Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names

[[:|WP:RFC/NAME
WP:RFCN]]

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.

Be aware that usernames are subject to specific criteria which differ from controls and guidelines regarding other forms of self-expression on Wikipedia. Please ensure you are familiar with the username policy before commenting on a username.

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:

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

Tools : Special:Listusers, Special:Ipblocklist

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

Temporary notice of discussion of interest to contributors here

There is a discussion about requiring Latin transliterations on non-latin usernames goin on here. Please add your input. pschemp | talk 15:44, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NazismIsntCool (talk · contribs)

Username is highly offensive to neo-Nazis. Rqquju 15:44, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy allow, if there is such a thing. It shouldn't be any more offensive that someone who likes spinach being told that I don't like spinach, and frankly, even were it more offensive, I wouldn't be inclined to care. -Amark moo! 15:51, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How about we agree that this username is appropriate, but so are pro-Nazi usernames?

Um... why? -Amark moo! 15:54, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because if we didn't allow them, yet we did allow this, than we would be discriminating against people like ME (Nazis). Rqquju 15:58, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Why is it bad to discriminate against people who believe that other races are inferior to them? We wouldn't allow people expressing that opinion anywhere else, so why would we allow it in a username? -Amark moo! 16:01, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If this isn't a fair, Nazi-friendly encyclopedia, why should I edit here? I can get along much better with neo-Nazis then with the dumbass kikes who run the hell out of this wiki!Rqquju 16:04, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You may leave if you wish, we are not holding you here. Cbrown1023 16:05, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If there is one thing this nomination has accomplished, it is to indentify a user who, judging from the comment above, should not be welcome here.Proabivouac 19:30, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Allow, this appears to be a bad faith request by a user whose few contributions include creating a racist page and deleting its speedy tag many times violating WP:3RR. Cbrown1023 16:05, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Disallow How can I create a Nazi-friendly encyclopedia?Rqquju 16:07, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- You can fork if you please. ~~WP:FORK lays out how.~~ Don't be surprised, though, when nobody actually believes your Nazi-friendly encyclopedia. -Amark moo! 16:10, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Or, for that matter, you could download MediaWiki and build from scratch. -Amark moo! 16:11, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Looking at the policy, it says that usernames that promote a controversial point of view can be deleted. However, it also says that references to violent actions are to be blocked. Nazi as a point of view. If it said something about the Halocaust, that would be different. --w^L^{<speak·check·chill>} 17:42, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Disallow. This username is culturally divisive and likely to provoke conflict. Some of my relatives died in Nazi concentration camps, but it isn't our place to make such value judgements. If a username is inherently disruptive, it doesn't matter who's right or wrong. —David Levy 18:00, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Allow. It's "culturally divisive"? Good grief. It's a bad-faith request, as Cbrown1023 points out, and we shouldn't pander to it with political correctness. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 18:08, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is culturally divisive (Nazism being a culture), and I don't care what the motive behind this listing was. We mustn't allow a username that belittles a group of people simply because we share the sentiment. We're here to build an encyclopedia, and this username is highly likely to provoke conflict that interferes with said goal. —David Levy 19:23, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disallow As nominator User:Rqquju identifies himself as a Neo-Nazi, the nomination may well be in good faith. However, the userbox displayed on his page is significantly more divisive and should be deleted. The trouble I have with this username is that the oppositional role it assumes violates WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not a battleground. Usernames referring to politics or religion should be disallowed.Proabivouac 19:28, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be minded to disallow simply on the grounds that this is not a great name to choose in the spirit of building an encyclopedia, but nom is in questionable faith and the sentiment isn't exactly disagreeable. Ahhhh.... Deizio talk 19:36, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Catholicdefender2222 (talk · contribs)

I've previouly blocked this user as Booooohhhaaya (talk · contribs), since the name was nonsensical. However he's now chosen User:Catholicdefender2222 as his new username. Since it both features a religious term as well as a possible bias, I'm asking if this name can be a valid WP username --w^L^{<speak·check·chill>} 21:41, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I wouldn't have blocked the first one. Disallow this one and let him use the first one. It isn't totally nonsensical. pschemp | talk 22:05, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, when I am looking for this user, how am a I supposed to know how many "o"s there are or "h"s, it seems to be some nensensical one to me. Cbrown1023 22:15, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I asked a few admins in IRC about that particular username, and they agreed to block the first one because of the above reason. --w^L^{<speak·check·chill>} 17:25, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disallow It has the word "Catholic" in it, and I did say that religious-related Usernames should be blocked. Acalamari 23:29, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: actually religious names are allowed, as long as they don't show a POV, or are soley the name of a religious figure. --w^L^{<speak·check·chill>} 17:25, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Disallow because it's extremely divisive and shows a potential bias. This individual should be directed to WP:USER so the next username he chooses will be allowable. Srose (talk) 00:34, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Disallow. While I'm not against having ones religion as part of the username, to combine a religion with either an offensive term (not this one) or a term indicative of a strong point of view is unnessecarily divisive. Crimsone 08:31, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Disallow per Acalamari. Usernames referring to religion or politics should be disallowed.Proabivouac 08:49, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Disallow Unlike the name JewishPride which I decided on allowing, this name seems to indicate an intention to act with a POV. While having pride in a point of view is not a claim intent, calling yourself a defender of a point of view is a claim of intent, an intent that violates our NPOV rules. This is why I resisted a blanket rule against religious terms, it is not so clear cut, that is why we have this page. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 14:26, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I also would not have block the name Booooohhhaaya. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 15:20, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Names such as User:Islampedia and User:JewishPride declare the very same intent. It is not violation of policy to defend Catholicism except insofar as one's contributions are biased, which is equally suggested by taking pride in something or by merely identifying with something strongly enough to put it in one's username. I have yet to come across a user with an analogous name who didn't act more or less exactly how one might imagine. The appearance is of a heirarchy of tolerance.Proabivouac 19:19, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Disallow per HiBC. Don't have a problem with user's previous name. Deizio talk 15:18, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]