Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names
Navigation: Archives • Instructions for closing administrators • |
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
I just found this username by chance when looking through the history of the article Pink (singer). By the fact this username is called "Bigbutt55", it sounds like the username is referring to the buttocks. Acalamari 18:18, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- Allow does not violate WP:U#Body functions(it does not refer to or allude to reproductive or excretory functions of the body) or WP:U#Sexual(does not imply sexual acts, genitalia, or sexual orientation including slang, innuendo, and double entendre. unless a butt counts as genitalia), it is also not in violation of WP:U#Prophanity(Butt is not profane). It is just a big butt. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 18:21, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- Allow I don't think it violates any WP:UN rules or has the potential to offend. A big butt is not inherently offensive. Leebo T/C 18:23, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- Allow - Whats next, big arms? big legs? what if it said, big gluteus maximus? I see no username violation here. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- But you can see how this could be taken as criticism. Like in email, really short comments can easily be misconstrued as sarcasm or eye rolling. Regards, Flyguy649talkcontribs 19:03, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- Allow - if it were User:Ryanpostlethwaite has a big butt, that would be likely to cause offense (well to someone it might), however this makes no statement as to who it is directed at Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 18:27, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- Comment This was not submitted in bad faith. Acalamari 18:30, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- I know it wasn't, that what we're here for, to discuss username :-) You havea legitimate concernRyanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 18:31, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- It seems that some people seem to forget that this page is for discussing usernames; this page is not AIV. Acalamari 18:34, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- Acalamari, I can certainly understand your reasoning for posting this here. I don't think anyone is accusing you of bad faith. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 18:33, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- I apolagize if my response appeared to insinuate bad faith on your part. I just like to give examples in efforts to back my argument. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:36, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- There is no need for anyone to apologize; no one implied bad faith. I simply said that I had submitted the name in good faith, and I wanted to clarify that no harm was intended. Acalamari 18:40, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- Comment This was not submitted in bad faith. Acalamari 18:30, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- Comment I would say allow if the username "Bigtits55" is allowed as well. --wL<speak·check> 19:09, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- I believe the request was submitted in good faith, however, I must allow, as the name seems within the bounds of propriety. Abeg92contribs 19:23, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- Allow, complaint is assinine... pun very much intentional. CascadiaTALK|HISTORY 19:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- Allow... as per all the above. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 19:36, 19 March 2007 (UTC)