User talk:SAMCOcreator1655

Yokohama Minatomirai Railway Y000 series moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Yokohama Minatomirai Railway Y000 series, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Dan arndt (talk) 06:08, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dan arndt Please note that Nyamo Kurosawa and Calvinkulit wanted to team up to create a page for the Y000 series rolling stock. Sam (talk) 12:23, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They can work on it in draft space and when it is sufficiently referenced - lodge it through the AfC process. Dan arndt (talk) 13:32, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dan arndt Why will you not question them instead? They started it first. Sam (talk) 14:48, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Yokohama Minatomirai Railway Y000 series has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Yokohama Minatomirai Railway Y000 series. Thanks! Dan arndt (talk) 06:09, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Yokohama Minatomirai Railway Y000 series (May 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by DoubleGrazing were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Yokohama Minatomirai Railway Y000 series and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:07, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, SAMCOcreator1655! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:07, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Yokohama Minatomirai Railway Y000 series has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Yokohama Minatomirai Railway Y000 series. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 13:10, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:AirbusA350500 per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AirbusA350500. 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 for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 00:30, 27 May 2024 (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).

SAMCOcreator1655 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Let me explain, please. So I was just looking through the draft for the Y000 series train, and I looked through the “Pages that link here” function, and saw this IP address talk page. I was curious and saw that User:DoubleGrazing had mistaken me for this IP address. It would have been obvious that this account was blocked in error. It would be likely that User:DoubleGrazing had misunderstood my reply. As for the “live near this IP address”, I had misspoke and actually meant that I did not know this IP address and did not know why they would mistake this IP address for the actual person who created the draft. Please note that SAMCOcreator1655 ≠ IP 220.255.180.65. SAMCOcreator1655 (talk) 07:54, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This is not remotely convincing. Yamla (talk) 12:18, 27 May 2024 (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.

Please don't ping me, I've no interest in your explanations.

And do not edit other users' comments, like you did in this SPI case.

Thank you. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:00, 27 May 2024 (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).

SAMCOcreator1655 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Allow me to elaborate, if you please. While perusing the draft for the Y000 series train, I happened upon the "Pages that link here" feature and stumbled upon this IP address talk page. Intrigued, I discovered that User:DoubleGrazing had erroneously associated me with said IP address. It seems evident that an oversight occurred in blocking this account. It is conceivable that User:DoubleGrazing misconstrued my response. Regarding the claim of residing near this IP address, I must clarify that I misspoke; I am not acquainted with this IP address and cannot fathom why it was linked to the draft's creator. Please understand that SAMCOcreator1655 is distinct from IP 220.255.180.65. SAMCOcreator1655 (talk) 23:59, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Posting an almost carbon copy of your previous request and expecting a different result is not a good strategy. 331dot (talk) 16:24, 9 June 2024 (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.

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).

SAMCOcreator1655 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I wish to address a significant misunderstanding that has led to the unwarranted blocking of my account. While traveling in a cab, I seized the opportunity to meticulously review the draft for the Y000 series train. To ensure precision, I verified my own IP address using the reliable resource whatismyipaddress.com. During this verification, I discovered an erroneous association between my account and a specific IP address. This mistake appears to have originated from DoubleGrazing's incorrect linkage. In the subsequent SPI case, I made efforts to correct DoubleGrazing's mistake, but unfortunately, my attempts were not successful. I believe my previous comments were misinterpreted, leading to this confusion. For clarity, I have no knowledge of the IP address in question, and any implication of residing near it was a misstatement on my part. It is crucial to delineate that this account bears no connection to that IP address. SAMCOcreator1655 (talk) 01:44, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You have seen effectively this same request declined twice already. Reposting it a third time will not produce a different result. More unconvincing unblock request like this will likely result your access to this page being revoked. Sir Sputnik (talk) 21:42, 15 June 2024 (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.

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).

SAMCOcreator1655 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

@Siawase: I am writing to appeal a block that was unfair, making obvious that it was not necessary to disrupt Wikipedia. Please thoroughly read everything I had written, as my appeals have been declined for not being remotely convincing, even though I made it as convincing as possible. I understand that we talked about some matter at Talk:Cinnamoroll, and I fixed it. Please let me tell you what had happened.

So I was just reviewing the draft for the Y000 series train. I then submitted my draft. Please take this matter as I looked through the "Pages that link here" function and saw an IP who was irrelevantly linked by User:DoubleGrazing. I tried to convince to them that they sent the message to the wrong person and I was the one who created the page, but in a misspeaking way. Immediately thereafter, User:DoubleGrazing went off to make a report in the SPI case without understanding what I actually meant, or they jumped onto a conclusion without thinking twice. And that was how the unfair block came about to my talk page.

I called this as unfair because I had no idea who this IP was, and who User:AirbusA350500 was either. I had no responsibility in getting blocked for something I was not aware of, or something I was accused for being a sockpuppet of someone whom I do not even know. This accusation could not be proven as a conclusion.

Please appreciatively consider looking into the matter and take some necessary action (which is not revoking my talk page editing ability) . Thank you for your co-operation to helping me define the block (if possible) . SAMCOcreator1655 (talk) 03:58, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

My use of the checkuser tool confirms the connection between the accounts. PhilKnight (talk) 16:51, 25 June 2024 (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.

Talk page access revoked for repetitive unblock requests.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:18, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]