Also, we have no way to know if that person is indeed from that company - it
could be someone trying to give them a bad reputation. I think the blocks
were completely in order.
mboverload
On 6/18/06, Alphax (Wikipedia email) <alphasigmax(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Erik Moeller wrote:
I don't know how common this is:
# 01:30, June 19, 2006 RadioKirk blocked "Shout magazine (contribs)"
with an expiry time of indefinite (username, existing company)
# 01:02, June 19, 2006 RadioKirk blocked "Shi star entertainment
(contribs)" with an expiry time of indefinite (username, existing
company)
# 21:04, June 18, 2006 RadioKirk blocked "ParsInternet (contribs)"
with an expiry time of indefinite (Username (name of existing
company))
# 00:59, June 19, 2006 RadioKirk blocked "Hammond Publishing
(contribs)" with an expiry time of indefinite (username, existing
company)
Given that we probably want people to identify who they work for,
especially when editing articles where this is relevant, is it a good
idea to block company accounts without any edits on sight?
Yes. Firstly, it's an unacceptable username; secondly, it could be seen
as a "group account"; thirdly, it could be being used for impersonation.
If so, perhaps we should at least modify the talk
plage template to
indicate to the user how they can put the company information on
their user page? See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Hammond_Publishing for an
example of the current template.
People identifying the company they work for shouldn't be editing the
article on that company, per [[WP:AUTO]] and [[WP:CORP]].
--
Alphax -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l