Hello, FisherQueen. You have new messages at Talk:Lewis Perkins. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Somebody keeps changing this article and putting in the wrong date of birth etc on the grounds of security. Can you help? I understand about keeping the parents names out, but I don't understand the other changes. Ravenscroft32 (talk) 20:03, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry. I'm sure it's an oversight that will be corrected soon, since I have a wild disregard for both Wikipedia's rules and basic human courtesies. Ask any of the thousands of surly teenagers whose asses I've blocked. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs)22:58, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to put a week-long block on Lovetimes9 due to the disruptive editing he has started. Can you look into it? Rusted AutoParts (talk) 18:02 4 October 2010 (UTC)
I suspect that the airport probably is in Vasco de Gama... but if it's impossible to find a source confirming that, then the article will continue to just say Goa, like all the sources do. I would be shocked if the ip isn't the same user who was pushing this odd edit before, but I've been wrong in the past. Once. In 2000. On a Thursday in June. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs)16:16, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I just blocked Hello5678 (talk·contribs) indefinitely with no talkpage access (unblock email in template) for violating BLP and making threats on their userpage while blocked. If you think it is worthwhile to continue discussion, I would not object if you were to undo this. Do you think that as one of the relevant parties I should request review at AN/I? Regards, - 2/0 (cont.) 17:39, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Meh. He made it clear that he had an agenda that was at odds with Wikipedia's mission, that he intends to keep pursuing that agenda, and that he's perfectly willing to threaten off-wiki retaliation if he doesn't get his way. You won't find me fighting for his right to continue participating. You can ask for a review if you like... you won't hear any protest from me about it. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs)17:40, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Google translate gives her explanation as "Why should there be a tribute text on animal farm only "glory days" from the very beginning of the article? This then provided by the "history" and should be placed there." But I can't make any connection between that and what the anon is actually doing, since she's removing information, not moving it elsewhere. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs)10:36, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I see- he thinks some of the information in the lede should be further down in the article, and is moving it. I don't really have any problem with that. Maybe she'd even get that change made, if she'd stop and discuss it in English instead of edit-warring over it. Oh, well, I told her how to do that. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs)10:37, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Btw, it seems as though this person has created a user, seen here: Hatadif (contribs). His or her username means "Hate DIF", DIF being an acronym for the club, Djurgårdens IF, which the user have edited. The same user have also edited AIK-related pages; AIK is the arch-rival of Djurgårdens IF. In short, this is a fan of AIK who doesn't like Djurgårdens IF. Cheers Tooga - BØRK!14:35, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(Also posted at User talk:Daniel Case) The last thing I want to do is exonerate Wikiplayer13 (I've mentioned elsewhere that the net effects of his edits have been negative.) However I do feel I should clarify that the edits in question did not occur while the user was logged in, they were made by 212.219.57.60 (talk) (see WP:AN/I#212.219.57.60 / Wikiplayer13). At minimum, the editor has thus admitted to having used the same computer from which the edits were made. It is puzzling why the user would imply a compromised account, when there's really no indication that anything like this has occurred - again, the edits were made from an IP address. But he's the one making that claim. Also note that another IP associated with this account, 82.46.89.207 (talk), has previously vandalized our user pages when faced with various disagreements (for example, [1], [2], [3], [4]). -- Gyrofrog (talk)19:19, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I got that- I even tracked down the ip in question to review, and there isn't really any question in my mind that it's the same person. I agree that WP:GOTHACKED doesn't exactly apply here, since he didn't make the inappropriate edits from his account. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs)20:47, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the welcome, FisherQueen, and local sourcing question please
added a new section in your humor essay "Friends of gays should not be allowed to edit articles" and checked your listed "LGBT rights in Benin" article in case it intersected with the Ouidah python cult there which I have been researching for a couple chapters of a near future novel series work in progress. In addition to any surveying you and colleagues might do through published law search, how might you encourage local community members to post fuller details in localities around the world for Wikipedia? As well as all other socioelect stuff? The pride, diversity, and identity drives which might be tapped may be beyond the habits of those who are or are not ordinary users in many places, if pointed out as worthwhile especially in areas where there are few regular surfers. Are there Wikipedia top down or grasroots "let's be noted in global Wikipedia" initiatives, other than long term effect of internet presence?
I did create a number of the LGBT rights in Africa nation-specific articles. I found that it was very difficult to find reliable sources of information. which is why they're so short- they contain all the sourced information I could find. Help from locals would indeed be useful, but only in adding information that is verified in published sources, since Wikipedia doesn't publish original research. I didn't write the 'Friends of gays' articles; I just have a link to it because I think it's funny. I don't know the answer to your question about the ways in which Wikimedia encourages participation from a variety of countries, because I live in the United States, and wouldn't be part of the target audience for such programs- there are already plenty of Americans around here. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs)22:07, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My briefs
I do not understand how the my briefs article was against the guidlines. As it is a one of a kind website providing a perspective not seen anywhere else in sports reporting
FisherQueen, arms are not usually included in bio articles for chiefs or nobles in general. They stay in the main article. Xander and I included them simply because they are so nice. So there you have three. As for Irish heraldry, there was no image of that kind there before Xander added them. Personally I think that they should actually be replaced with less excellent artwork since Xander's talent might actually confuse visitors into thinking that is how Irish arms are typically drawn. In fact Irish arms are usually quite boring and they have just never greatly gotten into them on that island. Finally, for the main article on the O'Donovan family, there is another, very low quality .gif I did myself ages ago, which was the image before, and which can be used again. And I have another generic one or two to upload.
I will not be participating in the discussion at ANI because this is ridiculous. And I have no intention of interacting with that sort of character anywhere. I knew as soon as I got the repeated activity on my talk page... oh and that cute template or whatever you call it. lol. DinDraithou (talk) 23:50, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really have an opinion on the images, myself. I just noticed that you were about to be blocked, and wanted to give you a chance to avoid it, by explaining what to do instead of repeatedly reverting. If consensus agrees with you that they should be removed, they will be. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs)23:52, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I was about to be blocked? By what? As far as consensus, I disregard it and don't respect the opinions of just anyone on certain subjects. Don't we all? People who get bent out of shape over nothing, like this character, don't count. They have to be ignored. DinDraithou (talk) 00:18, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, me, for one- I was planning to block you if you reverted another image. In fact, I still am. If you don't agree with the consensus model at all, then you probably won't like Wikipedia, since that's one of Wikipedia's basic principles. I don't really know who you mean by 'this character,' since I only reviewed your edits. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs)00:24, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I notice that ROUX did not begin a discussion, though. Instead, he ran right to posting an ANI. Rather silly, really. Perhaps if he was as cool headed as he demands others to be it could have gone a bit smoother. [talk]XANDERLIPTAK00:38, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
