Jump to content

User talk:FisherQueen: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
SineBot (talk | contribs)
Bots
2,551,164 edits
m Signing comment by Rain City Blues - "→‎Mary Cheney: "
m →‎Mary Cheney: the polite way to tell someone where to place their head in relation to their anus
Line 68: Line 68:
::::Wikipedia is not a fight; it is a cooperative enterprise, like building a great city. Fighting doesn't achieve anything; in fact, it keeps the work from getting done. I am not your enemy, but I am aware that you have deliberately disrupted the encyclopedia in the past, and are clearly stating an intention to do so in the future. I hope you'll choose not to- I notice that the work that you've been doing on [[Forum for Equality]] is off to a good start, though you need to add [[WP:RS|independent sources]] verifying that the group exists and is [[WP:ORG|notable]]. You seem to have forgotten why I blocked you before- it was because you [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:George_H._W._Bush&diff=prev&oldid=311181653 asked me to block you]. Remember, you were breaking the rules on purpose in an effort to 'bait' an administrator into blocking you? You thought that you could then appeal to the arbitration committee and have that administrator stripped of their admin buttons. Since then, you've presumably tried to do that and discovered that you were in the wrong to break the rules. You speak falsely (again) when you say that I 'tagged you as a vandal'; you are not a [[WP:VANDAL|vandal]] by Wikipedia's definition, and I don't think I've ever called you one. If I do lie, to you or about you, you have every right to correct me; I don't think I've done so thus far. Your message to me above is combative; so much so that some admins would consider it, in itself, a reason to block. Me, personally, I'd rather wait and see the edits you make to the encyclopedia. If you can get past your desire to see Wikipedia as a [[WP:BATTLE|battleground]] and try [[WP:AGF|assuming good faith]] of your fellow editors, you would be a useful addition to the community. If you can't, you'll make that clearer than you have. Please don't put any more threats on my talk page, though, although if you have any questions about Wikipedia policies, you are welcome to ask me, or ask any other experienced editor, or just [[WP:HELP|look up the answers yourself]]. By the way, my name is not Mary, and [[Mary Cheney]] is not a person who I admire, so I'm afraid I do consider the name an insult. Please don't use it again unless it is your intention to [[WP:ATTACK|insult me]]. -[[User:FisherQueen|FisherQueen]]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> ([[User talk:FisherQueen|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/FisherQueen|contribs]])</span> 00:51, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
::::Wikipedia is not a fight; it is a cooperative enterprise, like building a great city. Fighting doesn't achieve anything; in fact, it keeps the work from getting done. I am not your enemy, but I am aware that you have deliberately disrupted the encyclopedia in the past, and are clearly stating an intention to do so in the future. I hope you'll choose not to- I notice that the work that you've been doing on [[Forum for Equality]] is off to a good start, though you need to add [[WP:RS|independent sources]] verifying that the group exists and is [[WP:ORG|notable]]. You seem to have forgotten why I blocked you before- it was because you [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:George_H._W._Bush&diff=prev&oldid=311181653 asked me to block you]. Remember, you were breaking the rules on purpose in an effort to 'bait' an administrator into blocking you? You thought that you could then appeal to the arbitration committee and have that administrator stripped of their admin buttons. Since then, you've presumably tried to do that and discovered that you were in the wrong to break the rules. You speak falsely (again) when you say that I 'tagged you as a vandal'; you are not a [[WP:VANDAL|vandal]] by Wikipedia's definition, and I don't think I've ever called you one. If I do lie, to you or about you, you have every right to correct me; I don't think I've done so thus far. Your message to me above is combative; so much so that some admins would consider it, in itself, a reason to block. Me, personally, I'd rather wait and see the edits you make to the encyclopedia. If you can get past your desire to see Wikipedia as a [[WP:BATTLE|battleground]] and try [[WP:AGF|assuming good faith]] of your fellow editors, you would be a useful addition to the community. If you can't, you'll make that clearer than you have. Please don't put any more threats on my talk page, though, although if you have any questions about Wikipedia policies, you are welcome to ask me, or ask any other experienced editor, or just [[WP:HELP|look up the answers yourself]]. By the way, my name is not Mary, and [[Mary Cheney]] is not a person who I admire, so I'm afraid I do consider the name an insult. Please don't use it again unless it is your intention to [[WP:ATTACK|insult me]]. -[[User:FisherQueen|FisherQueen]]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> ([[User talk:FisherQueen|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/FisherQueen|contribs]])</span> 00:51, 13 September 2009 (UTC)


Mary, I'll try to stay within compliance with the civility policy. Mz. Cheney, may I politely request that you cease your numerous abuses of authority, including blocks placed on my account in an arbitrary manner, inconsistent application of Wiki policies, insistence that you are above those same policies and are incapable of error. May I ask, for the good of the Wiki community, that you resign your admin post, as you clearly have demonstrated a total disregard for the policies as they are written, and have instead decided to apply them only when it benefits your personal agenda? Your complete NPOV perspective and near total incompetence make you ill-suited for this position. Its a bad match, because you assume (mistakenly) that talking down to people as if we were children is going to excuse your foul behaviour. As a concerned Wiki user, for the good of the community, I'm afraid I will have to politely remind you of your incompetence and inability to properly execute the duties associated with your position until you back off. I intend to perform my duty as long as necessary, until you resign or cease your behaviour. [[User:Rain City Blues|Rain City Blues]] ([[User talk:Rain City Blues|talk]]) 17:06, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
You picked this fight, and now that it looks like it might last longer than you intended with a result other than my submitting meekly with a "Yes, teacher" kowtow, you want to play like you're above it? Mary, you started this, and I'm the one that's going to end it. Blocking me will not stop me, it'll only gicve me a greater incentive to make the point that your abuse of authority is a violation of Wiki policies. Come on, Mz Cheney. 16:43, 13 September 2009 (UTC)~ <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Rain City Blues|Rain City Blues]] ([[User talk:Rain City Blues|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Rain City Blues|contribs]]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


==[[Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Craig_Watkinson]]==
==[[Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Craig_Watkinson]]==

Revision as of 17:06, 13 September 2009

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


Did I delete your article? Try here first!

How do I talk to you?

I don't understand why you removed my changes to the article and can't figure out how to communicate with you.

If you think that I entered something that was "original research", please indicate what that is so that I could show that it isn't my original research.

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pachaga (talk • contribs) 19:45, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not the boss of Wikipedia. If you have reliable sources indicating that your interpretation is one that is reasonably widely held, discuss them on the article's talk page- decisions about content are made by consensus among editors. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 01:38, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ANi

There is something about you on ANI....[[1]] Hell In A Bucket (talk) 16:31, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It must be noted that this user evaded his block by coming back to action. As you see, his IPs is changing everytime he logs in, which shows why he was so keen to have a checkuser made on him (the IP addresses are not the same). Shahid • Talk2me 17:13, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
She doesn't appear to even be comprehending what 'edit-warring' is, or that it is the reason for her block. She also doesn't seem to comprehend the concept of 'sources,' or how they could solve her problem. Which is unfortunate, because understanding those concepts would solve her problem. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:06, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your thoughts on an MOS issue?

My gut tells me this is not a valid application of the cited policy, but I thought I'd get a few second opinions before proceeding. OhNoitsJamie Talk 20:39, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I... don't know. What a fascinating question, though. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:04, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

re Van Jones

Re: "Please, don't add any more quotes to this talk page; they are not helpful"

I only think I added 1 quote, but you tell me that nothing I will ever say in the future is helpful? You also did not say why they are not helpful, you just pronounced a very self righteous tone, as though you are the arbiter of what is "helpful" and what is not helpful. Who are we trying to help? How is a direct quote not helpful. It doesn't matter who we help or hurt, all that matters is truth. This is supposed to be an unbiased article about newsworthy things that people say and do. I added a quote to a discussion page. You don't even want to discuss the virtues of including the quote or not including the quote, you just tell me to go away and never come back. I think this is very mean.

re: "If you think there is a fact missing from the article, just state the fact you think is missing, and cite your source."

The fact was the quote, and I cited the source. I put it into the quote page so we could talk about it first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Myclob (talk • contribs) 01:50, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't that conversation happen a week ago? I think I said what I objected to on the talk page of the article, and only made a firmer warning when you put a second long quote on the talk page without specifying what fact you wanted to add to the article, or why, or what your source was. Quotes are not, in themselves, useful additions to the article or the discussion- it's an encyclopedia, so if you think that there's a fact missing, you need to identify what fact you want to add. I don't recall telling you to go away and never come back; perhaps I've forgotten saying that, or maybe you are confusing me with a different user. I'm not the only arbiter of helpful and nonhelpful, I'm just a fellow user with more experience, reminding you that we're writing an encyclopedia, so we really only need information of the type that would be useful in an encyclopedia article- not quotes that one might use to support a persuasive argument, which is a different kind of writing. Any other experienced user might have told you the same thing. You can discuss the information you think should be in the article about Van Jones at Talk:Van Jones, and you can sign comments by making four tildes- it looks like ~~~~. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 02:00, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry to get defensive... I responded here first, and am in the process of reading through the Van Jones conversation. Thanks for being nice/cool.myclob (talk) 02:03, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]


So are you suggesting that you should never be held accou8ntable for erroneous things you have said? Exactly who do you think you are? I dare say, Mary, you're not impressing anyone nearly so much as you impress yourself.Rain City Blues (talk) 16:51, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/194x144x90x118

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above.

194x144x90x118 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is banned for a period of one year. All editors of the DreamHost article are reminded to abide by Wikipedia's policies of neutral point of view, using reliable and verifiable sources; to engage in civil discussion on the talk page to resolve editorial disputes; and to use the relevant noticeboards and dispute resolution processes to seek external opinions on coverage of matters where the current editors may lack objectivity.

194x144x90x118's account has been blocked for a period of one year pursuant to this case.

For the Arbitration Committee

Seddσn talk|WikimediaUK 02:59, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mary Cheney

I just thought I would respond to your posting on my talk page, where you asserted that it would be impossible for someone like you to be a Republican. I'm assuming you say this because you, like me, are gay. Of course, you seem to forget that Mary Cheney is also gay, and like you, a devout christian, and very much a Repugnant... err... I meant Republican.... sorry. Anyway, the point is that you have taken a particularly one sided POV in your bans placed against me for noting a historical fact about George Bush. I have to wonder why this is. Have I offended your deeply christian conservative 'big tent' values? I mean, what I posted is no less relevant than his recent visit to an aircraft carrier, which you banned me for having deleted after you claimed that the standard applied was 'anything that would be remembered 50 or a hundred years from now'. So, what other similarities do you share with Mary Cheney? Is your dad also a Dick?Rain City Blues (talk) 00:05, 11 September 2009 (UTC)\[reply]

Almost everything in this message is false. I never said there are no gay Republicans. I did direct you to my userpage when you accused me of being a Republican blocking you out of political bias, because my userpage contains a box saying, 'this user is a Democrat.' I did not ban you- you are not banned, nor does any one user have the power to ban. I blocked you, but I did not block you, as you claim, for 'noting a historical fact about George Bush.' You were blocked for deliberately disrupting the encyclopedia, which you appear still to be doing. You were not blocked for making personal attacks, but I notice that you have made two such attacks since your block expired. I will check in on your contributions from time to time, and if you appear still to be making personal attacks or disrupting discussions rather than participating in them appropriately, I will block you again, for a longer period of time. I eagerly await being stripped of my admin status, which you assured me you would do when I last blocked you. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 01:04, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Disrupting? I stated a historical fact which I backed up with legitimate references. Personal attacks against whom? You're the one that personally abused your power to block to attack me. And you know what ? You do not intimidate me, you got that? You go right on ahead with your little block attacks, and I will continue to resist you. I'll appeal every block you make, I'll call you out on every mischarcterization, every lie, every falsehood. Bring it on, if you really want a fight. I haven't got the same privileges as you, but I do have a pretty strong argument. And I will never, ever back down, Mary. We'll be going back and forth like this for decades.Rain City Blues (talk) 15:25, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and by the way? Tagging me as a Vandal is really inappropriate. I consider myself more akin to a Visigoth than a Vandal.Rain City Blues (talk) 15:46, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not a fight; it is a cooperative enterprise, like building a great city. Fighting doesn't achieve anything; in fact, it keeps the work from getting done. I am not your enemy, but I am aware that you have deliberately disrupted the encyclopedia in the past, and are clearly stating an intention to do so in the future. I hope you'll choose not to- I notice that the work that you've been doing on Forum for Equality is off to a good start, though you need to add independent sources verifying that the group exists and is notable. You seem to have forgotten why I blocked you before- it was because you asked me to block you. Remember, you were breaking the rules on purpose in an effort to 'bait' an administrator into blocking you? You thought that you could then appeal to the arbitration committee and have that administrator stripped of their admin buttons. Since then, you've presumably tried to do that and discovered that you were in the wrong to break the rules. You speak falsely (again) when you say that I 'tagged you as a vandal'; you are not a vandal by Wikipedia's definition, and I don't think I've ever called you one. If I do lie, to you or about you, you have every right to correct me; I don't think I've done so thus far. Your message to me above is combative; so much so that some admins would consider it, in itself, a reason to block. Me, personally, I'd rather wait and see the edits you make to the encyclopedia. If you can get past your desire to see Wikipedia as a battleground and try assuming good faith of your fellow editors, you would be a useful addition to the community. If you can't, you'll make that clearer than you have. Please don't put any more threats on my talk page, though, although if you have any questions about Wikipedia policies, you are welcome to ask me, or ask any other experienced editor, or just look up the answers yourself. By the way, my name is not Mary, and Mary Cheney is not a person who I admire, so I'm afraid I do consider the name an insult. Please don't use it again unless it is your intention to insult me. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:51, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mary, I'll try to stay within compliance with the civility policy. Mz. Cheney, may I politely request that you cease your numerous abuses of authority, including blocks placed on my account in an arbitrary manner, inconsistent application of Wiki policies, insistence that you are above those same policies and are incapable of error. May I ask, for the good of the Wiki community, that you resign your admin post, as you clearly have demonstrated a total disregard for the policies as they are written, and have instead decided to apply them only when it benefits your personal agenda? Your complete NPOV perspective and near total incompetence make you ill-suited for this position. Its a bad match, because you assume (mistakenly) that talking down to people as if we were children is going to excuse your foul behaviour. As a concerned Wiki user, for the good of the community, I'm afraid I will have to politely remind you of your incompetence and inability to properly execute the duties associated with your position until you back off. I intend to perform my duty as long as necessary, until you resign or cease your behaviour. Rain City Blues (talk) 17:06, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Craig_Watkinson

Would you consider redirecting or merging this article to Craig Watkinson or One Life to Live right now? The article is obvious not notable in its current form, so this material can be removed right now, with only a redirect remaining. I could redirect the page right now for you and close the Afd. Please let me know as soon as possible, because as soon as someone else comments on the AfD, they must agree also before I can redirect the article and close the AFD.Ikip (talk) 15:12, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really have a problem with a redirect; I didn't realize this was a significant person on the show. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:53, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I will redirect this now and come back to you. Ikip (talk) 01:54, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar may be awarded to those that show a pattern of going the extra mile to be nice, without being asked.

This barnstar is awarded to User:FisherQueen, for their dedication to comprimise and his ability to work with other editors to come up with amicable solutions which satisfy everyone. Thank you for taking the time to consider redirecting. Ikip (talk) 01:59, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:FisherQueen&oldid=313600908"