User:FisherQueen/Archive66

FisherQueen User Page · Talk page · Archives · Sandbox · Patrol · Templates

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	For beating me to Bad axis! Electric Catfish 16:20, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

I hope you weren't too disappointed. Take comfort; there'll be another advertisement for a band along in a minute or two. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:21, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Great explanation

Great explanation, here - I might even, erm, borrow something like that for future use ;-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:11, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

That is one of my helpful metaphors. My other metaphor is for people who get unreasonably angry that they aren't being allowed to spam their web site, or advertise their band, or post a profile of their dear departed granny, and it begins, "Imagine you want to play a game of soccer. So you go to the opera house..." -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:36, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that's nice too :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:11, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Fantastic .. and fits a wide variety of situations on wp too. I just may steal that one one of these days. — ChedZILLA 15:29, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I've responded on my talk page. Cheers, Ocaasi^{t | c} 19:59, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Help with an article?

Hi! I wanted to ask you to help out with an article that's going through a mini revert war. Nothing serious so far, but I've had to revert some edits on the article for Goodreads. I'd added a section on the review controversy that has recently happened. I viewed it as notable since it resulted in the site changing part of their reviewing policy and had been commented on by Ray Garton. Recently there had been some good faith edits by other users to add unsourced content onto the article, such as a comment by a non-notable author and to add a Huffington Post blog to the entry. Until you'd edited down the content on the Victoria Foyt entry, I wasn't really aware that those blogs weren't done by notable people or were otherwise usable as reliable sources. I had previously had another blog listed on the article, so I moved the blogs down to the external link section to avoid any complaints of them not being reliable sources, as they're pertinent to the article but not usable as sources. In any case, I just wanted to get a second pair of eyes on the article to see if there's any way to keep this neutral. I've given the other user a message on their talk page about sourcing, notability, and neutrality, but you did such a good job with the Foyt article that I thought it'd be a good idea to ask with your help on this as well. I want to include this in the article without it being unfairly slanted on one side or the other. I'm not really directly involved with any of the stuff in the controversy section so I don't think I came across as predominantly on one side or another, but it's always a good idea to get a second opinion, right?Tokyogirl79 (talk) 18:29, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Queenie!

Haven't chatted with you in awhile Queenie. So I'm stopping by to say hi and am glad you are still around and as funny as ever. Best wishes. PumpkinSky talk 15:52, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Unblock request

Thanks for commenting at User talk:68.81.192.142. I made a newbie admin mistake and responded to an unblock request that I was originally involved in. As you had commented also, perhaps you should put your response instead in the unblock response.—Bagumba (talk) 22:15, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I went ahead and reopened the request. Either you or another admin can process it.—Bagumba (talk) 22:34, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Turkic vocabulary for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Turkic vocabulary is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Turkic vocabulary until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Shrigley (talk) 20:32, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Happy 6th Wikipedia Anniversary to you :)

Hi FisherQueen :) Greetings on your (belated) 6th Wikipedia Anniversary since your joining of Wikipedia on 7 September, 2006! Best Wishes. Regards and Happy Editing! TheGeneralUser (talk) 19:20, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

User talk:108.18.145.11

This happens so often I actually made a template to use in these situations at Template:ewblock. Since you are so very good at phrasing unblock declines I'd be delighted if you would look it over and make any changes you can think of so that it explains the situation better. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:36, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikiforyou

Re: User talk:Wikiforyou123, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cdctmom6712. Probably. —Quiddity (talk) 21:53, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Oh, how tedious. Clearly a bored tween. Why can't they just turn off the computer and look at girlie magazines, like bored tweens did when I was a tween? Wait, do girlie magazines still exist? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:51, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Well Bitch and Bust are still on my local's shelves, next to the Utne and Lapham's, and i'd assume YM and J-17 are still over in [hmm, nope, both folded] the tween's sectio... oh... you meant.. >.> —Quiddity (talk) 00:21, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Google

Hi:

Good morning, hope you're well. I was wondering if you might help with a problem.

Remember a couple of years ago you helped with an attack on Ron Bongo, it was all about stock trading and boiler room stock trading.

Well, we did get that resolved but Google seems to really like you user page point 9, which discusses the take down, ugh.

Is there anyway to either block Google or to no index your page, or take that section out?

I bet other people have had this problem, I wonder what can be done on the policy level?

Thanks, Jordan Glogau jglogau Jordan G (talk) 13:31, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't have any way to control what Google does, and although I understand that you were hired by Mr. Bongo to make his google results reflect more positively on him, I would prefer not to delete sections of my talk page history. Your statement on that page is very clear about Mr. Bongo's side of the story, and I'm sure the quality of his work will far outweigh any Wikipedia talk page in the eyes of potential employers. I suppose this page of the talk will now also show up in searches of his name. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:52, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, FisherQueen. You have new messages at Wikiforyou123's talk page.
Message added 11:59, 26 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I think you should be adding an accept template when I put an unblock request template on his talk page. Wikiforyou101112 (talk) 11:59, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Cdctmom6712 (talk · contribs) strikes again, not realizing that persistence isn't always a virtue. Acroterion (talk) 12:14, 26 September 2012 (UTC)