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

Connecticut State Library (talk · contribs)

Unless this is an official representative thereof, which I doubt, I don't think this is allowed. Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 20:03, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disallow Regardless of whether or not they are actually affiliated with the library. It implies that they are. Leebo ^T/C 20:08, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If it's verified they are then allow. BuickCenturyDriver (Honk, contribs, odometer) 20:12, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Disallow - Unless it can be proven that this user is the actual library itself, i see it as no different than a promotional username for a group, organization or business. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 20:20, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Disallow Wouldn't this be a role account and promotional even if it was true? Impersonation if it is not true. Either way disallow. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 20:20, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Disallow, I believe this falls under WP:U, specifically: "Usernames that promote a company: Usernames of or closely resembling the names of companies and groups are discouraged and may be blocked as a violation of Wikipedia policy against spamming and advertisement." Cascadia^{TALK| HISTORY} 20:23, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mmmmmooonnnnnn (talk · contribs)

Extended enough repitition for banning? Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 20:07, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Disallow, it may fall under extended repititon, but I'm personally not 100% sure. Although, I really wish people would come up with better / unique usernames. All this one does is remind me of a line from Stephen Kings The Stand. Cascadia^{TALK| HISTORY} 20:19, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Allow - Not too confusing, not too long a repetition. i think 6 n's is the longest repitition. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 20:20, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DrunkinDuncan (talk · contribs)

Funny joke, or offensive? Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 20:10, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Allow No policy violation. No offense. Cascadia^{TALK| HISTORY} 20:17, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Allow Duncan is a popular place to be drunk. But it is not a username violation. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 20:18, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Allow - I see no violation. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 20:19, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Poopaluto (talk · contribs)

Does it seem to you that it's based on "poop"? If it is, then it's not allowed. Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 20:23, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]