Erik Moeller wrote:
On 6/19/06, Alphax (Wikipedia email)
<alphasigmax(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Yes. Firstly, it's an unacceptable username;
Wikipedia:Username only speaks of usernames explicitly advertising a company:
Accounts with usernames that advertise a particular website, company,
etc. (e.g. "visit [name of url]" ) are discouraged and may be blocked.
I don't see how "company" or "[name of url]" are any different.
<snip>
thirdly, it
could be being used for impersonation.
That can be said about virtually any name. I suspect we probably have
a few undetected cases of users impersonating people they don't like,
ex-girlfriends, etc. Normally we assume good faith until impersonation
is brought to our attention.
For "public figures" we generally don't take the chance. A company
counts as a "public figure".
People
identifying the company they work for shouldn't be editing the
article on that company
I would make an exception for obvious errors. They also have every
right to comment on the talk page.
Ok.
I'm not saying these user accounts shouldn't
be blocked -- I think
they just may warrant a slightly more refined treatment than a
commented version of the same template that we use for people who call
themselves "YOU ARE ALL DICKHEADS11!!" A friendly notice how companies
are allowed to contribute to Wikipedia would work better, I think.
Yes.
It would also be nice to be able to turn off the IP
autoblocker in those cases.
It would be nice to turn off the IP autoblocker in a *lot* of cases.
Unfortunately nobody seems willing to implement any of the propsed fixes
for bug 550.
--
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