User talk:SAMBLAman

Please reflect that Kanye is running as a independent with republican ties. An Joe Biden is the primary contender against donald trump.

		The Afghanistan Barnstar of National Merit
		For the Creation of "Fall of Kabul (2021)" Randoperson1 (talk) 05:21, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations Randoperson1 (talk) 05:21, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How good am I!SAMBLAman (talk) 17:45, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SAMBLAman! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like 78.26 (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:02, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello SAMBLAman and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your contributions, such as the ones to 2020 United States presidential election, do not conform to our policies. For more information on this, see Wikipedia's policies on vandalism and limits on acceptable additions. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the sandbox (but beware that the contents of the sandbox are deleted frequently) rather than in articles.

If you still have questions, there is a new contributors' help page, or you can click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia.

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing and being a

And would this be because it's the FALL of Kabul, rather than the 'Battle of' ?: https://www.smh.com.au/world/middle-east/taliban-approach-kabuls-outskirts-attack-north-afghan-city-20210814-p58isx.html

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

Battle of Kabul (2021) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted

.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Kabul (2021) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

AINH (talk) 10:37, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not move a page to a title that is harder to follow, or move it unilaterally against naming conventions or consensus. This includes making page moves while a discussion remains underway. We have some guidelines to help with deciding what title is best for a subject. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. Thank you. Gotitbro (talk) 17:46, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

I noticed your recent edit to Abdul Ghani Baradar does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. With a

 → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks!

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in

page-specific restrictions

, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the

guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here

. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

― 

]

Clown porn

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Coulrophilia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cosmopolitan.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Coulrophilia has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Crossroads ^-talk- 07:38, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Coulrophilia has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:31, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the article Australia–New Zealand relations, you changed "some time before 1300" to "in waves roughly between 1320 and 1350" even though the linked source explicitly said it was "colonised in the late 13th century." This looks like deliberate mischief, vandalism. Did I miss something there? Doczilla _{@SUPERHEROLOGIST} 07:46, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That comes from here and I'll add its source. Definitely not vandalism; it conforms to my own belief. SAMBLAman (talk) 08:17, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:ZZ Top, you may be blocked from editing.
I'm not sure what you are trying to achieve with edits like these, but consider this an only warning – any more vandalism, and you will be blocked from editing. SuperMarioMan (Talk) 23:49, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Around our parts,

Dick Face was as famous for his name as Dick Assman would be around yours.— Preceding unsigned

comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of flippant, vulgar and titillating proper names is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of flippant, vulgar and titillating proper names until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

(t · c) buidhe 04:57, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#SAMBLAman_seemingly_not_here_to_build_an_encyclopedia

Dronebogus (talk) 13:17, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Jehochman ^Talk 14:28, 29 November 2021 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

My bad for trashing the filthy rumours aired to the ZZ Top talkpage in that way. Two wrongs don't make a right. Welcome me back. SAMBLAman (talk) 23:22, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Doesn't really address why you were blocked, and seems rather flippant. — Daniel Case (talk) 06:40, 7 December 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.

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

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 ~~~~}}.

• You were also using your account for what basically amounted to vandalism. See reasoning at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1085#SAMBLAman_seemingly_not_here_to_build_an_encyclopediaDronebogus (talk) 00:57, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, nice try. Go for the contract moving goalposts at the end of football season.

The reason for the block was stated concisely and with specificity further below; answered in similar spirit.

Expressing yourself undaintily on talkpages isn't 'vandalism'. And it isn't compiling an article with a couple dozen references about a fetish that's out there, or one that's a further extension of Place names considered unusual, List of chemical compounds with unusual names, etc SAMBLAman (talk) 06:02, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but WP basically has an unofficial zero-tolerance policy on racism— if it’s ironic it’s trolling, which is

WP:NOTHERE and therefore no real reason to unblock you unless you explicitly state how and where you plan to genuinely improve the encyclopedia. But in any case I’ll let the admins decide this one. Dronebogus (talk) 06:42, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Editing for your account has been disabled indefinitely for this edit: 1. You may request unblock by explaining what constructive things you plan to do, and showing that you sincerely understand the need to avoid making similarly offensive edits in the future. Jehochman ^Talk 14:41, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]