The Signpost: 31 January 2011[edit]Been editing a while lately and you're the first to say hi. =) Dictabeard (talk) 12:54, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
- Hi! :) -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:55, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your welcome. I have also made several edits, but had received no feedback until I heard from you. My most recent edit, on 2.18.11, on the article for the Caja del Rio, registered me by my computer address, rather than my user name. I have no idea why, although I would prefer to have my user name on the history. Riorider (talk) 05:38, 18 February 2011 (UTC) riorider
- Most likely, you were logged out and didn't notice (that's happened to be before). -11:29, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi! I'm trying to create a page for Nomadic Wax, which you previously flagged (A7). We have rewritten our text to make it clear how socially relevant and important Nomadic Wax is, and we are including outside links to back this up. The name is blocked, how can we go about re-trying this/ getting the name unblocked? Thank you! Lauranomadic (talk) 18:39, 4 February 2011 (UTC)lauranomadic
- (talk page stalker) If you mean User:Nomadicwax the answer is that it can't be unblocked. Usernames may not represent a company or organization. And as you can see from the notices there, subjects are not supposed to write about themselves either, as you are doing. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:25, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, what he said: if this is your own company, don't bother writing about it, but simply wait, and get on with your business. When the company becomes so important that it meets Wikipedia's notability criteria, it'll also be so important that plenty of people outside the company will want to write the article, and you won't have to lift a finger. Are you at all interested in helping as a volunteer to write an encyclopedia? It's mentally stimulating, and sometimes lots of fun. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:39, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
It's been determined that all licensed radio & television stations are notable. There've been discussions on WP:WPRS. Therefore, WWNH, a licensed radio station, is notable.Stereorock (talk) 02:59, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
- I agree with that decision. The only reason I tagged this particular article is that I wasn't able to verify the existence of WWNH. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:00, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
A full block should be added to the IP User:24.205.188.70 because he doesn't listen to warnings and keeps on blanking his talk page. Creation7689 (talk) 17:35, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
- I've blocked her ability to blank the talk page. I don't like to do that, but since this seems to be a block-avoiding vandal, I don't feel quite as badly as I would for a useful but confused editor. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:00, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
- Ok, and isn't the IP also blocked from editing? Because it made two more edits since it was supposedly blocked. Creation7689 (talk) 20:06, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 7 February 2011[edit]This is apropos your reply on 24 January 2011 which you subsequently deleted. What I had written was certainly not a lengthy series of poorly written insults. Lengthy yes, because you deserved it. Poorly written - Certainly not. But then you would have to have a very good grasp of the English vocabulary to understand good English language, which you presumably or rather most certainly don't. And anyways, since you must be rarely coming across good English, it would probably be difficult for you to understand the quality of it, since you are always busy scribbling on this scribble book of yours called Wikipedia. Also, you mentioned that in case I need any specific help from you, I should keep the message brief and clearly explain what I want you to do. I am keeping it very brief and telling you that I for sure, do not need any help from you, but you certainly require help in real life. So, I am quite clearly explaining you to go, and get some help in real life, instead of scribbling away in virtual life. Anyways, I am not going to be concerned with this matter henceforth and so, put a full stop to it here. So, I will not be bothering to check your reply to this final message. I have nothing to do with this entire issue anymore. I close this matter by using the most appropriate words for you – FISH OFF. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.195.243.90 (talk) 14:30, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- You forgot to explain what you want. And I still have no idea who you are or why you are unhappy with me. But don't bother to explain; I stopped caring. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:54, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- What a coincidence, you just declined to unblock one of my personal trolls who also does not take the time to specify who they originally were or why they are holding a long term grudge and deliberately pointing themselves out to be blocked again. Ain't adminship grand? Beeblebrox (talk) 22:15, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- I have this fantasy. I need to learn a lot more about technology, first, and also some private-detective skills. I imagine a blog in which I identify the real-life identity of Internet trolls, with photos and details about their lives. Interviews with their friends and relations, maybe, or video of them interacting with their bosses or mothers or teachers. I'm endlessly curious about who they are, and what they are like in real life. I suppose that many of them are poorly socialized junior high school boys, though, and my blog would quickly get boring. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:18, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Hey not sure how to leave a formal message but Crofton Middle School is actually a place this is Dudicus97 but yeah if you could just restore and delete all the names and stuff that'd be great. It offends us at CMS when people who don't live here assume it doesn't exist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dudicus97 (talk • contribs) 22:42, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- I have no doubt that it exists, but I don't know whether it meets Wikipedia's notability criteria, and what you wrote was not an encyclopedia article. Most middle schools are not so significant that an encyclopedia would need an article about them; if this is one of those rare middle schools that is notable, there was nothing in your article that would show that. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:45, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi FisherQueen. Wanted to leave you a note to let you know that I've tried before to get Dhoncarlo to not use wikipedia for his chatting and group accounts, to little avail. At this point, probably just best to block and tag. Syrthiss (talk) 14:57, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
I would like to create a new page[edit]Hi FisherQueen. I have read over all the immature recreations of "Shakur Green" page. I would like to have permission to write up an article on him. What would you need from to make this possible? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RedPeppers247 (talk • contribs) 03:52, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
- All you need is (a) to not be Shakur Green, or someone who works for him, (b) to explain what part of the notability criteria he meets, and (c) to present two or three reliable independent sources (like newspaper articles, magazine articles, or significant online sources) discussing his importance to the music industry. It looks like there have been six versions of that article created, and not one of them had those. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 11:52, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
- You may find the article on creating your first article helpful, or the article wizard. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:38, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
I read over Notability (Meets: 1,2,3,11) and Reliable Indie Sources I found several(Including: MTV,VH1,E!Online,USAToday,KissFM). What's the next step from this point? Where do I submit this information? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RedPeppers247 (talk • contribs) 04:14, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
- When I searched, I didn't find articles about Shakur Green at any of those sources. Can you share the links with me for the best three articles about him? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 05:57, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
The article I would like to write and post on Wikipedia is from his interview with Power 99.
Links are below:
- Wikipedia articles have to contain information that is verified in reliable sources. The sources you have only give enough information to write one sentence: "Shakur Green is a music producer who has worked with Miley Cyrus." One sentence isn't really an encyclopedia article, so it would probably be tagged for deletion almost immediately. Those articles are really about Miley Cyrus, not about Shakur Green. There won't be enough verifiable information to write an article until people start writing articles that are detailed and about Green- articles that really discuss his career in depth. If it were me, I wouldn't start an article if those were all the sources I had. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:24, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
I understand. But I was thinking of writing up a Stub for encyclopedia and over time expand it into a full article. I recorded his interview with Power 99FM. Enough for a encyclopedia stub Also, found over 148 articles which I could take bits and pieces from. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RedPeppers247 (talk • contribs) 20:43, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
- That's certainly up to you. So far, all of the versions of that article have been seriously undersourced, which is why they have been deleted. If these four are your best sources, then your sources aren't good enough- if there are better sources, I'm not sure why you didn't choose to share them, but that's your call. If you create another article, it should at the very least clearly state what makes him notable (notability is not communicable; just working with notable people doesn't make a producer notable), and cite multiple articles that write in depth about him. If you don't do that, it'll just be tagged for deletion for a seventh time by whoever is looking at new pages. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 20:50, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Thank You. The page I am looking to edit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakur_Green the page has been protected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RedPeppers247 (talk • contribs) 21:35, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
- Oh, I didn't realize that it was protected. That will keep you from creating the article, then, since you'd need to convince an administrator that this person meets the notability criteria and that there are good sources available, in order to have it unprotected. You haven't convinced me, based on the information and sources you've given, so I wouldn't feel good about unprotecting it. Of course, someone else might feel differently. You could try Deletion Review if you want to get a discussion going instead of having to depend on just my opinion.-FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm writing you from my android and it's starting to act up. I'll provide more information once I get home. Thanks. RedPeppers247 (talk) 21:57, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi, FisherQueen. I know it's later than expected, but thank you for unblocking me; although I have one question. How do you block people from editing due to vandalism? Jeff Ortals (talk) 02:35, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
- I push the 'block' button, which I have because I'm an admin. People who aren't admins can report vandals at WP:AIV, where there are usually a few admins watching and responding to problems. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 02:49, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 14 February 2011[edit]Deletion of the Rhon Mizrachi page[edit]I didn't receive any intimation about the deletion of the page for Rhon Mizrachi, nor any response for the criteria I presented regarding the inclusion of the completely new draft. There is sufficient material regarding his importance and position within the martial arts community, what else do you need to see in addition to the material provided in the entry?
Victornyc01 (talk) 05:39, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- I did delete a page titled Rhon Mizrachi, but what you're saying isn't what I saw when I looked at it; was there a later version under a different title? The article I saw didn't have any particular claim to notability, and the only sources were to articles about the martial art, not to articles about Mizrachi. I tried to discuss that on the article's talk page, but when there was no response after a full day, I assumed the author had realized that the person didn't meet the notability criteria and abandoned it, so I went ahead and deleted. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 13:05, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi FisherQueen, I'm very new to Wikipedia, I (perhaps mistakenly) thought I'd receive a prompt by email if there was any change/update. The version I posted was markedly different from the previous one that had been deleted in 2008. This Feb 2011 article was not only worded differently but also made apparent his lineage and relation to the founding parties for this martial art (Krav Maga). The articles cited that mention Mizrachi mention him specifically because he is an authority on the subject of Krav Maga in its variations—a version of it is taught in the Israeli military, another for general civilian street confrontation self-defense which includes material for extenuating circumstances pertaining to women(rape prevention) etc. In the United States, he is among a very rare few that authoritatively represent the different facets and philosophy of this particular martial art. Also, it's notable that outside Israel, he's the highest practicing recipient of his belts which he's received from the founders of the art (this is not mentioned in the article because it posits his information for understandable conflicts with guidelines etc).
After I posted this last version I came to find yet more material in print form, would it help to bring those references also ?
Also, for my future reference, where please should I check to see any response from you/an editor? I would be happy to come back this page for the Rhon Mizrachi entry in the meantime.
Victornyc01 (talk) 20:27, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- In general, at Wikipedia, you should look for responses wherever you've left the original comment- for example, I'll respond to this question here, as I responded on the article talk page to the comment you left on the article talk page. At the top of your screen you see 'my watchlist,' where you can click to see updates on any pages you are 'watching.' You can click the 'watch' tab manually to watch a page for updates or responses, or you can use 'my preferences' to set Wikipedia to automatically add any page you edit to your watchlist. Once you get in the habit of checking your watchlist, it works like a charm. As for the article, it isn't enough that articles about Krav Maga mention Rhon Mizrachi; you need articles that are primarily about him before you have enough verifiable information to write an article. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:17, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Denial of Unblock Request[edit]FisherQueen,
You recently denied an unblock request stating:
"Comparing your unblock requests to your contributions, I can only conclude that you do not understand what edit-warring is. Looking at your contributions, you appear also to be unfamiliar with encyclopedia writing, and what sorts of information are useful in an encyclopedia article. A closer look at your edits seem to indicate that you are focused on promoting a negative point of view of Key Lime Air, and that your focus on this goal has kept you from writing in ways that are most beneficial to the encyclopedia. If you are interested in editing again after your block expires, you should seek consensus on the talk page for significant edits until you have a better feel for what kinds of edits would be helpful at Wikipedia, and don't continue making the same edits without such consensus if they are removed. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:29, 15 February 2011 (UTC)"
My contributions are not any different than those in other articles. I merely added content to other content that existed as far back as 2007. You claim I focus on promoting a negative point of view of Key Lime Air. Well, my contributions are similar to others added years before mine by others. Also, is it fair that all content only be positive content. The content I added is true, verifiable and in the publics right to know. Especially since the Article company provides services to the public that effect life.
If you'll look at Article Gulfstream_International_Airlines, there is very similiar content. You also notice that there are very common and specific users that revise the negative content in the arena of aviation faults. This is not in the best interetst of the public to hide factual saftey related content from the public.
The public comes to Wikipedia to learn about something. To hide all the facts is not right. Although my contributions to Key Lime Air may be negative, they are factual and verifiable. But if you look deeper, not all my contributions are negative.
User:24.41.52.77
- It would not be appropriate for me to encourage you by discussing anything with you while you're evading your block. When you understand WP:EW and WP:DISPUTE, you'll know better how to deal with your desired edits. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:11, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
FisherQueen,
I agree to give up my lawsuit but I require some apologies from the user that accused me publicly of collusion. Meanwhile, the aggressive message I sent to that user was a mistake, as confirmed by the fact that I erased the message I sent right after realizing that it was on public display. Elementalkarl (talk · contribs) 00:44, 25 February 2011 (UTC)" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elementalkarl (talk • contribs)
- I want to clarify; is the apology a condition of not suing? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:47, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
It is nothing more than a gentlemen's agreement that I am asking for. I am not going to sue in any case. Elementalkarl (talk —Preceding undated comment added 00:51, 25 February 2011 (UTC).
- I'll accept that as an unqualified retraction, then, and not block your account, which is good. Obviously I can't make anyone else sorry for what he or she said. Conflict, sadly, is an inevitable part of editing Wikipedia, and I'll let you deal with that in any polite and reasonable way you choose. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:53, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
I appreciate your understanding and I do apologize for wasting your time on such issue. Nevertheless, I still expect apologies from the aforementioned user who has been poisoning my life for few months already by sabotaging numerous articles about English-language Hong Kong journalists that I've been contributing to, in order to increase public awareness about their identity, background and work. I also noticed on his 'talk' page that numerous other user have been complaining about his action.
Elementalkarl (talk
- As far as I can see, the only comment on his talk page about the dispute you're having with him is from you. If you mean general abuse... all Wikipedia talk pages have that, even mine. It's never a good idea to assume that they're right unless you've looked into it. Most of the complainers on my talk page are teenaged vandals and people trying to promote themselves, their friends, their businesses, their web sites, and their bands. There's a neverending parade of vandalism and promotion at Wikipedia, and none of them like it when you stop them from what they're doing. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 01:41, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 21 February 2011[edit]Why did you delete that page? i was unaware of the comments you made because I am new to wikipedia. i was looking at the rules in question and the artist falls under the 3-7 and 11th i believe. please put the page back up immediately. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MattSThomson (talk • contribs) 18:44, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
I am giving you much more them than I was given to respond. I simply want to know why, after having proven that the AMOS JOANNIDES page meets all requirements, is the page still down?(NagemRedam (talk) 20:16, 26 February 2011 (UTC))
- It isn't helpful for you to create a new username, so I'm going to block this account from editing. Would you like me to say again what I said on your talk page earlier this afternoon? Since you have a conflict of interest, it isn't appropriate for you to write about this topic. If you're interested in helping to write the encyclopedia, you should choose subjects that you aren't directly involved with. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 02:04, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
- Please note also that I double-checked the article you created, and it doesn't seem to include the necessary multiple independent nontrivial sources. Don't worry- if he is as significant as you say, it is inevitable that people who aren't being paid to promote him will write about him, and you're still welcome to edit Wikipedia as a personal hobby if you like. The only reason you are having so much trouble is because, in trying to advertise your client, you are doing something that is fundamentally not what Wikipedia is. Like playing soccer in a movie theatre... you'll be much happier if you use this space for its intended purpose, instead of a purpose it isn't suited to. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 02:13, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
- I appreciate that you took the time to review the page. let me just say that I was unaware that it was seen as promotion. In my opinion, it was a reference point on the artist. I understand the West Brome Records page being removed, because it only had Amos Joannides as an artist, but I do feel that the Amos Joannides page was a useful point of reference, that stated nothing but fact. It was also not complete, as I was going to include the Billboard page, Montreal Gazette reviews, CBC Radio and Montreal CJAD segments devoted to the artist. I would also like to say that, being unaware of exactly how Wikipedia works, and after seeing *new message* alerts, I kept looking and being unable to find my inbox, therefore I was unaware of the messages being posted on my talk-page. You are absolutely right that the artist will have a page made by his fans, and it will probably be sooner rather than later. (MattSThomson (talk) 15:44, 27 February 2011 (UTC)).
|
