User talk:Pennylane2009

This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.

Pennylane2009 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

71.16.122.51 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

---

Block message:

Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Pennylane2009". The reason given for Pennylane2009's block is: "Block evasion: User:Kentucky Distillers' Association".

• Blocking administrator: Blueboy96 (talk • blocks)

---

Decline reason: You have been blocked directly as stated in your block log. Since you have not provided a reason for being unblocked, your request has been declined. You may provide a reason for being unblocked by adding {{unblock | your reason here}} to the bottom of your talk page, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

Pennylane2009 (talk) 16:43, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

{{unblock|The Block for Pennylane2009 was not appropriate. There have been not edits to any wikipedia entry's made by this username and the only addition to Wikipedia was a request on administrator's, Blueboy96 talk page to correct the wikipedia entry for "Bourbon Trail" and providing numerous third party references in accordance for the same, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Blueboy96 or discussion on Blueboy96 talk page entitled Bourbon Trail. This requested revision is not being made in an effort for promotion, only for accuracy. Thank You}}

Are you, or are you not the same editor as User:Kentucky Distillers' Association? Did you, or did you not create a new userid because that one was blocked? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:26, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Again, the Block for Pennylane2009 was not appropriate. The creation of the new username Pennylane2009 was in no way an attempt to evade a previous block where no edits were made to the subject Wikipedia page in question. The creation of the above username was created in an effort to use an appropriate "username" as required by Wikipedia further discussions regarding correcting an apparent now obsolete Wikipedia entry. As stated above, there have been not edits to any wikipedia entry's made by this username. Please note that the only addition to Wikipedia was a request on administrator's, Blueboy96 talk page to correct the wikipedia entry for "Bourbon Trail" and providing numerous third party references in accordance for the same, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Blueboy96 or discussion on Blueboy96 talk page entitled Bourbon Trail. Therefore, please unblock this username because no inappropratie actions have been taken under the same. Thank You — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pennylane2009 (talk • contribs)

Note: I have removed your second unblock request, as the first one is still active. I have turned your unblock request into a response to the question, which is what we need here. As per WP:BLOCK once you are blocked, it is YOU the person who are blocked. If it's because of a username, the block notice gives you the ability to request unblock in order to fix it. Creating a second account while blocked is a violation of the WP:SOCK policy. As such, the block is appropriate. If you wished to change your name, you needed to return to your ORIGINAL account, state clearly that you would not make promotional edits and show that you clearly understood that policy, AND THEN request an unblock for WP:UNC. Procedurally, the block of this account is completely by the book, so claims otherwise will fall on deaf ears, and will make it so that no admin will review further. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:12, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Wilkins, calm down. It is entirely possible that this user did not know that Wikipedia:Changing username or {{unblock-un}} exist. I would assume good faith in this instance, particularly if this username has no promo edits and this user publicly links the two accounts on his userpage. —Jeremy ^{(v^_^v Boribori!)} 21:09, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Jéské, their intent here was to comply with the username policy. The original name has only 1 edit, so there's no real point connecting the 2 usernames anyway. Oh, and I have unblocked, as a gesture of good faith. Kevin (talk) 22:12, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Further reading

Pennylane2009, as you likely have a connection to the company you were trying to write about, it would be a good idea to read through WP:COI, to avoid falling into problems. Kevin (talk) 22:16, 24 February 2010 (UTC)