User talk:Shanebb

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Hello, Shanebb, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

You might like some of these links and tips:

Some general guidance.
Tutorial and the Manual of Style.
Find out how to revert, move and merge pages.
Sign your posts on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~).
Ask questions at the Village pump or Help desk.
Use the Show preview button
Provide an Edit summary
Add the correct image copyright tag to any images you upload
Create a User page

If, for some reason, you are unable to fix a problem yourself, feel free to ask someone else to do it. Wikipedia has a vibrant community of contributors who have a wide range of skills and specialties, and many of them would be glad to help. As well as the wiki community pages there are IRC Channels, where you are more than welcome to ask for assistance.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me on my talk page. Thanks and happy editing, -- Joann e B 20:51, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

== Talk:Visa (document) ==

I left a question on the talk page about projectvisa that you will probably want to look at. Spartaz ^Humbug! 18:30, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apparent / presumed sockpuppetry on Conch Republic

Due to suspicious edit patterns and account creation, described on WP:ANI#WP:DUCK (or not) on Conch Republic, I am treating this account as part of a sockpuppet editor group (see: Talk:Conch Republic#Apparent sockpuppetry). Please see WP:3RR and WP:SOCK and the article talk page for warnings regarding activities by accounts in concert which are prohibited. Georgewilliamherbert 00:46, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It would also be wise to stop using misleading edit summaries. Multiple reliable third party sources supporting the material you are attempting to expunge are already listed in the article, and have, moreover, been discussed at length previously. Presumably you have read neither the cited sources nor the prior discussions. --Gene_poole 05:17, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Block

You have been indefinitely blocked because of your singly focused editting to Conch Republic and Visa (document) that includes skewing POV, deleting entire sections, removing valid external links, and general edit warring. From simply looking over your posts, it is obvious you have some sort of vested interest in the visa debacle, and undoing perfectly good edits is really inappropriate. You may appeal this block with {{unblock|your reason here}}.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:43, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Shanebb (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I was keeping to the discussion page. I think this admin has gone a bit too far with his powers. It was requested to discuss so I have done so, I have not edited a page where I have been asked to discuss in talk. It would appear the weight of ones status matters on rank.

Decline reason:

Your request makes little sense, and your contributions (including to Talk:Visa (document)) appear to be entirely unhelpful. — Sandstein 21:11, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I am not sure where or if I should be adding here but it seems as though a lot of users get temporary bans/warnings. An indefinite ban seems a little harsh.Shanebb 22:17, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]