Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names

Edit links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Requests for comment

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Samir (talk | contribs) at 14:54, 1 January 2007 (→‎{{user|Heligoland}}). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Shortcut

If you believe someone has chosen an inappropriate username under Wikipedia's username policy, you may list it here. However, before listing the user here, please consider contacting the user on his or her talk page and bring their attention to the problem and Wikipedia:Changing username. Names that are offensive, inflammatory, impersonating an existing user, or asserting inappropriate authority will generally be permanently blocked by admins.

Shortcuts
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:

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

Tools  : Special:Listusers, Special:Ipblocklist

New listings below this line, at the bottom, please. Add a new listing.

Loganuniversity (talk · contribs)

The user mostly edits Logan College of Chiropractic. I believe this constitutes a conflict of interest and violates WP:U. I have mentioned such on the users talk page before. --Midnightcomm 16:14, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • see comment at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Loganuniversity. Chalk problems with comments up to ignorance of the style of the medium. I am more than happy to change the username but I thought it appropriate to use "loganuniversity" to make comments only on the university. Much more transparent that way, but you guys make the call. All the information on the Logan College of Chiropractic page is now very generic info on the University. I'm fine with whatever you feel is appropriate. Loganuniversity 15:30, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've had a word with the user about WP:COI. Suggest closure of this case as Disallow, invite user to choose a new name and thank user for respecting the spirit of WP conflict of interest guidelines in future. Deizio talk 15:36, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with this solution Lethaniol 15:41, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agree looks like a fine solution. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 16:00, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User is still getting a handle on the policies and guidelines involved here. Will enact block tomorrow if case still open. Deizio talk 23:50, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Block enacted. Deizio talk 03:30, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heligoland (talk · contribs)

The musical group Heligoland was founded in 1999, uses that name in several places online (e.g. their URL and MySpace ID), gets many Google hits, and their Wikipedia article was created on 18 September 2006.

Just one month later, on 24 October 2006, a user previously named "AA Milne" had his username changed to Heligoland, citing as a reason "Potential for confusion surrounding my name and the author A.A Milne."

Unfortunately, now there is a "Potential for confusion surrounding [his] name and [the musical group Heligoland]."

This is a clear case of "Usernames of or closely resembling the names of companies, groups, or include the URL", even leaving aside the trademark issue, and could create some confusion between the group's various online IDs and this Wikipedia ID.

If the band or a member wanted to contribute here under their own name, they're precluded by this user. If they'd be blocked from using their own name anyway, due to COI/self-promotion concerns, then why should anyone else get to use their name instead? If Microsoft Corporation can't have User:Microsoft, neither should anyone else.

According to WP:USERNAME#Changing_inappropriate_usernames, one should first approach the user on his talk page:

Co-operative contributors should normally just be made aware of our policy via a post on their talk page. Voluntary changes (via Wikipedia:Changing username) are preferred: users from other countries and/or age groups may make mistakes about choosing names -- immediate blocking or listing on RfC could scare off new users acting in good faith.

A request for this user to change this name voluntarily was posted to his talk page on 31 Dec 2006. Quoting the core points:

(begin excerpt)   ... please change your name at once, in accordance with WP:USERNAME#Inappropriate_usernames:
"Usernames that promote a company or website: Usernames of or closely resembling the names of companies, groups, or include the URL of a particular website are discouraged and may be blocked."
Your name doesn't just "closely resemble" but is identical to that of the group Heligoland, whose URL and MySpace ID also use that name. Acccording to their many Google hits, they don't need any more promotion via a Wikipedia username. As if further reason were needed, an Australian class-41/entertainment trademark would trigger:
"Trademarked names: Trademarked names, especially sports teams like the Miami Heat, the Carolina Hurricanes, or the New York Yankees should not be used in a username."   (end excerpt)

The user has refused this request ("I have no intention of changing my username, I've had the username for 3 months, and it was checked and changed here [1] by a bureaucrat." - full text), and closed the discussion on his talk page.

According to WP:USERNAME#Changing_inappropriate_usernames, the next step is further discussion:

Where a change must be forced, we first discuss it. This can take place on either (A) the user's talk page, (B) a subpage of the user's talk page, or (C) a sub page of Wikipedia:Requests for comment. It should be listed on Wikipedia:Requests for comment in the appropriate section. The user should also be made aware of the discussion.

In view of the user's closing off discussion on his own page, options (A) and (B) seem impracticable. Thus this RFC/NAME.

There is very much an ongoing question whether a name with (a) some legitimate referents, and (b) some (or even one) in violation of WP:USERNAME, should be allowed because of (a) or disallowed because of (b).

For instance, were I a New Englander who'd moved to upstate New York, would I be allowed to describe myself by the quite fitting and generic username of "New York Yankee"? Quite clearly not. As quoted above, WP:USERNAME specifically addressed that example, and declared it inappropriate. That I might like the name would not give me a free pass. The existing (trademarked) group name precludes its being a Wikipedia username.

For an actual precedent, User:Kuntan received an "Inappropriate username" block, despite there being legitimate real-world uses of that name — such as "Kuntan", the name of a town in Malaysia; "Kuntan Singh Kanwal", a football player, in The Hindu sport news; "Kuntan Krishnan", a Senior Superintendent of Police, in The Hindustan Times; "Kuntan" meanings, including "a strong, stout person (coll.)", in Tamil-English dictionary; other examples in Google searches (excluding Wikipedia) kuntan+malaysia and kuntan+kerala; and, from elsewhere in the world, the "Kuntan tree" (picture) — on the grounds of a citationless assertion that the word "Kuntan" also had a slang meaning in violation of WP:USERNAME.* The one purported (and unverifiable) "bad" referent trumped the multiple (and verifiable) "good" referents, all despite the unexamined possibility that this was the user's actual given name.

* The purported meaning (roughly, victim of child abuse) was alleged to be so obscene that merely having that name was "offensive", "disruptive", and "trolling"; an admin who'd made that assertion later changed the block reason to "trolling", without denying the previous reason.

If that precedent is to be upheld, if that rationale is good, it should apply equally to User:Heligoland. Other, legitimate referents cannot trump the violation of WP:USERNAME, nor can the age of the username (three months) justify its continuation — there is no exemption for how long a policy violation escaped detection. And certainly "Heligoland" is not this user's actual given name.

Otherwise, if that precedent is to be overturned, if that rationale is to be rejected, likewise this should apply to both usernames and not just one.

For instance, geographical referents: there is an island named "Heligoland"; there is a town named "Kuntan". This excuse should work for both usernames, or for neither. ("New York Yankee" is likewise a statement of geographical origin and current residence, which does not clear it of the WP:USERNAME violation.)

It would be nice to get a clear and consistent statement in the official policy on how it applies to such multiple-referent names. Perhaps this RFC on just one such name, "Heligoland", might contribute to that outcome.

I ask that discussion on this WP:RFC/NAME be kept to the WP:USERNAME policy and its application. This is not a "user conduct" RFC, nor an RFA, nor a popularity contest, nor a judgment upon anyone's character. Personal attacks, threats, and ad hominems are as out of place here as anywhere else in Wikipedia.

Thank you for your courteous and civil participation. – SAJordan talkcontribs 08:12, 31 Dec 2006 (UTC).

Addressing an objection brought up elsewhere: "You can't TM a placename so that no-one can ever use it in a different context." – The issue here is not whether trademark law allows the same name to be trademarked for different contexts (industries) by different entities. The issue here is that once anyone has trademarked it, Wikipedia policy precludes its use as a username. (Relevant provision quoted and cited above.) To rely on the leeway in trademark law would be misguided, because in this case Wikipedia policy is more restrictive – just as pointing to the "fair use" leeway in copyright law as the upper limit on uploading copyrighted materials here would be misguided, because in that case Wikipedia policy is more restrictive. – SAJordan talkcontribs 16:28, 31 Dec 2006 (UTC).

Comment - A place name cannot be trademarked, Heligoland has no obscure references in foreign languages and furthermore "Heligoland" is not a registered trademark in America [2] (location of WikiMedia Foundation for all legal purposes), Britain [3] (my country of residence) or Australia (where trademark law precludes the registration of any trademarks based around a geographic location [4])

I quote the Australian Government Geographical references or place names are usually very difficult to register, especially when the place has a reputation for certain goods or services. For example, it would be very difficult to register TASMANIA for apples or NEWCASTLE for steel production. Traders who provide goods or services from these areas have a need to be able to indicate that place of origin of their goods or services. - the band Heligoland are unable to register their name as a trademark because they aren't providing a product or service originating from the island of Heligoland. As it stands, the band have not registered their name as a registered trademark.

If this RfC does result in a request for the change of my username, I request the same requirement is set for all users in similar situations, so users like User:Lost, User:Montrose (just a couple off the top of my head with usernames that are locations in Scotland)

As it stands, I request this RfC be dismissed forthwith. --Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 16:51, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect: (1) Place names can indeed be used in trademarks, as you might have noticed from watching any film whose head-titles include "a Castle Rock production" (one of many many examples). (2) The stated problem with your name has nothing to do with "obscure references in foreign languages", so I don't know why you brought that up. (3) As to trademark law, in all good faith I must assume you've read the site a bit hastily. There is a difference between "difficult" and "impossible", since there are in fact both TASMANIA trademarks and NEWCASTLE trademarks (including the famed brown ale). The difficulty with registering TASMANIA for apples or NEWCASTLE for steel production is precisely that there are so many providers of those products from those locations. But there is no requirement that the registrant of a place-name trademark must actually be in or from that place; not in the US, UK, or Australia. Rob Reiner's "Castle Rock Entertainment" is not in or from any of the real-world places named "Castle Rock", nor (of course) is it in or from Stephen King's fictional Maine town, after which it's actually named. – SAJordan talkcontribs 18:41, 31 Dec 2006 (UTC).
Well, notable enough that they have their own article here — let's see how much more notable after their six-month European tour, first half of 2007 — and confusing enough when other people use their MySpace ID on Wikipedia too. – SAJordan talkcontribs 17:05, 31 Dec 2006 (UTC).
Names like Lost and Montrose are words that preexist any use by an organization. Does the word Heligoland predate the existence of the band or any other organization using the name? HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 17:09, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Heligoland has been known as such since 1807 - please see Heligoland. --Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 17:12, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm aware of a television show titled "Lost", but not of a company or group bearing that name. The WP:USERNAME provision cited refers to the names and URLs of companies or groups, not to the titles of literary, dramatic, or musical works. If you wanted to call yourself "The Unbearable Lightness of Being", or "A Tale of Two Cities", or "Painted Black", I don't know of any reason you couldn't. There can be (or are, or once were) copyrights on the contents of such works, but the titles of works cannot be copyrighted — which is why there are so many books titled "Raising Hell". But copyright law and trademark law are significantly different. – SAJordan talkcontribs 18:59, 31 Dec 2006 (UTC).
So you'd allow my use of "New York Yankee" (if I were a former New Englander living in New York state)? – SAJordan talkcontribs 19:02, 31 Dec 2006 (UTC).
"New York Yankee" isn't a word, nor is it a place, it is a compound of a place and a slang term. Worlds apart. I would not defend that name if it were challenged. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 19:04, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for clarifying. So then if I move back to Hartford, Connecticut, would User:The Hartford be okay with you? No-one's trademarked the word "The". – SAJordan talkcontribs 19:25, 31 Dec 2006 (UTC).
What's wrong with "New York Yankee"? —Centrx→talk • 21:51, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Trademarked team name. The second WP:U provision quoted above. – SAJordan talkcontribs 22:14, 31 Dec 2006 (UTC).
Trademarks apply to the commercial field in which they are trademarked. New York Yankee is terminology that was used a hundred years before the baseball team was founded. Redux, Firefox, Banyan Tree, Dragonflight, Centrx, Giano, and Malber are all live, registered trademarks in the United States. Most of them have several trademarks; that is, a commercial company in a different field can get the same trademark, but a Wikipedia user who derived it completely independently and does not use it for any impersonation or anything commercial—who in some cases have come up with the name before it was even trademarked—cannot? If I send $300 to the USPTO can I get "SAJordan" banned from Wikipedia? —Centrx→talk • 01:14, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(1) Take it up with WP:U. (2) I think I addressed, above, the possibility of different entities trademarking the same name in different industries. That's leeway allowed by trademark law, just as "fair use" is leeway allowed by copyright law. In both cases, Wikipedia mustn't break the law, but it can and does set policies that are stricter than the law. Not allowing usernames that duplicate (or come too close to) trademarked names, or other company or group names and URLs, is part of that. So here the restriction is from WP:U, not trademark law. (3) Your $300 wouldn't get me banned, but it might push me to change my username. I'm willing to keep doing that, as long as you're willing to keep paying $300 fees. US taxpayers will love us both, and I (at least) will ride the wave to fame and fortune, and every so often send little gifts to the poorhouse after you've spent everything. Sounds like a deal. – SAJordan talkcontribs 04:03, 1 Jan 2007 (UTC).
That would be an absurd policy. Also, WP:U clearly does not categorically mean all "Trademarked names". It specifically refers to the sort of uncommon multi-word names that would be used by sports fans, etc. Are you suggesting that all of the above users ought to be forced to change their names, and then forced again if someone happens to pay for a trademark for their new username? Do you think that is good policy, or what WP:U is referring to? Danny, Angela, Jordan, David, Gerard, Matt, James, and all manner of other commons names are also live, registered trademarks in the United States. —Centrx→talk • 04:15, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Where you live is not relevant. There is nothing wrong with naming yourself after a place. Nothing wrong with the word 'The'. Perhaps I am missing something in your comment, is Hartford a name used by an organization? HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 19:35, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(1) I posited residence due to the contention above, "the band Heligoland are unable to register their name as a trademark because they aren't providing a product or service originating from the island of Heligoland".
(2) The Hartford is a major insurance/investments company. URL, Google hits. – SAJordan talkcontribs 19:50, 31 Dec 2006 (UTC). It used to be headquartered in Hartford, Connecticut, but in 1985 it moved to Simsbury CT... with no name change.– SAJordan talkcontribs 20:04, 31 Dec 2006 (UTC).
In that case, User:The Hartford is in violation, and User:Hartford is not. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 19:58, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
All right, so let me make sure I understand the underlying principles and reasoning involved. Please check me on these:
  1. Wikipedia's official policy declares some usernames "inappropriate" for various reasons — including but not restricted to: being identical or similar to the names or URLs of companies or groups (trademark not a criterion); or likewise (as a separate reason) for trademarked names.
  2. However, this restriction can be set aside in the case of pre-existing: (a) geographical names, like Boston or Hartford; (b) non-specific [used by more than one person] proper names, like Donovan; (c) titles of works, like Genesis. Would you also allow (d) common innocuous words like "Yes" and "Wings"?
  3. The apparent violation is, um, "mooted"?, by the fact that the name is used in non-violating senses, and not solely or exclusively in the violating sense.
  4. In other words, the existence of "acceptable" referents trumps the existence of "unacceptable" referents.
Have I got that right?
If so, should some such clarification be added to the policy? – SAJordan talkcontribs 20:31, 31 Dec 2006 (UTC).
When there is doubt as to how policy is applied we have a discussion. This is that discussion. I think this can be handles on a case by case basis. However, if you wish to propose an amendment to policy I would be likely to participate. Oh, and genesis is a word meaning the beginning of life. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 20:35, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if policy really does not forbid such names in these circumstances, it would be nice for policy to say that, so everyone who reads it has a chance of getting roughly the same idea about what is and isn't permitted.
For one thing, there could be substantial unfairness if two or more users meeting all the same criteria get different results. We might agree all nice and friendly-like to read these unwritten exceptions into policy, but maybe the next group participating won't. Is precedent citable? What if no-one looked for it in the right place? What if this user gets another such RFC/NAME filed against him three months from now, and everyone who voted "Allow" this time is on Wikibreak, and the new crowd decide that precedent isn't binding? As policy is written right now, he should not have this name, because the exceptions you're arguing are not written there. Including these clearly stated exceptions in policy makes it likelier they'll be properly and consistently applied. Case-by-case stands a risk of being influenced by how many friends or enemies a user has, and I don't think this should be a popularity contest,.
Unfortunately, "reserved" vs. "public-domain" status for names is not the only problem — unless your exceptions also apply to other violations of WP:USERNAME. Prior use by a group was the clearest issue, but there's also a religious-or-divine connotation. The etymology of "Heligoland" has been disputed, but some claim it derives from Heilige Land or Holy Land. Before I even dig up citations, would it matter? I don't think we generally allow usernames to start with "Holy" or "Blessed" or "Sanctified" or "Saint", any more than we allow deity-names. But would this also be "mooted" or "tolled" by the geographical (place-name) usage? Likewise if someone were to claim it had an offensive meaning instead, like "Go-To-Hell-Land"? Would "acceptable" referents still trump "unacceptable" referents?
And... is precedent citable? Can a user whose name is challenged (or someone challenging a username) cite similar cases to support him? – SAJordan talkcontribs 22:07, 31 Dec 2006 (UTC).
The reasoning in previous cases is citable insofar as reason is universally binding, but there are no binding decisions on Wikipedia. —Centrx→talk • 22:23, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Including "Official Policy"? (Leaving decisions by Jimmy Wales or the Board entirely out of this, of course.) – SAJordan talkcontribs 22:53, 31 Dec 2006 (UTC).
Supposing that a policy was arrived at through perfect, flawless consensus: if there is a problem with a current policy then the best avenue to correct it is to propose it at the policy page or talk page. That the policy was decided to be policy in the past does not mean we are necessarily bound to have it as policy in the future; of course, because it was decided to be policy in the past, there must have been substantial reasons for that which would need to be addressed before changing it. Separate from that, there are also issues with whether something found in a policy page was in fact added through consensus, or whether there would be substantial disagreement over the idea but no one has happened to notice it. There are issues about whether something in a policy is vague or too categorical or how it applies; "neutral point of view" is nice to say and agreed by any encyclopedia writer, but fewer people have reviewed what is actually currently stated in the Wikipedia:Neutral point of view page, and it is not necessarily simple to apply it to a particular situation in a particular article (that is, there has not even been any sort of "decision" about applying it to that particular situation in that particular article, let alone a binding one). Also, Wikipedia:Ignore all rules covers a lot of these problems, and is itself "official policy". Also, certain things like freeness, more or less open editing, and "encyclopedia" are intrinsic, essential to what Wikipedia is; in that sense there could be said to be a binding decision about what the whole thing is for and about, but that is very general and that too is still based on solid "binding" reasons, reasons which inform us when allowing or disallowing fair use images, having semi-protection and more or less of it, currently protecting any high-visibility templates, possibly changing "Verifiability" and "No original research" to something else, or conceivably changing "neutral point of view" to something related. —Centrx→talk • 01:29, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Specifically meta:Foundation issues. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 23:52, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Allow - nothing wrong with this at all. Naming yourself after a place is not uncommon. A lot of bands name themselves for placenames, so do a lot of editors (indeed, my own username is a place name, Grutness). Unless it is clear that a name has been chosen for the likeness to the band rather than the place, I don't see a problem. In the case of this user, there are clear indications on his user page on an interest in northwestern Europe's maritime heritage... so which is more likely, that he named himself for a band or for an island off the German coast that used to be a major naval base? Grutness...wha? 00:07, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Allow, the user in no way is trying to "imitate" the band or whatever the thing is. I feel that SAJordan is trying to make a WP:POINT here, because he is involved in a dispute with this user on my RfC. Also, Kuntan created the username with an intention to make a WP:POINT, by writing that article – Kuntayithote; so your point is moot. --Nearly Headless Nick 13:34, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Allow this is a vindictive and spiteful user name RfC started by SAJordan, with no merit whatsoever. Pure WP:POINT. -- Samir धर्म 14:53, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

McFatFanny (talk · contribs)

I believe this is an inappropriate user name. The current content of their user page makes me think they are not intent on working with others to build an encyclopedia. Currently blocked for vandalism. --Guinnog 01:51, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Good catch, good call. Name sounds like a bad nickname for a fellow student. First edit, possibly experimental. Second edit, not especially well written, but (never having watched the show or its cast-change news) I don't know whether it's true or false. It was a decent start for a first-timer. After that, things went downhill, as though the user was bored and aimless and playing around with ways to express grudges. Might respond to some friendly interaction, might not. If someone's willing to try, broach the possibility of adoption or mentoring, because in a year or two there might be a good editor here. – SAJordan talkcontribs 03:42, 1 Jan 2007 (UTC).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/User_names&oldid=97730012"