User talk:Shayanrm

March 2009
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. ''Wikipedia does not tolerate behaviour like the behaviour you are exhibiting. Even if you are correct this is not the way to go about it. A likely consequence is that you may even be correct but still find that you are blocked. If you have something substantive to say about trademarks, use the article talk page or ask for an experienced administrator to help you with this problem'' Fiddle Faddle (talk) 23:31, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Three-revert rule
Please read Three-revert rule. As I have said before, you may even be correct, but this is not the way to handle it. The danger is that your behaviour will get you blocked. You may even have done enough to be blocked. That would be a shame.

Now you may or may not be experienced in trade mark law. But you are also too close to this problem to make a good judgement. Please ask someone who is not involved in this article for help. You can do this by placing helpme on this page and placing your request after it. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 23:37, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

To: Timtrent
Thanks for your advise. This violation of trademark is beginning damaging the company. I respectfully request shutting the page down until it is mediated by Wiki or a federal court. I need your email to send legal correspondences to you as it has been already submitted to the involved parties.
 * You will NOT make legal threats. Read WP:LEGAL Fiddle Faddle (talk) 23:55, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case
You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Sockpuppet investigations/Shayan.mashatian for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 00:01, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Response
It was not a legal threat and sorry if it sounds like that. Here is the situation: A user first claims he is an inventor of something (which himself found articles on same concept published 5 years before him). Then he creates a page in wiki starting by his name that he is the inventor (which is not a wiki standard; in an article, you usually introduce a concept, give background, explain it in details, and then you can also mention to those who contributed to it. none of above has been followed in the page originally created.). Then he has been informed he is using a trademark and he has no permission to use it. What else should be done? We are in the process of asking mediation by Wiki. Please advise how you can help to resolve the issue faster.


 * I lost any interest in a dialogue with you as soon as you issued that threat. If you want help please follow the suggestion above.  For my part I have made what I still perceive as a threat from you into a report on the Admin noticeboard.  Someone else can judge.  I made previously substantial and good suggestions and you have chosen to ignore them.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 00:53, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

You are claiming that your company (CellTrust) is the first creator of Secure SMS Messaging while we know that there are many schemes presented in previous years (as it is indicated by yourself too) while the only proofs by you is a news published by Reuters in Feb. 2008. Regardless, your claimed trademark is SecureSMS (a single word). It is not "Secure SMS" (two words) and it differs from SSMS, SMSSec, and SafeSMS that are proposed over the years. Ok. We will not use your SecureSMS but we will use "Secure SMS" everywhere we want and no one can prevent us from using such general words in context. At end, I advice you to change your manner of conduct, as I found in your talk page that you are threading other people without having adequate proofs and justifications. If your trademark is SecureSMS, you should know that no one has used your SecureSMS. The other thing is that you did not created any page for your claimed SecureSMS but you are vandalising other scientific pages and threading other people. (See also my talk page to see my answer to what you have expressed there) Quickwash (talk) 20:46, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Response
No problem if you don't want to accept it has not been a treat; it was meant to get you in the loop of communications already done as you showed interest.

One more note: I was using shayanrm for a long time and I decided to switch to a full identity of using my firstname.lastname moving forward; Obviously if someone wants to make changes anonymously wouldn't use such obvious username. That is my intention to use the new username; please remove the tag you have added to my page or I can do it. Thanks.

Conflict of Interest
If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors;
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam); and,
 * 4) avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 09:57, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors;
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam); and,
 * 4) avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 09:57, 5 April 2009 (UTC)