Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names

Edit links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Requests for comment

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Cascadia (talk | contribs) at 21:11, 2 April 2007 (→‎{{user|This username is my username and the username that I shall use}}). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Shortcuts
Navigation: Archives • Instructions for closing administrators • Purge page cache

This page is for bringing attention to usernames which may be in violation of Wikipedia's username policy. Before listing a username here, consider if it should be more appropriately reported elsewhere, or if it needs to be reported at all:

Do NOT post here if:

  • the user in question has made no recent edits.
  • you wish to have the block of a user reviewed. Instead, discuss the block with the blocking administrator (see also Wikipedia:Blocking policy § Unblocking).

Before adding a name here you MUST ensure that the user in question:

  • has been warned about their username (with e.g. {{subst:uw-username}}) and has been allowed time to address the concern on their user talk page.
  • has disagreed with the concern, refused to change their username and/or continued to edit without replying to the warning.
  • is not already blocked.

If, after having followed all the steps above, you still believe the username violates Wikipedia's username policy, you may list it here with an explanation of which part of the username policy you think has been violated. After posting, please alert the user of the discussion (with e.g. {{subst:UsernameDiscussion}}). You may also invite others who have expressed concern about the username to comment on the discussion by use of this template.

Add new requests below, using the syntax {{subst:rfcn1|username|2=reason ~~~~}}.

Tools: Special:ListUsers, Special:BlockList


Fenian Swine (talk · contribs)

Note to the closing administrator: The user in question has attempted to skew consensus by commenting with a "sock puppet" (multiple user names)

Bringing this here following a discussion at WP:ANI. This was also the subject of a previous request for comment. For the record, Fenian is a term for an Irish nationalist, and some apparently find the username insulting. I'm nominating this procedurally only, I have no opinion. RJASE1 Talk 19:25, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disallow Insulting to a particular ideology. Even if "Fenian" was not an insult, saying "Irish nationalist swine" would also be insulting. The fact that the user may be using it ironically does not effect the potential to offend.Allow as user predates the rule against "potentially inflamatory", it was only "inflamatory" then, so unless someone is actually offened this is a special case. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 19:28, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disallow, the article on Fenian even states it is an insult, and swine has been an insult for quite a long time. I really wish the user would've changed his username to something else that shows his heritage. Cascadia TALK| HISTORY 19:39, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Neutral The users tenure causes me to rethink my position, however, I believe this is a case where if the user agrees to a compromise, then the chance for a block is avoided. Cascadia TALK| HISTORY 20:02, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Allow - User's talk page shows he considers himself to be a Fenian swine in the sense of identifying himself with the freedom fighters of a century ago who finally obtained (partial) Irish independence. "Fenian swine" is being reclaimed by him proudly from the Black & Tan pigs who used to use it as an insult while they were brutalizing women and children. I consider myself to be a Fenian swine, too! TortureIsWrong 19:43, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • You allow almost everything, usually strongly, the fact is this is against policy. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 19:47, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • You disallow almost everything, and you're fortunate that your own pot-promoting name wasn't banned. You would think you'd give others a similar break from time to time. In any event, I stand by my comment. The user is proud to be called a Fenian swine, as am I. If you bothered to look into it, you'd see that. By the way, the name has survived a previous attempt to shoot it down - why take a shot at it again? TortureIsWrong 19:52, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • First off, no I don't disallow everything, check your facts. Secondly, if you think there is a problem with my name then go ahead and list it. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 19:56, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've noticed that as well, TIW. We need to judge it by policy, not in a "fight the man" attitude. Cascadia TALK| HISTORY 19:50, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • If the man is wrong, it's right to fight him. All Fenian swine know that. And the ever-blessed policy is not always clear, as these debates show. I think it would be better if people would acknowledge that instead of always claiming that they, and only they, know what policy means. It's a fluid thing, isn't it? TortureIsWrong 19:55, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • It should also be noted that the rantings above are inappropriate for this discussion and were seemingly made to invite some sort of political sectarian argument gaillimhConas tá tú? 19:54, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • It should be noted that the use of "rantings" is a personal insult. Of course that's the favorite sport in Galway. TortureIsWrong 19:57, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • You are ranting. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 19:58, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • And you're high. So? TortureIsWrong 20:07, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Not sure if this is relevant, but the user apparently transliterates his sig to something different. Also, since this is an established editor, I suggest we hold this open long enough for the user to comment. RJASE1 Talk 19:51, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's very relevant. The Play Brian Moore sig was chosen as a compromise after the user was blocked by Zoe and quickly unblocked by Geni for this same thing back in 2005. — coelacan — 20:29, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disallow as the second blocking administrator and per my comments on ANI, which can be viewed in full here. gaillimhConas tá tú? 19:54, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Allow - I came across this vote because User talk:Fenian Swine‎; page is on my watchlist. Am I allowed vote here? (Sarah777 20:12, 1 April 2007 (UTC))[reply]
    Yes, thank you for your input and welcome to RFCN. Ya might want to watch out for low flying disagreements, but in all it's a great way to put in your input into a decision. (statement of humor, please take it as such) Cascadia TALK| HISTORY 20:20, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure, you can edit (almost) anything on Wikipedia! As this is not a vote, but a discussion, it would be nice to provide some reasoning, however. gaillimhConas tá tú? 20:21, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Without policy based reasoning your vote will carry little weight I am afraid. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 20:25, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disallow Username is provocative and borderline inflamatory; this has an unignorable potential to offend readers. G Donato (talk to me...) 20:23, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Allow. It would be nonsense to block the name of someone who contributes well towards this site. Whether you perceive me to be anything is just your own personal opinion, it means nothing. Should you chose to block the name, you will be losing a worthwhile member over something as silly as political correctness.--Play Brian Moore 20:28, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is not you we would block, but that name, no block is needed at all if you change names. Your allow argument does not seem to be based in policy. It is not how we perceive you, but how others will react to your name, this policy applies to everyone. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 20:31, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I challenge someone to go through my edits over the past 2 years and show me where I have made bad edit's or where people have reacted negatively because of my username. This has never happened and therefore the backbone of the disallow brigades arguemnt is non existent. They claim it is in my best interest to change my name, when I tell them I have had no trouble in the past, they suddenly change their angle to "it's wiki policy". This is clearly a vendeta against myself and it wouldn't surprise me if Mr.Gaillimh is in fact emailing his administrator buddies in order to win this petty debate.--Play Brian Moore 20:41, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I must protest to these ridiculous insinuations gaillimhConas tá tú? 20:48, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not half as stupid as actually having this debate, a chara.--Play Brian Moore 21:06, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Allow. This is stupid, Fenian Swine in this context is not insulting, I would be regarded as a Irish Nationalist/Republican and I wouldn't regard this as insulting, it would be more a badge of honour if anything, I think the admin is being oversensative on this issue.--padraig3uk 20:37, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do you really thing calling a group of people swines is not insulting? The policy says "potentially offensive" not "offensive to you". HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 20:45, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Allow. As I read it, this has about as much offense as taking the name 'Kashrut Swine', and being a Schochet. Someone inside, who makes a joke about it, and has already compromised once? While WP is always 'evolving' as new people become established editors, that 'evolution' cannot always be backdatable. I've seen FS around before, and think it'd be odd and unfortunate to move all of his efforts to a new name, which causes all sorts of identity issues. there was a compromise which I think is plenty fine, and it should stay that way. What if he asks for a clearly pro his side name 'go fein!', perhaps?, and someone on the other side says, no that's offensive? will we make him change it to 'Man of Eire', until some british mapmaker says that's offensive to him, and then he's 'Irishman', which offends someone on classism and nationalism grounds, till he's just 'that readheaded bloke barry', and then some ginger flips out at him? (humor and irony intended.) how long do these dopey fights go till were'e all either #$trings, or we're all 'vaguehumanoideditor#3657837275553668367263565447'??? I get so tired of these sorts of disputes, while things like the EVP fight and Daniel Brandt rage for months without resolution. ThuranX 20:44, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your argument does not seem to be based in policy. How is calling a national group "swine" not insulting? HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 20:45, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So if a midwestern pig farmer called himself ArkansasSwine, we'd have to remove that too? I ask again. How far is this touchy-feely nonsense going to go on? If ANYONE is offended by a name, we can change it? Good. I am offended by ALL names at Wikipedia, and think EVERY SINGLE USER should pick a new name. Get over it. He went through this once, compromise was found, and he has continued to be a good editor. This is not article content, this is a User, a contributing PERSON, and should not be up for debate again and again. If you lose this time, will you just wait a month and do it again? He's stated here that if forced to change, he will leave. I wish him well, it's clear where this mess is going, and have little doubt that I'll be up here at some point for some trumped up reasons, like 'In this language I made up last thursday, and made a tenet of my new self-adhered religion, ThuranX means something I think is offensive, make him change it'. Once and done for user name issues. ThuranX 02:11, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Allow. It's a bit late for this debate ladies and gentlemen. Swine is not offensive at all. The user is a Fenian, henceforth if there is any sense left in this place, it will be allowed.--Play Brian Moore 20:47, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    This is completely inappropriate, as this account was made by User:Fenian Swine. He is attempting to skew consensus by using a sockpuppet to influence this discussion. The fact that he's being so overt about it shows a complete disregard for the community gaillimhConas tá tú? 20:52, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. That account was set-up so I could argue my case. Disregard for the community? What are you talking about, I am here longer than you. I don't do vandilism, you are clearly wrong on the matter.
    Fenian Swine should be unblocked and allowed to contribute to this debate. Sam Blacketer 20:55, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Mr. Blacketer, he's already been unblocked and has used both names to skew consensus. I invite you to read this discussion more closely before participating again, so as to understand the full picture gaillimhConas tá tú? 20:59, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disallow - "often considered offensive and a sectarian insult." Tom Harrison Talk 20:49, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I assume you know that often does not mean all of the time, just a majority of the time. This is one of those occasions in the minority where it is not intended to offend.--Play Brian Moore 21:00, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then again, so is "Tom." TortureIsWrong 20:58, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong allow. The user identifies himself as a Fenian, which is just another way of saying he is an Irish patriot. The use of 'swine' is self-deprecatory to himself. The only insult which could possibly be discerned would not be to other Irishmen but implicitly to the English (because the Fenians were fighting against the English for the control of Ireland), and this I do not think is enough. I have part-Irish ancestry and feel quite strongly about this. Sam Blacketer 20:52, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    You have it backwards, mate. The word "Fenian" is used by some Unionists and some British as an insult to Irish Catholics and nationalists. gaillimhConas tá tú? 20:56, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • There's nothing "backwards" about it - the Fenians were legendary Irish warriors in the 2nd and 3rd centuries, and the name was adopted by Irish rebels BEFORE it began being used as an insult by Black & Tan savages. TortureIsWrong 21:16, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Originally it was but I don't think anyone very much uses it in those terms now. A quick google shows Fenians Irish Pub, The Fenian Page (supporters of Celtic, ie Irish catholic Scots). It is now a term adopted by anyone proud of their Irish ancestry. Sam Blacketer 21:04, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    It may have been used and intended by Loyalists and some brits as a insult, but I have never met a Republican yet that would be offended by being called a Fenian.--padraig3uk
    Perhaps the user should just go by Fenian. Cascadia TALK| HISTORY 21:09, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disallow as offensive. Now I note the arguments relative to reclaiming the term and self-identifying, and I greatly sympathize for personal reasons. However, the other side is that the term is used offensively by some and understood as offensive by more. To which I'm sure the counter-argument is that y'all should just get better educated as to its roots and meanings. Which brings me to the fallacy in this particular case. In the first go-around the user disapproved of someone's disapproval, with the riposte "I assume your American." Which cracks me up as reading the Fenian article says that the original organizations were founded in the US. So... even the user does not necessarily understand the usages, and thus can't reassure us on this name. Shenme 21:18, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Read the article again, ShenMe. The term goes back much further than that, to Irish legend. TortureIsWrong 21:23, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. The term derives from the Irish Na Fianna or Na Fianna Éireann who in Celtic mythology were a band of warriors formed to protect Ireland, Fionn Mac Cumhaill being the most famous of its warriors. It derives from Fionn Mac Cumhaill, he was around a long time before our St.Brendan discovered America. Please don't question me on whether I know the origins of the term, Thanks mate.--Play Brian Moore 21:21, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment - as Cascadia noted, the problem seems to be more with "swine" than with "Fenian". Is this really necessary to your username, or can some compromise be reached? RJASE1 Talk 21:28, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. A compromise was reached, I would sign with a different signature. But even this appears to have been ignored.--Play Brian Moore 21:33, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • You are now dealing with a far different group of people, many of which are not admins. Perhaps a further compromise of simply User:Fenian will make both sides happy. Cascadia TALK| HISTORY 21:57, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disallow: "potentially offensive". NikoSilver 21:35, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disallow Besides being potentially offensive, it is a partisan political statement.Proabivouac 21:48, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Allow - It seems to my that those who would wish to "disallow" do not understand that historial origin of the term or its mainstream usage - which has been outlined immediately above. The term is only an insult if used in a specific manor by a specific group - the word is only an insult in the small minority in the context of its usage (this editor is not using it in that context and is not from that grouping and is using it in the correct/mainstream usage) For the vast majority of the time the term is used it is as a honour - I, for one, would consider it an honour to be called a Fenian. Instead of focusing on the minor usage I would look at its mainstream usage - therefore it is not insulting and should be allowed. Also - it is interesting to note that it is the "Fenians" that have said it is not an insult, that speaks volumes.--Vintagekits 21:55, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    No, you are quite mistaken in your generalisation that people who agree that this username should be blocked do not understand the term. I've outlined (in specific detail) the meaning of the term and why it can be considered offensive at multiple venues and have provided a link to this on this very page. Please refrain from making silly generalisations and perhaps read this page a bit more carefully before participating further. In addition, republicans do consider the term "Fenian Swine" to be an insult. I can point you towards numerous references, including Frank McGuinness' Observing the Sons of Ulster Marching Towards the Somme gaillimhConas tá tú? 22:20, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I dont appriciate you taking a snide and condasending tone with me a chara, I have set out my thoughts on the issue and just because they are opposite to yours do not attempt to reride them - to be honest I must say that your credability in my eyes has taken a serious nosedive over this issue and your handling of it. How about you stop focusing on a specific minority MISUSE of the term and remember the real mean of the term - SIGNED A FENIAN!!!--Vintagekits 23:00, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think you're taking this wrong. There's no condensation on my part (evaporation, perhaps, hehe). I was simply explaining how I have not generalised, as you mistakenly stated. Furthermore, as you agree that the term is misused by some, I'm not sure how you correlate this as not violating our username policy gaillimhConas tá tú? 23:30, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment you are quite mistaken in your generalisation, silly generalisations even which was rebuttled with republicans do consider the term "Fenian Swine" to be an insult. It appears that Gaillimh has just generalised in the very reply where he had a go at someone else for generalising. Funny how I'm a Reoublican and I don't consider Fenian Swine(along with many others here) to be offensive. Maybe Gaillimh should realise his opinion on the matter is mistaken.--Play Brian Moore 22:26, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah, no, there was no generalising on my part. You see, I provided a point of external reference to support my contention, and am happy to provide more gaillimhConas tá tú? 22:32, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's funny, I can't seem to find the part where he ask all the Fenians of the world, past and present if they found the name offensive? How odd. Maybe he also generalised? I have Republicans here who don't mind the name and yet you make sweeping statements such as republicans do consider the term "Fenian Swine" to be an insult. That is generalisation if ever I saw it and linking to another person who generalises only goes to allow you to make my point for me. The more you talk, the less and less I find myself being able to consider your opinion plausable at all. Keep them coming a chara.--Play Brian Moore 22:37, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Allow: have come across this name many times and never imagined that people who see the context would be offended. Maybe Swenian Fine would get the irony across to those who think literally. And I took it at first that Play Brian Moore was a celebration of the resistance of Irish rugby players to England's unjust dominance at Landsdowne Road - now happily a thing of the past.--Shtove 22:03, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Allow - If he wants to call himself an "Irish Nationalist Pig", then go ahead, let him!--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 22:48, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ed, not sure you are helping Mr Swine's case with that! (Sarah777 22:52, 1 April 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Ah but he is. I think he realises how silly some people are being. Also, feel free to call me Fenian. Mr.Swine's so formal.--Play Brian Moore 22:54, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Allow -I have been called a fenian many a time to which I happily reply yes I am --Barry O'Brien entretien 23:40, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disallow, for the same reason that "Dirty N***er" would be an inappropriate username, even for an African-American editor. It's offensive a priori, why should it matter that it's being used "ironically"? - Merzbow 01:19, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • You're not paying attention. "Fenian" is not the same as the N word because it had a long and positive history as a word in Ireland before the Black & Tan animals tried to turn it into a slur. By the way, your own name could be viewed as a violation of policy because you just named yourself after a famous Japanese noise artist/musician. How would you like to be forced to change it for no good reason? TortureIsWrong 02:07, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • This is exactly my point, I can see how some would correlate this situation to the "N word issue" in the US and beyond but that is totally different the main and original usage of that term is negative, the original and main usage of this term is a positive use and not an abusive or offensive use. To state that this is an offensive term is to accept the extreme minority view instead of viewing it in the mainstream usage and would set an unusual precedent. --Vintagekits 11:05, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mild Disallow. An offensive name is offensive even if the named is being "ironic". Irony is hard to grok from a username. But the user does not appear to be using the name to cause trouble, and has modified his sig as a compromise. Dan Beale 07:26, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Background to the Block

May I say that I am mystified as to how I'd even know that this debate was taking place were it not for my watchlist. User was notified on his talk page

I am not the User whose name is being challenged (not yet anyway). I was not notified of this. (Apologies, I forgot to sign the inclusion below) (Sarah777 21:06, 1 April 2007 (UTC))[reply]


Anyway, this was the discussion on User:Gaillimh:

"Again, there is no debate. Please change your username." Mr Galway, can you tell me by what authority you have chosen to block this contributor? Please respond. And I would also like an explanation as to why you took it upon yourself to delete comments I made on another editors page. That would appear to me to be a gross abuse of whatever admin powers you may have. (Sarah777 03:07, 31 March 2007 (UTC))

Hi there! First, please allow me to extend an apology for removing your comment on the talk page. It wasn't my intention; it was simply a miscue when pasting my response onto User talk:Fenian Swine. I didn't block the user by some sort of selective authority. As I've mentioned several times, the username was a clear violation of Wikipedia policy. gaillimhConas tá tú? 03:10, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

In fairness, do you not think you are being a bit high-handed? The policy would seem to support you but it also appears that you are the only one finds the name offensive. Surely as an Admin you should be refereeing rather than imposing your pov? There is a clear implication in the Wiki-rules you referenced (which I read) that a name is offensive only if someone decides to be offended by it. In your position as Executioner, you should not also be Judge and Jury. Surely? (Sarah777 03:19, 31 March 2007 (UTC))

The username is blatantly offensive, for reasons I've detailed on User talk:Fenian Swine. In addition, I am not imposing any biased point of view. Anyone can see that the name is offensive. gaillimhConas tá tú? 03:25, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Clearly Mr Swine is being IRONIC, given his obvious Fenian sympathies. This case was argued out some time back (before my time here) and he was unblocked. You seem to be the only one offended since then. I am at a loss to understand why your are taking such an uncompromising line on this. (Sarah777 03:30, 31 March 2007 (UTC))

Ironic or not, the username is entirely inappropriate; it invites conflict and division in addition to disparaging a group of people. To say I am uncompromising is a gross misrepresentation of my actions. For more than a week, I offered to help the user change his username and was met with nothing but hostility and insults. gaillimhConas tá tú? 03:34, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Fenian Swine is a long standing contributor, and blocking him without discussion at WP:RFCN is inappropriate. Please feel free to direct me to any discussion regarding endorsement of your block, otherwise I will raise this matter elsewhere. One Night In Hackney303 14:00, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank God for that, I thought I was the only one who saw you as being overly-harsh. Honestly though, it is in your best interest to unblock me, one person being offened by a name is not grounds for blocking, especially when the user who blocked me appears to make sweeping decissions without at least asking other administrators. Play Brian Moore 15:33 IST, 31 March 2007. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.202.159.12 (talk) 14:33, 31 March 2007 (UTC).

I think the post above is from User:Fenian Swine, who signs himself Play Brian Moore. You only come across the "offending" name if you click on his User-link. It takes some effort to be offended. Mr Gaillimh, to suggest that I am grossly misrepresenting your actions is a gross misrepresentation of my comments. I think we could perhaps keep the tone of this discussion calm yet frank. It is my view, that your actions in this matter constitute a misuse of Administrative power. Where should I take this matter for adjudication? Regards (Sarah777 09:53, 1 April 2007 (UTC))

As a result of your failure to reply to my message, I have started discussion at ANI over this matter. One Night In Hackney303 10:46, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

continuation of the vote/dicussion on Fenian Swine

  • Disallow The intent of the username is to propagate an insult. I really don't care if this is done ironically or not. It's supposed to be about creating an encyclopedia and not projecting an ideology, political agenda, or irony. patsw 03:03, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Allow A username by nature has to be self-referential, so this must be viewed in as a self-deprecating (ironic) statement. Should be allowable as "Spartan Dog." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Autocracy (talk • contribs) 04:12, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Or as allowable as "Georgia Dawg," for that matter. TortureIsWrong 07:39, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • It should be noted that "dog" (and derivative spellings) doesn't necessarily have a negative connotation, whereas "swine" does. Flawed example(s). EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:01, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Allow. We asked him nicely several times, he doesn't want to change it, he considers its use ironic, he has compromised by modifying his sig, and in the end the only thing we will achieve by attempting a forced change is to drive away a perfectly decent editor. Guy (Help!) 08:31, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Allow. Not very offensive, he modified his sig, and it's intended to be ironic. --Burgercat 11:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mild Disallow (with a strong request for the user to reconsider). Applying the pub test... could you walk into any pub in Ireland (particularly one in Northern Ireland), call out "A pint of Guinness please Fenian Swine" and expect to leave without the assistance of paramedics. On that basis, whether used ironically or not, it will offend people. DrFrench 12:18, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Well I live in the Republic so I couldn't tell you about the North of Ireland. Im sure if you went into a bar and shouted 'Dan', some one called Dan could get angry and give you a box. So I'm not sure that your pub test cuts it at all.--Play Brian Moore 12:45, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I come from the North and the term Fenian is not a insult, using the term 'Fenian Bastard' to someone is intended as one, but if someone called me a Fenian Swine I would regard it as a joke.--padraig3uk 13:11, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Allow. It's self deprecating, and his name doesn't appear in his sig. A lot of Irish republican inclined editors are acquainted with FS and are not offended by his name. One Night In Hackney303 13:19, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Allow per JzG and One Night In Hackney. Plus, this user registered their username in 2005; back then, the policy was not against "potentially" inflammatory names, just against "inflammatory or offensive" ones. After nearly 2 years of contributions, I would think that if this name is actually offensive to anyone who edits with this user, it would have come up by now, and we should not be violating the reasonable compromise that was reached previously. Mangojuicetalk 13:49, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Allow per Mangojuice. I'm not from Ireland, so I'm not sure how the word "Fenian" is perceived there, but if, as Mangojuice says, this editor has been contributing for two years and this is the first time someone raised the sisue of his name here, it's probably non-offensive. Coemgenus 14:12, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, it's not the first time.. but I would figure in all that time, if the name was going to actually offend someone (as opposed to seeming merely potentitally offensive), it would have done so by now. Mangojuicetalk 17:24, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Ah, yes here's the first incident. I'm going to withdraw my allow, based on this and on Alison's comment below. Coemgenus 19:12, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disallow per Cascadia. - PatricknoddyTALK (reply here)|HISTORY 16:06, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Allow. Username predates wording change. On that standard, I see it as a proud reclaiming of their heritage, i.e. Rebel Scum for someone in the American South. Abeg92contribs 16:10, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disallow - A general user won't know that he uses this as a matter of pride, but calling something 'swine' definitely is defamatory. Again, this is about the name, not the faith or intention behind the choice of name. Sorry. The Behnam 17:05, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disallow per The Behnam. Offense is always subjective, but better to err on the side of caution. Walton Vivat Regina! 17:18, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Allow per Mango and a suggestion to read Beatty's speech before he eats the flamethrower. If the name was intended to be offensive or should have been obvious that it would be massively offensive, thats an easy call here. This is obviously good faith, a strong contributor, and that makes this one an easy call as well. Let the name slide, and before someone accuses me of not basing my argument on policy, I'll point at WP:IAR and say that this is one of those cases where such a rule is exactly perfect. He broke the letter of the law, not the spirit. -Mask 18:23, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disallow - this editor had his name ruled against about 2 years ago and all he did was change his sig. I was around on WP:IWNB and remember it well. The term Fenian can be quite offensive & it's usually followed by "b**tard" - you get the idea - Alison☺ 18:32, 2 April 2007 (UTC) (from Ireland, BTW)[reply]
except that it wasn't followed by bastard. If the offensive term is Fenian Bastard, theres not a real issue here. -Mask 19:03, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
However 'swine' is still an attack. The Behnam 19:04, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I can understand the ironic and self-deprecatory use of the term 'fenian' here. However, amongst WP editors - esp. around Irish articles where he edits a lot - it's going to be constantly (mis)interpreted as being offensive. There's too much political history to that epithet - Alison☺ 19:09, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Allow - self-referential, as such not offensive, we should err on the side of caution in allowing fine contributors to continue contributing. Moreschi Request a recording? 19:39, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment - For those that say it is OK when a username is OK if it normally is offensive but is in Self-Referal, would you allow "ImADirtyWhore" or some other self-refering remark that typically is an insult? Just curious. Cascadia TALK| HISTORY 19:46, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Grrr. Look, this one is only borderline offensive, and IAR exists for a reason: to stop the letter of policy getting in the way of the spirit, which is invariably "Let the good guys contribute." We should never let our sense of morality prevent us from doing what is right. Moreschi Request a recording? 19:50, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hey, I was just asking a legitimate question. Besides, I suggested to this user that perhaps he could drop the "swine" and simply go by User:Fenian as a compromise. The user has not responded to the offer I had mentioned above. Cascadia TALK| HISTORY 19:52, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Sorry, I wasn't getting aggressive or frustrated there, just mock-annoyance. I still don't think this quibbling over usernames is really necessary: this chap is a solid contributor to the encyclopedia, just let him get on with it. The username policy is the one policy which need not be absolutely enforced. Moreschi Request a recording? 19:56, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • No offense taken. I have restated my position above to Neutral. I really think this is a case where a compromise would be best. Cascadia TALK| HISTORY 20:04, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • If ever there was a case of "no consensus" it's this one. The real compromise is to acknowledge that this username has not harmed Wikipedia in the slightest despite being in constant use for years. Long live Fenian Swine! TortureIsWrong 20:08, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • I disagree. It's quite obvious that there's no consensus. I say either kick it over to Admin or let it drop. Oh, and Long Live Fenian Swine! (I should probably take the yawn out but since you had to go and sigh...)TortureIsWrong 20:16, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • TIW, I'm trying to be as civil as humanly possible here (hense the sigh), I only ask that you return the favor. Should an admin decide that this is a No Consensus Stalemate, then fine by me. If the user is willing to compromise on the issue, then great. Cascadia TALK| HISTORY 20:27, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • The sigh isn't civil, it's childish dramatics. I'm eliminating my yawn.TortureIsWrong 20:30, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This username is my username and the username that I shall use (talk · contribs)

This name appears to be excessively lengthy. --Nick—Contact/Contribs 21:08, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/User_names&oldid=119811091"