Wikipedia talk:Username policy

2014 Request for Comment on reforming and updating this policy

Old revisions show newer reports

Like say the 8 November version, it is showing the reports bots made at 15 November. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 05:43, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

If you want old bot-reported data, you'll need to check the history of Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention/Bot. Primefac (talk) 14:03, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Ah, so it is transcluded, ok, thanks. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 14:19, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Declined and stale reports

Should we run a bot to remove declined and stale reports from UAA? Currently, HBC AIV helperbot14 only removes processed reports, so we have to manually remove declined and stale ones. I suggest removing declined reports that haven't received any comments within an hour, and stale reports with no comments in the past 24 hours. If HBC AIV helperbot14 can add this functionality, that would be great. Otherwise, I can assist with my bot. – DreamRimmer (talk) 12:12, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Huh, I thought that was already part of the functionality. Courtesy ping to Mdann52. Primefac (talk) 13:02, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

@DreamRimmer Sorry on my Christmas break still!

I don't think this was a feature of the old bot, I'll go back and check.

If we're happy to add removing declined as a feature and a change in behaviour, I'll look into this.

I'd rather have some more discussion on how to deal with stale reports first, and when we determine this. Mdann52 (talk) 00:33, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

I think an hour is far too brief of a time. And as far as I can recall, declined reports have been being manually removed for a very long time. We don't remove them immediately as to give the reporting user time to seer why their report was declined. However I wouldn't object to automatic removal of a report that has been declined with one of the standard templates indicating as much after a period of a few hours.

I'm not sure what we are talking about as regards "stale" reports. Does this mean reports that have sat for a while without an admin response? El Beeblerino ^{if you're not into the whole brevity thing} 01:03, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

I agree that an hour is far too short. Secretlondon (talk) 19:57, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

RFC relating to enforcement of this policy

See Wikipedia:Username policy/ORGNAME/G11 in sandboxes RFC. El Beeblerino ^{if you're not into the whole brevity thing} 21:18, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Redux

Wikipedia:Blocking policy/RFC on promotional activity. El Beeblerino ^{if you're not into the whole brevity thing} 21:48, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Top of page

What's the reason to ask that new reports go to the top, where pretty much everywhere else we ask edits/posts go to the bottom? 331dot (talk) 19:09, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

Are you talking about WP:UAA, WP:RFCN, or somewhere else? A few of those talk pages redirect here. Primefac (talk) 19:13, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

Is redirecting why? I just noticed the statement here when I posted. 331dot (talk) 19:16, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

Likely because these pages all deal with the username policy, and do not necessarily need to be discussed individually. Primefac (talk) 19:25, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

Misleading usernames

This should be changed to:

• Usernames that impersonate other people (see § Real names and § Similar usernames below).
• Usernames that give the impression that the account has permissions that it does not have; e.g. by containing the terms administrator, bureaucrat, steward, checkuser, oversight, or similar terms, such as admin, sysop, or moderator.
• Usernames that imply that the account has explicit ownership of certain articles, content, or topic areas, or that they have any kind of "power", "command", "control", or "authority" over other editors, or that a different level of accountability and application of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines should be enforced (such as implying that certain policies do not apply to them).
• Usernames that could be easily misunderstood to refer to a "bot" (which is used to identify bot accounts) or a "script" (which alludes to automated editing processes), unless the account is of that type; such as ABC Bot, XYZ script.
• Usernames that give the incorrect impression that the account is officially affiliated with the Wikimedia Foundation; e.g. Foo (WMF), Bar (Wikimedia Foundation)
• Usernames that resemble IP addresses (as these are expected to designate non-logged-in users), timestamps, or other names which would be confusing within the Wikipedia signature format.
• Usernames that appear similar to naming conventions used by community administrative processes, such as those starting with Vanished user (see Wikipedia:Courtesy vanishing).

• Usernames that resemble user warning templates or user block templates or otherwise imply administrative actions against another user (e.g. You have been blocked or You may be blocked without further warning)

Faster than Thunder (talk | contributions) 23:19, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Note that only the last line is different from the existing rules. Primefac (talk) 00:32, 13 February 2025 (UTC)