Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention: Difference between revisions

Usernames for administrator attention

This page is intended for reports of usernames that are blatant and serious violations of the username policy requiring an immediate block. Reports will be assessed in accordance with the username policy, the UAA instructions, and the following bullet points. Please ensure you are familiar with the assessment criteria before making a report. Except in the instance of an egregious name violation, please do not report accounts with no edits or those who have not edited in the preceding 2 weeks. Real names are permitted, except when the editor implies they are someone other than themselves, such as impersonating a notable living person. Promotional names require evidence to be blocked. Do not report a username merely because it "appears" promotional. For libellous usernames or usernames that contain another editor's nonpublic personal information, please contact an oversighter and do not report it here. Discuss less-serious violations with the user on their talk page so that they can rename or abandon their account in good faith. Templates such as {{Uw-username}} or {{Uw-coi-username}} may be used. If, after discussion with a user, the problem still seems unresolved, a username request for comment may be in order. Do not leave a username warning on a user's talk page and also immediately report them here. Do one or the other, and not both simultaneously. Patrollers are asked to remove reports that have been declined, are bot-reported false positives or are otherwise non-blatant or stale reports. You can subscribe to a web feed of this page in either RSS or Atom format.

Note: Patrollers may wish to monitor usernames flagged by filters 54, 148 and 149; private filters 102, 354, 499, 579; and this recent changes filter tag.

This page was last updated at 06:50 on 8 November 2024 (UTC). if it is out of date.

Bot-reported

• LALALOOLOOLALALOOLOO (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal)

  This username matched "l+o+l+o+l" on the blacklist. -- DQB (owner / report) 17:30, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

• Skofficial01 (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal)

  This username matched "official" on the blacklist. -- DQB (owner / report) 02:40, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

   Note on file Not of serious concern but may imply a position of authority or a role account -- DQB (owner / report) 02:40, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

User-reported

• Jessicacandrews (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal) – Appears to be that of a well-known person. See this user's Talk page, User_talk:Jessicacandrews, and the article referred to there, Jessica_Andrews_(writer). Geoff | ^{Who, me?} 18:07, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

  Not a blatant violation of the username policy. Given their contributions, I've seen nothing to indicate that this isn't a person using their real name. --Ahecht (TALK
  PAGE) 18:24, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

  That's exactly why it was reported, we routinely either block or ask such usernames to contact VRT to verify their identity, per WP:IMPERSONATE. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 22:01, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

  We haven't been if it is really clear cut. Secretlondon (talk) 22:29, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

  Perhaps we should refine the policy in the case of people who are not "super famous". As it reads now this is totally blockable, but I don't really have any reason to not believe them. A template advising them how to verfy with VRT might be nice as well. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 23:22, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

  If no-one would impersonate you then I've not been blocking. Secretlondon (talk) 00:51, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

  @Just Step Sideways Some additional clarification would make sense, and I'll work on a template. I'm just a newbie admin, but my reading of the "may be blocked" wording indicated that there was discretion, especially in cases like this where there is no reason to believe it is impersonation and the editor's actions couldn't be considered harmful to the well-known person in question. --Ahecht (TALK
  PAGE) 15:28, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

  First of all, this is definitely blockable, but I'm also inclined to believe that this user is who they say they are. As already stated, it would be a good idea to verify their identity. However, I'm not sure how you would determine if no-one would impersonate you. There are plenty of reasons why anyone would impersonate anyone. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 15:44, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

  I mean non-entities vs famous people. People who are not going to get an article - it doesn't matter if they are who they say they are. Secretlondon (talk) 17:01, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

  She has an article: Jessica Andrews (writer). Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 18:08, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

  @Drm310 2C0F:FC89:D9:4132:2:2:8133:D1D (talk) 02:43, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

• Jugnu and Johnny (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal) – Violation of the username policy as a misleading and promotional username. WP:ORGNAME, promotional userpage. Drm310 🍁 (talk) 20:46, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

  Comment: I lean towards not a violation. Jungu references the organization, but I can't find anywhere that "Johnny" is part of the name of the organization. This might just be an attempt to say "Johnny at Jungu," which is permitted. --Chris | Crazycomputers (talk) 23:25, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

• Laveekestates (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal) – Violation of the username policy as a promotional username. See user:Laveekestates/sandbox and https://laveekestates.com/. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 06:40, 8 November 2024 (UTC)