Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Everyone using a username which is against policy/archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Requests for comment‎ | Everyone using a username which is against policy

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Cribnotes (talk | contribs) at 05:58, 4 April 2004. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

I'm told this is the appropriate place to complain about inflammatory usernames. Under our no offensive usernames policy, the following user accounts should be disabled:

  1. Always gods child
  2. Child of God
  3. CrucifiedChrist (see also specific discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/CrucifiedChrist)
  4. Crusty Ass
  5. Eminem is god
  6. Fuck
  7. Fuck You
  8. Fuck2
  9. FuckAmerika
  10. FuckMenchi
  11. Fucking Asshole
  12. FuckingFucker
  13. Fuckstick
  14. Fuqnbastard
  15. God
  16. Godisgood
  17. Godisnowhere
  18. Jesus
  19. Jesus Chirst
  20. Jesus Christ
  21. Jesus Saves!
  22. Jesus is Lord
  23. Jesus is a controversial word
  24. Jesus is a fudgepacker!
  25. Jesus is so much cooler than Brahma
  26. JesusCantSave
  27. JesusChrist
  28. ManofGod
  29. NoLordButJesus
  30. Satan
  31. Satan is our Saviour!
  32. Sum' D-Block Muthafucka
  33. There is no God
  34. Wrath-Of-God

I haven't linked to the user pages because everything you need to know about them is on this page. May I suggest changing the relevant passwords to some random string? That way they won't have their IPs blocked next time they try to log in. -- Tim Starling 02:55, Mar 5, 2004 (UTC)

I completely support that. -- BCorr € Брайен 02:58, Mar 5, 2004 (UTC)
No objection, though it would be better if there was a way of blocking a username without blocking their IP so that if any of these users ever try to log in again, they will see the reason for the blocking, rather than being confused by a changed password. Angela. 03:11, Mar 5, 2004 (UTC)

Some more spotted by Pakaran are listed below. -- Tim Starling 04:27, Mar 5, 2004 (UTC)

  1. PhatJew
  2. Cumguzzler
  3. Cockgoblin
  4. Illiterate Cow
  5. Nutsack
  6. Fragrant feces

Some more offensive usernames.

  1. User:Jengod -- Offensive: contains the word "God" in it.
  2. User:Hephaestos -- Offensive: a tribute to a pagan god (Hephaestos).
  3. User:Stewartadcock -- Offensive: contains the word cock. There is a precedent: User:TMC.
  4. More: See Wikipedia:Offensive User Names Havers Club

Some of the names listed don't seem to me to be offensive. Is having a name of a religious nature ("Godisgood" for example) necessarilly offensive? Is there a policy in this regard? Sam Spade 05:30, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

from what I read here [1] it is reccomended against, but not against policy. I can't see how such a name would be inflamatory or offensive, which would be. Sam Spade 05:33, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)
We went through all this before. There was a long discussion, and a consensus was reached. If the policy page hasn't been updated fully, then the policy page is at fault. See User talk:Jesus is Lord! and User:Jesus is Lord!/namechange. It's got nothing to do with whether you personally find a name offensive, the question is whether some significant minority will find it offensive. -- Tim Starling 13:21, Mar 7, 2004 (UTC)
Its clear to me that the vote you cite favors my position, not yours. I ask again, where is there evidence of any signifigant minority feeling this name is so offensive as to force a change of name? Sam Spade 04:03, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I'd prefer to change offensive names to something inoffensive. That removes the name from the page history. Martin 00:51, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Yes, I'd rather that the names be changed. Perl 23:11, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I agree that something should be done since the presence of these names paints the project in a bad light. Perhaps they could all be changed to something like User:NameWithheld, especially if the number of edits is few. UninvitedCompany 21:12, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Jengod, Stewartadcock are from actual names. Nothing offensive there. Dori | Talk 18:21, Mar 31, 2004 (UTC)

A few more:

  1. CrapBeater
  2. Allah is great
  3. Olga Bityerkokoff

Dori | Talk 18:25, Mar 31, 2004 (UTC)

And:

  1. Sex
  2. Rothwellisretarded

Secretlondon 18:28, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)

And:

  1. User:Paki (racist term in the UK)

fabiform | talk 18:35, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)

We have had this page up in one form or another for almost a month. Since there appear to be no serious reservations about dealing with the clear-cut cases, and particularly since many of these are not regular contributors to the project, let's take action. Can we just delete the accounts, or do we want to go through and re-attribute the edits, first, to something neutral like "no longer a Wikipedian" or "name withheld"? And are we going to delete the user pages, or not? UninvitedCompany 23:18, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I agree that those which are obviously offensive should be changed, or banned, or what-have-you, but I also want it very clear that there is no concensus about religious names which are clearly not universally offensive, like god is good, or allah is great, or whatever. Sam Spade 23:21, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Rather than re-open that debate at this time, it may be wisest to remove those user names that are, as you say, obviously offensive, and perhaps also any marginal cases that appear to have been created for trolling or shock value; that is, those without meaningful edits. Once that is done, the remaining names can be dealt with in a more leisurely fashion, or perhaps not at all. UninvitedCompany 23:27, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)
  • Some of the names listed on this page are clearly offensive and obviously intended as such. Some ot the arguments against other names lean toward absurdity. I think it would be worthwhile for everybody to read "The Death of Common Sense" (as for the ISBN, I dunno, my copy is either in storage or loaned out, but as Yogi Berra often said, "You could look it up"). As to the policy "Wikipedia recommends that users avoid names of religious figures", for Pete's sake, gazillions of people are named after religious figures. Get real! And for the one about how "Paki" is offensive somewhere, lots of things are offensive somewhere, and SO WHAT? Example: "Omaha" means "piss" in Tahitian. If someone wants to call himself Paki, that's not at all the same as one person tossing it as an epithet at another. ;Bear 05:26, 2004 Apr 4 (UTC)

I disagree with a policy condemning all names which carry any religious significance. Specifically, I think objections to Jengod, Hephaestos, and Stewartadcock are unfounded and ridiculous. I do agree, however, that names containing profanity or racial slurs should be deleted. There is a clear difference between names which are intended to offend ("Fuck You") and names which simply contain some religious reference ("Child of God" or "Godisgood"). The latter should not be deleted. If you find "CrucifiedChrist" to be offensive, you are free to politely request a username change on his/her Talk page; but I disagree with a policy which forces deletion of those names. My two cents... Cribnotes 05:58, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Everyone_using_a_username_which_is_against_policy/archive&oldid=3050568"