User talk:Kensai Max

katana fix

You’ve got a good point, however I am not that great at writing. And from the archives it seems you’ve helped in the past when rewriting was needed to filter-out POV statements. So if you don’t mind my asking could you rewrite that paragraph and post it in here. Thank youFreepsbane 15:30, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And yeah it seems that all the editors stopped editing after this article made it to GA status. Maybe we’ve grown to complacent, thanks for reminding us. Freepsbane 15:33, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can do, thanks. I want katanas to get featured status, after all. Kensai Max 16:08, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For continuous behind the scenes in upgrades and aid. Freepsbane 00:14, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to let you know I’ve seen all the help you’ve given to the project, and appreciate the numerous subtle but valuable contributions you have provided.

Swordsmanship

I noticed that you seem to be quite a knowledgeable individual about Japanese swordsmanship as a whole, and not just a single school or piece of history. Your contributions to the swordsmanship article would be more than welcome. When you edit, keep in mind that the article is being written in a somewhat expanded WP:SS format. Each section should (if possible) contain a link to a significant article and then some brief information so that some information can be garnered from the page. I hope that you can find time for this - my own understanding of Japanese swordsmanship is embarrassingly minor (as it is with european swordsmanship, really). Thank you! -xiliquiern^talk 16:01, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be glad to see what I can do. It's nice seeing that someone finally got around to fixing up the Swordsmanship article. Kensai Max 16:18, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Q&A

hey I need to know about you are you nippon? - Some random dude who put this up on my main user page.

To take this literally, I am a red-blooded, stars and stripes-waving American of, if I am recalling correctly, primarily French, German and Scottish descent. My love of Japanese culture, history and martial arts is entirely unrelated to my family heritage. On another level, however, I am an American (one of the very few countries in the world with no ethnic strings attached!), and sushi and the katana are exactly as American as the saber and saurkraut. Kensai Max 23:44, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bugei blade? (Q&A 2)

My apologies for bothering you with such a question but I have been considering the purchase of a Bugei sword and by your last post you implied having knowledge of Bugei products, so I thought I would ask you; would you consider the [Wave Katana] a good blade for tameshigiri cutting. Your opinion would be appreciated, thank you. Freepsbane 01:14, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Personal Attack

Please refrain from personal attacks.--Asams10 02:32, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from refraining from the discussion. Kensai Max 23:33, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ACU controversy

Kensai, I think the RfC on the Talk:Army Combat Uniform page has established a consensus that criticism of the ACU based on reliable editorials, such as those posted on defensetech.org, are reasonable and should be included in the article. On the other hand, I think you have shown that there are several pieces of information which refute the claims that the universal pattern is ineffective, and I plan on including that information in the article also. If you still feel strongly about the reliability of the sources, even given the subjective nature of the criticism, then I urge you to bring it up on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. If you wish to reply to me, please do so on my talk page, as I do not often check other people's talk pages. Thanks, -Tmaull (talk) 16:59, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

UCP controversy

Kensai, please state your reasons in the discussion page for deleting my sourced content from Universal Camouflage Pattern. I am going to restore it, but I am more than willing to have a discussion with you about why you believe I am "stretching the sources". If you'd like, we can do another RfC. Please respond on my talk page or on the articles talk page. Thanks, Tmaull (talk) 16:40, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

144.226.230.36

Some dumbass from this IP recently posted something idiotic about the ACU controversy on my talk page (along with reverting recent edits by me to the article, which I have since undone). Real soldiers do not work for Sprint. This is what I'm saying about mall ninjas and random wankers on the internet. Who the hell are these people and what exactly is their problem with Army uniforms? Kensai Max (talk) 23:07, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Real soldiers who retired with over 20 years in service and then got a job in the civilian world just might.

What are YOUR qualifications regarding military matters? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.226.230.36 (talk) 11:43, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Time to stop.

Time for you to stop removing the referenced material at Multicam. It's well sourced, and at this point, you're just being disruptive. If you keep it up, you'll be blocked. It's as simple as that. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 21:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bring it. Kensai Max (talk) 00:35, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for a period of 24 hours as a result of your disruptive edits. You are free to make constructive edits after the block has expired, but please note that vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our policies concerning neutral point of view and biographies of living persons will not be tolerated. Mike H. Fierce! 16:47, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reason

I've blocked you after viewing your edit warring on MultiCam and your "bring it" taunt to the user you were in contention with. Removing sourced material and then warring about it is disruptive and will not be tolerated. Mike H. Fierce! 16:50, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Flimsy sources, flimsy reason. Kensai Max (talk) 01:48, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're still blocked anyway, so you have no choice but to sit it out and to absorb why you're actually blocked. And I'd read the civility guidelines while you're at it. Mike H. Fierce! 09:33, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blah blah blah. Kensai Max (talk) 12:21, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a problem with a source, please take it Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard here after you are unblocked. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:04, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He has a problem with Multicam in general, not with the source. No source will be good enough for him. I mean, FFS, we've been through Army.mil, a half dozen supporting images, and now a freaking magazine article picturing it. There's no doubt of the reliability of that source. Kensai Max's edit summaries, however, leave little doubt of his intentions. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 19:24, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't seek to disagree with you or weigh in one side or another, but instead try and direct him towards the appropriate place to take his viewpoint instead of outright removing a source that is viewed by others as credible and has credible publication details and deals with the topic. If the user does not wish to follow these steps, then he does not have to, but he will be forced into another situation like he is. I hope the user will be willing to take these actions. Ottava Rima (talk) 19:56, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've re-blocked you for 48 hours. Repeating behavior that you were blocked for and blowing off people who are giving you warnings is unwise. Phil Sandifer (talk) 19:32, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Every single source SWAT has provided has been absolute crap. I should not have to provide additional proof of that beyond that which I already have. This is a disgrace to Wikipedia. Kensai Max (talk) 22:03, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It was spelled out to you what you had to do, and you chose not to do it. It's your fault you were blocked twice, honestly. You could have prevented it. Mike H. Fierce! 03:55, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I reiterate my argument. This is pure bullshit. Talk about pompous, overbearing moderation. This laxity with sourcing is why Wikipedia is a joke on controversial subjects. Kensai Max (talk) 09:32, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And I reiterate a point someone else made: If you have a problem with a source, please take it Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard here after you are unblocked. We're not typing for our health. Mike H. Fierce! 10:14, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blah blah blah. This is clear-cut to the point of idiocy. It is unacceptable that I have to refer a clearly unreliable source to arbitration because SWAT decided to scream and whine over to the mods when I kept removing his bullshit. Kensai Max (talk) 13:11, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And your contentiousness, and lack of civility is likewise unacceptable. You've been told by no less than three admins to stop, and blocked twice over it. Maybe that's a good sign that you should indeed stop. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 14:27, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Waaaah. Go crawl back in your hole, kid. Kensai Max (talk) 17:24, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for 1 month for incivility and personal attacks. Next time its indefinite. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 20:30, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How cute. Kensai Max (talk) 21:47, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]