User talk:Penpen

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you want to send some message to Penpen, please contact to ja.wikipedia user:Penpen and write your message into the discuss page.(English acceptable)
I have been blocked in JA.wikipedia. So I can't respond your message at ja:user:Penpen. But I don't look this page frequently. So please do like this;

  1. Write your message here (English acceptable).
  2. Write short message to ja:利用者‐会話:Penpen.
  3. I will replay you here.

Contents

[edit] Yokoso!

Glad to see you here! Chris 03:40, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Zaikyō kī kyoku

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Zaikyō kī kyoku, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Tiddly Tom 20:46, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 突然失礼なんですが

地租改正の英ウィキ訳しているんですが質問があって手伝ってもらえるっかな～って思って。。。　[和ウィキ]で「このことが、現在の登記簿においても、登記簿と実際の地形や測量面積が一致しないこと（いわゆる「縄伸び」「縄縮み」）の原因となっている。」の「縄伸び」の意味ご存知ならば教えて頂けませんか？ご連絡にお待ちしております。Konamaiki 23:04, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

ありがとうございました ☆感☆(o^▽^o)☆謝☆Konamaiki 19:23, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: On request for mediation

Thank you for your giving the proposal of the informal mediation . I am sorry that connection becomes so slowly. I've had a brief journey. I will answer your question. Both of us can understand English. (Both of us have en.wikipedia account and did some contribute in en.wikipedia.) My opinion to Sys.OP Lonicera is "If there is no intention to process the appeal, please declare that the appeal will be left to other administrators." I leave about actual mediation to you. Thank you.Penpen0216 06:11, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Have you used the appeal methods on ja.wikipedia for other administrators to review the incident yet? PS: Please reply here, it'll make things easier for both of us. Daniel 09:24, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry for replying so slowly.

I write the situation explanation and the present condition.

First, I write the difference of the rule of ja.wikipedia from en.wikipedia.

  1. There is no Ban. Contribution Block is substituted.
  2. Since July 2006, both ja:wikipedia:投稿ブロックの方針(Blocking policy) (Old) and ja:wikipedia:投稿ブロックの方針/改定案(Blocking policy/proposal) (New) are used together.And New is used mainly. Old is used where there is no regulation in New.

But New does not have regulation of a contribution Block request. Therefore, Old is applied to contribution Block request.

  1. Blocked user cannot use her/his talk page.
  2. The appeal to Block is to be performed by a mailing list (wikija-L).
  3. Opposing to other administrators, without the discussion with the administrator who acted the Block, is accepted.
  4. The objection to other administrators is also to be performed by a mailing list (wikija-L).
  5. Although the mediation committee and the arbitration committee are examined, they are not materialized.

Next, I write the history.

On July 19 (UTC), 2007, block request ja:Wikipedia:投稿ブロック依頼/Penpen was raised by Ms./Mr. T.Saito. That was because of my unblock request ja:Wikipedia:投稿ブロック依頼/時空の旅人とオタスケマン 解除,ja:Wikipedia:投稿ブロック依頼/プロバイダ広域 解除 etc. She/he wrote that user:Penpen is "user who exhausts (New) and amendment proposal # community, and the plan of Wikipedia:banishment "There is no mind of following to the statement of principles and guideline of WIKIPEDIA. If it corresponds to or the behavior which shows that it cannot follow", and a "stalking act"

There was my unsuitable action in the process of the discussion. Sys.opNiKe executed one day block at 13:38, July20, 2007 (Fri.) (UTC) for my action.

After the cancele of Sys.Op NiKe's block (13:38, July21, 2007 (Sat.) (UTC) , Sys.Op Lonicera determined indefinite block at 16:40 July21, 2007 (Sat.) (UTC). The determination statment is "The argument disturbance act was continued immediately after the provisional block, it judged that the improvement of future of action could not be considered (taking into consideration from an old client's action), and the indefinite block was carried out." 「暫定ブロック直後に議論攪乱行為を続けており、（これまでの被依頼者の行動から考え合わせ）今後の行動の改善が考えられないと判断し、無期限ブロックしました。--Lonicera 2007年7月21日 (土) 16:40 (UTC) 」

I opposed to Sys.op Lonicera on July 29 (UTC), 2007.

Since there was no answer for two weeks or more, I supposed the inblock.

Since there was also no reaction to this, in it requested the mediation to the chair person . ( Because no mediation comitee exist in ja.wikipedia. )

She adviced me that it won't 's job, and I should some help to Jimmy Wales

First I send wiki-mail to him, and second I wrote message in en.wikipedia.

And you made the proposal of unofficial mediation (thank you very much.)

In parallel, although mediation is demanded also by wikija-L, the proposal of cooperation does not occur at present.


In the meantime, apart from my motion, there were deliberations on a contribution block release request.

I have done no appeal to other administrators.

I write the reasons below.

  1. I myself admit that there was some unsuitable action. However, indefinite Block is result of Sys.Op Lonicera's misunderstanding.
  2. I want to clarify as a precedent that the administrator who performed block must do some action to the appeal in wikija-L.
  3. If the objection to other administrators is made simultaneous, an objection may carry out congestion and may get confused.
  4. Other administrators can be intervened in this affair.
  5. Possibilly other administrators do not correspond in the situation where Sys.Op Lonicera does not correspond to the appeal.

Since the best for me is, that Sys.op Lonicera solve misunderstanding in the discussion with me,

I think that it is difficult to expect such correspondence.

At least, if Mr. Lonicera declare "I won't correspond to the appeal. Appeal to other sys.op.", the posibility of acceptance of appeal by other Sys.op may increase.

Thank you for your consideration. Penpen0216 11:00, 29 September 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Copyright violation in Shabano

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Shabano, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Shabano is unquestionably copyright infringement, and no assertion of permission has been made.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Shabano, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 06:01, 4 May 2008 (UTC)