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.

When contacting the user, {{subst:UsernameConcern|reason for objection}} may be helpful, but feel free to paraphrase it or write your own original text if you prefer. Please try to assume good faith and don't bite the newcomers, if possible: allow for the possibility of innocent error or other reasonable explanation.

Names that are offensive, inflammatory, impersonating an existing user, or asserting inappropriate authority will generally be permanently blocked by admins. Please also read Wikipedia:Username before reporting here. Grossly, blatantly, or obviously inappropriate usernames should be reported at WP:AIV instead.

Be aware that usernames are subject to specific criteria which differ from controls and guidelines regarding other forms of self-expression on Wikipedia. Please ensure you are familiar with the username policy before commenting on a username.

Please inform all users reported here with {{subst:UsernameDiscussion}}. If the RFC is closed as "Allow", please follow up by informing the user with {{subst:UsernameAllowed}}.

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

---

Tools  : Special:Listusers, Special:Ipblocklist

This page has an archive.

New listings below this line, at the bottom, please. Add a new listing.

---

Terror101 (talk · contribs)

Copied from WP:AIV:

• Terror101 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Improper username, indefinite block suggested. EnglishEfternamn^talk_contribs 03:43, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Running this past WP:RFC/N. Luna Santin 03:51, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Not difficult to see why this username would be offensive to many others. Should be deleted.--EnglishEfternamn^talk_contribs 04:00, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

• Allow - In what way is this offensive? --Onorem 04:01, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

• Comment - Heh...I'm in the US and I didn't even think about terrorism until seeing a few of the responses here. We're not all Boston PD hopefuls... --Onorem 04:15, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Wow, I'm also in US and I didn't even know about that incident. Anyway, I am just saying that the user name Terror101 doesn't yet have any non-disturbing message to it. This isn't just about the US; most people do not like being terrorized. Terror education advocacy or awareness names are not acceptable. The Behnam 04:23, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

• Allow - if the user were editing articles on the middle east, 9/11, etc, that would be different, but this user's only edit was to a soccer page. Terror could be the nickname of a sports team or something. --BigDT 04:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
• Disallow - Most probably a Terrorism reference, apparently to introductory Terrorism courses; aka Terror 101. Even if the name was about a "sports team", the user should know better than to choose something clearly provocative and disturbing. Disturbing in that it appears to advocate freshman courses in terrorism, and perhaps generally is about terrorism. Being one word, it may not literally advocate anything, but the meaning taken from it is definitely in that line. The Behnam 04:06, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
• Allow Just because the US declares war on something, does not mean it is offensive. You seem to be making a lot of assumptions. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 04:10, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

  Comment Uh, terrorism is offensive whether or not any country has declared war on it.--William Thweatt ^Talk |

  Regardless, who knows the real motive behind the name? You can't assume there's some sort of evil there, to do that is paranoia. Only the account creator knows. 74.38.35.171 07:51, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Contribs 04:58, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

• Allow Possibly bad taste, but AGF unless there's evidence to suggest otherwise. Aelffin 04:24, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

• Allow but watch closely. I'm choosing to Assume Good Faith at the moment. Philippe Beaudette 04:40, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
• Comment - Has anybody bothered to ask the user in question to explain the meaning of his name? At first I was inclined to agree with EnglishEfternamn and Behnam, but BigDT and Aelffin make good points. Maybe if the editor is made aware of the objections to the UserName, he may be willing to change it.--William Thweatt ^Talk | ^Contribs 04:58, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Agreed. Using {{subst:UsernameConcern|reason for objection}} or writing a message in your own friendly style to the user's talkpage, to discuss his name one-to-one before bringing the matter to RFC, might very well be appreciated by that user. Some such direct approach is recommended both at WP:U and at the top of this page. Please consider it. -- Ben 07:58, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Tityboy

Tityboy (talk · contribs) shouldn't need much explanation--- I find it slightly offensive. not sure about everyone else... - Penwhale | Blast the Penwhale 07:12, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

• Unsure. I'm not clear on whether this is supposed to be "titty," or if it refers to something benign -- hard to make that call without more context. On the other hand, judging from their first and currently only contrib, they may wind up blocked regardless of the outcome here. Luna Santin 07:36, 9 February 2007 (UTC)