User talk:Mr KEBAB/Archive 19

Archive 15

←

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

A small request

When you add a reply, can you keep the section link (/* ... */) in the edit summary? It makes it easier to track conversations in the watchlist and revision history. Thanks. Nardog (talk) 10:49, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

So... could you do that or not? JFYI, what I usually do is press Tab ↹ → when the focus is on the edit box and then enter e.g. "re", then hit Enter to publish the changes. Nardog (talk) 10:46, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

@Nardog: I'll write that somewhere, thanks. I actually have no idea why I'm doing that, maybe I just want my edit summaries to be shorter. Mr KEBAB (talk) 12:37, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

I appreciate it. Nardog (talk) 13:06, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

May 2018

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for using the "thanks" function for harassment. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Bishonen | talk 18:48, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

---

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

 Bishonen | talk 19:38, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

• Mr KEBAB, I've removed your intemperate post and revoked talkpage access during the remainder of the block. Exploding over a block is something I have understanding of — a block is a shock — and you're still welcome back after it. Bishonen | talk 19:40, 26 May 2018 (UTC).

@Bishonen: I didn't expect that, but thanks for the second chance. I apologize for my language, it was too strong.

I was actually serious with the password though. That's why I'm writing from a brand new account. Kbb2 (talk) 10:49, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Come back

I was just editing and came across this. Am not sure of the background but I figure a fight got raw after awhile. Just penning this to let you know I appreciate your contributions here and would like you to come back; also an apology if I in any way contributed to your frustration. I would think a few others who worked with you do too. Had a fair share of raw arguments in real life so I guess it's kind of normal. I just feel that if Wikipedia loses you just because of this reason it's quite sad.--Officer781 (talk) 13:27, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

I share Officer781's sentiments. You seemed to be really keen on improving and maintaining the quality of Wikipedia until just a couple days ago, so this comes as a surprise, although I also fail to see what the catalyst was. Your contributions were invaluable to me, as were to many others I'm sure. One of the things I appreciated in your edits is that you are one of the biggest defenders of Wikipedia's verifiability policy I've ever seen. Someone at AN3 has portrayed you in a pretty negative light, but not me. I won't deny that you had problems dealing with other editors, especially those who were not so well-informed about the topics you specialized in, but I know that was precisely because you cared so much—almost too much, as you said yourself—about the quality of Wikipedia. I stepped in from time to time to defend you or give you some unsolicited advice,[1][2][3][4][5] and I apologize if you found them or any of my edits discouraging in any way, but I want you to know I did them precisely because I found your contributions too valuable and I didn't want this very kind of thing to happen.

The world will not end tomorrow. Take a break, edit less, or declare retirement and get a new identity in a way that won't qualify as scrutiny evasion—just don't quit in the heat of the moment. It'd be too great a loss for us to see you go in this way. Nardog (talk) 21:38, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Let me just say that I agree with giving you a second chance. But if you act that way you did again, I hope the ban is permanent. Regadless of your contributions on wikipedia, you have no right to do what you did. You seem like you did contributed alot of good things to wikipedia. Please be kinder towards others if you do decide to come back. Jakeroberts93 (talk) 23:06, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

@Jakeroberts93: Hi Jake, bye Jake. Kbb2 (talk) 10:45, 28 May 2018 (UTC)