Wikipedia talk:Changing username

Archives
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

SockBot > SockMob

{{subst:Request accepted|Allowing username change to [[::User:SockMob|SockMob]] ([[::User talk:SockMob|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/SockMob|contribs]])

Dans-eng --> Dans

Dears,

I'd like to change my username from User:Dans-eng to User:Dans, in order to achieve coherence with my other accounts it:User:Dans and lmo:Utente:Dans and thus ask for a global account. I know that User:Dans was once used on en:wiki, but he seem to have been deleted, and I'd like to know if I can succeed. Thanks.--Dans-eng (talk) 18:00, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Make your request at WP:CHUU. Kingturtle (talk) 18:25, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

One/low number of edit(s)

See here. It seems to me our common practice with regard to this may have changed. Thoughts, bureaucrats? —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 08:38, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I put that feature in s more of a notice, rather than a problem. Xclamation point 10:56, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, fair enough; although, as it is currently worded, it is, in fact, stated to be a "problem" by SoxBot. Perhaps a rephrasing is what is needed? —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 10:59, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

If the current and target names are similar, I assume it may be more difficult for the editors to make the changes on their own, so I go ahead with it. I am also of the mindset that it may be better to make the change even if the current name and target name are dissimilar - because it is tidier that way, one less unused username lying around. Kingturtle (talk) 13:22, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

It's mostly a case by case situation. If a username is a change from "Acmeexplosivesinc." to "AcmeExplosivesInc.", that would be denied. However, some simple changes like that are perfectly fine. The bot is not (and should not) be the only thing the crats use. When I wrote SoxBot, I wrote it to assist the crats in identifying easily deniable requests. I did not write it to be prefectly reliable. Sometimes the API gives false results. It can't determine extenuating circumstances. Next time I SSH into the Toolserver, I'll change it. Xclamation point 20:11, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Limited number of edits

If my memory serves me correctly, if you made a certain amount of edits, you could no longer change your username. Does that limit still exist? DiverseMentality 21:28, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

I think so, but it's insanely high (I think it's around the range of User:SmackBot, with 2 million edits). Xclamation point 23:43, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm pretty sure the limit is 2 million. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 23:53, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

According to WP:RTV, the limit is 200,000. I had always assumed this was the correct number, but if it's not, that needs to be updated. Useight (talk) 00:50, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I see. As long as I can still change my username with the amount of edits I have, I'll survive. Thank you three. DiverseMentality 06:59, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Edit notice

Can we add a note about the potential harm of using a real name to the edit notice? Seraphim♥ 23:44, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

I added a this note on the page. Acceptable? NanohaA'sYuri^{Talk, My master} 23:54, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

This is a good idea. People do not realize how likely it is that someone will really make their life hard over the proper spelling of something. Chillum 23:56, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

There was already a sentence regarding the matter: "Using your real name as a username may put you at risk for harassment. Your request to use your real name will be delayed unless you state explicitly that you are aware the implications of using your real name." I will remove the new addition to reduce redundancy. The original text was also more neutral, as I don't believe we actually discourage users from selecting their name as a username, but rather simply inform them of the potential implications. Useight (talk) 15:37, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, anybody who uses their real name as a username is a fool. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 16:03, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Rofl! --Dweller (talk) 16:55, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Hm. :p PeterSymonds (talk) 17:11, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Erm, NanohaA'sYuri and Useight, you seem to have misunderstood. I was suggesting that we add the note to the edit notice for the page, not the page, which I knew already had a note. Also, can we add it above the collapsed "Instructions" box? Seraphim♥ 16:33, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

I didn't misunderstand. I simply removed a redundant and somewhat inaccurate statement from the front matter. Useight (talk) 17:41, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

It seems when I added it I must have missed notice that one was already there. NanohaA'sYuri^{Talk, My master} 00:17, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Ok, but can someone add a note to the edit notice please? I can't seem to find it. Seraphim♥ 10:38, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

I would, but I do not know how to edit that notice. I assume it has to be changed in meta, but I only edit en.wiki. If someone could tell me the correct procedure for editing that notice, I would be very appreciative. Useight (talk) 16:11, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Ditto! Then I wouldn't be bugging you kind people to do it for me :). Seraphim♥ 17:27, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Editnotice-4-Changing username. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 17:49, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

The dangers of using a real name are already documented in the general notes section. That editnotice was created for instruction, not warning. Furthermore, the editnotice is directly transcluded from the front matter's "instructions" subpage. So you'd have to change that to have the warning displayed; and it's hardly appropriate there. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 05:48, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

But I'm not sure how many people do see that note or really understand the seriousness of using a real life name. Wikipedia already damages people through BLPs; shouldn't we should try a little harder to stop the name of an account from potentially causing harm? After Juliancolton provided the link, I didn't edit it because of the transclusion (I'm not very code knowledgable). Can we just subst that part? Seraphim♥ 15:31, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Changing username removes my block log?

Would changing my username remove my block log? I know my edits are moved over but I have blocks in my log which are not valid blocks and want a clean block log. Bidgee (talk) 03:18, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

The block log would be transferred, as well. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 03:45, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

There is a reason for this. If you have been blocked, then it will be on your record forever. You can't evade your block history. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 05:43, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

A bit unfair for those who have been wrongly blocked. I can't see why such tool which can only be used by Bureaucrat to remove such block logs but is still stored but just under a Removed blocks log. Bidgee (talk) 13:55, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I have been errantly blocked as well. People can easily see that these types of blocks were made incorrectly and therefore don't consider them (during RFA or editor review, for example). I believe a developer could technically clean someone's block log, but that's not going to happen. Useight (talk) 06:25, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

That's been tried before, if I recall correctly. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 13:14, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Which part was tried, a developer tried to clean a block log or an individual tried to convince a developer to clean one? Useight (talk) 15:51, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

The former. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 16:09, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

It is essential that block-logs are carried over to new usernames. Blocks on your record that were wrongly done are not and will not be held against you. In fact, even blocks on your record that you deserved will not be held against you after some time. For example, if an editor was blocked because of an edit war 4 years ago, but has since been an ambassador of wikicitizenship, I doubt anyone would hold the incident against said editor. Kingturtle (talk) 17:29, 20 March 2009 (UTC)