User talk:Fish bowl

Nomination of NeXTWORLD for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article NeXTWORLD 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/NeXTWORLD until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 notice from the top of the article.

— Mhawk10 (talk) 04:43, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

IP socking

I'm sorry, I should probably just indef block them, but TBH I don't have a ton of time to triple-check that I understand exactly what's going on, so I'm hesitant to act even when it's fairly obvious. I'm hoping a "second" final warning works, but I admit that's a bit lazy. Certainly let me know if they pester you again. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:15, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

So frigging sorry about last July

I want you to know that I was the IP user who reverted Revision 1097890769 on your talk page over a year ago, and I didn't even know about the message Shāntián Tàiláng wrote on my old IP's talk page until this January. See, I had assumed that Shāntián Tàiláng's message to you was one sent by another person without an account, not a logged-out edit by a registered user. That's why I wrote the thing about WP:CIVIL, I didn't know who Shāntián Tàiláng was and I thought somebody in my IP range had simply been asking a question about how to properly sound clever.

For clarification: I remember that shortly before I reverted Revision 1097890769, I'd had to reset the router, as the Internet speed had gotten too slow. That always changes my IP address, and when I looked up my IP's contributions shortly afterwards to determine my new IP, lo and behold, there was that offending message, and I had no clue that it was secretly from Shāntián Tàiláng.

Besides, it struck me as rude to just revert a message without fully explaining why on Earth you didn't want it to be on your talkpage. I was assuming good faith, all right? See, it's not like I can watch you or other users type at their computers, unlike Skype!

Once again, I am truly sorry for sticking my nose into a matter I didn't fully understand. Besides, although I don't know if Shāntián Tàiláng has used this range anytime in the past six months, I only bought this cellphone a month or two ago and I've never left it out of my sight, so I understand that Shāntián Tàiláng could never have possibly used this device.

As they say in Japan, sayonara. 72.82.40.251 (talk) 18:41, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

stop talking about yourself in 3rd person dude — Fish bowl when reverting the preceding message

Look, Fishy. I don't know who you think I am, but I'm a woman, not a "dude", and I'm not trying to pester/harass/plague you or waste your time. All I want(ed) to do is apologize for that mistake I made last year. That's all. There's nothing sinister or deceptive about it. OK? 72.82.40.251 (talk) 21:00, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
PS. And BTW, please do tell me when you get a chance-- in general, why do editors sometimes revert messages left on their talkpages (that is, even when those messages are not copyvio or downright nasty)? I really want to know.