User talk:Here for the snacks

they lied to me

This page contains material that is kept because it is considered humorous.
Such material is not meant to be taken seriously.

they told me there would be snacks. there are no snacks here. liars. all of you. Here for the snacks (talk) 17:25, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Flamingo (YouTuber) (February 10)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Theroadislong was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.

Theroadislong (talk) 12:58, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Here for the snacks! Having an article 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! Theroadislong (talk) 12:58, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Flamingo (YouTuber)

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 Draft:Flamingo (YouTuber), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. Jalen Folf (talk) 05:19, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for advertising or promotion.

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 ~~~~}}.

Deb (talk) 08:56, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

did you even look at my contributions? Here for the snacks (talk) 15:19, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ive been blocked for advertising, and also implied sockpuppeting. see: (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Theroadislong#about_my_draft_that_you_deleted)

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).

Here for the snacks (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

i have been blocked from editing for apparently "advertising". (the block also accused me of sockpuppeting.) even though my account is not affiliated with any company, institution, or any other type of business. I only wanted to create a draft about a popular YouTuber. I also never intended to have that draft mislabeled as advertising, or have my account mislabeled as an advertiser/spam bot. I apologize for this misconception, however, I have a feeling that the admin who blocked me did so without checking my other contributions, which are not promoting said YouTuber, or any other business. I also have never vandalized any page or did anything else that could warrant a block. this is extremely infuriating as I just wanted to help Wikipedia a better place. as for the implied sockpuppeting, I do have another account I used for mobile, but it is inactive now. please consider unblocking me. sincerely, Here for the snacks (talk) 14:38, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

We're interested in knowing specific topics you would edit about, or specific edits you would make to improve this encyclopedia, not a general statment of intent. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 09:55, 2 March 2021 (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.

if i were to go into more detail about what i would edit would you consider rethinking the deny? sincerely, Here for the snacks (wanna chat?) 16:04, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt you're a sock puppet of anyone, though you do have an alternate account, Comically large spoon (talk · contribs). Can you tell us what kinds of edits you'd make if you were unblocked? Your edits so far have not been especially disruptive, but they were also not especially helpful. It seems like you think that Wikipedia is a free host for fan sites or a social networking website where you can joke around with friends. However, this is an encyclopedia. If you're not here to write encyclopedia articles, you're on the wrong website. Although we do have articles about YouTube channels, we only write articles about them when they satisfy our inclusion criteria. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:19, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the quick response, as for what edits I would make, I'd probably tone it down on the humor and look for more encyclopedic content that I could edit with confidence that I knew what I was doing. as for comically large spoon, that is the inactive mobile account I talked about in the unblock request. Here for the snacks (talk) 20:58, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. Are you able to tell us what kind of edits you'd make / topics you'd edit if unblocked? SQL ^{Query me!} 04:58, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I did. Here for the snacks (talk) 20:32, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ha this is the reason why Wikipedia needs to be more enjoyable. This guy is reasonable and 331dots reason for declining ban in not justified. Spongebob796 (talk) 08:12, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]