User talk:Squeaky Rubber Duck

Thank you folks! All resolved I believe.

This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
SUMMARY: I just made one edit, adding the model name to Land Rover (from Land Rover to Land Rover Freelander 2). My user name "Prince Phillip in a collision" was chosen only after I tried many times to select user names, all rejected by the computer. I have since changed my user name to the exact name suggested by an administrator. The blocking administrator must be on vacation and I have patiently waited for unblock for several days. Squeaky Rubber Duck (talk) 20:32, 21 January 2019 (UTC) January 2019 - Blocked because of User Name Your account has been blocked indefinitely because it is being used only for vandalism. Furthermore, your username is a blatant violation of our username policy, meaning that it is profane, threatens, attacks or impersonates another person, or suggests that your intention is not to contribute to the encyclopedia (see our blocking and username policies for more information). We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia, but users are not allowed to edit with inappropriate usernames and we do not tolerate 'bad faith' editing such as trolling or other disruptive behavior. If you think there are good reasons why these don't describe your account, or why you should be unblocked, you are welcome to appeal this block – read our guide to appealing blocks to understand more about unblock requests, and then add the text {{unblock-un|new username|reason=your reason here ~~~~}} at the end of your user talk page. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 20:39, 18 January 2019 (UTC) Template:Z13Template:Z18 This is my edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Prince_Philip%2C_Duke_of_Edinburgh&type=revision&diff=879072760&oldid=879072337 What I did: On 17 January 2019, Philip was involved in a serious car crash while driving his Land Rover, as he pulled out from a driveway onto the A149 near the Sandringham Estate changed to On 17 January 2019, Philip was involved in a serious car crash while driving his Land Rover Freelander 2, as he pulled out from a driveway onto the A149 near the Sandringham Estate See the Wikipedia Land Rover Freelander 2 article to see that there is such car. See the BBC News for evidence that the Duke of Edinburgh was driving a Freelander. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-46933739 , specifically "A new Freelander, the model the Prince was seen driving, was delivered to Sandringham on Friday." Conclusion: No reasonable person should consider this vandalism. Land Rovers can be very expensive. The fact that the Duke of Edinburgh was driving a Freelander 2, which was discontinued in 2014 and was one of the cheaper models may be of interest to the reader. This is why I inserted it. Please unblock This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without a good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked. Squeaky Rubber Duck (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) Requested username: new username (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Request reason: See above for proof that I did not commit vandalism. I can see that some people may not like my username. It was not my first choice, second choice, third choice, fourth choice, or fifth choice. Wikipedia kept saying that my other choices were either already in use or too similar to other usernames. Please note that I did not say Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh is a bad driver or should be ticket. My user name was Prince Phillip, not Philip, and the phrase "in a collision" is very bland and neutral. Still, I realize that some may not like it so I am willing to change it to something else. How about Subject of the Queen, Speeding is not recommended, or Sorry I will comply. I am not trying to be funny but have a difficult time finding usernames. Prince Phillip in a collision (talk) 21:01, 19 January 2019 (UTC) Decline reason: Firstly, you will indeed need to propose a new username (one, that is). If you have so much trouble finding an available one, let me help you: User:Squeaky Rubber Duck is up for grabs. Secondly, your justification for your edit doesn't hold water. There might be a Land Rover Freelander 2, there might have been a Land Rover Freelander delivered after the accident; no source says that a Land Rover Freelander 2 was the model driven in the accident. Wikipedia is not the place to tell the world about what you think is interesting. Huon (talk) 21:24, 19 January 2019 (UTC) https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6607197/That-quick-Prince-Philip-gets-new-Land-Rover-delivered-24-hours-car-crash.html The black Freelander was delivered to Sandringham at around Midday today It is an exact replica of the 4x4 Philip wrote-off in a Kia crash yesterday Another source confirming the car driven was a Land Rover Freelander. In any case, this is clearly NOT vandalism. {{unblock-un|Squeaky Rubber Duck}} Globally renamed 'Prince Phillip in a collision' to 'Squeaky Rubber Duck'. Another admin will consider your unblock request. Just Chilling (talk) 21:59, 19 January 2019 (UTC) This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request. Squeaky Rubber Duck (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) Request reason: I got my user name changed. Ready for unblock. See User:Just Chilling who sort of says I should ask for unblock. I was originally blocked for my user name and claims that I did vandalism. I am sorry that changing "Land Rover" to "Land Rover Freelander 2" was done and considered vandalism even though there are many news sources confirming the car that Prince Philip was driving was a Land Rover Freelander . I had no idea that Freelander was an obscene word in the English language. Squeaky Rubber Duck (talk) 22:05, 19 January 2019 (UTC) Accept reason: I think we can unblock you now. PhilKnight (talk) 21:11, 22 January 2019 (UTC) @Oshwah:- would you object to an unblock? PhilKnight (talk) 21:02, 20 January 2019 (UTC) @PhilKnight: @Oshwah:Please unblock. My writing in the article was clearly a good faith addition. Not a shred of vandalism. I changed my username to the exact one recommended by an administrator. I suspect that there was a pre-written vandalism+name reason that was selected even though it was not appropriate...blame that maybe on work overload. I have waited several days. Please offer good customer service at Wikipedia and do the unblock. Thank you. @Andrewa: @Beland: @Canley: @Dino: @Edcolins: Can one of you help. This is just a case of a block for a user name, since changed to the exact one suggested by an administrator. The blocking administrator possibly went on vacation. Please fill in and unblock. Thank you. FYI, I randomly chose people with a user name starting with A to E, Andrewa, Beland, Canley, etc. Squeaky Rubber Duck (talk) 20:28, 21 January 2019 (UTC) Can you explain why you have at least six other undisclosed accounts? —DoRD (talk)​ 01:06, 22 January 2019 (UTC) @DoRD: I did not know I have six. Block 5 of them but unblock this. I do know that I have at least another one but cannot remember the name. You see, if I forget the user name, I just start a new one and never use the old one, which I cannot remember the name. Squeaky Rubber Duck (talk) 19:08, 22 January 2019 (UTC) I am willing to make a bet. If I was editing the same articles with the 6 different user names, I will pay you MONEY. If it can be shown that I just serially used them, username 1 for a few days, forgot about it, then used username 2, you will pay me MONEY. I think the best thing would be if I could have a fresh start and receive the OK from you to create a new username and one that I can remember. Is that OK with you DoRD? (I was going to do that but then thought that I should get this Squeaky Rubber Duck thing resolved. Just give me the OK, please OR unblock this. I think I can remember this username better.)Squeaky Rubber Duck (talk) 19:20, 22 January 2019 (UTC) With help from Wikipedia, I have the following information User 1: started on October 31. Never logged in or edited after that. Did not edit any article that User 2-6 edited. User 2: started on November 7. Never logged in or edited after that. Did not edit any article that User 1 or 3-6 edited. User 3: started on December 25. Never logged in or edited after that. Did not edit any article that user 1-2 or 4-6 edited. User 4: started on January 3. Never logged in or edited after that. Did not edit any article that user 1-3 or 5-6 edited. User 5: started on January 5. Never logged in or edited after that. Did not edit any article that user 1-4 or user 6 edited. User 6: started on January 21. Thought that I should really clear this Squeaky Rubber Duck up so I did not edit at all with user 6. Squeaky Rubber Duck (talk) 19:28, 22 January 2019 (UTC) Thank you PhilKnight!

Nomination of 2019 Prince Philip road accident for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2019 Prince Philip road accident 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/2019 Prince Philip road accident 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. Oathswarm (talk) 10:17, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Cut-and-paste move

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give 2019 Prince Philip road accident a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into 2019 Prince Philip Road Accident and Licence Surrender. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. The correct intial step was to request undeletion to enable a page move. Just Chilling (talk) 21:54, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of 2019 Prince Philip Road Accident and Licence Surrender for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2019 Prince Philip Road Accident and Licence Surrender 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/2019 Prince Philip Road Accident and Licence Surrender 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. Just Chilling (talk) 22:16, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

Blocked

Also not clear to me but it seems that I have a lifetime prohibition to edit Wikipedia. Not 3 months. Not 6 months. Even greater than 70 years. Please do not be so harsh. In jail, it is supposed to be for reform but it is not clear what I did wrong. I did not sock puppet. However, I admit everything (not wanting to fight) and just want to know if you can not punish me so harshly. This is very stressful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Squeaky Rubber Duck (talk • contribs) 19:36, 18 February 2019 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

please unblock. I am not a sockpuppet but have edited in a non-warlike fashion. Someone put a checkuser on me and it did not say sockpuppet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Squeaky_Rubber_Duck/Archive Please. Thank you. I hope that I am not being block as a punishment for not liking how I researched about Prince Philip, including references but I am ok with not editing that article. If you want to change the block to a week, I am ok with that. Please.

Decline reason:

As I watched the AFD unfold it was obvious to me that either User:Cheesesteak1 was your sock or that you were working in concert (WP:MEAT). The behavioural evidence is clear. Just Chilling (talk) 19:44, 18 February 2019 (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.

@Just Chilling:. Would you let an uninvolved administrator consider the unblock? Just re-open my request. I have nothing to do with Cheesestake1. But I am more worried that I can NEVER edit in Wikipedia again????? Nobody has answered that question.Squeaky Rubber Duck (talk) 19:55, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

'Indefinite' is not the same as 'infinite'. Normally, there is always a route back to editing. If you submit a new appeal then it will be reviewed by a different admin. However, for a fresh appeal to have a realistic chance of success you need to adress, specifically, the evidence presented in the sockpuppet investigation. Just Chilling (talk) 02:49, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi. I'm an uninvolved administrator. Who is Cheesesteak1? Someguy1221 (talk) 03:04, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

@Someguy1221: Cheesesteak is some user that I wrote to and he/she formed an opinion in an AFD. I was then accused of meatpuppetry, which is false. At worse, it's canvassing but, in reality, was just an honest message. For that, I am blocked indefinitely. I plan to be on good behavior and ask for reinstatement in a few months. It is unfair but I accept the blocking punishment. It is also unfair that somebody in Wikipedia is trying to frame me by creating fake sockpuppets, like User:Janet Bourne . Squeaky Rubber Duck (talk) 21:45, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

unblock

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I am extremely concerned that somebody in Wikipedia are trying to frame me by creating sockpuppets, such as Janet Bourne. I request NOT UNBLOCK OF ME, but checkuser investigation of Janet Bourne and unblock of her because she is not my sockpuppet. However, warn her that trying to impersonate being my sockpuppet is forbidden. You see, I want to act very responsibly so that in a few months, I can ask for reinstatement. I protest that somebody is trying to ruin me by pretending to be a sock of mine. Squeaky Rubber Duck (talk) 21:41, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Decline reason:

This is not an unblock request, as you state you will ask for 'reinstatement' later. When you do, then you can discuss what you claim. 331dot (talk) 00:19, 5 April 2019 (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.

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

---

Request reason:

Request limited unblock ONLY for the purpose of contacting the checkuser. Thus far, I have acted very responsibly about my block because I intend to ask for reinstatement in a few months. I am very concerned that someone is trying to frame me by creating socks so they can claim "see, cannot unblock because kept creating socks". User:Janet Bourne was blocked as my sock bur I am being framed. If I am unblocked, I will not edit except to clear this Janet Bourne accusation and then, if desired, I will ask an admin to reblock me until I ask for reinstatement under the Standard Offer. Please note that my request is more stringent than the Standard Offer. The usual Standard Offer is just a request but this request is a way to show honesty and that I keep my word above and beyond demonstrated by Standard Offer applicants.

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=Request limited unblock ONLY for the purpose of contacting the checkuser. Thus far, I have acted very responsibly about my block because I intend to ask for reinstatement in a few months. I am very concerned that someone is trying to frame me by creating socks so they can claim "see, cannot unblock because kept creating socks". User:Janet Bourne was blocked as my sock bur I am being framed. If I am unblocked, I will not edit except to clear this Janet Bourne accusation and then, if desired, I will ask an admin to reblock me until I ask for reinstatement under the Standard Offer. Please note that my request is more stringent than the Standard Offer. The usual Standard Offer is just a request but this request is a way to show honesty and that I keep my word above and beyond demonstrated by Standard Offer applicants. |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=Request limited unblock ONLY for the purpose of contacting the checkuser. Thus far, I have acted very responsibly about my block because I intend to ask for reinstatement in a few months. I am very concerned that someone is trying to frame me by creating socks so they can claim "see, cannot unblock because kept creating socks". User:Janet Bourne was blocked as my sock bur I am being framed. If I am unblocked, I will not edit except to clear this Janet Bourne accusation and then, if desired, I will ask an admin to reblock me until I ask for reinstatement under the Standard Offer. Please note that my request is more stringent than the Standard Offer. The usual Standard Offer is just a request but this request is a way to show honesty and that I keep my word above and beyond demonstrated by Standard Offer applicants. |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=Request limited unblock ONLY for the purpose of contacting the checkuser. Thus far, I have acted very responsibly about my block because I intend to ask for reinstatement in a few months. I am very concerned that someone is trying to frame me by creating socks so they can claim "see, cannot unblock because kept creating socks". User:Janet Bourne was blocked as my sock bur I am being framed. If I am unblocked, I will not edit except to clear this Janet Bourne accusation and then, if desired, I will ask an admin to reblock me until I ask for reinstatement under the Standard Offer. Please note that my request is more stringent than the Standard Offer. The usual Standard Offer is just a request but this request is a way to show honesty and that I keep my word above and beyond demonstrated by Standard Offer applicants. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}