Herr Goebbles wrote:
The Wikipedia user: HerrGoebbles, has been blocked by Wiki Admin MarkSweep, whose reasons given were dislike of my user name ( because I am German?) maybe due to MarkSweep claiming to be a former US Marine, he considers me to be an enemy.
I blocked one username of [[User:DrMengele]], offering to unblock if he could offer proof of his name and his doctorate ... instead, he picked another name and (as far as I know) is editing happily. I'm afraid names of famous Nazis or names close to those are too popular with pranksters and tend to get blocked on sight.
- d.
On 2/23/06, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
I blocked one username of [[User:DrMengele]], offering to unblock if he could offer proof of his name and his doctorate ... instead, he picked another name and (as far as I know) is editing happily. I'm afraid names of famous Nazis or names close to those are too popular with pranksters and tend to get blocked on sight.
Which, according to [[Wikipedia:Username]], they shouldn't. Supposedly we're supposed to warn them at least once, and only take action (like changing their name for them) after a reasonable delay.
Steve
On 2/23/06, Steve Bennett stevage@gmail.com wrote:
Which, according to [[Wikipedia:Username]], they shouldn't. Supposedly we're supposed to warn them at least once, and only take action (like changing their name for them) after a reasonable delay.
I don't see much point in warning them since it's not a behavior they can stop. An inappropriate username is an inappropriate username. In this case, warning just seems to be more work for the administrator when the result is the same either way.
Ryan
On Thu, 23 Feb 2006 10:02:43 -0500, you wrote:
I don't see much point in warning them since it's not a behavior they can stop. An inappropriate username is an inappropriate username. In this case, warning just seems to be more work for the administrator when the result is the same either way.
If the account is brand-new with no history it's hardly a problem, I guess. For an established account of course we should let them change it first. Guy (JzG)
On 2/23/06, Ryan Delaney ryan.delaney@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/23/06, Steve Bennett stevage@gmail.com wrote:
Which, according to [[Wikipedia:Username]], they shouldn't. Supposedly we're supposed to warn them at least once, and only take action (like changing their name for them) after a reasonable delay.
I don't see much point in warning them since it's not a behavior they can stop. An inappropriate username is an inappropriate username. In this case, warning just seems to be more work for the administrator when the result is the same either way.
Ryan
One little problem with that is the autoblocker - once their username is blocked they can't register a new name.
Doesn't the autoblocker only kick in when one tries to edit?
On 2/23/06, Guettarda guettarda@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/23/06, Ryan Delaney ryan.delaney@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/23/06, Steve Bennett stevage@gmail.com wrote:
Which, according to [[Wikipedia:Username]], they shouldn't. Supposedly we're supposed to warn them at least once, and only take action (like changing their name for them) after a reasonable delay.
I don't see much point in warning them since it's not a behavior they
can
stop. An inappropriate username is an inappropriate username. In this case, warning just seems to be more work for the administrator when the result is the same either way.
Ryan
One little problem with that is the autoblocker - once their username is blocked they can't register a new name. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 2/23/06, MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
Doesn't the autoblocker only kick in when one tries to edit?
Yep, my mistake. But they still won't be able to edit with the new username
From: wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Guettarda
On 2/23/06, MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
Doesn't the autoblocker only kick in when one tries to edit?
Yep, my mistake. But they still won't be able to edit with the new username
It also comes up when you click on a redlink.
Peter (Skyring)
Peter Mackay wrote:
From: wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Guettarda
On 2/23/06, MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
Doesn't the autoblocker only kick in when one tries to edit?
Yep, my mistake. But they still won't be able to edit with the new username
It also comes up when you click on a redlink.
Clicking on a redlink /is/ trying to edit.
From: wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Alphax (Wikipedia email)
Peter Mackay wrote:
From: wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Guettarda
On 2/23/06, MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
Doesn't the autoblocker only kick in when one tries to edit?
Yep, my mistake. But they still won't be able to edit with the new username
It also comes up when you click on a redlink.
Clicking on a redlink /is/ trying to edit.
No it's not. I've clicked on redlinks with no intention of editing. For one thing, it's an easy way to get to a new editor's empty user page so as to get that "User Contributions" link. For a new editor, they might click on it not know ing it leads to an empty article. For a more experienced editor, it might be a mistake, or possibly the redlink is not easily seen in a particular skin.
Peter (Skyring)
Peter Mackay wrote:
From: wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Alphax (Wikipedia email)
Peter Mackay wrote:
From: wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Guettarda
On 2/23/06, MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
Doesn't the autoblocker only kick in when one tries to edit?
Yep, my mistake. But they still won't be able to edit with the new username
It also comes up when you click on a redlink.
Clicking on a redlink /is/ trying to edit.
No it's not. I've clicked on redlinks with no intention of editing. For one thing, it's an easy way to get to a new editor's empty user page so as to get that "User Contributions" link.
Install [[WP:POPUP]].
For a new editor, they might click on it not know ing it leads to an empty article. For a more experienced editor, it might be a mistake, or possibly the redlink is not easily seen in a particular skin.
I can't help you with that one.
From: wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Alphax (Wikipedia email) Sent: Friday, 24 February 2006 16:08 To: English Wikipedia Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Username block (was Admin Abuse)
Peter Mackay wrote:
It also comes up when you click on a redlink.
Clicking on a redlink /is/ trying to edit.
No it's not. I've clicked on redlinks with no intention of editing. For one thing, it's an easy way to get to a new editor's empty user page so as to get that "User Contributions" link.
Install [[WP:POPUP]].
Yeah, I've done that. Handy gear. I'm not sure when [[WP:POPUP]] became available, but I wasn't aware of it until recently.
I'll agree with you that most of the time, clicking on a redlink IS intentionally editing, at least for an editor who knows what they are about. But not ALL the time, and there's enough pedant in me to pick that nit.
Peter (Skyring)
From: wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Ryan Delaney
On 2/23/06, Steve Bennett stevage@gmail.com wrote:
Which, according to [[Wikipedia:Username]], they shouldn't.
Supposedly
we're supposed to warn them at least once, and only take
action (like
changing their name for them) after a reasonable delay.
I don't see much point in warning them since it's not a behavior they can stop. An inappropriate username is an inappropriate username. In this case, warning just seems to be more work for the administrator when the result is the same either way.
Warn them so they can change their username or at least be aware of why they were blocked. Otherwise they come here seeking an explanation for the random brutality.
Peter (Skyring)
Peter Mackay wrote:
From: wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Ryan Delaney
On 2/23/06, Steve Bennett stevage@gmail.com wrote:
Which, according to [[Wikipedia:Username]], they shouldn't.
Supposedly
we're supposed to warn them at least once, and only take
action (like
changing their name for them) after a reasonable delay.
I don't see much point in warning them since it's not a behavior they can stop. An inappropriate username is an inappropriate username. In this case, warning just seems to be more work for the administrator when the result is the same either way.
Warn them so they can change their username or at least be aware of why they were blocked. Otherwise they come here seeking an explanation for the random brutality.
How about we change {{usernameblock}} to the effect of:
"This notice was placed at ~~~~~; you have 24 hours to pick a new name, at which point your account will be renamed."
From: wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Alphax (Wikipedia email)
Peter Mackay wrote:
From: wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Ryan Delaney
I don't see much point in warning them since it's not a
behavior they
can stop. An inappropriate username is an inappropriate
username. In
this case, warning just seems to be more work for the administrator when the result is the same either way.
Warn them so they can change their username or at least be
aware of why they
were blocked. Otherwise they come here seeking an
explanation for the random
brutality.
How about we change {{usernameblock}} to the effect of:
"This notice was placed at ~~~~~; you have 24 hours to pick a new name, at which point your account will be renamed."
Good, but the editor also needs to know why the username was deemed inappropriate, otherwise it will merely confuse them.
Also, if they don't log in again for a couple of days, then they will find their account has inexplicably disappeared. Such a warning should be coupled with two email notices: 1. Wording as above, plus a reason. 2. Notification that the account has been renamed and the new account name is xxxxx
Peter (Skyring)
Alphax (Wikipedia email) wrote:
Peter Mackay wrote:
From: wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Ryan Delaney
On 2/23/06, Steve Bennett stevage@gmail.com wrote:
Which, according to [[Wikipedia:Username]], they shouldn't. Supposedly
we're supposed to warn them at least once, and only take
action (like
changing their name for them) after a reasonable delay.
I don't see much point in warning them since it's not a behavior they can stop. An inappropriate username is an inappropriate username. In this case, warning just seems to be more work for the administrator when the result is the same either way.
Warn them so they can change their username or at least be aware of why they were blocked. Otherwise they come here seeking an explanation for the random brutality.
How about we change {{usernameblock}} to the effect of:
"This notice was placed at ~~~~~; you have 24 hours to pick a new name, at which point your account will be renamed."
If during that 24 hours they haven't made any edits, there's a good chance that they have not even been on line to see the message.
Ec