Restriction on usernames starting with asterisk or hash or colon?
Has there been a previous discussion on usernames starting with an asterisk, a hash/pound symbol, or a colon? It appears from this discussion that magic words like {{REVISIONUSER}} can, in some cases, get confused when user names of that sort are used, starting a bulleted list, for example, instead of returning a username. It is also possible that Template:AfC submission/declined is just badly coded, but it looks pretty reasonable to me. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:07, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
- Based on Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(technical_restrictions)#Restrictions_on_usernames it looks like two of those options aren't even allowed. I'll be honest I'm a bit surprised that * is acceptable, but other than weird glitches with {{REVISIONUSER}} where does this pop up? Primefac (talk) 14:06, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
- There are about 1500 global users that start with "*". — xaosflux Talk 14:26, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
- Other than Treker are there any that are active and/or not blocked? I ask mainly because the comment was made "we don't want to make everyone change their names", but if there's only a handful of users, it should be trivial to ask them to change their names and then softblock everyone else (assuming a technical fix isn't found). Primefac (talk) 14:37, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
- Re where else it's a problem: There is a discussion on *Treker's talk page about how they weren't receiving pings, but I don't have a way to verify whether the asterisk was causing a problem in that case. Maybe they will see this ping and respond here. (edited to add: It looks like the asterisk causes a problem in {{U}}, since this response is interrupted by a newline starting with a bullet.) – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:49, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
- Other than Treker are there any that are active and/or not blocked? I ask mainly because the comment was made "we don't want to make everyone change their names", but if there's only a handful of users, it should be trivial to ask them to change their names and then softblock everyone else (assuming a technical fix isn't found). Primefac (talk) 14:37, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
- There are about 1500 global users that start with "*". — xaosflux Talk 14:26, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
- I'd also add the equals sign (=) to the list of discouraged characters. Some time ago I happened to fix a linking error (with the {{u}} or {{re}} template) to a user whose username contains this symbol, which causes a misinterpretation of the username as a template's named parameter. --CiaPan (talk) 15:04, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, I'm personally quite attached to my username (as it is a pun of sorts) but if it is agreed that "*" should not be used I will agree to change it.★Trekker (talk) 15:58, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
- Incidentally, I note the use of * in their signature to actually allow linking, similar to how to 7&6=thirteen needs to use & in their sig. Primefac (talk) 16:02, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
- I can imagine a wrapper for {{REVISIONUSER}} (and for
|1=
in {{User link}}) that would cause the user name to be "literalized" (for lack of a better word) so that characters in the user name won't cause this trouble. Is there a string-processing template or magic word that will do that for us? – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:19, 15 February 2022 (UTC) - *Trekker: Every time you edit a draft, if the submission has been declined, the submission block gets messed up and it generates misnested
<small>
tags; if the submission has not been reviewed at all, it generates a Misnested tag with different rendering in HTML5 and HTML4 and a Stripped tag lint error for<span>
. Right now, that's 14 unreviewed and 67 reviewed, in fact, other than Missing end tags, all 14+14+67 draft lint errors are in drafts you edited last. Why not change your user name to ★Trekker? —Anomalocaris (talk) 19:20, 6 May 2022 (UTC)- @Anomalocaris: I wouldn't mind. I don't know how to change it tho.★Trekker (talk) 22:29, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- *Trekker: Instructions for changing your username are found at Wikipedia:Changing username. Looking at WP:NOEMOJI, I am concerned that "★" might be considered a prohibited character. If that happens, I would strongly support an exception for you, because the purpose is to solve technical limitations of the Wikimedia software, and I could go to Wikipedia talk:Linter and urge users to share their views wherever it is that this case might be considered. Good luck and let us know how it goes! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anomalocaris (talk • contribs) 00:19, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
- *Trekker: There are now 153 drafts with misnested tags, all emanating from the "*" starting your user name. Would you please see about changing the "*" now? —Anomalocaris (talk) 20:00, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Anomalocaris and Xaosflux: I have sent a request now.★Trekker (talk) 22:28, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
- Looks like it got declined, in general unicode symbols are not welcome in usernames. You can try the usurp process at meta:Steward_requests/Username_changes#Requests_involving_merges,_usurps_or_other_complications — xaosflux Talk 13:52, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Anomalocaris and Xaosflux: I made one last effort using "¤" this time, if it fails I will simply change my username "StarTrekker".★Trekker (talk) 17:14, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Personally, I think the one without symbols is much better - certainly easier for others to communicate with you using. — xaosflux Talk 17:33, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Anomalocaris and Xaosflux: My requests havn't shown up in Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple/Archive275 or Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple/Unfulfilled/2022/May.★Trekker (talk) 10:42, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- Both of your rename requests were denied by the global renamers. (92023 and 91997) Both for the same reason, trying to change your name to disallowed characters. StarTrekker exists, but has 0 global edits from over 10 years ago. I'd endorse that usurpation, you can list it at Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations. — xaosflux Talk 13:11, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Anomalocaris and Xaosflux: My requests havn't shown up in Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple/Archive275 or Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple/Unfulfilled/2022/May.★Trekker (talk) 10:42, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- Personally, I think the one without symbols is much better - certainly easier for others to communicate with you using. — xaosflux Talk 17:33, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Anomalocaris and Xaosflux: I made one last effort using "¤" this time, if it fails I will simply change my username "StarTrekker".★Trekker (talk) 17:14, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Looks like it got declined, in general unicode symbols are not welcome in usernames. You can try the usurp process at meta:Steward_requests/Username_changes#Requests_involving_merges,_usurps_or_other_complications — xaosflux Talk 13:52, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Anomalocaris: I wouldn't mind. I don't know how to change it tho.★Trekker (talk) 22:29, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- I can imagine a wrapper for {{REVISIONUSER}} (and for
- Incidentally, I note the use of * in their signature to actually allow linking, similar to how to 7&6=thirteen needs to use & in their sig. Primefac (talk) 16:02, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
Username ending in semicolon
While we're here, the user name User:Assert(false); causes problems for me. When I manage to find their contributions, clicking on User:Assert(false); from that page leads to User:Assert(false), complete with an error message saying that the user is not registered on this wiki. The trailing semicolon is trimmed. Is this a MediaWiki bug, or the result of a security patch sometime between the editor's last activity in 2016 and today? Either way, some action probably needs to happen. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:16, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
- That's messed up. It's nearly impossible to even get to their user page, the talk page appear to exist but I can't open it. If this account were active now I think we'd pretty much have to block it. I may do it anyway, this is clearly not acceptable. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:49, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
- I don't know the policy, but can we simply rename the account for technical reasons? My guess is that this account used to work, and a MW change caused it to break. I suppose we could also file a phab bug report, but I haven't had good results in getting those addressed. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:04, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
- xkcd oblink. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:12, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
- Good old Bobby Tables! I forgot about him. The task has been marked as a duplicate of a November 2019 task, which has seen no updates from developers since October 2020. This means that we are on our own here and need to make local accommodations, whether that is an account rename or something else. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:10, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- xkcd oblink. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:12, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Beeblebrox: You can get to their user pages by opening a history of any page and replacing the page title in the URL. Then you can jump to any chosen revision, including the current one:
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Assert(false);&action=history → Special:PermaLink/691187016, Special:PermaLink/727826156
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Assert(false);&action=history → Special:PermaLink/675611790, Special:PermaLink/1072065308
- CiaPan (talk) 12:54, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- As far as I can tell from reading the phab ticket, the key thing in all of these is that the ";" isn't part of the base URL. Once you move it into the query string, that hides the ";" from the bit of software which barfs on it. So https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Assert(false); works too. Well, it does if you copy-paste that from the wikitext source into a browser's URL bar, but it looks like the link is not going to get rendered correctly :-) -- RoySmith (talk) 16:55, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- I don't know the policy, but can we simply rename the account for technical reasons? My guess is that this account used to work, and a MW change caused it to break. I suppose we could also file a phab bug report, but I haven't had good results in getting those addressed. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:04, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
Affected users
There seems to be an emerging consensus above to just restrict use of these names (specifically, * at the front and ; at the back). Other than *Treker, which users are/will be affected by any sort of username blacklist/changes? For the record I'm assuming these users to be a) unblocked, and b) active at some point in the last 1-3 years. Primefac (talk) 10:47, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- I suppose Wikipedia can restrict a character set accepted from the registration form quite easily, but renaming existing accounts is completely another matter. There would have to be some way to inform affected users about a need of renaming their accounts OR about renaming done without their participation. The former way may not work in all cases, because users are not forced to register their e-mail contact, nor they are obliged to regularly check their inbox. And even if they do, they may simply refuse. The latter way would need keeping both accounts associated until the user logs in with their old account and then inform them about the rename done, consequently forcing all future log-ins to be redirected to a new account. Both methods look quite ...unkind to users. The latter, however, has already been tested during implementing central login, when conflicting accounts from Wikipedias in different languages were renamed to unique names. And it somehow worked. CiaPan (talk) 13:57, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Badly affected by this problem is Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of **sammy** Dawson., whose entire wikitext is
{{sockpuppet category}}
, and generates 6 stripped</span>
, 3 missing end tags for<span>
, and 3 HTML5-misnested<span>
tags. There really is a User:**sammy** Dawson. page. —Anomalocaris (talk) 09:53, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
Globally locked
We've had an increasing number of accounts that are being globally locked before they've been actioned here. That's fine, if they are being blocked for actions of multiple wikipedias, but some of them have only had edits on en! Secretlondon (talk) 18:41, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
- This is probably best discussed at WP:AN as it doesn't really pertain to the username policy. That said, a global lock can only be done by a steward, and they aren't casually handed out. 331dot (talk) 19:15, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
- This is also the talk page for Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention, which is a bit confusing. Secretlondon (talk) 20:21, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
- @Secretlondon: Yes.. it is a bit confusing, least of all because you're replying to yourself..? ~TNT (talk • she/her) 20:29, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
- I think it was intended for 331dot's message ... Sdrqaz (talk) 20:34, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
- Ohhh I see now, Wikipedia talk:Usernames for administrator attention redirects here! That is a bit confusing! As to your query Secretlondon, some accounts (such as the one reported here) will be locked solely based on the username, or the fact the underlying LTA is evading a previous lock, irrespective of the number of projects they have edited ~TNT (talk • she/her) 20:42, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
- I think it was intended for 331dot's message ... Sdrqaz (talk) 20:34, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
- @Secretlondon: Yes.. it is a bit confusing, least of all because you're replying to yourself..? ~TNT (talk • she/her) 20:29, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
- This is also the talk page for Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention, which is a bit confusing. Secretlondon (talk) 20:21, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
- Would it help (if it is possible) to adjust the relevant bots – DeltaQuadBot and HBC AIV helperbot5 – to remove reports of locked accounts, in addition to blocked ones? DanCherek (talk) 20:41, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
- While I'm sure it would be possible, I think it's fine if we block locally as well. When appealing a global lock, the appelant is expected to to have already appealed any local blocks, so this gives individual projects autonomy. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:30, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
weird bug
Wondering if anyone else is experiencing this, I use the script that draws a like through the usernames of blocked users, and it has stopped working, but only at UAA/Bot, which I find very weird. I keep clicking on names on the bot list in particular, only to find that they've already been blocked, so it's kinda wasting my time. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:32, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- I just checked and popups, the other way to get that information without clicking through, aren't working there either. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:35, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- I'm seeing "blocked" "has blocks" etc in navpopups. — xaosflux Talk 18:50, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- Huh. There's no blocked names on the list at the moment, but I tried opening an old revision and popups are working for me on everything except the usernames, and the script isn't striking the blocked ones out. If this is just me, I'll probably just have to live with it as I have no clue what is going on. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:33, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- @Beeblebrox is it working for you on other pages for example this one? — xaosflux Talk 20:25, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- It worked for me when I manually put a user that is blocked on that page, look at the 3rd entry here, is it working for you? — xaosflux Talk 20:28, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- Nope. Interestingly, it does work when I hover over your name at the top of the page, but not on any of the entries below. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:33, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- It worked for me when I manually put a user that is blocked on that page, look at the 3rd entry here, is it working for you? — xaosflux Talk 20:28, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- @Beeblebrox is it working for you on other pages for example this one? — xaosflux Talk 20:25, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- Huh. There's no blocked names on the list at the moment, but I tried opening an old revision and popups are working for me on everything except the usernames, and the script isn't striking the blocked ones out. If this is just me, I'll probably just have to live with it as I have no clue what is going on. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:33, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- I'm seeing "blocked" "has blocks" etc in navpopups. — xaosflux Talk 18:50, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- @Beeblebrox: This appears to be caused by User:DanCherek/UAABotRemover.js. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 20:43, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- Uh oh... sorry about that, I don't know why it's doing that. DanCherek (talk) 20:46, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- Huh, that would explain it. I hadn't patrolled UAA in a bit and forgot I had that turned on. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:03, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- Yep, that was it all right, turned it off and everything's back to normal. Thanks all for your input. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:06, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- Huh, that would explain it. I hadn't patrolled UAA in a bit and forgot I had that turned on. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:03, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- Uh oh... sorry about that, I don't know why it's doing that. DanCherek (talk) 20:46, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Corporate usernames - when to report
I've been doing occasional runs through the user creation log, and on occasion will find a new account that bears an obvious corporate name but that has not edited anywhere as of that time. I am hesitant to do anything with these, because I'm not sure whether this is a straight-up violation of the username policy that should be blocked from the get-go or whether I should drop a warning on their talk page and wait to see what happens. Case in point: I've just spotted User:Pictureperfectcommunications which matches several communications outfits when Google searched; it has yet to edit as I type, so I'm not sure whether to warn or report at this point. (Another I was going to use as an example just posted an ad on its user page.) So: where should I consider the line to be for accounts like this? Tony Fox (arf!) 05:45, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
- Tony Fox, my thinking is that an account like this should not be reported to WP:UAA or warned or blocked until they edit. If their first edits are to declare their COI and ask for help in dealing with their COI, then a friendly request to select a policy compliant username is the appropriate response, followed by other advice about our policies and guidelines. If, on the other hand, their first edits are to try to insert overtly promotional or spam content, then an immediate indefinite block is justified. The first few edits usually reveal a lot about intentions and inform the decision to warn, soft block or hard block. Cullen328 (talk) 05:56, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
- If they haven't edited yet, drop a {{uw-coi-username}} on their talk page; there are a surprisingly large number of new editors who don't know you're not allowed to have usernames like that. Primefac (talk) 06:59, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the insight. I'll take them on a case by case basis and use warnings as a first step for the marginal cases. Tony Fox (arf!) 15:45, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
- There was a discussion initiated by me eight years ago on this subject that you might find relevant [1]. I concur with Primefac; warning with a uw-coi-username is appropriate and warranted for such cases. --Hammersoft (talk) 16:33, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
- I don't think there's much point in warning editors with no edits. An awful lot of them never make a single edit. I have a brief guide to how I make username-related decisions if that's of any interest. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:15, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- There was a discussion initiated by me eight years ago on this subject that you might find relevant [1]. I concur with Primefac; warning with a uw-coi-username is appropriate and warranted for such cases. --Hammersoft (talk) 16:33, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the insight. I'll take them on a case by case basis and use warnings as a first step for the marginal cases. Tony Fox (arf!) 15:45, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
- If they haven't edited yet, drop a {{uw-coi-username}} on their talk page; there are a surprisingly large number of new editors who don't know you're not allowed to have usernames like that. Primefac (talk) 06:59, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
- Often a corporate name might be created simply to prevent someone else from doing so, without any intention of editing. 331dot (talk) 21:25, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Do not edit under a name that is likely to imply that you are (or are related to) a specific, identifiable person, unless it is your real name. If you have the same name as a well-known person to whom you are unrelated, and are using your real name, you should state clearly on your userpage that you are unrelated to the well-known person.
- If a name is used that implies that the user is (or is related to) a specific, identifiable person, the account may sometimes be blocked as a precaution against damaging impersonation, until proof of identity is provided.
The "related to" part could be read as meaning that any Johnsons must give on their userpage an exhaustive list of notable Johnsons they are not related to. That's plain excessive and frankly comical. To my mind, any known relative of any specific, identifiable person is themselves identifiable and therefore already covered by the wording without the "or are related to" part. It's unclear what the special purpose of that extra clause would be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8071:184:DA00:880F:4D44:C96F:BAC6 (talk) 03:37, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
- Everything involves common sense. Secretlondon (talk) 22:47, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
- However, common is not that common anymore. Cheers, - FlightTime (open channel) 22:59, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
"Wikipedia:UNC" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Wikipedia:UNC and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 30#Wikipedia:UNC until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Q28 (talk) 11:32, 30 June 2022 (UTC)