Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names

Navigation: Archives • Instructions for closing administrators • Purge page cache

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

WebstersDictionary (talk · contribs)

Username is a well-known company/dictionary. AIV suggested RFCN. {{UsernameConcern}} at 07:04, 23 March 2007 (UTC), no response. Flyguy649^talk_contribs 21:31, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disallow per WP:U#Promotional. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 21:33, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Disallow, although it is the product of a well known dictionary, I doubt highly that it is for promotional purposes. Cascadia^TALK^|^HISTORY 21:42, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Disallow per HighInBC GDon4t0 (talk to me...) 21:54, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Very weak allow, I'd say that at least 85% of people already know about WebstersDictionary, so it really doesn't do much as far as promotion goes. Wǐkǐhérṃǐť(Talk) (Contributions) 22:16, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does that really make a difference? WP:U#Promotional does not mention any such exception. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 22:24, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disallow as an existing product name. Philippe Beaudette 22:22, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Disallow' misrepresenting his/herself as a representative of websters Borisblue 22:42, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Allow -- and reopening this issue, sorry for not catching it during the bare hour-and-a-half it was originally open for comments, RfCs sure go by fast these days, you'd think we all lived in the same time zone -- but if any of you had bothered to read the article Webster's Dictionary, you might have noticed that it is not "a well-known company", nor is it true that (as Flyguy said on the user's talk page) "your username is the same as a company."
To quote the article, adding underlines,
Webster's Dictionary is the common title given to English language dictionaries in the United States, derived from American lexicographer Noah Webster. In the United States, the phrase Webster's has become a genericized trademark for dictionaries. Although Merriam-Webster dictionaries are descended from those of the original purchasers of Noah Webster's work, many other dictionaries bear his name, such as those by the publishers Random House and John Wiley & Sons.
(end quote) You and I could publish our own dictionaries and title each one "Webster's Dictionary", with complete legal safety, just as these other companies do, precisely because it's a generic title, not the property or trademark of any person or company. That's why it's such a well-known title: it gets put on so many different dictionaries. Likewise, using it as a username violates no trademark, promotes no particular company's product -- any more than the username "Dictionary" would do. This username doesn't come anywhere NEAR violating WP:USERNAME. Kindly unblock and allow. -- Ben ^TALK/_HIST 23:30, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User unblocked pending response to new info. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 23:39, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Allow due to new findings presented by Ben (I had some reservations when I made my weak disallow, but being at work I had about 20 seconds to check in between calls)... a strong thank you to Ben for reopening the case after making the clarification. Cascadia^TALK^|^HISTORY 23:38, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Allow per new information by Ben, I did not know that. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 23:40, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Allow thought this was a clear disallow until ben brought this up! Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 23:42, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Well, you learn things all the time. And isn't this why we have RFCN? Thanks to Ben for the research. Flyguy649^talk_contribs 00:04, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Allow-Thanks Ben! Just another reason why non-obvious ones should stay open for at least a few hours. --TeckWiz ^ParlateContribs_@ 00:05, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Allow as nom, per Ben. That about covers it. Flyguy649^talk_contribs 00:07, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]