User:FisherQueen/Archive67

 {| 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"|

Vandalism in Turkish Cypriots article
Hi. Can you please have a look this article and history of article. During september 8th-14th user called Turco85 did tens of edit for the page (with deleting infos with sources etc) and change the article extremely Turkish Nationalist perspective. I saw your name in talk page and I guess you are aware of this situations in this article as a administrator. Thanks very much and kind regards (Ghuzz (talk) 10:59, 4 October 2012 (UTC))
 * I am afraid I don't know anything about this subject, but if there are incorrect facts in the article, you should feel free to correct them. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 11:33, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for information. But can you please look last 2 changes in article as administrator. Basically I did some edits on page with giving reliable sources and also sharing ideas in Talk page. But one user just keep turns article to its old version with argument like "old one is better". And even he/she doesnt need to share ideas on Talk page. Is it normal on Wikipedia? (Ghuzz (talk) 13:49, 4 October 2012 (UTC))
 * Since I don't know anything about the subject, I don't know which version is better. I don't see a section on the talk page that has a clear consensus for one version or the other.  I see that you opened a thread at the dispute resolution noticeboard; I hope that will be helpful.  If it isn't, there are other options at WP:DISPUTE that are sometimes helpful in disagreements.  As an administrator, I can protect the article from being edited while consensus is reached, or I can block someone, but neither of those things seems to need done right now. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:37, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Maybe you could also see if TremoloKid has come back; but you don't have checkuser rights, remember? :-) All the best. --E4024 (talk) 21:49, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I helped out at this article once, but I don't have any real interest in the subject of Turkish Cypriots, and know nothing at all about it. I'm not interested in a job as the permanent administrative guardian of this article- I don't even understand what the disagreements are about. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:06, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
 * And possibly you don't understand either why the user came to your TP: Could it be like the assassin's urge to return to the crime scene? :-) I am really sorry you have been disturbed here. I apologize for my part. Best. --E4024 (talk) 22:11, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see, you think this is User:TremoloKid. It could be.  Similar interests and writing style.  I'm not sure enough to make the block myself, but I think a checkuser might be reasonable.  I'm not entirely sure his presence on my talk page means it's that user returning- the logic is reasonable, but I've shut down a lot of irritating people in relation to Turkish politics, and my username is probably all over those histories.  It always makes me feel a little odd, because... I don't know what a Turkish Cypriot is.  I don't even know whether they live in Turkey, or Cyprus, or somewhere else.  FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:24, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

A gift for you
You have been disturbed and your precious time occupied on the topic of Turkish Cypriots. As I would not like you to have a negative impression of this people, I want to present to you, as a token of appreciation of your patience and good-will, music played by Ms Rüya Taner, Turkish Cypriot pianist. She happens to be a friend of mine and in case you are interested in classical music, I can provide you with a couple of concert tickets some time. Good-bye. --E4024 (talk) 22:37, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

User:Efrange
Hi, FisherQueen, the above user made a bit of a mess of their talk page after the block, and I did my best to clean it up. That may explain your belief that the request to vanish came after the request for an unblock. It did not. Efrange first requested to vanish. Then JohnCD and I commented. And then the user requested an unblock (their final edit in the edit history).--Bbb23 (talk) 15:20, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. That was a little confusing.  Of course, since the user doesn't appear to understand what Wikipedia is or have an interest in finding out, beyond promoting his own religious perspective, the question is moot, but it's important to be clear, anyway.  -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:16, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I saw your latest comment on the user's talk page - thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:00, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Jeremy Hunt (politician)
HI, I noticed you semiprotected this for two whole weeks for "persistent vandalism". Looking at it, I'm not sure that that's quite right. There's were several vandalisms by 31.54.1.176, until I blocked him. Then there were two bits by another IP. If we've only got a couple of IPs messing about, can I ask you to consider that it might be better to block the odd IP vandal, rather than prevent all IPs editing for weeks on end. If we start getting multiple IP vandals, then semi for a short period would be right. Could you take another look at this? Thanks.--Scott Mac 22:41, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure; I can see you're keeping a pretty close eye on the article, so if you don't mind continuing to revert, I don't mind unprotecting it. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:41, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Actually, if we have to keep reverting on a BLP, I'm happy to semi it. However, if a couple of vandal blocks will do the trick, that's a plus.--Scott Mac 16:43, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Disingenuous unblock request
It is of no importance, as you declined the request anyway, but you just may be interested to read my comments at User talk:85.10.202.142. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:02, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I am shocked, shocked I tell you, that someone would lie in an unblock request! Beeblebrox (talk) 18:52, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
 * This is the first time someone has ever lied in an unblock request. Ever.  We should create some sort of special badge to put on that page.  "Here be The Lie." -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 20:50, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
 * My one regret is that the person who made the unblock request will probably never read my message, and so will never know that he/she has been rumbled. However, life goes on... JamesBWatson (talk) 16:55, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
 * It was a nicely done proof, whether they ever see it or not. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:52, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thank you very much for unblocking me.--S.M.Samee (talk) 12:54, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I apologize, very much, for incorrectly blocking you! -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:56, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Link to a crime (what is need to do)
Hello. I want ask the question. If some topic contains link, who directs to a crime: what is need to do? Such link will be located on talk page of an relevant article. Not crime in far past (online directly now in jurisdiction of not USA). Topic will be published in English Wikipedia. Thank you! - Bond 2012 (talk) 14:47, 14 October 2012 (UTC).
 * I am sorry, but I don't understand the question. What article are you talking about?  What is the 'crime?'  -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 14:50, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Is this related to the discussion you removed on your talk page? It looks like you were trying to add information to the article about Heinrich Himmler that was not about Heinrich Himmler, but was about Vladimir Putin.  Information about Vladimir Putin, if it has been verified, belongs on the article Vladimir Putin.  I think part of your problem is a language barrier- your English is very hard to understand, and I think you may not fully understand the English that others are writing.  Would you be more comfortable editing the Russian Wikipedia?  It is impossibly difficult to edit English Wikipedia unless you are fluent in English. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 14:56, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Violation of copyright - fantastic size (SOFTLY speaking). You must not know title of article to be objective (on this stage of my question). On third stage - I will say (probably): in accordance with your reply. This has more than direct relation to nature of the article. Old topic has no any relation. I have no respecting to Russian Wikipedia. - Bond 2012 (talk) 15:05, 14 October 2012 (UTC).
 * I have removed your use of the tag; it doesn't make your writing easier to understand if you write it bigger. That is all I have to say; I do not understand anything you have written in this reply.  -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 15:09, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Bad adviser - it means. I not will ask question here more. Because all can be understood very easy. Stories about troubles with language ...... When someone wishes - he can be free of this: http://translate.google.com (BOT). - Bond 2012 (talk) 15:30, 14 October 2012 (UTC).
 * Do you mean that your English comes from Google Translate? That explains why it is so hard to understand.  It's okay that you don't read and write English, but Google Translate will not solve that problem.  I would never try to edit Russian Wikipedia using Google Translate - it does not work well enough to do that. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 15:50, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Example: you write about violations and you can not be free of link to such violation (you display crime - to provide good explanation of situation). On a talk page. And I am not making editing of articles at English section on Wikipedia (we say now about talk pages: small mistakes with language - are not trouble). - Bond 2012 (talk) 16:10, 14 October 2012 (UTC).
 * I know you think you are speaking English, but I really do not understand what you are trying to tell me. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:12, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I will explain on the practice: ///////// (you will make actions, about which I want know reply). If it is not crime, please say me about this. Even now this is used in educational aims (I will very glad after your explanation). - Bond 2012 (talk) 16:39, 14 October 2012 (UTC).


 * He wished to know: which measures are used in such cases technically (hidden category, fence and so on). But admin with small brain blocked him without even one legal ground. 2.93.55.223 (talk) 23:49, 14 October 2012 (UTC).


 * Someone created useful method to fight against offenders from Wikipedia. Our request already: http://my.mail.ru/community/beatleshigher80/3ECB17D97F6BC66.html (is in force). Such hunt - is useful. Wikipedia will be closed in Russia (you can be sure). This fool: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Beeblebrox was punished already. Who next .. - 2.93.151.112 (talk) 03:44, 15 October 2012 (UTC).
 * Logging out to avoid your block isn't a good idea. Especially since your idiosyncratic writing style, besides being incomprehensible, is easy to recognize.  Please, just use Russian Wikipedia, where you can communicate.  Or some other web site written in Russian.  I'm sure you're a good person, but you do not speak good enough English to do anything useful here. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 10:42, 15 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Here, let me show you using a Russian book I like, The Brothers Karamazov.

The Brothers Karamazov, original text by Dostoyevsky
Алексей Федорович Карамазов был третьим сыном помещика нашего уезда Федора Павловича Карамазова, столь известного в свое время (да и теперь еще у нас припоминаемого) по трагической и темной кончине своей, приключившейся ровно тринадцать лет назад и о которой сообщу в своем месте. Теперь же скажу об этом «помещике» (как его у нас называли, хотя он всю жизнь совсем почти не жил в своем поместье) лишь то, что это был странный тип, довольно часто, однако, встречающийся, именно тип человека не только дрянного и развратного, но вместе с тем и бестолкового, — но из таких, однако, бестолковых, которые умеют отлично обделывать свои имущественные делишки, и только, кажется, одни эти. Федор Павлович, например, начал почти что ни с чем, помещик он был самый маленький, бегал обедать по чужим столам, норовил в приживальщики, а между тем в момент кончины его у него оказалось до ста тысяч рублей чистыми деньгами. И в то же время он все-таки всю жизнь свою продолжал быть одним из бестолковейших сумасбродов по всему нашему уезду. Повторю еще: тут не глупость; большинство этих сумасбродов довольно умно и хитро, — а именно бестолковость, да еще какая-то особенная, национальная.

English translation of The Brothers Karamazov by Constance Garnett
Alexey Fyodorovitch Karamazov was the third son of Fyodor Pavlovitch Karamazov, a land owner well known in our district in his own day, and still remembered among us owing to his gloomy and tragic death, which happened thirteen years ago, and which I shall describe in its proper place. For the present I will only say that this “landowner”—for so we used to call him, although he hardly spent a day of his life on his own estate—was a strange type, yet one pretty frequently to be met with, a type abject and vicious and at the same time senseless. But he was one of those senseless persons who are very well capable of looking after their worldly affairs, and, apparently, after nothing else. Fyodor Pavlovitch, for instance, began with next to nothing; his estate was of the smallest; he ran to dine at other men's tables, and fastened on them as a toady, yet at his death it appeared that he had a hundred thousand roubles in hard cash. At the same time, he was all his life one of the most senseless, fantastical fellows in the whole district. I repeat, it was not stupidity—the majority of these fantastical fellows are shrewd and intelligent enough—but just senselessness, and a peculiar national form of it.

English translation of Dostoyevsky's version, from Google translate
Alexei Fyodorovich Karamazov was the third son of the landowner in our district of Fyodor Pavlovich Karamazov, as known at the time (and even now we still recall) and the tragic death of the dark, happened exactly thirteen years ago and reported in the right place. Now I will say about this "landlord" (as we called him, although he had always really almost lived on his estate) is that it was a strange type, quite often, however, there are, it is the type of person and not just a crappy depraved, but at the same stupid - but of these, however, confused, who can perfectly arrange their property affairs, and just seem to some of these. Fyodor Pavlovich, for example, began almost with nothing, his estate was very small, running on other people's dinner tables, strove to toady, yet at the time of his death he was a hundred thousand rubles in net cash. At the same time, he did all his life continued to be one of the goofy fantastical fellows throughout our county. I repeat again: there is not stupid, and most of these fantastical fellows quite clever and cunning - namely, stupidity, and even some special, national.

Russian translation of Garnett's version, from Google translate
Алексей Федорович Карамазов был третьим сыном Федора Павловича Карамазова, собственник земельного участка, хорошо известных в нашем районе в свое время, и до сих пор помнят у нас в связи с его мрачной и трагической смерти, которое произошло тринадцать лет назад, и которые я опишу в свое место. В настоящее Скажу только, что это "помещик", так мы называли его, хотя он едва провели день в его жизни по собственной недвижимостью, был странный тип, еще один довольно часто, чтобы можно встретить, введите унижающей порочный и в то же время бессмысленно. Но он был одним из тех бессмысленных лиц, которые очень хорошо способны заботиться о своих мирских делах, и, видимо, после того, как ничто другое. Федор Павлович, например, начал с бесценок, а его имущество было самой маленькой, он побежал, чтобы пообедать в таблицах других людей, и крепится на них, как холуй, но после его смерти оказалось, что у него было сто тысяч рублей наличные. В то же время, он был всю свою жизнь одной из самых бессмысленных, сумасбродов на всю округу. Я повторяю, это была не глупость, большинство из этих сумасбродов являются проницательного и умного достаточно, но просто бессмысленностью, и своеобразная национальная форма. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 15:57, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Help
I want to ask you something. Can I refer an article for speedy deletion or other tags that does not meet Wikipedia's Standards?--S.M.Samee (talk) 12:21, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
 * You can. If it meets the very specific criteria at WP:CSD, you can tag it for speedy deletion; if it doesn't meet those criteria but you still think it should be deleted, you can open a deletion discussion at WP:AFD.  Full instructions for both of those things at the links. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:38, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Eight Pattern Wing Chun deletion proposal
Hi, please help me a little here, I am new to this. Can / should I remove your deletion proposal tag from my page or would this be against policies? Is there anything I can do about your notability concerns? Independent print sources about Eight Pattern Wing Chun are still rare, currently the mentioned book review seems to be the only one. However, the style is still more widely known than at least two others in this category. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GruberMatthias (talk • contribs) 15:40, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
 * No, don't remove the Articles for Deletion tag. The discussion will take about a week, and the Wikipedia community will decide together whether this subject meets Wikipedia's notability criteria or not.  Once the discussion is over, the closing administrator will take down the tag. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 05:55, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
 * In the future, it's better to write about things you aren't directly involved with. As you're learning the hard way, it can be hard on the nerves when articles about subjects you are personally involved with have problems that need to be fixed, or can't be kept at the encyclopedia. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 06:05, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for reverting User:KwamiFKu's edits on my Talk page. He is a sock of User:LanguageXpert, who is slow-motion edit warring on Saraiki language without discussion on Talk Page (he never reverts enough in a day to pass the WP:3RR threshold). Cheers. --Taivo (talk) 11:32, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you- I could tell he was a sock, but I wasn't sure of who, so decided to simply watch the disruptive editing and block for that. I'll get it now. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 11:34, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for your comments. I have a better understanding of how Wikipedia works now. I will make all corrections that were stated. Thank you for assisting me.--Lightoflove —Preceding undated comment added 17:38, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
 * The most important 'correction' is to add references to independent, nontrivial, reliable sources that have written in depth about this person. Do such references exist?  I wasn't able to find them when I looked. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:41, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, there are references, they came up as Jamillah Shabazz instead of Jamillah A. Shabazz. She seems to use both but the referances don't seem to have her middle initial. I will put all the referances up. Your comments and links that you supplied are greatly appreciated.--Lightoflove —Preceding undated comment added 04:11, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Love Of Light, Deletion Fix
Hello FisherQueen, I have made many changes on the page. I now hope this meets with your approval. If there is anything else that must be changed, it would be of great assistance if you could be specific to me, as to which lines they are. Again my gratitude for your assistance.--Lightoflove —Preceding undated comment added 06:22, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I've looked at the changes you made- I appreciate all the hard work, but in my opinion, the article still doesn't show that this person meets Wikipedia's notability criteria, and the sources don't seem to support a claim of notability (by Wikipedia's definition.) -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 13:03, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much for everthing! I will come back in the future when I can gather more information on her; Would that be possible and is the previous information saved?--Lightoflove —Preceding undated comment added 15:54, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, if a time comes when she is written about significantly in multiple, reliable, independent sources, all you need to do is open a discussion at deletion review and share the new sources, and there'll be a community discussion which, if she then meets the notability criteria, will result in the undeletion of the article. Everything you wrote will still be there and restorable. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:23, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

re: question
re:, see the playlist account of one such segment given in my keep !vote. 86.44.24.94 (talk) 13:09, 31 October 2012 (UTC)