Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names

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 - User must be given a reasonable chance to discuss on their talk page before being listed here, as per instructions above. 5 minutes is not enough time. kotra (talk) 18:17, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Allah does not exist

Allah does not exist (talk · contribs)

Originally reported to UAA as "an offensive and disruptive username," however there has been some disagreement there as to whether or not this is a blatant violation. It is suspected this could be a Single-purpose account. --Tckma (talk) 17:42, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

• Disallow although it may be a valid viewpoint, the use of it as a username where it will appear in watchlists and talk page signatures places it under the noses of all users and it is going to be offensive to a proportion off them. Expressing/declaring atheist opinions on a users own userpage is one thing, but chosing a username that puts down other users beliefs is a whole step further. (it also seems like a pointy and antagonistic choice of words). Thus it is disruptive and not in the interests of collegial editing. Mfield (Oi!) 17:52, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

• While I'm inclined to agree with the above, if this username is to be disallowed, then so should all similar usernames, such as User:Jesussaves et al. Exploding Boy (talk) 18:01, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

• • I guess the thing with that is that "Jesussaves" can be viewed as more of a positive than a derogatory comment. I mean to say, as an atheist I don't believe that, but I don't find it offensive. Well as "Allah does not exist" is going to be seen as blasphemous and highly offensive by Muslims. Mfield (Oi!) 18:06, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

• Comment. I didn't report this username to UAA when I initially saw it, but it was later reported. There are a number of religious viewpoint-themed usernames, and I do think that if one is blocked then all should be blocked. I do, however, agree with Mfield that perhaps the username was chosen just to stir up certain people. I'm still undecided on whether or not this is a blatant violation. --Tckma (talk) 18:10, 2 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.

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.

User has already requested and been granted a changename, this discussion is therefore moot. Shereth 16:29, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] 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.

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; username is promotional. hmwithτ 14:38, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] 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)

  How does this implies that the account represents an organization? --Tom (talk) 15:46, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

  Because it's a shortened version of Shipping & Trade NewsLetter? --Orange Mike | Talk 15:56, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

  Yeah, I sort of rethunk that one and was going to strike that, still not sure about this one so defer to smarter folks than me :), thanks, --Tom (talk) 15:59, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

  He is a editor for Shipping magazine and is editing shipping and port related articles and Shiptradenews is a shortened form of Shipping & Trade NewsLetter Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 23:30, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

  Therefore, disallow. hmwithτ 14:33, 4 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.

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: allow. [T]he community has decided some professionalism can be sacrificed for personal expression seems to be the key point. ÷seresin 19:55, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] 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)

• I agree with Tombstone in that the username is not ideal for maintaining a professional image of Wikipedia, and when warning users it may be less effective... however, we have admins named Bongwarrior, for whom the same reactions to his username occur. So, perhaps the community has decided some professionalism can be sacrificed for personal expression? Not sure, I'm on the fence on this one. -kotra (talk) 18:37, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

• WP:IU does not allow usernames that are misleading, promotional, offensive or disruptive. It does not prohibit humor. If there are other types of inappropriate usernames they should be added to the policy. I had made several hundread edits over a couple of months before receiving any comment on the name. If I really believed my username to be problematic I would change it. A look at my edits shows my presence is not for nefarious purposes. The term retarded is mildly insulting, but any term that refers to people of low intellect will be insulting until society changes it's attitude. I chose the name because I am physically handicapped and people often confuse physical handicaps and retardation. I also thought it might help excuse my frequent typographical errors. In retrospect I should have chosen ShortBus instead. Anyway any insult implied by the username is clearly directed at me not anyone else.--Weetoddid (talk) 19:38, 2 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.