User talk:MykhalBot

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing.

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 ~~~~}}. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 20:00, 19 December 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).

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

Request reason:

Won't continue bot tasks until bot status provided. Or at least fix the wrong "Spamming links to external sites" reason (edit summary info flag incorrectly indicated so, while the bot was in fact fixing/extracting Google search URL result tracking URL to the real target URL) to true statement like "Bot-ing without being approved bot" or so, please.

Decline reason:

The bot shouldn't edit without approval. Of the edits I checked, every single one was useless, so I rather doubt the task will be approved any time soon. That said, I agree that spamming wasn't the issue here; I have removed the relevant category. Fixing the block log entry would just be make-work, though. Huon (talk) 00:08, 20 December 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.

Why are you operating this bot without approval? — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 20:02, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Uh! What a html soup! To the current topic: Why? Not doing anything harmful. Making approx. 20 edits without a bot status after asking for it is a common practice on some wikis anyway. Btw, why do you revert legitimate edits? Related talk: User_talk:Coffee#MykhalBot. —Mykhal (talk) 20:11, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the message on my talk page. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 20:23, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Huon: I disagree slightly about changing block rationale being busywork; sometimes the block log is the only thing people look at, and in this case they'd get an unfair picture of what happened. Left the block in place, just made it clear in the block log this wasn't spamming. --Floquenbeam (talk) 03:04, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I strongly disagree with Huon's evaluation of the bot's actions, that they are useless edits. Following talk here. —Mykhal (talk) 07:32, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]