Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names: Difference between revisions
→Jimbojonesisgod: reply |
→Fatmac: cm |
||
Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
:::::::Hmmm. this is interesting. The fact is the name itself, which is what is being discussed, is not necessarily a vio. Firstly, the name could, very improbably, I will admit, be in reference to a person whose name is Mac, and who is "fat". Secondly - if they are pushing promotional POV, why did they not create a [[User:FatMac IT Solutions]]? -- <strong>[[User:Anonymous Dissident|<span style="font-family:Script MT Bold;color:DarkRed">Anonymous Dissident</span>]]</strong>[[User_talk:Anonymous Dissident|<sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;color:Gray">Talk</span></sup>]] 09:15, 14 August 2007 (UTC) |
:::::::Hmmm. this is interesting. The fact is the name itself, which is what is being discussed, is not necessarily a vio. Firstly, the name could, very improbably, I will admit, be in reference to a person whose name is Mac, and who is "fat". Secondly - if they are pushing promotional POV, why did they not create a [[User:FatMac IT Solutions]]? -- <strong>[[User:Anonymous Dissident|<span style="font-family:Script MT Bold;color:DarkRed">Anonymous Dissident</span>]]</strong>[[User_talk:Anonymous Dissident|<sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;color:Gray">Talk</span></sup>]] 09:15, 14 August 2007 (UTC) |
||
::::::::The account username clearly matches the company's tradename (if not its full legal name). The username's only two edits were to create and further categorize a spam article which has now been deleted. ''For the company of the same name.'' As to why they chose "Fatmac" as their username, I imagine it may be for the same reason that they chose "fatmac.co.uk" as their domain name...... [[user:j|<span style="background: #222; color: #fff;"> '''j'''usten </span>]] 09:39, 14 August 2007 (UTC) |
::::::::The account username clearly matches the company's tradename (if not its full legal name). The username's only two edits were to create and further categorize a spam article which has now been deleted. ''For the company of the same name.'' As to why they chose "Fatmac" as their username, I imagine it may be for the same reason that they chose "fatmac.co.uk" as their domain name...... [[user:j|<span style="background: #222; color: #fff;"> '''j'''usten </span>]] 09:39, 14 August 2007 (UTC) |
||
::Hmmm. Ok. I agree now. Its not terribly blatant, though, so it was the right choice to bring it here. -- <strong>[[User:Anonymous Dissident|<span style="font-family:Script MT Bold;color:DarkRed">Anonymous Dissident</span>]]</strong>[[User_talk:Anonymous Dissident|<sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;color:Gray">Talk</span></sup>]] 09:46, 14 August 2007 (UTC) |
|||
===The4skins2004=== |
===The4skins2004=== |
Revision as of 09:46, 14 August 2007
![]() |
Navigation: Archives • Instructions for closing administrators • |
This page is for bringing attention to usernames which may be in violation of Wikipedia's username policy. Before listing a username here, consider if it should be more appropriately reported elsewhere, or if it needs to be reported at all:
- Report blatantly inappropriate usernames, such as usernames that are obscene or inflammatory, to Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention.
- For other cases involving vandalism, personal attacks or other urgent issues, try Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents; blatant vandalism can also be reported at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism, which is sometimes a better option.
Do NOT post here if:
- the user in question has made no recent edits.
- you wish to have the block of a user reviewed. Instead, discuss the block with the blocking administrator (see also Wikipedia:Blocking policy § Unblocking).
Before adding a name here you MUST ensure that the user in question:
- has been warned about their username (with e.g. {{subst:uw-username}}) and has been allowed time to address the concern on their user talk page.
- has disagreed with the concern, refused to change their username and/or continued to edit without replying to the warning.
- is not already blocked.
If, after having followed all the steps above, you still believe the username violates Wikipedia's username policy, you may list it here with an explanation of which part of the username policy you think has been violated. After posting, please alert the user of the discussion (with e.g. {{subst:UsernameDiscussion}}). You may also invite others who have expressed concern about the username to comment on the discussion by use of this template.
Add new requests below, using the syntax {{subst:rfcn1|username|2=reason ~~~~}}.
Tools: Special:ListUsers, Special:BlockList
Reports
Jimbojonesisgod
Jimbojonesisgod (talk · contribs)
- Invokes the name of a religious figure, which is specifically proscribed. Deranged bulbasaur 08:47, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- Not familiar with that religion, but it seems ok. BushpigsGoneWild 09:05, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- You're not familiar with religions that include God? I find that a bit odd. Deranged bulbasaur 09:15, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- I think it very likely that he is, but I tihnk he is under the impression that you are reporting because it is the name of a religion. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 09:17, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- What you just typed didn't make the least bit of sense. Are you trying to say that I claimed "Jimbojonesisgod" is the name of a religion? That's patently false. Deranged bulbasaur 09:25, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- If thats directed at me, then no, I just thought that maybe he interpreted it that way. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 09:45, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- What you just typed didn't make the least bit of sense. Are you trying to say that I claimed "Jimbojonesisgod" is the name of a religion? That's patently false. Deranged bulbasaur 09:25, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- I think it very likely that he is, but I tihnk he is under the impression that you are reporting because it is the name of a religion. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 09:17, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- You're not familiar with religions that include God? I find that a bit odd. Deranged bulbasaur 09:15, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- Not familiar with that religion, but it seems ok. BushpigsGoneWild 09:05, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
IeieieieFrenchenenenene
IeieieieFrenchenenenene (talk · contribs)
- Almost breaching the length and random sequences of letters borders. Thoughts? -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 07:40, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- Disallow. Too long, gibberish. BushpigsGoneWild 09:04, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Fatmac
- Account has two edits from February, both to a promotional article FatMac IT Solutions (just
now listed forspeedy deleted, A7). May also be a shared account. Referred to this RfC on user talk page, and sent an email notice of this discussion via Emailuser. justen 07:39, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- How does this related to Usernames? -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 07:43, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- uh, yeah, I don't see any reason this violates naming rules... --Lucid 07:51, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- Hah. Do I need more coffee, or do you two? :) WP:USERNAME: "Wikipedia does not allow usernames that are confusing, misleading, disruptive, promotional, [et al.]... Promotional usernames that attempt to promote a group or company on Wikipedia, including but not limited to...[u]sernames that match the name of a company or group, especially if the user promotes it [are not allowed]." So, by that measure, if I work for Microsoft, and create a username called "Microsoft," under the policy, it ought to be blocked. "Fatmac" did just that. He or she (or they), presumably, work or worked for "Fat Mac IT Solutions," and created a promotional (and now deleted) article on their company. Am I missing something? justen 08:12, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- That's not promotional, though, and it's no more a company name than "Mart" promotes any number of general stores --Lucid 08:41, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- The username is User:Fatmac and the only edit the account has made was the creation of FatMac IT Solutions. If User:Mart created Wal-Mart, your point stands. If User:Wal-Mart created Wal-Mart Stores, well, then I think that's what we have here. justen 08:46, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- Hmmm. this is interesting. The fact is the name itself, which is what is being discussed, is not necessarily a vio. Firstly, the name could, very improbably, I will admit, be in reference to a person whose name is Mac, and who is "fat". Secondly - if they are pushing promotional POV, why did they not create a User:FatMac IT Solutions? -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 09:15, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- The account username clearly matches the company's tradename (if not its full legal name). The username's only two edits were to create and further categorize a spam article which has now been deleted. For the company of the same name. As to why they chose "Fatmac" as their username, I imagine it may be for the same reason that they chose "fatmac.co.uk" as their domain name...... justen 09:39, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- Hmmm. this is interesting. The fact is the name itself, which is what is being discussed, is not necessarily a vio. Firstly, the name could, very improbably, I will admit, be in reference to a person whose name is Mac, and who is "fat". Secondly - if they are pushing promotional POV, why did they not create a User:FatMac IT Solutions? -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 09:15, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- The username is User:Fatmac and the only edit the account has made was the creation of FatMac IT Solutions. If User:Mart created Wal-Mart, your point stands. If User:Wal-Mart created Wal-Mart Stores, well, then I think that's what we have here. justen 08:46, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- That's not promotional, though, and it's no more a company name than "Mart" promotes any number of general stores --Lucid 08:41, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- Hah. Do I need more coffee, or do you two? :) WP:USERNAME: "Wikipedia does not allow usernames that are confusing, misleading, disruptive, promotional, [et al.]... Promotional usernames that attempt to promote a group or company on Wikipedia, including but not limited to...[u]sernames that match the name of a company or group, especially if the user promotes it [are not allowed]." So, by that measure, if I work for Microsoft, and create a username called "Microsoft," under the policy, it ought to be blocked. "Fatmac" did just that. He or she (or they), presumably, work or worked for "Fat Mac IT Solutions," and created a promotional (and now deleted) article on their company. Am I missing something? justen 08:12, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- Hmmm. Ok. I agree now. Its not terribly blatant, though, so it was the right choice to bring it here. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 09:46, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
The4skins2004
The4skins2004 (talk · contribs)
- well, we can all sort of see where my concern is if we look at the "4skins". -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 07:23, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- Not really a problematic name, and user is just a fan of The 4-Skins. I think it's okay. -SpuriousQ (talk) 07:34, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- I agree, now that I know there is such a band. Thanks. I guess this should be closed... -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 07:38, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Stfu1989
- While technically not an egregious violation worth of UAA, the intention of the initials is my concern. I have left a notice on the user's page, encouraging them to create a new account (as well as a CSD notice for the article they created). My concern is that harmonious editing with this name would be difficult, as the name could be used to tell others to "shut up". Ariel♥Gold 02:34, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- I would tend to interpret this as offensive - a large proportion of users will understand the internet abbreviation, and it's then not really any better than if it were written in full. SamBC(talk) 03:25, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- Also - if "Stf" (can) = "stuff" and "u" = "you", then "stf" + "u" = "Stuff you". Enough said. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 03:30, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- Disallow this username. What happened to the wtf username a while back? I can't find it. I think there should be a proposal to amend the username policy about internet acronyms and slang that could be offensive. i said 03:31, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- Unless this user is Saint Fu, I think they should probably change their name. — The Storm Surfer 04:27, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- Probably meant to be offensive, and have yet to find an instance where "stfu" was anything other than derogatory or rude. Jmlk17 05:01, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- Is a collection of letters and numbers no more inherently derogatory or rude than Jmlk17. BushpigsGoneWild 09:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- That argument could be brandished for any conceivable username. It's hard to imagine one that's not a "collection of characters" and if you just consider them as glyphs and not as containers of meaning (symbols) there can be nothing offensive about any of them. I guess we might as well shut down the whole show. Deranged bulbasaur 09:20, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- Is a collection of letters and numbers no more inherently derogatory or rude than Jmlk17. BushpigsGoneWild 09:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC)