Wikipedia talk:Username policy/Examples

I agree with the listed examples personally, and I feel they are in line with community norms as well. These examples have all gained consensus in the past and while the policy page has been generalized it does not contradict any of these. Good guide. 1 != 2 15:42, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

These aren't even examples, they're rules trying to be made part of the policy through the back door. People will use these to justify their dubious blocks, and they are far too easily misused. As one example: "Indicates a controversial or potentially inflammatory stance or statement" essentially means "Block any name you don't like".

There are admins out there, unfortunately, who pay attention only the letter of the rules. If this were referenced from the policy when User:Can't sleep, clown will eat me registered, he might be blocked for having a name that's "very long", "likely to be problematic", "implies a misleading point of fact" (if the user is not actually an insomniac or afraid of clowns), and "may be perceived as defamatory" (toward clowns).

Also, this will be bait for TWINKLE.

I strongly oppose this list being referenced from the policy.

rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 00:53, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]