User talk:ScroogeMcDuckling

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	I think your contributions to the article Squad Busters was very nice, and expanded it nicely. ScrammySuperman (talk) 20:56, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 2025

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.

21:11, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

You are creating multiple accounts to mess around ((see User:ScroogeMcDuckling2) and you are evading an IP block that is specifically in place due to your edits on that IP.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:13, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I actually did very constructive edits. I share this computer with my friend, so many of the edits is his. ScroogeMcDuckling (talk) 21:14, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Look at my edits. Please unblock me, as I am actually contributing. ScroogeMcDuckling (talk) 21:16, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The directions for requesting an unblock are included in my block message. You are blocked as an IP and, based on your edits, are obviously the same individual who is currently blocked. This is not allowed under policy.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:22, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The block seems a little harsh to me. Being blocked indefinitely when I have made many edits is unreasonable. Can I appeal the length of the block on the unblock ticket request? ScroogeMcDuckling (talk) 21:27, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please tell me which of these I violated:

Inappropriate uses of alternative accounts

"WP:ROLE" redirects here. You may be looking for Wikipedia:User access levels.

Shortcuts

Editors must not use alternative accounts to mislead, deceive, disrupt, or undermine consensus. This includes, but is not limited to:

Creating an illusion of support: Alternative accounts must not be used to give the impression of more support for a position than actually exists.
Shortcut
- WP:PROJSOCK Internal discussions: Undisclosed alternative accounts generally may not be used in discussions internal to the project outside of limited circumstance. A legitimate undisclosed alternative account is permitted to contribute to project space discussions that directly affect the account.
Circumventing policies: Policies apply per person, not per account. Policies such as the three-revert rule are for each person's edits. Using a second account to violate policy will cause any penalties to be applied to your main account.
Shortcut
- WP:STRAWSOCK Strawman socks: Creating a separate account to argue one side of an issue in a deliberately irrational or offensive fashion, to sway opinion to another side.
Circumventing blocks, bans or sanctions: Sanctions apply to individual editors as people, not to accounts, unless specified otherwise. Using a second account to edit in violation of an active block, community ban or other sanctionimposed on your original account will result in further sanctions, which may include reversion of your contributions. See also Wikipedia:Blocking policy § Evasion and enforcement.
Contributing to the same page or discussion with multiple accounts: Editors may not use more than one account to contribute to the same page or discussion in a way that suggests they are multiple people. Contributing to the same page with clearly linked, legitimate, alternative accounts (e.g. editing the same page with your main and public computer account or editing a page using your main account that your bot account edited) is not forbidden.
Shortcut
- WP:SCRUTINY Avoiding scrutiny: Using alternative accounts that are not fully and openly disclosed to split your editing history means that other editors may not be able to detect patterns in your contributions. While this is permitted in certain circumstances (see legitimate uses), it is a violation of this policy to create alternative accounts to confuse or deceive editors who may have a legitimate interest in reviewing your contributions.
Shortcuts
- WP:GHBH
- WP:HAND
- WP:DUMBSOCK "Good hand" and "bad hand" accounts: Using one account for constructive contributions and the other one for vandalism or other types of disruptive editing.
Shortcut
- WP:LOUTSOCK Editing while logged out in order to mislead: Editing under multiple IP addresses, or editing under both a named account and as an IP, when done deceptively or otherwise violating the principles of this policy, may be treated as the same level of disruption as editing under multiple accounts. When editors log out by mistake, they may wish to contact an editor with oversight access to ensure there is no misunderstanding.
Misusing a clean start: Switching accounts or concealing a clean start in a way that avoids scrutiny is considered a breach of this policy; see Wikipedia:Clean start.
Shortcut
- WP:ROLE Role accounts: Because an account represents your edits as an individual, "role accounts", or accounts shared by multiple people, are (as a rule) forbidden and blocked. Many first-time editors may sign up an account with a username that implies it is a role account or is being shared. Such accounts are permitted only if the account information is forever limited to one individual; however, policy recommends that usernames avoid being misleading or disruptive. As such, if you edit for an organization, please refer to Wikipedia's username policy for guidance on choosing a name or a replacement name that can avoid these problems. Role account exceptions can be made for non-editing accounts approved to provide email access, accounts approved by the Wikimedia Foundation (list below), and approved bots with multiple managers. See Username policy § Sharing accounts.
Deceptively seeking positions of community trust. You may not run for positions of trust without disclosing that you have previously edited under another account. Adminship reflects the community's trust in an individual, not an account, so when applying for adminship, it is expected that you will disclose past accounts openly, or email the arbitration committee if the accounts must be kept private. Administrators who fail to disclose past accounts risk being desysopped, particularly if knowledge of them would have influenced the outcome of the RfA.
Shortcut
- WP:ADMINSOCK Using more than one administrator account: Editors may not have more than one account with administrator user rights, except for bots with administrator privileges. However, Wikimedia Foundation staff may operate more than one admin account, though they must make known who they are. If an administrator leaves the project, returns under a new username, and is nominated for adminship, they must resign or give up the administrator access of their old account.
Posing as a neutral or uninvolved commentator: Using an alternative account to participate in a discussion about another account operated by the same person.

ScroogeMcDuckling (talk) 21:48, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Message left for my IP:

Editing by unregistered users from your shared IP address or address range may be currently disabled due to abuse. However, you are still able to edit if you sign in with an account. If you are currently blocked from creating an account, and cannot create one elsewhere in the foreseeable future, you may follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Request an account to request that volunteers create your username for you. Please use an email address issued to you by your ISP, school or organization so that we may verify that you are a legitimate user on this network. Please reference this block in the comment section of the form.

Please check on this list that the username you choose has not already been taken. We apologize for any inconvenience.

"Editing by unregistered users from your shared IP address or address range may be currently disabled due to abuse. However, you are still able to edit if you sign in with an account." Doesn't that mean I am able to edit, with an account? Correct me if I'm wrong. ScroogeMcDuckling (talk) 22:00, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, not if you are the target of the IP block, which you are. I can't say more without exposing your IP, which is why this is a checkuser block. You will need to wait for the block to be reviewed by another admin/checkuser as we don't review our own blocks.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:08, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, again, this computer is shared by many people, so an edit done on an IP, may not be definitely mine. ScroogeMcDuckling (talk) 22:02, 10 January 2025 (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).

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

Request reason:

I believe that this indefinite block is a much too harsh punishment for having multiple accounts. I did nothing on the list of "Inappropriate uses of alternative accounts". I engaged in no disruptive editing, and all my edits were constructive to the articles. I have expanded many stub classed and starter classed articles. None of this was done to "Circumvent IP Blocking". My computer is shared amongst many people, which is also why I decided to create an account. See my edits please. I will remove the other account on my computer. The indefinite block is unnecessary. ScroogeMcDuckling (talk) 21:41, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You're pretty obviously evading a block meant for you. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:53, 11 January 2025 (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.

Again, you, the individual, are currently blocked as an IP. You used a different IP to create ScroogeMcDuckling, then went back to the blocked IP to continue editing. This is block evasion (i.e. "Circumventing blocks, bans or sanctions").-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:54, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]