Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names

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

Please remember that this is not a vote, rather, it is a place where editors can come when they are unsure what to do with a username, and to get outside opinions (hence it's named "requests for comment"). Bolded recommendations are not necessary. There are no set time limits to the period of discussion.

Place your report below this line.

---

The following discussion is an archived debate of the username below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/User names). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result is disallow. Obvious consensus that this fails WP:SPAMNAME. As the user's edits do not seem to be inherently promotional/problematic, they will be given an opportunity to request a name change prior to any further action. Shereth 16:29, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Truthinlabeling

Truthinlabeling (talk · contribs)

From UAA: Violation of username policy because it's a promotional and disruptive username; Contains "truth" and is an account involved in advocacy, and seems related to the website "truthinlabeling.org" which the editor has referred to, and is an advocacy site on the same topic this WP:SPA edits. Verbal chat 15:08, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

• Disallow apparently a corporate/group name. User asked "what would be wrong with being connected to truthinlabeling.org?". My answer is: Your name violates our policies, as company/group names are disallowed. You seem eager to attribute valid requests that you change your name to some kind of "pro-MSG" bias. That is not the case, we forbid all group usernames. You are free to edit under a personal account. Material you add that violates the WP:NPOV policy will continue to be removed, no matter what account you edit under. Gigs (talk) 20:35, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
• Disallow - clearly promotional. I sympathize with this user's cause, but usernames that are used to promote an organization are explicitly disallowed. User is free to edit under an individual name, as long as they keep neutral point of view in mind and don't add external links to promote a viewpoint. -kotra (talk) 00:43, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
• Disallow As per Kotra.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 07:00, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the entries talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.

Shiptradenews

Shiptradenews (talk · contribs)

Originally reported to UAA as promotional. I wasn't entirely convinced and asked that the user be notified about the concern. Per a comment on the talk page, this user claims this is a standard pen-name they use, but that they are willing to change their username if necessary. Personally I do not see an issue; a quick Google search turns up no companies/groups/etc under "Shiptradenews" or "Ship Trade News", and the user appears to be trying to make good-faith edits. Since I am so on the fence as to whether or not he should change names, I'm requesting disuccsion here. Shereth 20:33, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

• Allow - No "shiptradenews", "ship tradenews", "shiptrade news", or "ship trade news" found using Google or Yahoo; so in the absence of evidence to the contrary, it can be assumed this is not promotional. -kotra (talk) 20:41, 23 June 2009 (UTC) (changed to disallow, see below)
• Disallow Looking at the edits of the user a large part of them relate to the Ports and are related to shipping. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 15:03, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

  It's possible they are just a shipping/trading/news enthusiast. This would be like if you spent all your time editing articles about pharaohs and wizards; nothing wrong with that. In the absence of some evidence of a "shiptradenews" publication or other strong evidence, I don't think we should assume it's promotional. -kotra (talk) 15:30, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

  Changed to Strong Disallow Promotional username as per his talkpage He is the Editor of " Shipping & Trade NewsLetter" His username is the name of the Publication of which he is the Editor.Do not know whether it is online and his editing is going to be in that area. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 15:41, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

  I stand corrected. Judging by the user's contribs, I'm not sure it's being used promotionally, but it implies that the account represents an organization, not a single person, and sharing accounts is not allowed. So I would disallow this username. -kotra (talk) 00:32, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the username below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/User names). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result was: disallow. ÷seresin 05:53, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

89.11З.208.1З

89.11З.208.1З (talk · contribs)

Registered name that appears to be an IP address. Editor is using a confusing З instead of the number 3 in the username. When typed into the search bar, it goes to an apparently unrelated set of IP contributions. Has continued to edit since an attempt to discuss the issue on the user's talk page. The contributions themselves are idiosyncratic, but not clearly disruptive: eight articles created, two of which have since been speedy deleted, and one that was almost a word-for-word rephrasing of another article as though it had been put through a thesaurus. Dekimasuよ! 09:37, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

The З vs 3 issue seems to be sufficiently confusing so as to be in violation of WP:U. I don't know that mimicking an IP address is a good idea, either. Not blatantly blockable but if the user continues to edit without addressing this issue - and preferably changing to a less confusing username - a block may then be in order. Shereth 14:55, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Given that the username is clearly supposed to mimic an IP, and the obscure character, this username is clearly meant to be deceptive. I plan to block shortly barring objection. ÷seresin 01:23, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I was just going to add something similar here myself, since the user is still continuing to edit without response after having been informed of this discussion. Dekimasuよ! 01:26, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the entries talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.

Weetoddid

Weetoddid (talk · contribs) "Weetoddid" is a corruption of "Retarded", which is inappropriate for an encyclopedia. Placed {{Uw-username}} on user's talk page on June 17 and user failed to respond, user has since made over 100 edits including response to a different inquiry on their talk page. --Tombstone (talk) 11:35, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

I do not feel that my username is inappropriate for an encyclopedia and have responded on my talk page. If an admin decides that it is, I would like to be given an opportunity to change it rather than being blocked. --Weetoddid (talk) 20:15, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree... I'm not too sure how you got "retarted" out of that...--Unionhawk ^{Talk E-mail} 18:01, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Just say "wee tod did", I think it is clear that this is simply a creative spelling of "retarded". This is an old joke. You can write down "I yam sofa king we Tod Ed" and ask your friends to say it. Just a variation on the theme. Chillum 18:04, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Insufficiently problematic to warrant any action. Someone might be offended upon seeing this username, but there are a lot of usernames that someone might be offended by. Shereth 14:59, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Not sure. While I didn't immediately associate the name with the word "retarded" the user seems to agree that their username is a corruption of that word. Username:Retarded wouldn't be likely to survive an RFC. Neither would (just randomly) Phaggit, Mentullydissterbd or any similar corruption. On the other hand, some other self-deprecating usernames have been allowed recently. Exploding Boy (talk) 23:58, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

• Allow, harmless somewhat hidden version of self-depreciation. Kusma (talk) 12:17, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

• Note, I never said or implied this username was offensive, I said it was inappropriate. My concern is this user seems to be mainly reverting vandalism and warning new and anon users, and the warning templates come off more as a joke. This leads me to believe it is ineffective and leaves an unprofessional image of Wikipedia. Rgrds. --Tombstone (talk) 15:50, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the username below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/User names). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result was: no action taken; no prior attempt to discuss with user. -kotra (talk) 19:06, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

City of Dallas Eco Dev

City of Dallas Eco Dev (talk · contribs)

This appears to be a group or role account.   Will Beback  talk  21:44, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

This name is problematic and should not be allowed. As the user does not appear to be spamming per se, they should be given opportunity to change their username prior to blocking. Shereth 22:02, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

There's a notice on the user's talk page, but he's only made two edits so let's see what happens. If he ignores the message and keeps editing I'll remind him, and then block the account if it keeps being used.   Will Beback  talk  23:24, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the entries talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the username below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/User names). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result was: no action taken; no prior attempt to discuss with user as per instructions above. kotra (talk) 00:12, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

AzeriTerroru

AzeriTerroru (talk · contribs)

A reference to terrorism in Azerbaijan with anti-Azerbaijani sentiment in Ganja edit. Not auto-confirmed, but already familiar with editing. Brandt 00:06, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the entries talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the username below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/User names). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result was: no action taken - no prior attempt to discuss with user as per instructions above. -kotra (talk) 19:42, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

R. Swipe

R. Swipe (talk · contribs)

The combination of R and swipe, that is Arse wipe, is a crude and offensive reference. Snappy (talk) 06:04, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Wow. I never would have noticed that without having someone explain it. I suppose when viewed in that way, it seems inappropriate, but it is also not beyond realistic that someone's name could actually be Ron Swipe, or Richard Swipe. There is nothing wrong with the five edits they have done, they seem to have not realized the name could be seen that way. Ariel♥Gold 07:53, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Hahaha, very clever. Pretty borderline stuff. In any event, however, the user has neither refused to change their name nor have they continued to edit after being notified of the username concern; per the instructions at the top of this page, this report should not have been made at this time. Shereth 12:46, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Like the others have insinuated above, I think we're reading too much into this one. It isn't a stretch of the imagination that the username represents someone's actual name. Even if it wasn't, the intention clearly isn't malicious, but rather a clever and relatively innocuous pun. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 14:29, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

The name is in fact Rex. I have never quite forgiven my parents for that. However, despite all the teasing I have endured all of my life, nobody had previously suggested that my name was "crude and offensive" and I am a little hurt by Snappy's statement.R. Swipe (talk) 18:03, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the entries talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the username below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/User names). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result was: no violation. Behavior issues may be handled separately. ÷seresin 23:02, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

TeaParty1

TeaParty1 (talk · contribs)

The Editor in question has mostly edited exclusively in the Tea Party protests article and if they edited outside the article it has been to add the protests to those article. Obviously, this account is a WP:SPA and might violate WP:SPAMNAME or another policy and indicates a connection with the Tea Party protest. Brothejr (talk) 10:40, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I am hesitant to call this a promotional username; given the "Tea Party" protests were loosely related and organized (ie. there is no "Tea Party" organization) it makes it a bit sketchy to argue that their username is promotional of a group or product per our naming policy. I noticed this is already being discussed at WP:COIN, which seems a more reasonable venue and I don't see any need to take action based on the username. Therefore, allow as a username. Shereth 15:39, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Sounds cool with me. Brothejr (talk) 16:13, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

• Comment This is more of a COI issue, as Shereth said. Let them figure it out at that noticeboard, as the username, in general, is ambiguous. hmwithτ 17:39, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

• This does not seem to be a violation of the username policy. The name is not itself promotional. Behavior issues can be dealt with separately. Chillum 17:42, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

• No violation, ARCHIVE. --194x144x90x118 (talk) 22:12, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the entries talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the username below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/User names). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result was: blocked by User:Orangemike. -kotra (talk) 19:34, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Discoveryhealthpr

Discoveryhealthpr (talk · contribs)

This username is obviously promotional, which I think is a violation of WP:U, but I'm not entirely sure. Comment? Scottcampb (talk) 22:19, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Comment. That may well be, but we should maybe give them a bit more than three minutes to respond.  ;) user:J aka justen (talk) 22:24, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

• Username has been blocked indefinitely by User:Orangemike. -kotra (talk) 19:34, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the entries talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.