User talk:Speedcuber1

Need help regarding my username

I will ping an admin who said to do so if I need any help or have any questions, but help from anyone is fine here.

@SQL: Hey, as you know when I got unblocked I wanted to change my username, I put a request in and it got approved and all went well, however since then I have thought of a username which I would rather have as my Wikipedia name.
Would it be ok if I made a new account with that username so that it doesn't get taken? (Keeping in mind that I could of had that name now if I would of requested it)
And then in 6 months when I can apply for a rename request again, would it be ok if I request a rename on both accounts, for example to swap the usernames?
I also have another question - can anyone edit the administrators noticeboard? I'm a bit confused because of it's name whether only admins are meant to edit it, even though it's not protected. Speedcuber1 (talk) 22:58, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh God. I don't think all this renaming is possible. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 01:59, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, anyone can edit WP:AN. I'm honestly not sure on the rules surrounding repeated renames. ^{!ɘM γɿɘυϘ}⅃ϘƧ 13:23, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I know one editor who has been renamed four times - RecentEdits, Super Typhoon Eden, Super Typhoon Mercedes-Benz, ModulatedRotation, and RoyceTarantino are is five usernames. So yes, there's probably no limit. 🏳️‍🌈 Chicdat ^{Bawk to me!} 10:54, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

September 2021 (II)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits. If you can appeal this block successfully, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}.

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).

Speedcuber1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I clearly don't belong on any admin boards, not at the moment at least, as when I try to help I am involuntarily making disruptive edits. This is what has got me blocked. I'm new to them, and I was trying to post there like an admin or a really high level editor, but unfortunately this didn't work out.
Please change my block parameters whereby I'm blocked from all admin boards, as this will prevent me making edits that people think, and know are disruptive.
I posted this on the administrator's noticeboard, as I felt uncomfortable by that edit. But the responses weren't replying to my post, and the admins thought that I was being disruptive. If possible, change my block parameters whereby I can only make reverts, if that's not possible, then whereby I'm blocked from all of the admin boards and the teahouse.
Reverting vandalism is what I'm here to do. It will be my focus when I'm unblocked. If you, the reviewing administrator, want another person who helps to revert vandalism on this Wikipedia, this is another reason to accept. Just make sure I'm banned from all the noticeboards and the teahouse for atleast 5 years.
I posted this because I was intimidated by the admin, but I know they don't mean anything by it. I also awarded that admin an admin's barnstar, which is deserved as every time I have looked through their contributions, I see that they are constantly reverting vandalism. I will also state here that when I'm unblocked, I will be awarding Admin's barnstars ~~to every admin if I could~~. I will be awarding (if I remember) 1 barnstar each day, to who I think is the "Admin of the day" (This part isn't trying to persuade admins to unblock me, this is just me wanting to show my appreciation to these hard working editors who work countless hours every day to make Wikipedia better).
Speedcuber (talk) 14:02, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This block isn't for your benefit, Speedcuber1: it is to save other editors from having to waste time dealing with your antics. You don't get to dictate its terms and you're not automatically entitled to an unblock. I'm not going to copy this to a WP:AN because we've heard enough from you there recently. I'm declining your appeal because these are the exact same issues that led to your block four years ago, that you assured us were not going to be repeated, and I have no confidence that they will not repeat again. Before you return to this talk page, I strongly encourage you take some time to consider whether you're actually interested in writing an encyclopaedia and not just in 'being a Wikipedia editor'. If you're not, that's okay; editing isn't for everyone and you can show your appreciation for others' work by continuing to read and enjoy Wikipedia. But—and I'm sorry to have to be blunt—we don't need somebody to give out barnstars and you've proven that you're simply not good at vandal-fighting and other maintenance jobs. – Joe (talk) 18:44, 19 September 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.

Unblock request | May 2022

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).

Speedcuber1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I was blocked for disruptive editing to the admin noticeboard and making persistent posts there that i thought were ok at the time, but they were actually disruptive edits and i shouldn’t have posted as much as i did and shouldn’t have kept going back to that noticeboard to post about general things, as it was counterproductive. I was then blocked from my talk page as the edits i was making on there were wasting other editor’s time and weren’t productive, if i was unblocked the things i would do differently include possibly avoiding the noticeboards, as they were partly the reason why I was blocked in the first place, and I would also try my best to not make any disruptive edits and i would think before making edits to make sure the edit is generally good, productive, not disruptive and not an edit that would waste any other editor’s time. I will do this by going over it and thinking about the purpose of each edit.
The constructive edits i would make include going to random articles and linking key words or any important words, fixing any general mistakes such as punctuation mistakes or spelling mistakes, reverting vandalism, and also edits such as adding paragraphs to articles if i find any new info on that article that comes from a reliable source. Speedcuber (talk) 12:03, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The unblock appeal was unsuccessful (permalink to discussion). NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:47, 5 June 2022 (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.

Thanks. Will Carry to WP:AN. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 12:11, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Posted. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 14:39, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deepfriedokra, the things that I would focus on out of the 9 things in the open tasks page that you linked me would be fixing spelling and grammar, fixing wikilinks, checking and adding references, adding images, and improving lead sections. Speedcuber (talk) 18:06, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Update: When i put something such as ‘I will try my best to not make any disruptive edits’ i worded it wrong. I should have put ‘I will make no disruptive edits’ and when i put ‘possibly avoid the noticeboards’ i worded that wrong too, i meant to put ‘i will avoid them’Speedcuber (talk) 20:27, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: I have updated my unblock request. Speedcuber (talk) 20:29, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedcuber1, please do not modify your unblock request, now that it's been posted to WP:AN. --Yamla (talk) 20:30, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Please post responses and addenda using the reply button. Someone will see and add to the WP:AN thread. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:35, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

March 2023

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).

Speedcuber1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am hoping to be unblocked, I know that when you’re blocked you are not allowed to edit Wikipedia on other accounts, and I haven’t edited Wikipedia since I was blocked, I haven’t been on Wikipedia since last year but it came to mind today so I am going to attempt to be unblocked, if this request is unsuccessful, then I will have to try again another time in the future and I am ok with it. I’m not going to beg to be unblocked, I will just have to wait and see if I am unblocked or not in the future and accept it.

I was blocked some time last year or the year before and I think it was because I made to many edits on the administrators noticeboard, I can’t remember the edits that got me blocked or how many edits it was but I think that some of them were disruptive and that this is why I was blocked. If I am unblocked in the future, I will make sure that I don’t post a lot on the administrators noticeboard and I will also make sure that none of my edits are disruptive. I have had some experience in the past with the Wikipedia user gadget twinkle, and have reverted vandalism in the past.

The kind of edits that I might make if or when I am unblocked might include things like adding sources to articles, adding wikilinks to articles if they need them, and going to random articles that have messages at the top of them saying what needs to be done on the article, and doing that, for example if the message says that the article needs additional sources or that the article relies too much on primary or secondary sources, I will probably fix them if I have time.

I also want to change my username and also change some userboxes if possible.

I didn’t think that Wikipedia would have come to mind again but it did so I thought I would post an unblock request. Thank you for reading.
Speedcuber (talk) 20:33, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Appeal was declined by the community per this discussion Nosebagbear (talk) 14:57, 12 April 2023 (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.

Hey 331dot, Yamla, JBW, Deepfriedokra, I didn't know who to tag so I thought about tagging you as each one of you has helped me out on Wikipedia in the past. I was only going to tag one person but I thought it would be better to tag a more people as it might make things easier, etc.
I wasn't going to post anything on my talk page at first but I have been thinking about it in the past week as I posted my unblock request over a month ago and I haven't had any messages on my talk page yet asking me about the block or anything like that. I know that there's no deadline and that admins have a lot of tasks to do at the moment and I like to be patient and wait for a message or response, but I was just wondering when I was looking at the requests for unblock why most people seemed to be getting messages on their talk pages from admins not long after they posted their request and I haven't had one message since I posted it. I know and have seen admins say that the request has to make the reviewing administrator think you should be unblocked, and I thought I had a good request. Also I did see somewhere that if an unblock request is posted to the administrators noticeboard or maybe other noticeboards and isn't successful, then the user is banned by the community and has to appeal, but I'm not sure if this was referring to unblock requests or not because it might have said something else, and also because I have had repeated unblock requests in the past posted to the administrators noticeboard where the first one or ones were unsuccessful but the one after was successful. Also I know that I ended up being unblocked in the past when my requests kept getting posted to the noticeboard which is good, but I would have preferred it if I would have been unblocked just by a reviewing admin on my talk page instead of having multiple people who were mostly not admins decide it, only because I have seen people get unblocked in the past without having their requests posted to any noticeboards. Also when I have been reading Wikipedia in the past few days I have come across several articles that need to be updated and I have got some edits in mind for these articles that would improve them, and I'm hoping to be unblocked soon as I'm looking forward to making useful contributions if I am unblocked. Speedcuber (talk) 04:53, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning. Someone who is awake will probably need to carry this to WP:AN -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 07:18, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will post it to AN. 331dot (talk) 09:15, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why does it need to be posted to AN? I also said in my message above “Also I know that I ended up being unblocked in the past when my requests kept getting posted to the noticeboard which is good, but I would have preferred it if I would have been unblocked just by a reviewing admin on my talk page instead of having multiple people who were mostly not admins decide it, only because I have seen people get unblocked in the past without having their requests posted to any noticeboards.”

And (331dot) the way you have put that you are posting it to AN as a courtesy and make no endorsement in doing so will only make it more likely that people will oppose it rather than support it, as that is the first thing they will see. So now I think I probably don’t have much chance of being unblocked unfortunately. But it is what it is. Thank you though for posting it as I know you don’t mean anything bad by what you put. Speedcuber (talk) 10:08, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Girth Summit I seen your reply to the post about my unblock request on AN, I can’t edit AN so is it ok if I reply to you here?

The main reason why I didn’t investigate the block and the edits that got me blocked was because when I postsd my unblock request, it was the first time Wikipedia had come to mind in nearly a year, and I remembered I was blocked so I just posted an unblock request without thinking too much about it. When I posted the request I didn’t even think of investigating the block but I am ok with redoing my unblock request and investigating the disruptive edits that got me blocked and addressing them in the new request. I think your suggestion is good.

Could you put my reply under your post at AN so that other reviewing admins can see it? Speedcuber (talk) 10:24, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm on mobile at the moment - that much copying, navigating tabs and pasting is beyond me. Someone else may do so. I'll reiterate here though that you appear to acknowledge having posted this request with very little forethought. The result of that will be a lot of other editors' time being wasted - they will spend time looking into your original block, subsequent unblock and reblock, previous unblock requests, your editing prior to the block, etc. You really should have done that legwork for them, and presented a set of links for them to access easily; you should also have taken time to show that you really understand why you were blocked, and what you will do differently in future to avoid repeating the problems. The fact that you didn't do any of that may make people disinclined to support an unblock. Girth Summit _(blether) 10:44, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I didn’t even think about it when posting the unblock request but I understand what you’re saying and know that I should have done those things in the request. I am ok with doing them though either today if I have time or tomorrow and will put it as a reply on this page, and then someone could copy and paste it over to AN as an add on to the unblock request. Speedcuber (talk) 11:01, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Why does it need to be posted to AN?; this block can't be lifted by an individual admin without community consensus, for the reasons outlined here and here. --bonadea contributions talk 13:02, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I have read the discussion at AN and I understand why the request was unsuccessful. If I post another unblock request in the future I will keep in mind what was said in the discussion about what needs to be included in the request.
What I don’t know though, is who that IP user is. The user User:192.76.8.84 doesn’t have a lot of contributions yet ever since I posted to the teahouse in 2019, it seems like they have been waiting on Wikipedia every day for there to be a discussion about me, just so they can oppose it. They have replied to each discussion about me on the same day the discussions were first posted, in 2021, 2022, and 2023. The IP is registered to oxford university, as seen on their talk page, but I highly doubt that there is a student in oxford university who has so much free time that they can be on Wikipedia all the time. If I went to oxford university and went on Wikipedia on one of the computers there would I be editing with the same IP? I think it could be someone who is using some sort of VPN or IP changer or even someone who lives near there who is blocked and goes on their computers every day anonymously. Speedcuber (talk) 16:31, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is a really, really bad idea to make an accusation of that kind against a fellow editor when you have no evidence for it. The IP's post to this AN discussion was well-reasoned and factual, and so are the user's other contributions linked from that post. Your accusation about "some sort of VPN or IP changer" makes no sense (it's how non-static IP addresses behave), and your guess that it is a blocked user is a personal attack. Also not sure why you jump to the conclusion that only students use computers at Oxford university, but whether the editor is a student or not is of course irrelevant. Bottom line: your unblock request was declined because of your own actions, and appearing to try to shift the blame to someone else just because they edit using an IP is not a good idea. --bonadea contributions talk 17:11, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, sorry if it appeared to you as a personal attack, I didn’t mean for it to be taken that way. I just didn’t know why this IP user seemed to be waiting on Wikipedia for every one of my discussions as they replied to each one within a few hours and also don’t seem to have many other contributions. And I didn’t jump to the conclusion that the editor is a student, I obviously know that there might be people who aren’t students that use computers there, which is why I didn’t say it because I thought it would be obvious. And like you said it’s irrelevant anyway. Thirdly, I really don’t understand what you mean by me trying to shift the blame to someone else? Do you think I’m trying to blame them for me being blocked? I don’t understand as I clearly stated that I know why the unblock request was unsuccessful and I know what I should have posted in the unblock request to have a higher chance of being unblocked, and said I will include such things if I post a request again. Speedcuber (talk) 18:26, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Have you considered Not Saying Things? You could simply stop complaining about the IP, instead of continue to Golbez (talk) 19:42, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, 192.76.8.84 is The Harvard IP User. A long time anonymous user with a lot of experience and good judgement. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 22:57, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ub rq, please support me

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).

Speedcuber1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I wish to be unblocked. I have good memories on wikipedia, and I like the project. I know that in the past when I had the freedom of editing, I was silly. The edit to the teahouse was very unwarrented from me, and I shouldn't have done it. I strongly believe that if psydelisto? (don't know their exact name) wouldn't have replied to my teahouse post, and tagged someone else saying that I am their "emancipated minor" then I wouldn't have posted to AN. I thought the edit wasn't needed as iirc i was going to start editing again the next morning which i was looking forward to. I do want to be unblocked and I want to improve the project, hopefully you can support me. I'm sorry about the complaints I made to the anon user, I just want to edit again it's been years. I won't edit all the time, but knowing I can improve the project is good to know. Hopefully I can get atleast one support on this when it goes to AN :) I truly believe I have changed and won't make any silly edits again. Speedcuber (talk) 14:27, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your unblock request was declined by the community less than a week ago. There's no chance you'll be unblocked any time soon. You can make a new appeal to the community no sooner than six months after your last decline or your most recent edit, whichever comes last. Yamla (talk) 14:30, 17 April 2023 (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.

User:Yamla why do I have to wait 6 months? why can't i just be unblocked if i know i won't make disruptive edits?

WP:SNOW. You had your chance to make a compelling argument to the community and you failed. We aren't going to let you continue to waste our time by continuing to argue your case each time the community says no. --Yamla (talk) 15:59, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

it's not the community, it's just a few people who are on the administrators noticeboard at the time it gets posted, you're just unfair..

That's your opinion. No sooner than six months from now, you can try to make a more convincing unblock request. Until then, en.wikipedia isn't the place for you, I'm afraid. --Yamla (talk) 17:30, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]