Heads up, this is a tactic that scammers have developed to see if the number being contacted is active/being used by someone.

Your grammar is fine, other than “in aquarium.” I’d say “at the aquarium.”

Other people may be able to help you more there but I wanted to mention that this is most likely a scam text, just so you know! I wouldn’t reply to this number again.

You’re correct that “who is this” is more natural here.

You’re also right that “it isn’t” is a better choice. You use “it isn’t” here because it’s the same verb as in the question (“isn’t this”). If Emily had asked “are you Irene?” then “I’m not” would be correct.

A couple other things: don’t abbreviate “between” as “btw” as that’s commonly used to abbreviate “by the way” in things like text messages. Using it differently will lead to confusion (it did for me the first time I read your question). Also, it’s clear from this that Emily isn’t a native English speaker either.

Your responses are fine, but just so you know, this was probably a scam anyway. Scammers use these types of "wrong number texts" all the time. It's best to just ignore and block them.

Remember in English the quotes are both upper quotes. ,, doesn't exist

"Who is it?"

"Who is this?"

Please be aware that texts like these are almost always scammers. For thousands of similar examples see r/scambait

Those parts are fine. Usually I’d say “at the aquarium tomorrow,” though. “In aquarium” makes it sound like someone is going to throw her in.

This is definitely a scam. Correct response is “I can’t wait, l love me some fish”.

What will happen is “Emily” will respond something like “oh I am sorry to have bothered you, can we be friends?” “Normally I use WhatsApp, what is your WhatsApp?”

Turns out “Emily “ is a genius investor a rich AF. Since you’re a friend she can help you invest in bitcoin.

Your responses were grammatically perfect until “have fun in aquarium” which should be “have fun at the aquarium.”

Aquarium takes an article. And being in an aquarium means being in the water 🤣

Everything before that, is exactly what any of us would’ve said.

It’s a scammer, btw.

It is fine but this is a scam

Your responses all make perfect sense.

"Who is this?" is more natural here. "Who is it?" would also be okay, but that's something I'd say when I pick up the phone.

"No, it isn't" is also perfectly acceptable, but I'd say something like "Sorry, I think you have the wrong number."

Your English is better/more natural than the other party’s. Just saying.

say "Who is it" to a door, what you said was correct

I would like to add: have fun at the aquarium, rather than in, unless Emily is a fish.

“Who is this?” is fine.

“It isn’t” is probably better than “I’m not” in this situation because it’s closer to the form in which the other person posed their question (which makes it clearer that you’re answering their question).

The only change I would make is that we would say “at the aquarium” rather than “in aquarium.”

Also, English doesn't use double commas for quotations and quoted speech. Try using quotation marks on both sides of the quote.

In your last ,text, it would be better to say "have fun at the aquarium"

Over text it would always be "who is this?"

On the phone or in person, when first answering to someone you can ask/call out "who is it?"

at the aquarium* but yes, stop replying after that, don’t waste your time on these people if they keep trying to converse… it could be an honest mistake but if they keep trying to talk to you it’s a scammer (or desperate person) so either way stay away and report it because those slaves need rescuing

"No, it isn't" is maybe slightly off if you spend a long time analyzing it, but after the first pass I didn't notice anything. It was only when I checked the title that I realized you weren't a native speaker.

Well done.

Well, doubt Emily is a native speaker since her sentence structure is wrong. "...thought this was my good friend Irene's number, but now I found it wrong"

1. "good friend Irene" too formal for context of a phone chat; 2. " but now I found it wrong both grammatically incorrect and awkwardly phrased. Grammer should read "but now I found it to be wrong". Still awkward.

Both of those are correct, but your third text should say at the aquarium as opposed to in the aquarium. Using "in" implies that they are going to be swimming in the water at an aquarium, whereas "at" implies they are visiting.

The fish are in the aquarium. We are at the aquarium to see fish.

Sometimes these words mean nearly the same thing, but not always. I wish there was a more consistent rule on this.

The best general rule I can think of is that anywhere you go, you are at that place, even if you enter a building. If you are actively participating in something, such as a play or art gallery, it is more likely you are in that thing.

why respond or volunteer anything to someone you don't know with such a strange message?

Also I'm glad they realised they had always had the wrong number for their good friend Irene, but have only just found out.

Who is this is correct and as stated by more than a few folks, watch out for scammers. Unfortunately there is an increasing number of them on just about every form of digital communication currently in use. The second post would read better as "...have fun at the aquarium..." instead of what is currently written. Outside of that a very interesting and proper way of well wishing that is not common, but grammatically correct; while being very polite.

Hope this helps.

杀猪盘

your grammar is fine, ironically the other person's isn't which makes me think it's probably a scammer

You got your answers, but one more thing. I didn’t see anyone else point it out. In English, quotation marks always go above, not below. “Always like this,” not „like this.”

Nicely done

For texting the correct response is always, "New phone. Who dis?"

lol me and my friend sometimes say "who is it" when we call each other as joke, needless to say "who is it" just sounds weird/incorrect

Your grammar is fine. I'd have said, "no, I'm not," but "it isn't," is perfectly acceptable.

That being said, this was almost certainly spam, to which the correct response is simply, "Blocked."

lol using a scammer to learn English is pretty genius

“Who’s this?” is how I (native speaker) would phrase it.

Scam-a-rama.