User talk:Pugpa2

Thanks for uploading File:Since Headline 24 months 30122024.png. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 14:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello Pugpa, you have removed discussion notifications from Talk:Scottish National Party as "vandalism" for the second time. I had reverted your removals the first time. If you don't understand the notifications, feel free to ask. Also please read up on WP:What Is Not Vandalism. Jay 💬 14:40, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for reaching out to me.

IMHO these contributions are someone abusing the system to perpetuate vandalism. Perhaps you don't understand the meaning of background of "Scottish Nose Pickers" it is a childish derogatory phrase used to describe a political party known as Scottish National Party. As such it seems clear to be vandalism, however if you believe differently then by all means correct me. Pugpa2 (talk) 15:18, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

I don't know if you followed the links in the notifications, and read up the thread at WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 2#Scottish Nose-pickers where the discussion concluded that these are valid terms. In any case, notifications are a means to let readers know that a discussion is happening, and that anyone can participate. You don't attack notifications if you disagree with a term. Jay 💬 16:15, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Ok

In which case the fairly limited discussion is in error, and by a long way. This phrase is not commonly used nor is there any chance that someone would innocently use it trying to access further information on Politics in Scotland.

Emphasising this error by notifications (three) of them seem a very poor way to build and maintain credibility.

Is there a time limit on these notifications? do they eventually get archived? Pugpa2 (talk) 16:24, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Article talk page discussions, or notifications, are not expected to be deleted. Yes, they eventually get archived automatically (120 days in this case), or may be manually archived if the talk page is getting long, or hampering other discussions. These notifications, or the talk page should not be your worry, but rather the actual redirect pages, if what you disagree with are the phrases being used for the redirect titles. Jay 💬 17:30, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Again thanks for taking the time to assist my understanding.

This first caught my eye when looking at the talk page which has 6 topics three of which are this Nose pickers redirect. That seemed odd. I think it does fit a definition of vandalism Sneaky Vandalism bu the creation and spreading of misinformation.

I appreciate that my target should be the original erroneous discussions, however given age of entries October 24 and the 120 days till archive it seems the best I should do is just wait for them to run out as suspect any attempt to engage will only spark the thing off again. Pugpa2 (talk) 00:21, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your user page may not meet Wikipedia's user page guidelines. It is intended for basic information about yourself, your interests and goals as they relate to editing Wikipedia, as well as disclosures of conflicts of interest and paid editing. Although a lot of freedom is allowed in personalizing your user page, it is not:

• an encyclopedia article (and should not be styled to look like one)
• a workspace for a draft article
• a personal website, blog, or social media site
• a space for self-promotion or other advertising
• a CV, resumé or lengthy autobiography

The user page guidelines have additional information on what is and what is not considered acceptable content. Please use your user sandbox or the draft article space to practice editing or to create new articles. Thank you. Jay 💬 14:48, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Reminder. You would need to move your user page to [[Draft:title of your draft]] or [[User:Pugpa2/title of your draft]]. See speedy deletion criterion WP:U5. Your user page is not meant to draft articles. Jay 💬 16:03, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading File:IRbaR-polling-on-scottish-independence-headline-figure (1).png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Ирука¹³ 04:44, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, think i have resolved it now. Had not specified it was my own work and all are free to use Pugpa2 (talk) 11:28, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks again, think I got it sorted. I need to be more careful when uploading for first time to ensure I mark it as my own work. Pugpa2 (talk) 10:48, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Polling Company by Year(feb25).png. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 18:30, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Headline Figures Last 24 months.png. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 18:30, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

Hi there, I think the above article ought to be moved to either Opinion polling for the next United Kingdom general election in Scotland or Opinion polling in Scotland for the next United Kingdom general election, can you take a look at my comment on the talk page please? Grinner (talk) 08:19, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you I have responded on the talk page Pugpa2 (talk) 09:04, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I'm going to have to push this, it's just so obviously wrong. There is no Wikipedia style guidelines that indicate titles are ever permitted to be fully capitalised. This isn't a matter of "which part of guidance you give most weight to", my proposed title is perfectly clear. Grinner (talk) 10:48, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Pugpa2. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Polling in Scotland for next UK General Election, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:07, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

This article was accepted for publishing on the 24th of June 2025, currently under the name of

[[Polling in Scotland for Next United Kingdom general Election] I am somewhat confused at this message Pugpa2 (talk) 19:41, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Pugpa2. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Polling in Scotland for next UK General Election".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:36, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Liz the article was accepted and published back in June 25, not sure what issue is as live article is worked and and updated on a very regular basis. I'm probably missing something here Pugpa2 (talk) 18:27, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Soosider3 per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Soosider3. 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 believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 18:26, 8 September 2025 (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).

Pugpa2 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

I believe a mistake has been made Pugpa2 (talk) 21:48, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

I do not have or ever had multiple accounts, I have only this account. I see nothing in any transactions I have made that can justify this blocking, either in my edits, participation in talk pages or in the article I created that was accepted for publication, that can possibly be seen as justification for this action, accepting good faith I can only assume that a mistake has been made.

Much of the techno stuff about IP addresses passes over my head as techno babble, however a quick google would suggest it is far from infallible and would suggest too much credence has been given to it in this case. Pugpa2 (talk) 21:48, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

Decline reason:

This block is not based on IP addresses. Like the reviewer, I don't think it is a coincidence that your username is that of the sockmaster's spelled backwards, especially where you have edited the exact same articles. 331dot (talk) 09:47, 9 September 2025 (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'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).

Pugpa2 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

Cirmumstantial and unreasonable Pugpa2 (talk) 12:07, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Circumstantial, yes. Unreasonable, no. Yamla (talk) 21:06, 9 September 2025 (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.

Thank you for the clarification, very helpful if still very frustrating. To summarise it seems the 'evidence' against me is at best circumstantial and appears to be that I have similar edit history to a blocked user and my user name. I suspect their may be many people with similar interests to myself so feel that is not a particularly strong reason to block my account. As for my name, that is from a nickname my family gave me many years ago and is to do with being reluctant to have a Pug but once we did I was smitten to such an extent that I was given the nickname 'Pugpa', as to its reverse spelling by a blocked account I would suggest that is no evidence of anything and deny any and all connections. So as I say all rather circumstantial especially when considered that my editing history has never once breached Wikipedia rules of behaviour. I ask once again for you to reconsider that decision and allow me to continue to enjoy and contribute to Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pugpa2 (talk • contribs)

If you wish to be unblocked, please sign in to your account and make your request here. Your whole request should be inside the unblock template. WP:GAB explains how to contest your block, if you are uncertain. I strongly advise you to drop the "circumstantial" part of your argument, though, as it's actively harming your argument. --Yamla (talk) 14:34, 10 September 2025 (UTC) {{unblock|1=Unreasonable and disproportionate Pugpa2 (talk) 08:11, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

This really does take up an inordinate amount of time, the last editor had blocked my IP address, I had reached out on his talk page as I was unable to logon and make a response here, Yamla responded and blocked my IP something about Proxies - another couple of hours looking up what Proxies are and then searching my system to discover I do not run any Proxies nor does my Router so I can only assume that it is something to do with my ISP, by this time realised that perhaps Yamla had may only have blocked me from his talk page. I apologise if I have transgressed but Wikipedia is not always the easiest system to use, however several hours wasted chasing this down. Back to my account being blocked I will not rehash the argument I have already given other than to repeat that interactions with Wikipedia have been well within the rules and nothing in my actions justify this block. If this is to be the end of my time on Wikipedia then so be it I would ask that my account is deleted and all edits etc are deleted, if that sounds a bit truculent then it is only because it probably is. I have spent far more time on this than I intended but enough is enough

Addendum 17/9/2025 @10.53 On checking it would appear that yamla has actually blocked my IP address across the whole of Wikipedia, sighs. Not intending to repeat this circle of what appears to be ever self justifying behaviour, based on assumptions and some dodgy tech. One last question, did this "enquiry" into my account begin as a spontaneous one or did some one actually instigate it.

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).

Pugpa2 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

Caught by an open proxy block but this host or IP is not a web host. My IP address is 149.5.50.11. This takes up an inordinate amount of time especially to someone like me that is not overally tech savvy. reentering as request made a few days ago seems to have had the tag removed,This really does take up an inordinate amount of time, the last editor had blocked my IP address, I had reached out on his talk page as I was unable to logon and make a response here, Yamla responded and blocked my IP something about Proxies - another couple of hours looking up what Proxies are and then searching my system to discover I do not run any Proxies nor does my Router so I can only assume that it is something to do with my ISP, by this time realised that perhaps Yamla had may only have blocked me from his talk page. I apologise if I have transgressed but Wikipedia is not always the easiest system to use, however several hours wasted chasing this down. Back to my account being blocked I will not rehash the argument I have already given other than to repeat that interactions with Wikipedia have been well within the rules and nothing in my actions justify this block. If this is to be the end of my time on Wikipedia then so be it I would ask that my account is deleted and all edits etc are deleted, if that sounds a bit truculent then it is only because it probably is. I have spent far more time on this than I intended but enough is enough Addendum 17/9/2025 @10.53 On checking it would appear that yamla has actually blocked my IP address across the whole of Wikipedia, sighs. Not intending to repeat this circle of what appears to be ever self justifying behaviour, based on assumptions and some dodgy tech. One last question, did this "enquiry" into my account begin as a spontaneous one or did some one actually instigate it. Addendum 25/9/2025 Having had a further look at the issue of blocked IP address, the announcement from Wiipedia is rather dramatic and alludes to such IP addresses, running Proxies etc can be used for various nefarious purposes. Having checked my PC etc I do not run any such thing as proxies. This can be easily checked by using any of many IP address checkers on the Internet such as https://whatismyipaddress.com https://www.myip.com https://www.ip2proxy.com there are many others available, every single one of them shws that my address is not used for any of these purposes, I have 3 questions from this 1 on what basis did Yamla reach the conclusion to block my IP address? 2 deeply concerned about the damage done to the security of my PC by publishing my IP Address in a public forum 3 why has such an obvious mistake not been quickly corrected rather than me being advised to be patient Pugpa2 (talk) 7:48 am, 19 September 2025, Friday (14 days ago) (UTC−4)Pugpa2 (talk) 11:45, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I'm not seeing how any of the various arguments in this request even begin to relate to the actual block at hand, which is based on clear matches of behavioral evidence. It is simply implausible to suggest that you are not in fact that same editor as Apgupthedark. The complaints regarding your IP address further confirm that you have attempted to circumvent the block by editing while logged out. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:01, 3 October 2025 (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.

reentering as request made a few days ago seems to have had the tag removed,This really does take up an inordinate amount of time, the last editor had blocked my IP address, I had reached out on his talk page as I was unable to logon and make a response here, Yamla responded and blocked my IP something about Proxies - another couple of hours looking up what Proxies are and then searching my system to discover I do not run any Proxies nor does my Router so I can only assume that it is something to do with my ISP, by this time realised that perhaps Yamla had may only have blocked me from his talk page. I apologise if I have transgressed but Wikipedia is not always the easiest system to use, however several hours wasted chasing this down. Back to my account being blocked I will not rehash the argument I have already given other than to repeat that interactions with Wikipedia have been well within the rules and nothing in my actions justify this block. If this is to be the end of my time on Wikipedia then so be it I would ask that my account is deleted and all edits etc are deleted, if that sounds a bit truculent then it is only because it probably is. I have spent far more time on this than I intended but enough is enough

Addendum 17/9/2025 @10.53 On checking it would appear that yamla has actually blocked my IP address across the whole of Wikipedia, sighs. Not intending to repeat this circle of what appears to be ever self justifying behaviour, based on assumptions and some dodgy tech. One last question, did this "enquiry" into my account begin as a spontaneous one or did some one actually instigate it. Pugpa2 (talk) 11:48, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Only one open request is needed at a time; your request is open and visible. Adding additional requests does not speed the process, which is run by volunteers. Please be patient. 331dot (talk) 20:20, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

It is to my mind 2 separate issues therefore I thought there should be a request open for each, as regards patience I think I have already demonstrated a considerable amount. Given the above I would suggest reinstating to request you removed as without an editor may not notice the text I have entered. Pugpa2 (talk) 11:55, 22 September 2025 (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).

Pugpa2 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

IP Address blocked unreasonably and disproportionate Pugpa2 (talk) 07:46, 5 October 2025 (UTC) Despite repeatedly pointing out that the reason given for the IP block was inaccurate, this seems to have been ignored by both the editors that have "reviewed" my appeal.

Quoting from the warning label that appears should I inadvertently try to edit in response to these talk page communications by trying to reply or edit in response

" ..it appears to belong to a VPN or proxy service"

neither of which are true. The warning label in its Note states

" These blocks are about the type of connection, not your actions"

This IP block is therefore against Wikipedias own guidance and I ask that it is removed

Decline reason:

This is going nowhere. I am revoking talk page access. PhilKnight (talk) 15:03, 6 October 2025 (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.

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked because an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

---

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the Unblock Ticket Request System that have been declined leading to the posting of this notice.

 PhilKnight (talk) 15:03, 6 October 2025 (UTC)