User talk:Shanen

Welcome

Hello, Shanen, 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 New contributors' help page, 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. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Dick Clark 16:29, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Japan taskforces

In order to encourage more participation, and to help people find a specific area in which they are more able to help out, we have organized taskforces at WikiProject Japan. Please visit the Participants page and update the list with the taskforces in which you wish to participate. Links to all the taskforces are found at the top of the list of participants.

Please let me know if you have any questions, and thank you for helping out! ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 01:41, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide reference regarding patents history addition

Hi, could you please provide a reference for the information you added about the history of patents in [1]? Thanks in advance. --Chealer (talk) 06:11, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Encouraging translation

Hmm... apparently the previous entry about patents was a message someone was trying to send me back in 2008 as in over four years ago... As a messaging system, this isn't so great, eh? Today's visit was actually because I wanted to find some way to encourage the translation of a fairly new article from English to Japanese. So far my struggles with the mechanisms of Wikipedia have been quite fruitless. Shanen (talk) 00:19, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits to Abu-Bakr Yunis Jabr

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to the Abu-Bakr Yunis Jabr article. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. Thank you! Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 12:01, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New messages

Hello, Shanen. You have new messages at Marcus Qwertyus's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

May 2014

Hello, I'm Jsharpminor. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/AbigailAbernathy because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Jsharpminor (talk) 01:50, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Let me put it more bluntly: Your comments were a personal attack, a violation of WP:NPA. Someone else already removed it, but if you do something like that again, you will be blocked. You are welcome to vote, you are not welcome to call people professional criminals and the like. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 01:53, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to block away. I think I can safely promise that was my last attempt at any constructive suggestion to the Wikipedia. It seems a bit pointless to attempt to write more clearly, but I did NOT say that this AbigailAbernathy person was a criminal. I wrote that I considered it a distinct possibility because her action appeared to help obvious and well-known criminals in their obviously criminal activities. I also explained why and what could be done to make the situation better, but at this point I merely hope google finishes shoving Wikipedia where the sun never shines. In a way, it's kind of funny. I think most people are basically good, and if society were more broadly democratic and participatory, then because of their general niceness things would be much nicer. In reality, the nasty dicks continue to call the shots, and the historical trend is not encouraging. (That includes google's trend to the evil side, by the way.) I can't decide if you two are nasty dicks, spammer sock puppets, or just remarkably naive morons. At this point I'm getting to be like ol' Dubya: I don't know and I don't care. Shanen (talk) 04:53, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. This is a community. Like all communities, it has its own rules. If you want to be a part of our community, you will need to show some willingness to work with the other members of the community. The fact that we don't allow 419 scam warnings to exist in the places and the wordings that you think they should does not mean that we are all scam artists. If you would like to learn how to work with us in our community, we will be more than willing to help you as much as we possibly can. If you can't be bothered to learn how our community works, you know where the door is. Jsharpminor (talk) 06:40, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My position is that you obviously have some serious delusions about reality, but I'm sure I'm projecting to some degree. Notwithstanding, perhaps your most dangerous delusion is that there is such a thing as a NPV. I am NOT interested in playing delusional community games. Just more disillusionment? I tend to start out with an optimistic perspective and then learn that things aren't so great. I thought Wikipedia was a good idea, but now I think it's some kind of silly circus. I also thought the google was sincere about not being evil, but have you even noticed how the google reduced your traffic from their search engines by 40%? So now you think I should spend the time to learn your silly games and party rules? You and your spammers can enjoy your little party. Yes, I am willing to contribute towards making the world better, and no, I do NOT want to be part of your little spammer-loving zoo. Shanen (talk) 07:29, 15 May 2014 (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).

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

Request reason:

your reason here

Decline reason:

Not an unblock request. This account is not blocked; and 184.106.81.13 mentioned below is blocked as part of the open proxy block on 184.106.0.0/16 per this proxy discussion. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 06:51, 13 July 2014 (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.

Well, it certainly is NOT as though you people want to encourage participation or create good feelings, eh? First of all, as regards the block, I'm pretty certain it is a mistake. It is apparently related to 184.106.81.13, but that must belong to WiMax or KDDI. If WiMax, then it is dynamically allocated and it's collateral damage of some sort. If it's KDDI, then it is probably a gateway machine of some kind, and it's also collateral damage, but it might be significantly larger, sort of like accidentally nuking a large chunk of Japan. The whois information is more confusing, apparently pointing to San Antonio, which is evidently ridiculous, but concurs with my general opinion of Wikipedia's competence these days. Actually whois makes me suspect it's a private IP used for NAT, and in that case the mistake is of random and unknown magnitude.

Now for some more specific background. I encountered the block when I attempted to find out if someone had sent me a message. If so, then it was probably related to my concerns about criminals using Wikipedia to support their scams. I'd be glad to help you be less criminal, but based on my last experiences with Wikipedia, you seem to be some sort of criminal enterprise of the most stupid sort. I may not approve, but at least I understand the motivations of profitable criminals, but I can't understand why you help OTHER criminals make their profits at the expense of your OWN reputation and credibility. It was possible that the message from Marcus Qwertyus involved that issue, and I was willing to discuss it, or even volunteer some time to help out. ROFLMAO.

Why is that so funny? Because I stopped using Wikipedia a while ago. I am philosophically opposed to supporting criminals, even under the most naively good intentions that Wikipedia might have. I did NOT stop by to use Wikipedia or to check for personal messages. I stopped by to add a comment why I was NOT going to give you any money or time (which is even more precious and limited than money). I accidentally saw your latest self-plug for donations when a friend called me over to see something about a swallowtail butterfly. Therefore, my humorous conclusion is I don't think I could care less about this erroneous block and how many innocent victims it might affect.

Do drop me a line when you decide you want to stop supporting criminals, eh? You really could do MUCH better. I may well stop by to visit sometime in the next few years.

P.S. From looking at the template information that was added when I posted this comment, it told me to check at another place. At that place it confirmed that the block was not targeted at me, but rather at an entire block of IP addresses. The block was activated over a year ago, and is more obviously ridiculously mistargeted per the first paragraph. Shanen (talk) 05:54, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What was that about?

Obviously I don't care. For some reason the notifier told me I had one, but it was apparently 8 months old. Hope it wasn't an important message, but guess why I care less and less about Wikipedia these days. Interesting idea gone to pot or the dogs or worse. Shanen (talk) 09:46, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Shanen! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Does anyone want to create an article about "parsimonious with the truth"?, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.

See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). Muninnbot (talk) 19:00, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for proving my point about the closed-mind nature of Wikipedia. I suggest you not hold your breath waiting for my next contribution of any sort. Shanen (talk) 18:11, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Parsimonious with the truth

Hello, Shanen. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Parsimonious with the truth, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:04, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Parsimonious with the truth

Hello, Shanen. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Parsimonious with the truth".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:44, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]