the ideal that Jimbo espouses.

We'll see whether Jimbo really believes in the rational community. If he does, I think you might get a talk from him and you will see my username active again.

If it turns out that Jimbo doesn't really care about the ideal that he espouses, Wikipedia's reputation will reflect that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.35.156.50 (talk) 16:17, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Hadding —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.35.156.50 (talk) 16:13, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Blocked users are not permitted to edit. Changing ips to avoid your block is against the rules; please do not do it, as it makes it unlikely that you will find anyone willing to unblock you if you someday solve the problem that made the block necessary. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 01:44, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 October 2009

 * New talk pages: LiquidThreads in Beta
 * Sockpuppet scandal: The Law affair
 * News and notes: Article Incubator, Wikipedians take Manhattan, new features in testing, and much more
 * Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia used by UN, strange AFDs, iPhone reality
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * WikiProject report: New developments at the Military history WikiProject
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 04:56, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Knowledgeispower76
Thanks, I was just about to report him to AIV for personal attacks. Much apperciated on the quick block. -  NeutralHomer •  Talk  • 22:31, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * He never did seem to understand the concept of citing sources. Very unfortunate.  But most people know that insulting people is bad. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:32, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * True, I was a little surprised by the personal attacks. He seemed, last night, to be willing to work with us after a block for edit warring and I actually looked forward to working with him. -  NeutralHomer  •  Talk  • 22:36, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe I'm an idiot, but... if the radio station does not have a rock format, I don't understand why their official logo has the word "Rock" in large red, white, and blue letters. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:37, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That station is a carbon copy of a station that is close to I am. At times, WACL and WFQX run the same exact DJ (via voicetracking) and the same song at the same time.  Kinda neat when it happens, so it was easy to figure out the format.  I actually tried to meet the user halfway when the format was listed at Active rock and changed it to Album-oriented rock.  That didn't seem to satisfy them.  I contacted another Wiki user who is better at these things and he said just plain Rock would be better.  Still that didn't help.  I tried.  But you are right, it would be silly for their logo to have "rock" on there when it was Classic Rock or soemthing else. -  NeutralHomer  •  Talk  • 22:49, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Unprotected talk page
I'm wondering if something should be done with Talk:Van Jones/Unprotected. The regular talk page is no longer semi-protected, and with Jones not so much in the news it probably won't be for the foreseeable future. So having a prominent notice at the top of the talk page directing IP users to a subpage seems unnecessary. Maybe it should go into an archive or something? --RL0919 (talk) 14:50, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I thought I had removed that notice! Yes, it should be taken down now that it's irrelevant.  There's not much on that talk page but vandalism, anyway- I'll go fix it now.-FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 15:56, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Message = Awesome
I absolutely love your block message on User talk:Conner.hewitt1. By far it is the one of the funniest thing I have seen on Wikipedia. Keep up the good work. I'm going to go find you a barnstar. Nezzadar (talk) 16:10, 8 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Why, thank you! Feel free to steal it as long as you, like me, only use it in those special situations when the blocked user has clearly communicated a desire to be blocked. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:16, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * If only I could. I would love to be an admin, but I doubt I have done enough to be seen worthy of the honor. Nezzadar (talk) 16:29, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

He blanked my talk page to say this
i messed up queens page yo mama thats right im wiki's terrorist —Preceding unsigned comment added by I change stuff ha (talk • contribs)
 * Not that impressive, as terrorists go, really. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:02, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Jadal
U asked me to provide three links for articles in magazines about Jadal so you undelete the page here they are:

Many of the articles are in arbic But here is some english articles http://www.jordantimes.com/?news=19075 http://www.flickr.com/photos/mohammad_alqaq/2100993766/sizes/l/ http://www.gvpedia.com/Jordan/Jadal-Top-Arabic-Rock-Band.aspx

if you want more let me know, do a search about "jadal" on google or find their tv interviews on youtube if you want

I just found couple of stuff about them on wiki too! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic_music#Arabic_rock —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tamakey (talk • contribs) 22:40, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Cool! The Jordan Times article is definitely a good start- it's the only one of those articles that meets the reliable source guidelines.  Are there other reviews in newspapers or music magazines?  The best of the Arabic articles would be okay; I don't read Arabic, but there are people at Wikipedia who do. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:18, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes arabic articles theres a lot I guess, also english magazines, the thing is how much u can find online of these, I already found some like: http://www.alghad.com/index.php?news=440091 http://www.alrai.com/pages.php?news_id=280894 let me know if I should look for more Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tamakey (talk • contribs) 07:43, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I've opened a community discussion about undeleting this article here.  Feel free to participate in it if you like, especially if users there have questions. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 11:45, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Changes to Wiki
Hi FQ, can you direct me to information regarding the future of editing on Wikipedia. There is talk of gate-keeping, editorial reviews of articles, etc, but I cannot locate anyting concrete. Thanks. Politis (talk) 11:57, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I do not understand the question. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:47, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, didnt mean to sound confusing. Apparently it might become more difficult for registered users to edit Wikipedia. In other words, most, if not all edits will have to be approved by a 'gate keeper' who approves or rejects edits to articles. At least that is what I understood. I will try an find out more. ThanksPolitis (talk) 13:22, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You might be thinking of flagged revisions. They were recently introduced, and the media outlets that reported on them misunderstood them in a variety of ways- but they are, essentially, a softer, less obtrusive alternative to semiprotection, and shouldn't affect those of us who are already established users.  -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 13:49, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

thanks for a perfect answer to a half-chewed question! Politis (talk) 14:11, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

User:Kimmi09
I was also looking at that user's unblock request, then noticed you ahve reviewed it. I respect your opinion there, and I am not planning to unblock, but I did notice that the user in question undid all their own vandalism to golem, and the last time they edited was the same minute as their last warning. So it seems plausible (maybe not likely, who knows) that the user really was not a habitual vandal yet. There are really only two edits to one page that were reverted by anyone else. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 21:44, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * If you feel like unblocking, I don't really mind. Grace and charity, second chances, la la la. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:44, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I left a note for the person, I'll see what they say. If it is a vandalism account, they will probably just disappear. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 21:52, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Will you please stop posting shit on my webpage?
What, do you attend the Church of Perpetual Annoyance? Leave me alone. Rain City Blues (talk) 05:13, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It has been more than a month since I last warned you to stop breaking Wikipedia's rules on your talk page, so I think one could say that I have 'left you alone.' At that time, you were blocked for personal attacks against me that had become harassing; now that your block has expired, your have continued to post personal attacks against me on my talk page and on your own.  I have the ability to block you myself, but I think I'll wait and let someone else do it, so it's more clear to you that you are not allowed to use Wikipedia for insults and harassment, and so that you understand that that's a Wikipedia rule, not just my own.  However, if no one gets around to blocking you before your next attack on me, I will go ahead and block you myself.   -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 11:39, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * She carries a big stick, and uses mighty soft words.....If she suggests in plain langauge like that it's infinitely better to back off cool down and let it go. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 11:41, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

May I pouint your attention to......
User talk:IWazEre1 self promotion articles. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 11:48, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Neat. I'll add him to my watchlist, and see if he heeds the warnings he's gotten. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:13, 11 October 2009 (UTC)


 * AT least something original, or baring that funny. It got taken care of though so thank you anyway Hell In A Bucket (talk) 12:13, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

ANI heads up
I've blocked Rain City Blues and listed it for review at ANI. Since you're somewhat involved, in that you seem to be standing near him during this activity, I thought I'd let you know. (I don't see you as actively involved, since you're not engaging him in any way, but it still seems proper to notify you. :)) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:38, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Neil Gaiman event
So, did you go in the end? How did it work out, if so? --Richardrj talkemail 20:53, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I did go. I was right in thinking the library staff didn't have a very rich understanding of what they were hosting, so I went three hours early, and I did make it in- but lots of people were turned away, and the fire marshals got involved.  Neil was lovely. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:03, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Why did you delete our page -_-
Ok, I'm still a noob at wiki. It says you deleted our article for "Article about a group or club, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject". Am I supposed to state somewhere "This is important because...." I never seen a single article that said that.....We weren't advertising anything, people were asking us how we started our youtube videos, and where the ideas come from. It took me a long time to write it, and I wasn't even finished yet. The instant I wrote it, you deleted it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChrisNSF92 (talk • contribs) 21:34, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. What makes this series of YouTube videos something that an encyclopedia would need an article about?  Most YouTube videos are not something that an encyclopedia would need an article about, but if these ones are unusually famous, you should be able to explain what makes them so important, and link to two or three of the newspaper and magazine articles that have been written about how important they are.  -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:24, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Black Mafia Family Article
It's not dead, you just have to register (it's free) to view it. I could send it to you directly if you like, it's about 239 pages on .pdf, but I could direct you to his specific testimony and the related page #'s. Or I could also take print screen snapshots of his testimony being viewed on my computer and send you the picture. Tedder already blocked him for me, but I know he'll be back. His "strong01" account has also been blocked.jlcoving (talk) 23:59, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I tried again and got to it; I don't know why I got an error message a few minutes ago. I blame the Internet.  Carry on. :) -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:00, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Cool, glad you were able to get to it. There are multiple .pdf's covering 10+ days of testimony in just this one related case; I'd upload them all but I don't think it's necessary since a few can cover the basic information I'm putting on here. The guy doing the vandalism never once provided a reason for why; meaning he didn't claim "Oh this is not proper source," or what have you. I know my sources are solid, I spent many hours reading through thousands of pages of court documents in this case and other related cases in Detroit, Atlanta, and Orlando.jlcoving (talk) 00:09, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 October 2009

 * From the editor: Perspectives from other projects
 * Special story: Memorial and Collaboration
 * Bing search: Bing launches Wikipedia search
 * News and notes: New WMF hire, new stats, and more
 * Wikipedia in the news: IOC sues over Creative Commons license, Wikipedia at Yale, and more
 * Dispatches: Sounds
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * WikiProject report: WikiProject Tropical cyclones
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 03:51, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

LensFlare Creations
I'm new to wikipedia as well, and I tried creating a page for my business. Yes I know, that under wikipedia's guidelines, business and advertisements are not allowed, however our business is notable for winning online video contests, 3 to date, with more to come in the very near future. These contest wins are significant in that, they aren't by chance, but by the talent behind our creators. The page tried to reference the contests won, and the videos that go with them. They are all significant in that they yielded prize winnings, that can be referenced online. Also, our company has begun production with TLC, and I would say that having content on a national network, is something notable and worth documenting. Sure, while there isn't alot of notable things now, there will be even more in the near future. Our page is no different from others such as [], and [], except that we are a team of 3, rather than a single person. Please help me to rectify this, as I would like to create a page for us. -Joseph Robba —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrobba2 (talk • contribs)
 * Yes, as I said on your talk page, there really isn't any correct way to write about your own business at Wikipedia, but don't worry- if your business is truly notable, it is inevitable that people outside the company will read about it in published sources and create an article. If you think that Chris Lowell does not meet the notability criteria, you can nominate that article for deletion, explaining your reasons in the deletion discussion. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 01:08, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello
I'm sorry, but its not independently rotating floors. Imagine a half circle. Now think that it has height. The floors don't rotate, the hall itself is a curvature in shape. Like i said, i am a current ninth grade freshman, and i know my school inside out because i go there. However, i'm not good at citing (actually, I don't know how!!) but would appreciate you put my article back up until further notice, when I upload a picture or something so you can see. Regards of my classmates, staff and me, xxxx, Freshman, Springfield High


 * Hey there FisherQueen. A user I was dealing with posted this on your D6 subpage so I moved it. Also removed his name, privacy and all that. He left me a posting on my talk page too, and I responded as best I could, but it seems he might have been a single purpose editor, and we umm... chased him off. Thoughts? User:NezzadarUser_talk:Nezzadar 22:35, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

P.S. if the conversation isn't on my talk, check the infinite archive subpage, which is linked to my talk page.

JeffPW
Hi. I noticed you were good friends with Jeff. I was just wondering whether his sexual orientation was ever an issue, or if you simply thought of him as a regular guy like anyone else. Cheers, 79.79.110.56 (talk) 02:21, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt, but warn you that people at Wikipedia do not have a sense of humor regarding any perceived slight to User:Jeffpw. Yes, his sexual orientation was most definitely an issue- I met Jeff while working at WikiProject LGBT, and his good work for the coverage of gay subjects at Wikipedia is an important part of his legacy. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 02:44, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yup, I ask as I am in a similar position to Jeff. I have faced considerable discrimination in a volunteer role as a moderator in a non Wikipedia forum since my own orientation was discovered; and although I have not told anyone I am myself in a similar situation as Jeff may have found himself in re: life expectancy. Would it be impertinent of me to email you... and if not (as I hope!) what is your email? 79.79.110.56 (talk) 21:26, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think I have any useful advice for you, but I wish you luck. I don't know exactly how Jeff died, though I have some educated guesses, but it wasn't related to his work at Wikipedia. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:29, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Cult of Personality
Looks like the edit war on the talk page of "Cult of Personality" has heated up again. I'm 99.9 per cent sure this isn't were to request an article be semi-protected (if not indefinately protected) but in my opinion, it might be a good idea.

Note that I do have strong political opinions but that they have zero place on Wikipedia. Our goal is, in my opinion, to be neutral ... to both sides. Otherwise, what's the point? Happy Trails! Dr. Entropy (talk) 22:02, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 October 2009
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 03:00, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * News and notes: WikiReader, Meetup in Pakistan, Audit committee elections, and more
 * In the news: Sanger controversy reignited, Limbaugh libelled, and more
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Mediation request for KgKris
Hello, seeing that you blocked KgKris, I think it's appropriate for me to ask you on the next step in the dispute resolution process. Now that his block has expired, he has the ability to edit pages, but I believe from his edits to his talk page, there is a high possibility that he will not return. Would you believe that KgKris will not return to editing and this case be closed (from your email discussions with the user) ? Thanks. Netalarm talk  04:39, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I believed him when he said that via email. If you want to indef block the account, considering that it's supposed to be inactive now, I don't suppose it would matter. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 11:37, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

User:Jpuligan 12
Hi there - Ive left a couple of comments on his talkpage, for you or another administrator to review. Thanks Jason Rees (talk) 14:01, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I see the issue now; if the blocking admin wants to reconsider, I don't mind. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 15:50, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

User:Dreamdesignernow
Hello, … After you blocked, a bunch of sock/meatpuppets began to appear at Articles for deletion/Eric Zaccar … there's a list on the talk page … I know that there's nothing that can be done, but I just wanted to give you a "heads up" in case they continue their disruptive edits after the block expires. :-) &mdash; 141.156.161.245 (talk) 22:50, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Cute. I think it's the same person, based on the similarity of editing style.  -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:28, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Civility
Learn some. " "This is interesting. The word 'fat' has insulting connotations, which cause negative rather than neutral feelings in the minds of many readers. You appear to be edit-warring to keep that word in the article. The word 'fucking' has insulting connotations, and tends to cause negative rather than cooperative feelings in the minds of many readers. Your unblock request indicates that you do not understand that the word 'fucking,' like the word 'fat,' is often not appropriate. In my seventh grade classroom, I teach my students that every word has two kinds of meaning: its denotative meaning (the definition of the word) and its connotative meaning (the feelings the word creates.) You appear to understand denotative meanings, but your difficulty in using words with appropriate connotative meanings is causing you trouble. If you are a non-native speaker of English, please be aware that English has positive, negative, and neutral words for many concepts, and that the neutral word is the one you want to use, not the negative word. I hope this advice will be useful to you when your block expires. "

The word "fucking", in the context in which it was used, operates as an intensifier. As an alleged english teacher, you should know this. Implying that a person is either a non-native speaker of a language and/ or has a grasp of the language below that of a seventh-grader, has insulting connotations. But, of course, you know this. In future, you should treat other users with civility. I hope this advice is useful to you when you eventually cop on. 79.97.166.36 (talk) 21:37, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You've quoted, at length, a comment I made to you. The only words of your own here have inoffensive denotative meaning, but insulting connotative meaning, which suggests that either you did not understand me, or have chosen not to take my advice.  I'll check in on your other contributions from time to time, therefore, to make sure that you're following Wikipedia's civility policy.   Thank you for requesting my attention. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:40, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

The initial statement in my above remark was "learn some", used in the imperative sense, in reference to civility. Apparently you misunderstood my instruction to learn some civility as a request for checks on my own civility. Until you do learn some civility, I would direct your attention towards the Oxford English Dictionary for an explanation of the use of the word "fucking" as an intensifier, and a definition of the term "intensifier". I would also recommend that you read WIttgenstein's Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus in order to improve your understanding of the way in which language operates in day-to-day discourse beyond the simple denotative/ connotative distincition which is taught to children. A reading of B.F. SKinner's Verbal Behaviour, and Noam Chomsky's critiques thereof, may also help you understand your apparent difficulty in drawing inferences from other's behaviour. 79.97.166.36 (talk) 00:14, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, those are lovely big words, and I'm so very intimidated that you know the names of some undergraduate required texts. But you still aren't allowed to use biased language in articles when neutral language is available, nor are you allowed to direct profanity at other users in ways that they are likely to perceive as rude.  -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:21, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Likewise, I am so very intimidated that you can quote the difference between denotative and connotative meaning, and oh so impressed by your use of feigned misunderstanding to insult and intimidate me. 79.97.166.36 (talk) 00:48, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * And still, Wikipedia's rules remain in place, and if they were going to be changed, it would be with community consensus, and wouldn't happen on my talk page, so there doesn't appear to be anything else you need right now. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:53, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Excellent, I'm glad that you've come to understand that you need to follow civility guidelines just like everyone else. 79.97.166.36 (talk) 00:55, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

==

If/When you have a sec
The admin who deleted Hennepin Technical College seems to have disappeared since April - I'm going to dig for the Afd for it, but is it possible to userfy it for me when you have a sec :-) Thanks in advance ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 12:42, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It was an expired PROD, and these days wouldn't survive WP:CSD for a minute. :) I'll userfy it for you. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:47, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It's at User:Bwilkins/Hennepin Technical College. (I'm stalking here in keeping an eye out for potential harassment issues, btw.) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:49, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * And all taken care of before I had even finished my breakfast... thanks, Moonriddengirl. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:50, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Happy to help. It gave me something to do while waiting for Wikiblame to finish reviewing a copyvio article. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:51, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks to both. I'll see if I can clean it up ... the template for Colleges & Uni's in Minnesota looks odd with a redlinked article.  Perhaps I'll ask for some high-quality copyediting when I get some stuff on it :-)  ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 13:25, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Rain City Blues
Hi, FisherQueen. You restored the threat made against you by Rain City Blues because you thought he wasn't blocked yet. Actually, this user has already been indef-blocked with talk page editing disabled; see my report at RFPP. Would you blank the user talk page now? Best, Cunard (talk) 05:38, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, I didn't realize that he was indeffed; in that case, I have no problem with removing the problematic edit, and have done so. We'll all miss him a great deal. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 11:43, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 October 2009
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 01:07, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Interview: Interview with John Blossom
 * News and notes: New hires, German Wikipedian dies, new book tool, and more
 * In the news: Editor profiled in Washington Post, Wikia magazines, and more
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

User:The-Giant-Andrew
Noticed you blocked this character for 24 hours a day or so ago for personal attacks, I've checked their contribs and it seems odd given not that many new editors immediately nominate articles for deletion or take on creating SPI cases. Those actions and this sub-page essay make me think this editor is most likely a return vandal, couldn't tell you who the sockpuppeteer is but I doubt they're new. treelo radda  00:53, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's odd, isn't it? I'll try to keep an eye on this user; if anyone has any light to shed, feel free to illuminate. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 01:25, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


 * He was a recreation of a banned user. Since you edited  Negative Reverting, I'll leave it up to you whether you want to delete that page he created or not. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:43, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sockpuppet investigations/K.duan2009 by the way... most likely a sock of User:AndyCrogonka. --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:08, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for updating me. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 02:18, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Brandon Teena
I have received and reviewed your message in regards to the gender issues concerning the Brandon Teena article. I want you to know I was not trying to push my personal views on the masses of the Wiki-world, but rather was trying to stay as true to the facts as they were/are, and my views have not changed. I was not trying to "edit war" anybody, I made what I honestly feel is good faith edits that were reversed in such a constant fashion that I just took to cutting and pasting the code of the page to re-do what I had already done, and for which people were undoing. I am fairly confident in believing what happened in that somewhere along the lines someone else added edits of whatever, and I missed adding them to the code I had saved. The only other thing I did was clean up an area that was redundant with the same information and links. However which way it played out, there was not the intention of sabotaging any links, edits or what have you.

With all that said, obviously this is a matter that some people feel very strongly about. I was trying to help Wikipedia be a credible online resource of information, and get away from issues such as what was happening on the Brandon article; issues that have unfortunately tarnished the image of Wikipedia to most of the public who see Wikipedia as nothing more then a hodgepodge of misinformation, and EXTREMELY biased. Sadly, I must now count myself among them.

You want the article to be unfair and inaccurate? Fine by me. Just know that when good people spend their time to try and help and get bullied for it, don't wonder when and why the resource YOU stand up for is and always will be considered second rate and a joke.

Tgox1 (talk) 20:28, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You've had opportunities to read the rule at MOS:IDENTITY. When you seemed to have trouble finding the relevant section, I even copied and pasted it into the discussion for you.  What seem like 'facts as they are' to you reveals that you do not know very much about transgender people.  You are coming across to me, and to other users, as an anti-transgender bigot.  If you are not a bigot, but simply don't know very much, Wikipedia has an article on the subject you can read, with links to more information, which will explain it much better than I can.  If you're just a bigot, I'm not even slightly interested in conversation with you.  If you think that particular rule should be changed, you're welcome to discuss that at the WP:MOS talk page, but I don't think you'll be successful, and while that's Wikipedia's rule, it'll be followed at Brandon Teena.  -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 20:43, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

You know, FisherQueen, I will admit to you that I probably am not an authority on Transgender issues. I believe I am not a bigot, or have other inert biases towards gay, lesbian or transgendered peoples. But of it's inert, then I guess I wouldn't realize it. I will tell you that I have gay people in my life, my Aunt is in a very long term lesbian relationship, and her partner, Diane has ALWAYS been a member of the family, and is called Aunt Diane. She is very much loved and adored.

In the past week or so I have done cursory searches on the issue of transgender, Teena Brandon and the gay/lesbian/bi-sexual movement (if that is the correct word, I don't want to offend anyone, contrary to belief) and one thing I have noticed is that around 1996 (or so, I am working from memory, please allow me a little latitude) there was a defining shift on the front of gay pride, to the extent the movement "woke up" and now there is a common banner under "LGBT pride". Not to impugn several centuries of fighting for their rights, notwithstanding.

I just wanted to be fair and accurate as possible. To me, in reporting facts, there is no room for consensus, the facts are the facts. To allow for consensus is allowing room for biased slants and information spinning that can (and does) over time "muddy" the waters.

That is all. Tgox1 (talk) 23:34, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Listen,

I was merely responding to what YOU wrote about me on the Brandon Teena talk page. So why are you going to come to my talk page and threaten me with blocking? Are you saying that because someone bestowed admin privileges on you that you are letting it go to your head? How fair is it that you can say anything YOU want, but I can't answer your charges? THIS makes my point exactly about the spirit of Wikipedia being diluted down to nothing because if someone doesn't see it your way, you will bully them out of town.

I thought I handled the situation quite well. I agreed to stop attempting to good faith edit the article. The talk pages were another story. What you are telling me is that I am not allowed to participate ANYWHERE. I was more then civil to you, and when talking things over with you I thought I did a good job at soothing things over. I even AGREED with you on certain key points. But that wasn't enough for you. Well, I have saved the relevant pages, both your threats to me and your condescending tone and stance you have taken with me, and I am fully ready to report YOU to the powers that be because while you may not be jumping over that fine line, you are certainly walking the tightrope.

For the last time, I will tell you that I am not going to touch the Teena Brandon article. When the hold on the edit expires I will not touch it. I promise to leave any and ALL articles alone as they pertain to transgender issues. Therefore, with that said, if you block me now, it will be for spite and you will be guilty of that which you (wrongfully I may add) accuse me of.Tgox1 (talk) 13:00, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for refraining from disrupting Talk:Brandon Teena further. If you feel I have broken rules, the appropriate place to report me is at WP:ANI.  They'll expect diffs, a clear statement of which rule I broke, and a clear statement of what administrative action against me you are requesting- a block, the removal of my administrator status, or simply a firm slap on the wrist. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 13:04, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

FisherQueen, I do not think you have broken the rules. I think you were unnecessarily harsh, but then I will have to admit I am unnecessarily hard-headed at times. Regardless of how I feel, when I tell you I am going to do something, like NOT edit any more transgender articles, you can take it to the bank. Even if I still believe in what my position is. Heck, I even found a miscue on the Chaz Bono article and pointed it out to Banjeboi so corrective action could be taken.

Had you chose to ban me, this is what I was going to submit:

Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. Vandalism cannot and will not be tolerated. Common types of vandalism are the addition of obscenities or crude humor, page blanking, and the insertion of nonsense into articles.

'''Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. Even harmful edits that are not explicitly made in bad faith are not vandalism. For example, adding a controversial personal opinion to an article once is not vandalism; reinserting it despite multiple warnings is (however, edits/reverts over a content dispute are never vandalism, see WP:EW). Not all vandalism is obvious, nor are all massive or controversial changes vandalism. Careful thought may be needed to decide whether changes made are beneficial, detrimental but well-intended, or outright vandalism.'''

But I think we can all agree to just let this thing go. Thank you for the time and effort you have put into educating me on the common practices of Wikipedia, and in repayment, I will try to follow them to the letter. If I have any questions, I know where your talk page is. Agreed? Tgox1 (talk) 13:45, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

You=hilarious
 This is at least the third time I've seen something you wrote that was so funny I had to put down my laptop for a minute due to laughing so hard I was afraid I'd drop it on the floor. Thanks for injecting some humor! Beeblebrox (talk) 20:35, 31 October 2009 (UTC) I live to amuse myself... you're welcome to join me. :) -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 20:36, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Ditto you have a unique admin style like your request to be blocked template. It is extremely funny.Hell In A Bucket (talk) 21:43, 31 October 2009 (UTC)