Misplaced Pages

:Requests for comment/User names - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by H (talk | contribs) at 19:19, 11 March 2007 ({{user|Wykypydya}}). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 19:19, 11 March 2007 by H (talk | contribs) ({{user|Wykypydya}})(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) Shortcuts
Navigation: ArchivesInstructions for closing administratorsPurge page cache

This page is for bringing attention to usernames which may be in violation of Misplaced Pages'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:

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 Misplaced Pages'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



Cuddlebitch (talk · contribs)

No contributions, use of the quasi-curse "bitch" could be considered offensive by some, and thus violation of WP:U. —Krellis (Talk) 04:22, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Good for you, but it is possibly offensive. It is probably safe to say that offensive "bitch" is used more than technical dog term "bitch". The Behnam 04:53, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Honestly, anything is possibly offensive to someone. Son of a gun. RFerreira 05:04, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
That it is a point of subjectivity that this RFC is responsible for handling. We have the policy to guide us as we decide whether or not they are sufficiently offensive. Of course, the policy is against 'offensiveness', which is subjective; hence we run this RFC. In really advanced cases we have actually referenced sources to establish the offensive nature of the phrase, but in this case it will probably be obvious enough to make that measure unnecessary. The Behnam 05:07, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
I dont think the "B"-word is refering to a female dog and so it would be really offensive to female editors..--Cometstyles 15:47, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Because we solve the ambiguity of policy with discussion instead of creating more and more detailed rules, the slippery slope phenomenon really does not apply, imo. InBC 16:47, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Clear Disallow contains explicit profanity: "bitch". NikoSilver 16:50, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Changing to allow per HighInBC and Kukini below. Pardon my non-nativeness. It would have been more insulting in my mother-tongue (which actually uses the same parallel for the female dog). NikoSilver 17:08, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
    • While bitch may be a naughty word to some, is it actually profanity? I here it on sitcoms and the radio, by what standard is it profanity? InBC 16:57, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Allow I think we need to be careful about blocking too quickly based on issues like this. Have any of you heard of Bookslut . Quite the zine! And note the use of the word "slut" in a positive fashion? Kukini 16:55, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Wykypydya (talk · contribs)

Account created a few days before the new rule on Misplaced Pages terms in usernames was created. However, I still think it should be disallowed, given the statements on the user page. RJASE1 18:57, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Allow username. not even against current policy. Disallow the user trolling(if that is what is going on, I am not sure), but then that is a discussion for another board. InBC 19:11, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment - the policy I am thinking of is:
"Prohibited username components include, but are not limited to words resembling the following:"
"Usernames that contain the word Misplaced Pages..."
But maybe I'm nitpicking... RJASE1 19:17, 11 March 2007 (UTC)