User talk:BorgQueen

Welcome to the discussion page. -- BorgQueen

Please click here to leave me a new message.

Industrial Revolution

This article is attracting a lot of IP vandalism today. Do you think it merits protecting for a short period? Squeezeweasel 16:03, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, let's try it for a while. --BorgQueen 16:10, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great - thanks very much for that. I'm sure it'll quiet down shortly. Squeezeweasel 16:11, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why?

I would like to know why you have blocked me from editing. I am a new user to Wikipedia, I edit/improve one article, and someone blocks me! Do you get a kick out of it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sloq (talk • contribs)

I looked at the block log of yours, and found that no one ever blocked you. Do you get a kick out of accusing innocent admins? :-D --BorgQueen 01:47, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BorgQueen & BorgQueer

Somebody moved your(?) korean wikipedia account from 사용자:BorgQueen to 사용자:BorgQueer. Are these accounts yours? -- ChongDae 04:36, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, ko:user:BorgQueen is mine. (Don't you see the link to it on my user page here?) Thanks for taking care of it. --BorgQueen 06:41, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But of course, BorgQueer is an impersonator, needless to say. --BorgQueen 06:42, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They might be the vandals from my school, who have a vendetta against BorgQueen. See the request for Checkuser that I filed for some of the details. Nwwaew (Talk Page) (Contribs) (E-mail me) (Review me!) 22:35, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:137.222.10.67

Hey, there -- just looking into this user's unblock request, and I am inclined to agree that a week-long block seems excessive, at least at first glance. No blocks since June 2006, and not much talk page activity since then, either. For their contribs in the past month, only this one strikes me as undisputable vandalism (I could have missed some, but my main point is that there's apparently good edits coming through). Are there any deleted edits, or other incidents or information that could help shed a little light on this matter? Am I missing something? =\ Thanks for any time you may put into this. Luna Santin 00:14, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocked for now. --BorgQueen 00:23, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks. I can't picture a situation where you'd need it, but if you need help with anything related to this, feel free to let me know. Luna Santin 00:31, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Satanic Verses

It looks like the user who moved The Satanic Verses (novel) to The Satanic Verses forgot to move the talk page as well. I saw you added tags to the new talk page today, could you move the old one over and merge the histories? Thanks!--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:27, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Taken care of. --BorgQueen 19:33, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting Vish

BorgQueen, please desist from reverting any entry in the article on Hindu if the merit of the subject matter is not apparent to you. Dr. Vish Ayengar has been held in high esteem by scholars including in the United States. Kanchanamala 12:55, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for the note. If you think my reverting was inappropriate, then by all means, revert it back to the version you like. The current semi-protection blocks only IP users and new accounts (upto 4 days old, if I am not mistaken), which means you are free to edit. But it seems to me there is some disagreement between regular editors there, so I cannot guarantee your edit will stay, for I am not one of those regular editors on Hindu. Please know that I have a deep respect for Hinduism, and don't hesitate to contact me if there is anything I can help. Thanks. --BorgQueen 13:46, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Favorite Admin Invite,toolbox

Come on down and add yourself to my list of favorite Admins, and make yourself a copy of my toolbox. Martial Law 22:48, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well but I haven't "assisted you greatly", have I? Adding myself to the list would be pretentious. Besides, it is your favorite admin list, and you are supposed to add. --BorgQueen 22:55, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen you in action. Martial Law 19:58, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Email Query

Thanks for your reply and Yes Please. Mobile 01^Talk 11:51, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You for doing that for me. Much Appreciated. Mobile 01^Talk 02:11, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Parrot

I've read your comments on "Genius Bird" and find them unwarranted by the policies you cite. The addition to Parrot is within the scope of the sections on intelligence and mimickry. --68.221.0.226 14:17, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on Talk:Parrot. By the way, I didn't make any comments on the external link. --BorgQueen 15:04, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Hi BorgeQueen. I really feel nice to come to your page. I noticed that you have saved my user page from the claws of an anonymous. Thank you and all the best for the new year. --Bhadani 16:31, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BorgeQueen? May I suggest you do some research on Borg. :-D Happy New Year to you, too. BorgQueen 17:34, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editing help

Hello, could you please see as to why Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Gilliam is not linked to from the RfA page? Thank you. - Gilliam 18:08, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. --BorgQueen 18:15, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thank you. - Gilliam 18:17, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why delete my article?

Hello,

I tried to make my first contribution to Wikipedia... hard to learn so I first posted only a link which was deleted, after reading all the help section I understood why. Then I made a full article Aquarius_gay_hotel_in_Patong this place is the one I spend all my holidays in, this is more than an institution so I think it deserves a page and I promissed the owner I will make one. I tried to be very factual, even not so much description but you deleted it, I really don't understand why.

Thank you for your answer on the way to improve it, this hotel, is so big and so popular that it deserves it, as well as more comment on phuket island and patong beach. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tomtomfr (talk • contribs) 08:33, 1 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Novels newsletter : Issue IX - February 2007

The February 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 16:37, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"English Language" revert

Thanks for that: I was afraid I'd stuffed up removing that vandalism! 61.88.124.200 02:19, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hello Queen! Just stopped to say hello to you. --Bhadani 04:41, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. I've seen your pictures with our beloved Jimbo :-) You looked a bit more elderly than I thought. --BorgQueen 04:49, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I am elderly for sure :) --Bhadani 15:34, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Wigi Wigi" versus "Wiki Wiki" in Blue Hawaii article.

"Wiki Wiki" is the Hawaiian phrase for "hurry up" or "quick!". There is no such phrase in the Hawaiian language as "Wigi Wigi". I ought to know, I was born and raised in Hawai'i, and was educated at the Kamehameha Schools/Bernice Pauahi Bishop Estate. If someone can prove that the line in the film is "Wigi Wigi" based on the published screeplay, then "Wigi Wigi" should stand. If not, it should be "Wiki Wiki", despite how Elivs pronounced it - unless the trivia is that Elvis mispronounced the words, in which case the trivia should be made more explicit to explain that fact. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.38.163.84 (talk) 19:00, 11 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I wonder when BorgQueen will respond to my very valid remarks?

Sorry for delayed reply. You are welcome to make the changes to the article if you can cite references. Thanks. --BorgQueen 06:27, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

monkey brain

I'm not sure, but it seems you had objection to content on monkey brain discussion. I felt the information provided was objective, accurate and relevant to the monkey brain page. I would happy to discuss your thoughts otherwise. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Barrolltc (talk • contribs) 22:50, 11 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Nevrax

Is there a reason why Nevrax was deleted back in Feb 2006, and can it be recreated? What's G1 by the way. I think there's enough material to have an entry about it, and it is notable especially with involvement by the Free Software Foundation in trying to acquire it and turn it's software into opensource software. [1] --Witchinghour 08:42, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article was deleted because it was written in Romanian, and was clearly someone's résumé. Yes, it can be recreated if you have totally different topic in mind. --BorgQueen 00:03, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Robot or cyborg?

Hi, are you a robot or a cyborg. This is relevant to how you are classified under User:Radiant!/Classification of admins. JoshuaZ 15:43, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

According to the article Borg: "The Borg are a fictional race of cyborgs in the Star Trek universe." --BorgQueen 20:28, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking

Why have you blocked me?

Regards

Colin Webster —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 41.243.134.80 (talk) 08:47, 16 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Your current IP 41.243.134.80 hasn't been blocked by anyone. --BorgQueen 08:58, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pseudo Knowledge

Hi, I just read your last remark on the foie gras talk page:

SchmuckyTheCat put it pretty well. It is pseudo-scientific. --BorgQueen 20:34, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Since you complain about pseudo knowledge, take an impartial look at the pseudo history of foie gras you contributed to write: it is made of pseudo sources (no historians, no archaeologists, just foie gras producers, chefs and "connoisseurs") of pseudo archaeological information (since there is no concrete iconographic evidence about Egyptian foie gras and its existence is based on nothing but foie gras lovers suppositions), on pseudo linguistic explanations (using French and Portuguese to explain Latin, while Greek and Latin dictionaries I consulted give at least three different explanations of the connection liver-figs). And lastly, a half of this pseudo history talks actually about force feeding and should therefore be moved to force feeding. I'm not going to involve in the foie gras controversy at the moment, but I ask you to consider seriously this problem. Benio76 00:57, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Lunar New Year. How long are you going to stay away from the foie gras article? You seem to be passionate about the issue. Wouldn't it be difficult for you to keep silent on the page for long? Just worried. --BorgQueen 03:26, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kama Sutra Poses - Kamasutra training

What is wrong and why you think this is spam??? The link is Kama Sutra Poses - Kamasutra training —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.58.205.55 (talk) 16:30, 18 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]