Wikipedia talk:Username policy

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Page semi-protected
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Wikipedia Talk:Usernames for administrator attention and Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/User names now redirect here. Click "show" for archive links and other relevant information on those pages.

WT:UAA
archives:

Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/User names
archives and deletion notices:

How are changes from a blatantly inappropriate username to a double entendre handeled?

The IRL example that comes to mind is SSMB player

Dr. PeePee changing his name to "PPMD" upon sponsorhsip. Certianly, there are examples of names with subtle references like "PPMD" among active editors, but would someone who was username blocked be allowed that courtesy? Mach61 (talk) 18:51, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Hi, how long does it typically take to get username change approved?

I requested a username change around 4 days ago and I didn't get any updates regarding the username update.

talk) 17:54, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Your rename request, #116335, was rejected. You should have received some notice, or been able to check the request. The reject reason was "The chosen username is similar to an existing username". As that was the only reason, you may submit a new request with a different new username. — xaosflux Talk 19:24, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Long, meaningless, random string of characters

It doesn't appear to be addressed anywhere in the policy, but what about usernames that look like the cat walked across the keyboard, such as, say, User:Jfdsalkqrewiqvhrbhqoihewqvfhbkdvajewqvbiuqobvfobqena ? That one is fake—I just made it up. However, this post is inspired by a real user I recently interacted with, and their username is exactly the same length and exactly as meaningless. They let me know in two replies that they don't feel there's any problem with it, and to my question about whether they were worried they could be pranked by some other user simply transposing a couple of characters, they remained unconcerned (discussion).

I'm not here to encourage further intervention with this user, as they've made it clear they are happy with the username, and I don't see it as violating anything in policy currently. What I'd like to know in this discussion, is whether it is consensus here that such names are consistent with the intent of the policy and if not, do we need to modify the policy to say so? I'm not bothered by names that long as long as they are meaningful, and an attempted pranking would be more obvious. For example, I wouldn't oppose User:I am the best editor at Wikipedia in the whole world (identical in length to the fake one above). But it seems to me a long, meaningless string seems to heightens the risk of mischief, which means making it more likely that admins or other users monitoring the situation may need to spend more time with such users. Mathglot (talk) 04:17, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's been discussed before but never really gained any traction. Primefac (talk) 10:19, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure on this

The username Iamnotblocked123 seems to be a challenge to the administrative oversight of Wikipedia. If that is the case, an ordinary user raising the matter on the user's talkpage does not really seem appropriate – and I am not 100% sure that we have an issue here in the first place. Hence flagging here for someone with more experience in the matter to take a look at. ThoughtIdRetired TIR 08:37, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]