Cool three

Your farewell message

I hope that you will come back under another name - after a break from Wikipedia, if that is what is required.

I think it would be a loss if you were to permanently go away, but whatever you choose to do, I wish you much success and happiness in your life.

Regards, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 15:58, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Best wishes on your future endevours

I am sad to see you go. I have enjoyed and been educated by a variety of your articles. While it is true that i am not the among the more prolific article writers i try to help out where i can. I was going to change my comment from "Next time, maybe" to "Next time, for sure" when i found you had withdrawn. I realise this is likely to be blanked but i just wanted to say "i thank you" for all that you have put into Wikipedia. delirious & lost ☯ ^~hugs~ 16:04, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I am truly saddened that it has come to this. Fare well in whatever you now do, but if at some point you do return and give us another chance, please consider just reopening this or your other account - if only to keep an eye on the articles you wrote here. ϢereSpielChequers 16:32, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

As am I, although we didn't ever interact substantially that I recall. While I can't agree with everything you say on your user page I can understand your frustration given what's happened, and I wish you the best for the future: life is too short to let it get you down. Perhaps I'll see you around if you do ever decide to slough back towards Bethlehem. Olaf Davis (talk) 19:04, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Cool three

I understand that you are embarrassed, however we do not as standard blank a failed RfA. SilkTork *^YES! 18:13, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I believe we've established consensus some time ago, that this is alright if the nominee wishes it. I see no problem with it. Anyway Cool three, I don't know if you're around to read this, but I've started a topic on ANI about your user page. It's okay the vent some anger, but you've basically turned it into an attack page. I hope you would refactor some of it.--Atlan (talk) 18:49, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I'll accept consensus on that, though it was my understanding that a project page was not blanked unless there was some personal information on that page.

As regards the user page. It has been brought to my attention that I am mentioned, and I wish to let Cool three know that it was not my desire to offend. I was not commenting on your mainspace contributions, which do add to the encyclopedia, and which you should be proud of. We are grateful to you for those contributions. My comments regarding commitment were regarding the sporadic nature of your involvement because a pattern of occasional editing doesn't give the community confidence in that user's overall commitment to the project. It wasn't intended as a personal criticism, nor to diminish your valuable contributions, and I do apologise that you have been offended by my clumsy wording. SilkTork *^YES! 19:19, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

I am very surprised to see myself quoted on your home page. I wish that I came to your attention under more pleasant circumstances. Please take care of yourself. You deserve better and I hope you that there is happiness in your future. Warrah (talk) 19:14, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I am sorry that it had to end in such a miserable way. I wish you success and luck in your future. Please remember, three FAs is a gargantuan task, and not one to be forgotten. And I hope you are remembered in whichever way you wish. ceranthor 20:59, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Clearly, we screwed this one up. Please forgive the community for our collective lapse in judgment.--Father Goose (talk) 09:10, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Did we?--Atlan (talk) 18:43, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm not saying I personally would have restored the admin bit, but we could have been more civil in how we turned down the reapplication.--Father Goose (talk) 21:33, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, what I mean is, that now it seems this account wasn't really legit anyway, judging by the checkuser block.--Atlan (talk) 21:55, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, hindsight is 20/20. I'd still have no qualms about expressing sympathy toward a user in his apparent situation.--Father Goose (talk) 05:39, 6 March 2010 (UTC)