User talk:Kansascitt1225

1 year without editing unblock request (keeping it short as previously suggested)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Kansascitt1225 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

(keeping it short for WP:TLDR) Hi Wikipedia community, it has been over 1 year since I edited on Wikipedia without evading my block or breaking community rules. I would like to be given another chance to edit. I realized that my blocking was due to my behavior of creating multiple accounts and using them on the same page and creating issues during a disagreement. I was younger then and am now able to communicate more effectively with others. I intend to respect community rules and not be disruptive to the community. I was upset years ago when I mentioned Kansas City’s urban decay and it was reverted as false and I improperly reacted in a disruptive way that violated the community rules. The mistake I made which caused the disruptive behavior was that I genuinely thought people were reverting my edits due to the racist past of this county and keeping out blacks and having a dislike for the county. I also thought suburbs always had more single family housing and less jobs than cities. In this part of the United States a suburb means something different than what it means in other parts of the world and is more of a political term for other municipalities which caught me off guard and wasn’t what I grew up thinking a suburb was.[1] Some of these suburbs have lower single family housing rates and higher population density and this specific county has more jobs than the “major city” (referenced in previous unblock request if interested). This doesn’t excuse my behavior but shows why I was confused and I should have properly addressed it in the talk pages instead of edit warring or creating accounts. After my initial blocking, I made edits trying to improve the project thinking that would help my case when it actually does the opposite because I was bypassing my block which got me community banned to due the automatic 3 strikes rule. I have not since bypassed my block. I’m interested in car related things as well as cities and populations of the United States and want to improve these articles using good strong references. Thanks for reading. Kansascitt1225 (talk) 04:46, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

Unblocking per successful appeal to the community. Welcome back. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 20:00, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Beeblebrox: and @Yamla: I’m curious if you can post this to the admin notice board again to try to get another chance at unblocking. I was suggested to keep it short so I tried to keep it shorter this time. I’m not sure if you’re able to do this or not or if I have to wait 6 more months but either way is fine. Thanks Kansascitt1225 (talk) 04:55, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

{{checkuser needed}} voorts (talk/contributions) 23:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Kansascitt1225: I would be happy to post this over after a clean CU. Before I do so, I would recommend explaining why your edits were disruptive. Additionally, the sentence about why you objected to "largely suburban" seems to be a bit defensive. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:38, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Voorts: - I have run a checkuser and there is no obvious socking. PhilKnight (talk) 03:45, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Kansascitt1225, I agree with voorts that you should probably change the "largely suburban" line, though not because it strikes me as defensive, more because it gives people a reason to avoid commenting at all. You can be specific about what you did and why you won't do it again without referring to the specifics of the dispute itself. Basically, the more you make it about you, and the less you make it about any particular fact, the better (imo). For an unrelated example, I think something like "I immediately jumped to the conclusion that the other editors in the dispute were biased against me because of racism, and became angry about it, but really they were just objecting to my use of unreliable sources" is clearly understandable to the people who will be reading a ban appeal at AN, but something like "I tried to fix the population figures for Cityname, which wrongly understated the number of Minoritygroup there, but I kept being reverted by other editors and... (etc)" can make others feel like they need to be some kind of an expert on that topic to weigh in, and also sounds a bit like you still haven't let it go or still don't actually understand what you did wrong. -- asilvering (talk) 04:26, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Voorts: I changed my request to make it explain more where my point of view and confusion was coming from and how I should have reacted differently instead of it sounding defensive or trying to justify my actions. I think that sounds better and would appreciate it being posted to the notice board unles you have any other advice. Thank you Kansascitt1225 (talk) 06:38, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Asilvering: looks okay to me. Do you have any other suggestions? voorts (talk/contributions) 14:48, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I still think this is more specific information than AN really needs or wants to decide an unblock, but this expanded version has really improved it with the added context, without hitting tl;dr territory. Better to keep it from the heart and not go through any more iterations. Let's post it. -- asilvering (talk) 19:50, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Appeal posted: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Kansascitt1225 ban appeal. voorts (talk/contributions) 21:24, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Voorts, since there's no firm opposition, I think we can probably close this as successful. -- asilvering (talk) 02:12, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Kansascitt1225: do you have a response to FOARP's comment? voorts (talk/contributions) 17:57, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Voorts: Sorry about the late response I’ve been really busy today.

Yes I can write in paragraphs and list different ideas in separate paragraphs instead of a giant run on sentence.

I wasn’t trying to right great wrongs but noticed the contrast of the definition of suburban on Wikipedia and these communities being described as suburban (meanwhile some of these suburbs verifiably having lower residential to job ratio than the city and also a higher overall population density with some suburbs gaining population during the day due to commuters coming into them). This is essentially why on my case page It says I feel as tho something had to be “fixed”. I thought my edits were being removed simply because people didn’t like this place or some of its past so I felt as tho I was simply being purposefully misled which caused me to not follow proper civility.

I just wanted to clarify that these places weren’t only residential and were major employment areas that they sometimes have a lower percentage of single family homes. This to me was always the opposite of what suburban meant, atleast what I learned during grade school and what it says on Wikipedia. That’s where the confusion came from. Kansascitt1225 (talk) 06:17, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think the definition of suburban on Wikipedia as "predominantly residential" is not the most accurate. I searched the first ten results for suburban on Google, the first result stated that a suburban area separates residential and commercial buildings, several results stated that a suburban area does not have many tall buildings, a result stated that some suburban areas are independent from their central city. If you want to clarify that "these places weren’t only residential", I think discussing a change to the suburban page is the approach that is most likely to provide you success in convincing others. Kenneth Kho (talk) 11:44, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@User:HouseBlaster Thanks I’ll make sure to only use 1 account this time. I will use the talk page if one of my edits are reverted especially on Kansas City related articles. Kansascitt1225 (talk)

Hey @User:HouseBlaster Am I allowed to edit my user page ? Not sure if I’m allowed to edit yet although I am able to. It still says I’m blocked indefinitely as a sock on my user page. I think an administrator has to change it and I’m not allowed to but I’m not sure, Thanks. Kansascitt1225 (talk)

You are free to remove that notice. Best, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:08, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Kansascitt1225: I can delete your user page so you can have a clean start, if you'd like. Also, please sign your comments using ~~~~ so that they're dated. Best, voorts (talk/contributions) 02:11, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@voorts Yeah that would be great if you could clear that thanks. I‘be only been using 3 tildes I’ll start using 4 Kansascitt1225 (talk) 02:18, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. voorts (talk/contributions) 02:44, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]