Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names

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.

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.

LITHIUM™ (talk · contribs) - The name is the title of a song by the band Evanescence and while I don't think a user can have their name changed/account blocked because of that, they have ™ in their name and I'm not sure what the rules on things like that are. If someone could help out, that would be great. Thanks in advance. // PoeticDecay 01:40, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lithium is an element. Like lead, gold, or oxygen. As for the trademark symbol, I don't think that violates any policy here. So Allow. Weak disallow per non-latin character. The user can rename without that character and can use the symbol in the custom signature option. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 01:52, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Allow per HighInBC. Crimsone 01:58, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: The word "Lithium" is entirely unproblematic (although I personally prefer the song "Lithium" by Nirvana to the other one mentioned; see Lithium (disambiguation) for more). Lithium is indeed the name of an element, and in any event, a song title, at least in the United States, cannot be trademarked (as evidenced by the existence of at least two songs of the same name). However, although I don't see it mentioned in the username policy, I do see a potential problem with use of the superscripted "TM" symbol, of a type that I believe has been mentioned with similar names in the past. Suppose I wanted to get to this user's userpage or talk page: What, precisely, would I type into the search box? Unless I am missing an aspect of the situation, a change might be appropriate, and in the user's own best interests, for this reason. Incidentally, has anyone notified the user of this discussion? I don't see any such notification on his or her userpage or talk page. Newyorkbrad 02:01, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Non latin character, good point. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 02:06, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Change to remove non-latin character. I had thought it was merely a supersctipted "T" and an "M" . As pointed out, it's a non-latin character, which is discouraged per WP:U for the reasons above. I must confess, that caught me out. lol. Crimsone 02:12, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

      I've just added a note on the users talk page :) Crimsone 02:24, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

      • Even a superscripted character would be a pain in the neck in a username, for the same reason I discuss above—it would be quite difficult for less experienced users to find the person through a search. (I haven't even tested whether superscripted or subscripted characters work in the search box, has anyone?) I'll let the user know this discussion is going onedit conflict, I see that's been done, which come to think of it I suggest the instructions to the page should indicate as a requirement. Newyorkbrad 02:26, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

        Of course, I probably should have realised that it's likely impossible to superscript characters for usernames. I very much doubt the software was designed to allow such markup. As for searching though, I should imagine that the search box treats superscript as normal text, but of course, that's still confusing for less experienced users. Might I ask, Newyorkbrad, when you mention the instructions to the page, what exactly are you referring to (this page, WP:U, or user signup, or perhaps even something completely different)? Crimsone 02:36, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

        I meant that the instructions to this page, which suggest notifying the editor whose username is under review, but do not make it a requirement, should probably be changed to state that this should always be done (except in the case of blatantly offensive or harassing names). It's unfair to discuss a user's name without letting him or her know about the discussion, and pointless to have the discussion if (as sometimes happens) the user is perfectly willing to change the name when a problem is identified. Sorry if I wasn't clear. Newyorkbrad 02:41, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

        No, It's OK NewYorkBrad. It's probably just a case of me being a little bit slow in the thinking department this morning (2.45 am here). I completely agree that a message should always be left on the users talk page regarding discussions about his/her username here - just so long as nobody strictly removes reviews posted here if it hasn't happened which would probably be a little bit silly, but such people are out there unfortunately. Sadly, there's also always somebody that screams "legalistic!" because of it. I guess it's all about the way it's said and the people that read it. Crimsone 02:55, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

        Removal wouldn't be necessary: when one finds that there has been a mistake in following policy, the remedy should be to fix the mistake, not take advantage of it. Newyorkbrad 02:58, 12 January 2007 (UTC)][reply]

        Absolutely. As long as that's clear to everyone, then there's no problem, and will get reverted if it happens :) I couldn't agree more. Crimsone 03:04, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Allow -- username is not a violation of the policy concerning usernames. - Longhair\^talk 02:08, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment LITHIUM actually is a registered trademark of Tripos Corp. (some kind of data-analysis tool). So doesn't this fall under " trademarked names that undoubtedly refer to the owner of the trademark"? I'm not really conversant with trademark law, but in general it doesn't seem like a good idea to allow usernames that appear to make legal claims or threats. -- Visviva 04:36, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Allow. Trademark law is very narrow, so it's too much of a stretch to assume that this is actually a problem. -Amarkov ^blah_edits 04:40, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Allow, ideally after removal of TM, no legal worries. Deizio talk 10:10, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - I think this username is sketchy, but not quite worth blocking. --Matthew 21:33, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Disallow removed TM as non-latin character there is no problem with LITHIUM though Cheers Lethaniol 01:51, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment There isn't actually a ban on non-latin characters in the policy, there is a recommendation to avoid them. The non-latin reference was written with other languages in mind, so if this is an ASCII character (is it?) there really isn't anything relevant about this in the policy at all. Deizio talk 06:12, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While it may not violate policy, the trademark symbol is difficult in that it makes it very hard to navigate to the user's page without a link. I would guess that most users (myself included) would not have a clue as to what the proper escape sequence was for generating a trademark symbol in a text field of their browser. --Matthew 07:30, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Allow: Who ever said the TM symbol isn't Latin? It looks Latin to me. Latin does not mean ASCII, and if the TM symbol is banned, so must every username with an accent or a tilde in their name too. If you can't type a character, copy and paste it. It's my understanding that the reason we insist on Latin is so people can read the user names, and not see indistinguishable boxes. The TM symbol presents no readability problem. Reswobslc 07:51, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Note It seems clear that a consensus to disallow is unlikely to be reached in this case, and I believe we have established that policy has not been breached. Anyone with some really good advice about how LITHIUM™ should go about representing their name and signature should place it on LITHIUM™s talk, and if anyone wants to float ideas about this at Wikipedia talk:Username, now is the time. Deizio talk 14:05, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hampi.com (talk · contribs) and GoHampi.com (talk · contribs): actually dummy userpages created by a different editor (the dummy usernames have no contribs of their own). Similarity to websites (the sites are linked to from the userpages) is obvious. Kafziel ^Talk 19:41, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Users" blocked, parent editor Pratheepps notified. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:10, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{user:David r from meth productions|User:David r from meth productions|David r from meth productions}} Doesn't sound appropriate it sounds like he likes/makes meth. WikiMan53 T/C e@ edits 22:10, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]