User:FisherQueen/Archive43

 {| 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"|

You misunderstood what I was saying to that "seb" dude.
You wrote me that thing on my talk page, even after I already tried to clear you up, still thinking that I was using those terms against him/her while thinking I was going to convince him/her of my changes to the wording. Your assumption is a wrong one. I wasn't thinking I could convice that dude of my wording. I was just responding to his rude fire (stupid crap like, "haha, it gets better every time") with my own fire. Maybe I'd like other editors to agree with me, okay... but they're not the ones I was reported to you admins by, so they're not the ones that I'm yelling at like this idiot. He already made an ass of himself.

As for what you said about "the way English is spoken," you said that as if saying "American" is the official way English is spoken (even though you did later say it was informal--yeah, I know that). Well, it's not "how English is spoken," as you called it, so don't use that errant terminology. It's just a stupid error that the vast majority have mistakenly adopted for whatever unexplained reason.

Canadians are Americans. Canada is part of America. Mexicans are Americans. Mexico is part of America. Brazilians are Americans. Brizil's part of America. Chileans are Americans. Chile's part of America. People from the U.S. of America are obviously Americans. USA is only a PART of several nations in America, hence the word "OF" (as a part OF) in the title. Etc., etc., with other nations that are also part of America.

I once shot a telecourse of a sociologist who used the term "U.S.-Americans" properly. No, I'm not a sociologist, though! I'm not an English teacher, either! It just makes sense, though.

And you talk as if you think I'm going to keep trying to edit those places again the way I recently did. No, that's a wrong assumption, too. However, can I, instead, replace "American" with something like "U.S. citizen" or "person from the United States of America" or "person from the U.S.A."? Maybe that would sound less of what some of those other editors were errantly claiming was "awkward" (for whatever unexplained reason), but still be correct and generally acceptable, wouldn't it? (You know whom you're talking to...)
 * You are not convincing me that you're ready to stop pushing your point of view regarding how the word "American" ought to be used. No, you can't continue your work replacing "American" with other phrases, just because you think the vast majority of English-speakers are speaking their language incorrectly, and ought to speak it the way you think they should.  You're not going to win that argument on Wikipedia until after you change the way the vast majority of English-speakers speak- in other words, until you change English.  And I think that you know that you're in the wrong here.  If you say to a person from Canada, "Are you an American?"  she will answer, "No, I'm Canadian." -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 13:00, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

It's not so much about the English language. It's about concepts and logic.

No, I do NOT believe/think/know that I'm in the "wrong" here. I wouldn't be talking about this if I thought I was wrong. Yeah, right. That would be pretty dumb! Puhleease!

And what would be supposedly encyclopedically "wrong" with using a phrase like "U.S. citizen"? That's been a very accepted term to use, has it not? Why would you or most editors want to revert that back out?

Also, why would you guys as encyclopedia admin.s prefer to cater to the wide, but wrong, majority of people who lazily apply the wrong logic to a word rather than standing first with what's actually logically correct, and not bending to the popular vote just because it's what happens to be what most people (wrongly) think is the right way to say something? Aren't encyclopedias there to show people what the REAL truth is? Well then, why not with this simple terminology?

If I ask a Canadian (or Mexican, or Brazilian, or whatever) if she was an American and she said no, then despite what she thinks is her "correct belief," that so many other Canadians(/Mexicans/Brazilians) errantly believe, too (that shows what popularity does to muddy-up a fact), she'd be WRONG. If Canadians (/etc.) were to "not be Americans," then how could they possibly belong to a continent CALLED AMERICA?
 * This is not the first time I have seen this come up, so I'm going to butt in here and tell you the same thing I always tell persons who bring this up: Come up with some reliable sources that demonstrate that Canadians and Mexicans want to be referred to as "Americans" and that this is not just a fringe viewpoint and we can talk. If you can't produce those sources, then you will have to face the reality of the situation, which is that, right or wrong, the vast majority of English speaking, Spanish speaking, and French speaking persons say "American" only in reference to the United States. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:32, 1 May 2010 (UTC)


 * The application of pure logic is rarely going to lead one to how a language is really used. Unless you're speaking Esperanto.  And not always then.  It might be logical for people to speak the way you'd like, but as far as I know, they don't.  Languages don't always grow logically. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 20:35, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Dankojn, Fiŝistreĝino! Ni penas paroli loĝike. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  20:57, 10 May 2010 (UTC) (should do more editing on the Esperanto Vikipedio)
 * Tutaj Esperantistoj estas cxiam logxikaj. Ankaux belegaj. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:01, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Uh, beeb, it isn't about what they want to be called. It's about what things just are.

Hey, Orange and fisher, what are these last things you said (I guess they're in that Esperanto), translated into English?

P.S., fisher, see my talk page as of 05/14.

MaxxFordham (talk) 19:15, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * You missed my point when you say it's how things are, because it is most certainly not how things are. Cough up some sources to support your view or put down the stick. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:19, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * User:Orangemike said, "Thanks, FisherQueen! I try to speak logically."  I answered, "All Esperanto-speakers are always logical.  Also very good-looking." -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 19:28, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Speaking of not putting down the stick... Like converting the U.S. to the metric system, Esperanto is an idea that just makes too much sense to work in the real world. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:55, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Depends on what you're using it for. I always laugh at people who say "Esperanto will never work," thinking that the goal is for everyone in the world to speak it.  "La fina venko" might have been Zamenhof's idea, but I think the people who are using it now to connect internationally are finding it works pretty well for them right now.  Did you know there's an Esperanto hospitality network?  You can get a free bed just about anywhere in the world... I've never used it, but I've been thinking about it as an interesting approach to a future vacation. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 19:58, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Account
Don't you need to pay to do that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.1.157.16 (talk) 14:01, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
 * No, Wikipedia accounts are free for everyone. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 14:06, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

It's the question we all have to ask, isn't it?
WHY? Stellastellastella (talk) 15:56, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
 * See my response on your talk page- and please, put new comments at the bottom, not the top, of my talk page, since I might miss them there. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 15:58, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I still have you on my watchlist from the Irving Society AfD brouhaha. Anyhow, did the deleted article make clear that "Jacques d'Azur" is a fictional person currently being used by er... Stella Artois in their ad campaign?, Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:21, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
 * No, I did not realize that this was a fictional person. There's a possibility that he is a notable fictional person... but if so, someone will have to actually write an article about that, not just copy his Facebook page to Wikipedia. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:23, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The ad campaign just started. He's a very recent invention by the Stella Artois ad agency, and they're plugging him all over the internet. He's not notable yet, although they're obviously trying hard to make it so. Given the similarity of the above editor's name and Stella Artois, I'm wondering if this wasn't a bit of "product placement". ;-) Voceditenore (talk) 16:38, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Ooo, do you think I just blocked an employee of Stella Artois? I feel so daring. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:58, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Whoops!
Sorry, I didn't mean to delete your decline from User talk:Iamironman lulz. I only just noticed I did. - Vianello (Talk) 20:56, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I assumed that it was an accident of reformatting, and didn't mean you disagreed with me. After all, you didn't unblock him.  Sigh.  No lulz for u. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:17, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Alas, no lulz for me. Oh well. - Vianello (Talk) 00:38, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 3 May 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 14:42, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Urban75
You would be wrong... today is the first time, i've edited Urban75...since there is now a page on Mike Slocombe I thought I should recvert back to that.. --SanityFreeZone (talk) 17:06, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
 * There's been an enormous number of different account making the same unsourced edit. It isn't sourced until someone outside the forum writes about it.  It's either one person with lots of accounts, or a bunch of people from the forum bringing their internal forum dispute and trying to add it to Wikipedia.  This is an encyclopedia- the article doesn't need anything that only people inside the forum have written about, because all the people in the forum already know, and no one outside the forum cares. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 18:15, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
 * We aren't talking about the link to the Mike Slocombe article, but to the edit I reverted, the paragraph about some specific incident. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 18:17, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Discussion of informal limit of three unblock requests
Since you review so many unblock requests, you might have something to add to this discussion thread. Daniel Case (talk) 19:35, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I did. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:51, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

User:Enforcer808
I thought you might want to know that deleted a section from your talk page archives. Could he have something to do with, who wrote that section in the first place and was later blocked for sockpuppetry? However, that was two years ago. Thought I'd just let you know. Goodvac (talk ) 05:44, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Weird. Thanks for restoring it; I prefer not to lose big chunks of my archives. That was several years ago, too... I wonder if it turned up in a Google search?  -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 10:42, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Picture of the Day
Love puzzles, so hats off to you for using one as your Picture of the Day! Happy Editing!--Fumitol (talk) 17:50, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It's not my picture of the day, but the picture of the day- I don't even help choose them, and am always delighted to be surprised by the new one. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 18:01, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Do you mind if I add the code to my userpage? Thank You!-Fumitol (talk) 18:11, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure; it's general Wikipedia code anyway. Lots of people use it- it's fun to see the picture change every day. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 18:17, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok! Thank You FisherQueen! Happy Editing!--Fumitol (talk) 18:21, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Turian
I understand your point - but at the moment, all your asking him is doing is poking and provoking him.

I really would like to avoid provoking him more than we have to. Whether he's retired or not, for real, can be established next week. If you can let it lie until then I would appreciate it.

Thanks. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 01:01, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I have no intention of posting on his talk page again. One chance to be reasonably polite to me is all he needed, and now I'm content that he is not interested.  -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 01:03, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, cool. Have a better one day...  Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 01:50, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Rich Zubaty
Leave my links alone. You drove me off of here five years ago and I am not going to let it happen again. Rich Zubaty —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.253.135.100 (talk) 06:27, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't really remember that; every day, hundreds of people try to use Wikipedia to promote themselves, and they don't usually stick in my mind. I'm not sure what you mean by 'not going to let it happen again,' though.  Wikipedia has thousands of regular editors, and all of us follow the same set of rules, so yet, when you break those rules by trying to use Wikipedia to promote yourself, your edits will, in general, get reverted every time.  You don't really have a way to promote yourself here; you could get your own blog, where you make the rules, or you could stay at Wikipedia but write about something other than yourself.  There's still work to be done writing articles for the unlinked items on List of Irish cheeses. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 10:58, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I tried to flesh out the article about you, but it turns out that there isn't any verifiable information available- I couldn't find any books that have been written about you, or even magazine or newspaper articles that have been written about your importance in your field. Without any verifiable information (that is, information that has been fact-checked by someone other than yourself), there aren't any facts on which to base an article, so I've nominated it for deletion.  I hope this is helpful.  Trust me, you don't necessarily want an article about yourself on Wikipedia, the encyclopedia that everyone - not just you- can edit.  It might end up being more accurate, and less flattering, than you'd like. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 11:07, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I tried to talk him down off the ledge, but he kept up the thuggish attitude and personal attacks. I've extended and hardened the block on his ip, but somehow I doubt this is the last we'll be hearing from him. It's funny how wrong he was about who I am and what my motivations were, he called me a "thin skinned asshole" and "some kind of chemistry nerd from the Netherlands." I've been called an asshole in the real world, but usually for not being sensitive enough, and my sister got all the "science brains" in the family. Why he imagined I'm from the Netherlands is beyond me. You got off fairly light, since I don't suppose you would consider being called a lesbian a personal attack, although "feminazi" seems a pretty unfair characterization. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:35, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * He and his readers have, in general, lived up to most of my stereotypes regarding members of the "men's rights" "movement." -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 01:07, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * He is a problematic troublemaker, to be sure, but please do not paint all of us who are interested in men's rights, or at least fathers' rights in my case, with the same brush. Thank you for your attention to and help with Zubaty and his allies.  Sincerely,  Ebikeguy (talk) 03:29, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

I do notice that Articles for deletion/Rich Zubaty is getting mostly edits from users who've been canvassed by Zubaty, and little attention from experienced Wikipedians. I don't think that any of the new editors understand the rules, and their inherent sexism makes them find it difficult to believe a lesbian who explains the rules. I'm still open to the possibility that this guy might squeak in under the bar of notability, but I wasn't able to find the sources that would make that happen, and his supporters have gotten so distracted by my femaleness that they don't seem even to be looking for sources.. I'm just mentioning this, because I know that there are lots of people of many schools of thought who watch my talk page. It might be nice if someone with a penis could search for sources and weigh in on the discussion. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 13:23, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * My penis and I will try to do some research on the matter, but it looks like it's going to be a crazy few weeks. Besides, now that I've been labeled a "manhole," I'm not sure my penis will be recognized as a valid one by those who seem so passionate in this discussion.  Ebikeguy (talk) 16:11, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * "Manhole?" What a lovely word.  Anyone who uses it must surely be both wise and kind. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:12, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Just one of the many lovely descriptors applied to you and me by the nimble wits in Zubaty's fan club. Ebikeguy (talk) 16:36, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * There are a couple of brief references to him in two reputable books, although probably not ones he'd appreciate.;-) See:
 * The wimp factor: gender gaps, holy wars, and the politics of anxious masculinity (Beacon Press, 2004)
 * Throwaway dads: the myths and barriers that keep men from being the fathers (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 1999)
 * But that's one AfD I'm staying well away from. His socks make the frat boys at the The Irving Literary Society look like models of decorum. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:49, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I've been looking a bit myself, but I'm really not sure on the notability of those magazine references - I'll do some more searching when I've got the time, and hopefully be able to add a comment shortly -- Boing!   said Zebedee  16:52, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar
I've never been one of those who thinks that women are innately superior to men. But the men in this discussion are seriously making me re-think my opinion on the matter. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:06, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * As a man, it gives the same feeling too ;-) -- Boing!   said Zebedee  16:46, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Speaking as someone from a white midwestern middle class background, allow me to say that many of us do not subscribe to the theory that men have been brought to some low place by an international female conspiracy. Unfortunately change is never easy, and a lot of white males feel like they are "loosing" because people who have slightly darker skin, or are (gasp) not men at all, can now sometimes reach positions of great power and authority. On the other hand, the one point I will give up to these guys is that the family courts in the United States do tend to assume that the mother is automatically the better parent. Of course, if the reaction to that is to be completely unreasonable and throw a screaming fit when they don't get their way, that situation is unlikely to change. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:14, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Speaking as a man who endured 11 years of an abusive marriage, including frequent threats that my ex would "make sure I never got to see my kids again" if I divorced her, I agree with Beeble about the courts. I have always played the role of mother and father to my children and tried to shelter them from their abusive mother, but I was told that the best I could hope for was 50% custody when I finally developed the courage to get away from her abuse.  If our genders had been reversed, it would have been a slam dunk.  I would have full custody, and my children would be safe.  Of course, my situation makes it difficult for me to be objective about men's rights and the women's movement.  I would like the system to change to give men who want to be caregivers more opportunities to do so.  That said, I have been very disappointed by the whole Zubaty exchange, which has been my first real introduction to the "Men's Movement."  I hope there are calm, reasonable men and women involved in fighting for men's rights as well as these, shall we say, excitable folks who have been commenting on Zubaty's status.  OK, I know I am getting off-topic here.  I'll stop babbling.  Ebikeguy (talk) 19:52, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I think that the idea that men are as fully capable of being good parents as women, and should be considered equally in divorce and custody proceedings, is very much a feminist position. True equality cuts both ways.  :)  I think there's a world of difference between that and what appears to be the main idea of Zubaty's work, that women are inherently inferior to men.  For what it's worth, though, I'm not sure you're right to be certain about what would have happened if you were a woman; as a teacher, I've met many mothers who were in a similar position to yours, stuck by the courts sharing custody with an abusive, neglectful, or incompetent father.  Maybe 'getting screwed over by the courts' is an equal-opportunity experience.  -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:04, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * You may be right. As I mentioned, it's hard for me to be objective about the situation.  It's always easier to label something that goes against you as a universal truth than as a sucky turn of fate in your own life.  Ebikeguy (talk) 21:46, 10 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Just for a change of pace, I think I'm going to go and find an actual, physical brick wall and pound my head against it. It'll probably hurt less than trying to explain simple concepts to an angry mob for the fifteenth time. I guess as an educator you are used to it, I don't know how you put up with it all day. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:53, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Most of my seventh graders are able to assimilate new information much more effectively than Rich Zubaty's fans. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 19:33, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * And now it's closed, and you know... I think I'm going to miss it a little bit. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:53, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm just waiting for the inevitable sequel... Beeblebrox (talk) 22:01, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Then I'll get to be the bad guy, and just speedy-delete it. Do you think I'll get a mention on his podcast?  I don't know if I could manage to listen to it, even to hear him talk about me.  Hard call.   -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:05, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Undent. Good lord, I had been reading the AFD for a good five minutes, then noticed the scroll bar was only past the top third. What a load of nonsense. I had to deal with the same POV-pushing sock/meatpuppetry when removing convenience links to news stories helpfully posted, highlighted and sometimes edited by the Canadian Children's Rights Council. I also note FQ, that you appear to be responsible for numerous people losing respect for wikipedia because of this article's AFD. Tsk, for shame! How could they have possibly have respect for wikipedia in the first place? Don't they know what a worthless, unreliable source we are? I for one, am very pleased that you were so helpful in educating them.

I am pleased to see they took the high road in asserting notability, by putting their !votes in ALL CAPS. That's always the best way to make a convincing argument. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 14:57, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how they 'lost respect' for Wikipedia, when there's no evidence that they knew what Wikipedia was, either before this discussion or after. Whatever they 'lost respect' for, I doubt it was Wikipedia.  Some construct of their own minds, I guess.   "Wikipedia sucks!  Now, let us write unsourced paeans in praise of our leader!"  I was also amused by how many of them had no idea what self-publishing was, or how it is different from being a real, published author.  I'm guessing the "author" doesn't often explore that nuance. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:20, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * While the AfD was on I purposely avoided reading any of Zubaty's actual writing, because I wanted to try to judge it purely according to WP:RS etc. But since it's closed, I've had a look at some of his blog stuff, and I have to say I'd find it very offensive to be included in his definition of "men" -- Boing!   said Zebedee  22:49, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I had a look, and he struck me as a mentally ill person. On the one hand, the Internet has provided a voice to every crazy person in the world.  On the other hand, by doing so, we are more accustomed to what 'crazy' sounds like, and are less likely to be taken in by it.  Some kinds of mental illness can be very persuasive; this is how religions get started. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:55, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * If you're looking at his website, don't miss the horrible children's story he wrote. The rhyming is often broken, there are assorted talking beans of various ethnicities, and the point of the story is to teach little girls to laugh like they enjoy it when little boys are mean to them. Beeblebrox (talk) 03:29, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Could you look at...
...the substance of my latest comment on Epididymus10's talk page? It's pretty obvious to me that a lot of time is being wasted on a vandal, who varies between being "subtle" and being blatant. And this is in addition to the edit warring that's currently dogging him. I'm afraid what will happen will be a repeat of last time - a short block for a specific act, while ignoring the broader scope of all the account's edits, which cements in my mind the idea that yon seminal tube is naught but a troll.

Gracias, WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 17:15, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, I know. I'm just giving him enough rope, so when his block is indefinite, no one will take unblock requests seriously.  I have his talk page on my watchlist. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 19:33, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, gotcha. Of course, there's always a chance it's just a big misunderstanding.  WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 20:38, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Is this enough rope? That's over three by my count.  WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 00:30, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I think that rope is long enough, now. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 10:59, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * As I state here, the account is essentially vandalism-only. I've never seen an actual productive edit (bar perhaps this one, but I've never actually seen the film).  Your thoughts?  If you'd prefer not to weigh in, I could bring it up at AIV instead.  WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 12:26, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm sure that the ultimate outcome will be an indef either way. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:29, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll kick it to AIV and see what they say. Thanks for your help!  WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 13:06, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * ...and it got kicked back. I'll just leave it for a week and see where it goes.  WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 14:09, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 10 May 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 12:24, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

FYI Sock
You have previously had dealings with an editor at User talk:Newmans123 and User talk:86.10.10.115. See current case at Sockpuppet investigations/Tony1234512345.  Ty  10:00, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * What a sad, strange thing to spend one's days doing. I never did figure it out.  I've restored the talk page to my watchlist, though- it dropped off the last time I cleaned house. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 10:16, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Irving Literary Society
If you get a chance, would you mind checking out the AfD page for Irving Literary Society. Articles for deletion/The_Irving_Literary_Society ... It is a disaster and I think we have reached the point where a decision needs to be made. Thanks again. Cornell1890 (talk) 20:35, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It's a nightmare. Fortunately, I'm just involved enough that I can justify recusing myself from closing it.  Good luck to someone smarter than me. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:05, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 17 May 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 18:44, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Ldnresearch
Thanks for removing the (unblock) template from this article. I've only recently started looking at these requests and I am still finding my way through the correct procedure; I wasn't sure whether or not to remove it. I think I know how to handle these now!! I'm going to learn how to handle these very slowly, on the "do nothing rather than do the wrong thing" principle, but if I have a question, I'm sorry to say that you're now on the hook since I know you know what you're doing. If you have any questions or comments, I'm at your service. Accounting4Taste: talk 16:49, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I think he probably put two up by accident, but one review of the request was sufficient. Now, fetch me a glass of wine and a redheaded librarian. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:51, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
 * A nice Chianti? The redheaded librarian will take a little longer (I'd like one too!).  Accounting4Taste: talk 16:56, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

BlaZe4489
FisherQueen, would you mind if i ask you to email me so i may speak with you on the matter of the page for Brooks'd-up? i understand the policies you enforce, but I wish to speak with you ojn the matter personally, rather than on the talk page. im a new user to Wikipedia, so the wiki-syntax is still unclear. i usually prefer just standard HTML, which does not work here. Thank you for your patience on this matter. if you choose to contact me, i will include my email address to which you can reach me. Respectfully, Petty Officer 3rd Class Battaglia. US Navy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BlaZe4489 (talk • contribs) 01:54, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I prefer to do my Wikipedia business on Wikipedia. There's no reason for much discussion, in any case- Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, so you can't use it to make fun of your friend with made-up words.   If this is a real word which one could write an encyclopedia about, feel free to put links to two newspaper articles about the concept and its significance here on my talk page. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 11:14, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

The nest of socks editing on the George Harrison page
Hello FisherQueen. Thanks for your previous help on Mr Harrison's page. I wanted to let you know that, based on edits made today, it looks like Rarara1111 may be trying to get enough edits under its belt to edit on the page again. I have very little experience with SSP cases so, since the original sockpuppet Sockpuppet investigations/Dmerkurev/Archive has been archived, are we supposed to open a new one? For your info I am also posting this on Rodhullandemu's page just to keep you both in the loop. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 21:38, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I see you have already blocked this sock. Thanks for your quick action and have a great weekend. MarnetteD | Talk 21:42, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Keegscee ArbCom
Hello FisherQueen. Since you were a blocking admin in the User:Keegscee dramafest, I'm listing you as an involved party an ArbCom request seeking an official ArbCom ban for that user. Your input is desired. PCHS-NJROTC (Messages) 20:45, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Protection
I've semi-protected this page for a while, since the trolls need a rest. Unprotect at your leisure.  Acroterion  (talk)  13:41, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Normally, vandalism and personal attacks amuse me, but reformatting other users' comments is less amusing, so I'll leave it up for a bit.  I block a lot of mentally ill people, so I have no idea who this is.  I wonder whether my dire punishment from God starts three hours after his first message, or three hours from his last one?  I'd like to get my will in order, call my mother and tell her I love her, that sort of thing. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:06, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Good luck explaining to your ma why you've called. "I've annoyed someone in Guandong." "No, Guangdong, China."   Acroterion  (talk)  17:23, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Amusingly, I'm planning a trip to China in just a few days. Wouldn't it be funny if I showed up on this person's doorstep? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 17:32, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, you could beat the crap out of him, but you'd just want to do it again in half an hour. (See what I did there?) Half  Shadow  01:59, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Have a safe trip Fisher. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 18:42, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I expect to hear all about your Esperanto speaking Chinese friends upon your return. Be sure and eat a century egg while you're there. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:06, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Century eggs (known as 'Horse piss eggs' in Thailand, after an alleged old method of making them) are delicious! -- Boing!   said Zebedee  19:08, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The vandals seem to be moving to the archives now.  — Soap  —  01:34, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Sigh. Given the circumstance, RBI seems like the only reasonable response. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 01:39, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 24 May 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 03:41, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

More Spies!
Hello FisherQueen,

I have discovered more spies, this time people who are claiming to be from Manchuko, the old puppet state that no longer exists. What should I do next?

86.176.79.150 (talk) 23:08, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi
Hi my old Account called HumbertoGillan are blocked, and you don't want unblock me, beacuse you says that not apear an error, but i was changed the music genres various times, and me never see the discussion page, i was a newbie in Wikipedia, and i am mexican, and i talk more spanish than english, because the Spanish it's my native language. that's the motive because my account are blocked by an error. Please unblock me. Thanks!!--PsychedelicMan (talk) 01:10, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Creating an account to avoid your block is not okay. Your block wasn't a mistake- it was necessary, because your edits were disruptive.  You haven't said anything that indicates you have a plan to edit differently in the future; you've only claimed that your block was a 'mistake,' but it was a good and valid block for a person who wouldn't stop the disruptive edits after several warnings.  If you don't speak enough English to understand the rules, that's fine- I don't speak enough Spanish to understand the Spanish Wikipedia rules, but I'll bet you do.  Maybe you should contribute to the Wikipedia in the language you read and write well. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:07, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Your talkpage
Please feel free to undo or vary my action. LessHeard vanU (talk) 13:46, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Hm. The edit was undone so thoroughly that I don't even know what it said... I'm guessing it wasn't, "FisherQueen is teh awesome!"  You have my blessing; I'll be out of the country for a while starting soon, in fact, so consider this my blessing to protect this page as needed when I'm away if the vandals become an annoyance. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:24, 30 May 2010 (UTC)