User talk:Samuel8281

August 2025

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:09, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Okay, sorry about that, Please reply Samuel8281 (talk) 14:18, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

September 2025

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia. 〜 Adflatuss • talk 00:13, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

Okay, I'll Stop. Samuel8281 (talk) 14:19, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

Tbh, I thought I was helping, Not hurting. Samuel8281 (talk) 14:24, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

October 2025

Hello, I'm LuniZunie. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Manslaughter seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. – LuniZunie ツ_(talk) 23:28, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Tfym

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Tfym requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. SLIDD yap 19:51, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Elimination Tower

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Elimination Tower requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Folkezoft (talk) 22:58, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

I suggest you refrain from attempting to create articles in mainspace. Please use Wikipedia:Article Wizard to create an article in draft space and submit it for review. Thanks. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 01:44, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

June 2026

Hello, I'm B.J. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Lake Tahoe seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ‎ — B.J (talk) 15:20, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Shut up emoji.jpeg

A tag has been placed on File:Shut up emoji.jpeg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a copyright violation and has no credible claim of non-free use or permission. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use it — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Folkezoft (talk) 05:11, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

June 2026

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then submit a request through the unblock wizard or through your talk page.  CoconutOctopus talk 13:45, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Why was I blocked Samuel8281 (talk) 14:45, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Your user page indicates that you are a former sockmaster, that you have been previously blocked, and at one point you made an edit while logged out telling someone that you were a sock. I will leave your unblock for another admin to review (since I was tangentially involved in the decision to block your account). Primefac (talk) 15:11, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

unblock|reason=The following request was written through the unblock wizard.

Can you explain, in your own words, what you were blocked for?

Alleged sock puppetry

If unblocked, what edits would you make and what (if applicable) would you do differently?

Request edit ability using my mentor

Is there anything else that may be helpful to your unblock request?

I do not own any sock puppets

Samuel8281 (talk) 14:48, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

unblock-auto|2=Clearly [[WP:NOTHERE|not here to build an encyclopedia]], likely a sock based upon behavioural evidence, admins can email me for more info if needed.|3=CoconutOctopus|4=25436918

unblock|reason=The following request was written through the unblock wizard.

Can you explain, in your own words, what you were blocked for?

Alleged sock puppetry, I only use this account

If unblocked, what edits would you make and what (if applicable) would you do differently?

I didn’t do anything wrong in the first place.

Is there anything else that may be helpful to your unblock request?

I was not a sock master, I just listed others, I researched this stuff. I only research it, those are just facts. I only use this account. All the accounts i listed were not owned by me, and put on my user page for entertainment purposes.

Samuel8281 (talk) 18:00, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Why was I blocked, I only used this one account. I’ve always thought about edits in one way. I never really did any harm to the website, what sockpuppets did I allegedly use? Please tell me the violations I allegedly did on those accounts, how many sock puppets do I allegedly have? Samuel8281 (talk) 20:34, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Do not abuse the help-me template in this manner. --Yamla (talk) 20:36, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Unblock requests

You had three simultaneous open unblock requests and a helpme request. One at a time, please, three is abusive, nor is the help-me template to be used for this. WP:GAB explains how to contest your block. --Yamla (talk) 20:36, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

June 2026

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.

In solidarity, asilvering (talk) 01:21, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

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).

Samuel8281 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

The following request was written through the unblock wizard.

Can you explain, in your own words, what you were blocked for?

Blocked for Listing accounts for entertainment purposes

If unblocked, what edits would you make and what (if applicable) would you do differently?

Remove all accounts listed (they were mistaken to be owned by me) I also will stop using my other accounts to say stuff like “I’m a sockpuppet of someone you know of.”

Is there anything else that may be helpful to your unblock request?

Although I always had interest at looking at block logs I never wanted to be blocked myself, and have always tried to help Wikipedia. I do not have ANY interest in vandalism and all edits are made for making Wikipedia more accurate.

Samuel8281 (talk) 13:08, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Confirmed sockpuppetry and this request is almost indistinguishable from trolling. Yamla (talk) 16:02, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

---

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.

• A checkuser confirmed sockpuppetry in a check on the technical information about your account. Wikipedia's servers have lots of information that can detect the use of multiple accounts.

In any case, if you're ever to come back to this project, there have been serious problems with the edits you've made, and many have resembled vandalism. They've ranged from fairly innocent edits that represented poor grammar or misuse of English, to adding your personal opinion to articles, to unsourced information, to outright trolling other user's talk pages . I believe most, if not all, of the edits you've made to articles have been either immediately reverted or had to be fixed later. Along with the sockpuppetry, this will likely need to be addressed. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 14:27, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

Idk any sock puppets, which ones did I use Samuel8281 (talk) 19:26, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

The Help-me template is not to be used for garbage like this. Do that again and you'll lose access to your talk page. Confirmed to Freezenite, Highly likely to BeyondMeNow, plus WP:LOUTSOCK. --Yamla (talk) 19:37, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

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).

Samuel8281 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

The following request was written through the unblock wizard.

Can you explain, in your own words, what you were blocked for?

I was accused of socking a account, I listed some on my talk page, for entertainment purposes

If unblocked, what edits would you make and what (if applicable) would you do differently?

I would stop doing anything wrong and think harder on edit and account creation decisions.

Is there anything else that may be helpful to your unblock request?

I have ALWAYS tried to put Wikipedias rules first, I do not EVER mean any harm or do negative things, I think about an edit every time. So all harm was unintentional and I would like to know more. The edits were made to help more than harm, I am willing and always will be when it comes to helping Wikipedia grow.

Samuel8281 (talk) 19:46, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

Decline reason:

This unblock request is so unconvincing that I'm wondering if you're just taking the Mickey Bliss? In any case, I think by now your best chance is with the standard offer, see WP:SO.

If you intend to file another appeal, do it properly, not like this again. You are currently closer to losing editing access to this page than you are to being unblocked. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:44, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

---

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.

Please list all of the accounts you have ever created on Wikipedia. In solidarity, asilvering (talk) 20:38, 23 June 2026 (UTC) {{unblock|reason=<small>The following request was written through the [[Wikipedia:Unblock wizard|unblock wizard]].</small>{{pb}} '''''Please list all accounts you have used besides this one.'''''{{pb}} Freezenite BeyondMeNow{{pb}} '''''Have you taken the standard offer? (six months with no edits)'''''{{pb}} No.{{pb}} '''''Is there anything else that may be helpful to your unblock request?'''''{{pb}} I was told to list these accounts by a administrator {{pb}} Samuel8281 (talk) 20:48, 23 June 2026 (UTC)}}

You were asked to list your other accounts, not to file another unblock request, hence I've neutered this template. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:39, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

If your gonna Harrass me I'm gonna mute you.

Samuel8281 (talk) 14:30, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

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

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

---

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the Unblock Ticket Request System that have been declined, leading to the posting of this notice.

UTRS appeal #114540

was declined by another admin. User is banned from UTRS for six months. --Yamla (talk) 15:17, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

July 2026

Asilvering, Doublegrazing It's obvious I can see I made mistakes, and I thank you for clarifying it, (it was obvious) and I can understand the frustration during it. It's easy for me to slip up and you were right about me knowing I did something. As it's common for people who are shy and nervous of communities and all that stuff, it's very easy to do something bad, wait a hot minute, and then pretend to forget about it, and it was easier for me to act clueless it the time.

I was told to list all accounts I created: •Freezenite •BeyondMeNow •Anonymousx8

~2026-42358-66 (talk) 20:13, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

Srry I forgot Wikirevenger ~2026-42358-66 (talk) 20:16, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

You are banned from UTRS for six months and your talk page access was removed. If you'd like to comment on your talk page, the proper approach is an appeal to UTRS to ask to have your talk page access restored no sooner than January 12, 2027. You currently have no rights on English Wikipedia, including to use your talk page, so this may be considered a new instance of block evasion, and tolling of any standard offer request. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 20:21, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

And this edit is definitely a new instance of block evasion. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 20:22, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

For god sakes, I'm trying to talk things out with you, you have to be considerate for the sake of my mind, and, IM GOING CRAZZZY! I am asking for one little piece of understanding. ~2026-42358-66 (talk) 20:29, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

You are not a victim. You were blocked due to your actions. Then you lost your talk page access due to your actions. Then you used three sockpuppet accounts to evade the block, all because of your actions. You've also evaded blocks with multiple temporary accounts, all by your choice. Then you lost UTRS access, also due to your actions.

If you want a chance to possibly return to this project someday, stop evading your block. Outside of reading English Wikipedia, you have no part in this project at this time, and every single action you've taken since being blocked has made it less likely you'll ever be unblocked. I want blocked editors to get chances to return and do better, but you're acting in exactly the opposite way from the editors who gets those additional chances. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 20:52, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

Hi Samuel, I appreciate the apology you emailed me, but please don't contact anyone about your block on English Wikipedia until your UTRS ban has been lifted. I would suggest waiting six months from today - that is, until January 31 - before appealing. In solidarity, asilvering (talk) 21:26, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

This really should not come as a surprise: please do not contact people about it on Discord either. In solidarity, asilvering (talk) 19:39, 6 August 2026 (UTC)