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 Buddy431 (talk | contribs) at 06:09, 9 January 2011 (Double standard with religious user names?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 06:09, 9 January 2011 by Buddy431 (talk | contribs) (Double standard with religious user names?)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) Shortcuts
Navigation: Archives • Instructions for closing administrators • Purge 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

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 Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for comment/User names). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result was: Non-admin closure: hasn't been discussed with the user. GiftigerWunsch 00:19, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Perseus, Son of Zeus

Perseus, Son of Zeus (talk · contribs)

Same name as God. Is this allowed? --Tyw7  (☎ Contact me! • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 19:32, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
Which part of Misplaced Pages:Username policy does this run afoul of? - Ahunt (talk) 19:42, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
I mean is it? It's the name as the name of Perseus Jackson, the hero of the book Perseus Jackson and the Olympians. Also there is a god name by Perseus. SO I guess user names that are named after famous gods/dieties are allowed? So User:Athena is allowed? --Tyw7  (☎ Contact me! • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 20:02, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes, they are. --Conti|✉ 20:33, 8 January 2011 (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.
Except, of course, for user:Jesus, who got his ass blocked for the name, despite it being a not uncommon name. user:Allah too, though at least that's not a real name. Do we maybe have a double standard in regards to western monotheistic religions vs. everyone else's belief system? Just saying. Buddy431 (talk) 06:09, 9 January 2011 (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 Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for comment/User names). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result was: Allow - a username indicating that you are an individual who works for a company is permissible and is a useful voluntary self disclosure of a potential COI..  7  22:39, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Mark at Alcoa

Mark at Alcoa (talk · contribs)

Previous discussions: User talk:Mark at Alcoa & Misplaced Pages:Changing username/Simple/Archive80#Alcoa → Alcoa Editor
I think this user is violating Username policies because of a. of possible WP:COI vio and is used for promotional purposes (editing a company article of the same name). For example, would Mike from Symantec be banned if he is editing the Norton Internet Security article? I think he should. (see also Misplaced Pages talk:Username policy#User names that have known companies in them) Tyw7  (☎ Contact me! • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 19:46, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Allow: The username policy and coi policies are two different policies, and names which indicate a conflict of interest are not a violation; the name was specifically changed so that it no longer violated WP:ORGNAME, and represents a single individual. The user has explained that they intend to abide by our rules on conflicts of interest, neutrality, advertising, etc. and indeed that they chose the username for the sake of making their conflict of interest transparent. I don't see a username policy violation. GiftigerWunsch 20:05, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Block "Unambiguous use of a name or URL of a company, group or product as a username is not permitted. A username that is the name of a company or group implies the intent to promote this group. Accordingly, such usernames may be indefinitely blocked. Even if the name is ambiguous, accounts with a company or group name as a username may be indefinitely blocked if their editing behavior appears to be promotional." (copied and paste from http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Username_policy&oldid=404623475) --Tyw7  (☎ Contact me! • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 20:17, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
    As I've mentioned above, however, the user has explained that his motives are exactly the opposite, and has no intention of promoting the company. The use of their name as well makes it clear that the username represents one person, so I don't see how this can be said to be violating WP:ORGNAME as either promoting a company or representing that company. GiftigerWunsch 20:20, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
How about changing it to just User:Mark or User:MarkA --Tyw7  (☎ Contact me! • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 20:21, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
If the user is willing to change it then problem solved, but I don't see a compelling reason to make such a change obligatory. Note that both cases would require usurpation, making them less than ideal, but I take your point. GiftigerWunsch 20:23, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Is User:MarkA a registered user? --Tyw7  (☎ Contact me! • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 20:27, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
I was bounced here from WP:UAA (see http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Usernames_for_administrator_attention&oldid=405209592) :/ --Tyw7  (☎ Contact me! • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 22:13, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Allow Tyw, your own argument reads better as a reason for allowing the name than disallowing it. Where is the evidence he's editing promotionally? It certainly is not a group account, as it identifies him as one person. Hes been through this before, let's not do it again please. —Soap— 22:22, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
The user is editing an article called Arcoa and is obvious that s/he is from that company, --Tyw7  (☎ Contact me! • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 23:24, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
But "Arcoa" is. Why is Bill from Microsoft would get a uninomous vote to block while Mark at Marcous is getting a unimous vote to allow? --Tyw7  (☎ Contact me! • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 23:23, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
  • As the bureaucrat who renamed the user from "Alcoa" (which was a violation) to Mark at Alcoa, I obviously felt the new name was permissible per our username policy and accorded with relevant guidelines on declaring a conflict of interest.
    Tyw7, you seem to be implying the conflict of interest would go away if the individual was renamed to MarkA - it wouldn't. The user has a COI with respect to the Alcoa article for as long as they are employed at Alcoa - but COI editing is not prohibited, it is merely strongly discouraged.
    In this instance, I see no need for further action. –xeno 21:00, 4 January 2011 (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.


Flyingved

Flyingved (talk · contribs)

COI/SPA and possible user name policy vio. (May also be 178.94.130.125) Other editors already issued warning on User talk:Flyingved but that was December 15 - 17. On December 20 they created CTLS Flight Design. See also User:Flyingved/Flight Design aircraft LSA which is now a redirect to the mainspace. On December 21 they created Flight Design aircraft LSA as a redirect to CTLS Flight Design. Today, December 23, they created MC Flight Design with their user page a redirect to that article (I have removed the redirect). They also, today, created Flight Design aircraft as a redirect to CTLS Flight Design. Also on December 20 they uploaded one image (File:CTLS in flight.jpg) sourced to flightdesignusa and licensed it {{cc-by-3.0}}, however I don't see any such license listed at the source. December 21 they upped two more (File:Aircraft's look.jpg and File:LSA plane.jpg), with no source listed, but with a company watermark. These are also license via {{cc-by-3.0}}. See also Flight Design and Flight Design CTSW, both article they have contributed too. EDIT: See also User:Managerved who created Mc Flight Design as well as the first "CTLS Flight Design" article which was speedied December 14. More information on their talk page, including the same SPA/COI warnings. Soundvisions1 (talk) 18:05, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Disallow - User is trying to promote his company through Misplaced Pages. It appears he's trying to continue to do so after Managerved was blocked. T3h 1337 b0y 20:34, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Incidentally Managerved (talk · contribs), the previous account, is not blocked. January 20:59, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
As one of the editors who actually communicated with this user I can add that he makes it clear on his user talk page once I asked him, that he works for this company, Flight Design. He had agreed to stop posting COI/spam/copyright violation articles because five of them had already been speedily deleted. So I was shocked to find out hear that he has done it again at CTLS Flight Design. As in his past efforts that article is a copyright violation from the company website although this time he seems to have changed a few words. As you can tell from our conversation on his talk page he clearly understands that he is in a COI and that he is spamming, but he keeps doing it even after being warned multiple times. Because he keeps creating new spam articles on his user and talk pages and then moving them into mainspace his warning record is all over Mainspace instead of on his talk page, so the history of the multiple warnings is a bit hard to follow. From his behaviour it is also very likely that he is a sockpuppet of Managerved. At this point I would recommend banning him and CSDing the article. I will nominate it for CSD as spam. - Ahunt (talk) 21:01, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
It's clear that the user is editing with a COI, but I can't see a violation of WP:ORGNAME. I think this board is the wrong venue, WP:COIN would be more appropriate. January 21:10, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
I don't see anything wrong with the user name either, I agree this should be moved to WP:COIN. - Ahunt (talk) 21:12, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Ineligible for posting here as username concern was not discussed with user prior to posting here.216.67.77.18 (talk) 21:38, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Overall comment/reply: Note I did say "possible" user name policy vio and this is the correct venue for posting "where editors can come when they are unsure what to do with a username." I have no real clear idea if "ved" is related to the company or not but it must mean something as they also used another "ved" name to promote it. I have no issues with this going to another venue. Soundvisions1 (talk) 00:13, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
see Before adding a name here YOU MUST ensure that: above.216.67.77.18 (talk) 06:18, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Did you miss the notice on the page? Also, fair question here - as you have only made two contributions to Misplaced Pages and both of them are too this discussion, is there anything you wish to disclose? Soundvisions1 (talk) 06:42, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
I suspect a user probably just forgot to log in; however, they're correct. You need to discuss it with the user and give them opportunity to reply before taking a username issue to RFCN. GiftigerWunsch 14:38, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
(sigh* Since it must be too difficult for the I.P or you to look anywhere else here: Hello, Flyingved. Concerns have been raised that your username may be incompatible with policy. You can contribute to the discussion about it at the page for requests for comment on usernames. Alternatively, if you agree that your username may be problematic and are willing to change it, it is possible for you to keep your present contributions history under a new name. Simply request a new name at Misplaced Pages:Changing username following the guidelines on that page, rather than creating a whole new account. Thank you. Soundvisions1 That is a vlear message teleling the user to come and discuss the issue. Unless the I.P is the user they have not done it. Soundvisions1 (talk) 16:08, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Posting that message to the users talk page one minute after posting here is not notifying and allowing time to discuss the concern on their talk page.216.67.77.18 (talk) 22:49, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
I'd suggest actually reading the comments, Sound, rather than accusing me of not checking for discussion with the user, which I did. You cannot bring a report here until after attempting to discuss it with the user, and giving the user sufficient opportunity to reply. You left a templated message with the user immediately after filing this RFCN; there's no point in speedy-closing this now since the user has now continued to edit without acknowledging the message, but in future discuss with the user first. GiftigerWunsch 22:55, 24 December 2010 (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 Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for comment/User names). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result was: Allow.  7  22:41, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Nissae Isen's Man

Nissae Isen's Man (talk · contribs)

  • Posting for comment. I worked with an IP editor to resolve confusion over who was editing using their IP address/computer and advised them to go the ACC route due to limitations on their ability to use the interface. At the time I thought the name was iffy but OK. The editor has since created a related article (CSD). Although I'm quite certain there's no COI issue, having looked again at a search engine, I'm now thinking this usernamer is unacceptable from a BLP standpoint. I've begun discussion with the editor and thinking within a day or two resolving it and working back through talk pages to move previous sig's as necessary until searches no longer reveal this name. If I'm over-reacting, I'd like to know. Thanks! Franamax (talk) 09:07, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Comment: Usually this forum is for clear violations only. I would suggest you look into the oft-neglected option of WP:RFCN. Beeblebrox (talk) 10:07, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Boy, we really do have a page for everything. :) Thanks, will do tomorrow. I probably already knew that too. :( Franamax (talk) 10:27, 24 November 2010 (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.
Category: