User talk:Rbka

Welcome!

Hello, Rbka, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Nordic skiing. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! User:HopsonRoad 01:05, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Gallery

Thank you for expanding your explanation. (I must admit that I'm surprised that no-one has pointed this out to me in my 10 years as a wikipedian, but that's hardly your fault, is it!) Cheers & thanks, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:28, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A pity you ruined that nice sentiment by stalking my edits and undoing them, isn't it. Rbka (talk) 14:36, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The interested observer can see Pdfpdf's response here. There was an excellent opportunity here, of course, and now it is gone. Drmies (talk) 02:29, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2017

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

— Berean Hunter (talk) 02:26, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed to Two.25.45.251.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 02:27, 7 November 2017 (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).

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

Request reason:

Some kind of crazy accusation, for editing an absurdly bad plot section in a Tom and Jerry article?? Amazing.

Decline reason:

That does not address the reason for your block. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:03, 7 November 2017 (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.

That there are at least two people who want text like "But Jerry plugs his tail into the light socket, lighting poor Tom like a Christmas tree, and pushes a roller skate under the cat's foot for final measure, sending him crashing into Spike!" in the encyclopaedia is appalling. Making childish accusations against me to ensure that this excruciatingly awful text is forced in is scarcely believable. Rbka (talk) 08:42, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, your other account was blocked in September and you are using this one to sock illegitimately to evade a block. It has nothing to do with your edit to the article.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 17:02, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]