MediaWiki talk:Signupend
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Release of e-mail addresses
On meta:Talk:Privacy policy, somebody has complained who was apparently misled because the account creation page does not make it explicit that email addresses will be released if it is legally required. Should the text perhaps be altered for the benefit of those who read "We won't reveal your address to anyone" literally? -- Jeronim 22:18, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
- I would think that that would be essential. That's a problem, in my mind. If that's our privacy policy, then it should read "We won't release your e-mail address to anyone unless it's legally required." That doesn't sound great, but if that's the truth, then that's the truth. --Blackcap | talk 01:19, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
- Note: the exact link may be found here: m:Talk:Privacy policy#Email address releases (when required by law). Blackcap | talk 21:25, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Proposed changes to text regarding visiblility of e-mail addresses
I didn't realize at first that when you send another user e-mail, he will be able to see your e-mail address. I know that sounds clueless, but I honestly assumed that when I sent another user an e-mail, my address would either be anonymized or it wouldn't be shown. I figure that if I can make this mistake, others can too. Here's the text as it is now:
- However, giving your e-mail address allows other users to send you mail without knowing your address, and enables password reminders to be requested.
Here's my proposed text (changes shown in bold):
- However, giving your e-mail address allows you to send mail to others, using this as the reply-to address, other users to send you mail without knowing your address, and enables password reminders to be requested.
I'm interested in any suggestions others may have here, and maybe someone else will have a better wording than mine. Hopefully these changes will be helpful. --Blackcap | talk 01:19, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
(migrating talk from Wikipedia:Village Pump (proposals))
I'm reposting this here from WP:AN (I had originally posted there as this is a protected page, and would need an admin to change it). I've thought for a while that the text on this message (MediaWiki:Loginend) is misleading. Jeronim has pointed out there that the phrase "We won't reveal your address to anyone" isn't accurate, as we will if we legally need to. Also, I didn't realize at first that my e-mail would be visible to users that I sent mail to, or that it was required in order to send mail (yes, I know how clueless that sounds, but I didn't really think about it until later). I've proposed some changes at MediaWiki talk:Loginend (bolding added to make the changes more visible): essentially, that the phrase "We won't reveal your address to anyone" be changed to "We won't release your e-mail address to anyone unless it's legally required," and the sentence "However, giving your e-mail address allows other users to send you mail without knowing your address, and enables password reminders to be requested" be changed to "However, giving your e-mail address allows you to send mail to others, using this as the reply-to address, other users to send you mail without knowing your address, and enables password reminders to be requested."
I think that this will be helpful, not to mention more honest. It's going to be a little bit longer than before. However, I think that the gain in information and accuracy is worth it. If anyone has better texts, please suggest them—I don't like my "unless it's legally required" addition that much, but I think that that or a phrase like it is mandated to be consistent with our prvacy policy. Sorry to be pedantic, folks. Blackcap | talk 21:26, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
- I don't really like the proposed changes, as both sound kind of wordy and may scare some users aware. For the first one, why not ask a Board member (try Angela or Anthere) if we need to add that? Unless the Board states that there may be a need to add that, I don't see an urgent need to introduce that piece of text. For the second proposed change, I think that it makes it too wordy. How about adding more details at Wikipedia:Emailing users (a currently pretty-much abandoned page) and add a link to the log-in page? (I.e. "For more information, see here.") Thanks. Flcelloguy (A note?) 22:24, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
- I agree that the changes suggested are a little wordy, especially the one about the email. I'd also point out that when you actually go to mail a user, that page does say 'The e-mail address you entered in your user preferences will appear as the "From" address of the mail, so the recipient will be able to reply.' Maybe we should bold some of that text to highlight the issue? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:39, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
-
- I didn't really like them that much myself (my changes, I mean). You have a good point in saying that that message is already in MediaWiki:Emailpagetext (which is the text that comes up when you attempt to e-mail a user), but for someone who doesn't have an e-mail ID, that's not so helpful. I like Flcelloguy's proposal above to add a link to Wikipedia:Emailing users. It seems to me more honest to add that in, so that it's crystal clear what the policies are and what we'll do with the information. As an aside, the original conversation that brought this up is here: m:Talk:Privacy policy#Email address releases (when required by law). Blackcap (talk) 13:04, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- I agree with the sentiments expressed by Blackcap. (Somewhere here I criticised the "Bugzilla" procedure for, as far as I can tell, asking for an email address and then publishing it to the whole world without even a single warning!) I would point out, though, that the sentence "However, giving your e-mail address allows you to send mail to others, using this as the reply-to address, other users to send you mail without knowing your address, and enables password reminders to be requested." is gobbledegook. Matt 11:32, 20 November 2005 (UTC).
-
-
-
-
- Hmmm. Why do you think that? Because it's redundant? Or because it's poorly phrased? I agree that it's not the best in the world, but I haven't yet thought of a better alternative save the idea brought forth by Flcelloguy. Oh, and by the way, I have the same problem with Bugzilla. I don't really know why they do that the way they do: it seems like there's surely a better way to give out contact information without compromising privacy so much. Blackcap (talk) 18:55, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- What I mean is that it is a long and overly complicated sentence, with a complicated punctuation structure which takes several attempts to figure out. And even then, never having used the facilities in question, I am not sure what it is trying to say. E.g. I'm not sure if you are talking about a Wikipedia facility, or email in general. Basically I just think that whatever is trying to be said could be said a whole lot more clearly. If I understood it I would offer a suggestion! Matt 00:10, 21 November 2005 (UTC).
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- I see. What I was trying to say was that, by providing an e-mail address, you would be able to e-mail other Wikipedians who have also have an e-mail set in this preference. Otherwise, you will be unable to e-mail them (unless you happen to know their address). The e-mail provided would be used as the reply-to address. Blackcap (talk) 00:14, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
(end migration)
[edit] Discourage use of real name?
A few users have recently come under various degrees of real-world harrassment due to their use of their real names on Wikipedia, at least one of which regrets doing so. Due to the existence of mirrors, etc. it isn't really possible to "take back" having revealed ones' real name, yet it is always possible to reveal it later if necessary or desirable. Should we discourage users from using their real name as their usernames, or at least warn of the risks? And do something similar on the MediaWiki:Prefs-help-realname? Demi T/C 00:56, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
- I don't think users should be actively discouraged from using their real name, but a short note warning them of the possible consequences is a good idea. Canderson7 (talk) 02:34, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
- Agree with Canderson7; a light word of warning would be OK, but not a discouragement. — Matt Crypto 12:51, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'd go with the light warning rather than the discouragement. Steve block talk 13:45, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
Okay, a light warning seems reasonable. How about something like "Consider not using your real name on Wikipedia--you can always identify yourself later, if desired." Demi T/C 00:14, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
How about "The real name you enter will be propagated to other servers beyond our control, and thus will be forever attached to any contributions you make. Proceed with caution, or be brave and stand up for what you believe." — Stevie is the man! Talk | Work 02:14, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
- It's a little long for the short tips; since we welcome anonymous contributors (as in WP:BITE) we shouldn't describe revealing personal information as 'brave'. Demi T/C 20:16, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
I think "Consider not ..." is already too much of a discouragement. How about "See this discussion if you are considering to use your real name." (I actually think we should encourage people to identify themselves, because it will make them more cautious about what they write and it will generate trust.) -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 00:36, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
Given the recent Seigenthaler controversy, I, as a proud real-name user, definitely do not think it a good idea to discourage this practice. Yes, we should warn people of the possible consequences, but I think allowing people to use their real name encourages the sort of Wikipedians we want here, people who will stand behind what they write and write what they would stand behind. Daniel Case 03:44, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
We should definitely discourage real names. OpenBSD prides itself on being 'secure by default'; we're only an encyclopedia and not an operating system, but I think the same principle applies. It's just not a good idea to by default give away sensitive and personal information like that; even if you think it's perfectly safe, you may be terribly terribly wrong. --Gwern (contribs) 22:36 22 November 2006 (GMT)
- We don't use the real name by default, do we? I don't understand at all how you conclude that "we should discourage" from the rest of your comment. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 02:25, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Why isn't this text showing anymore on the sign up page?
Redisign is all right, but if a page is moved, it should be moved to a working location, not blanked. - Mgm|(talk) 09:33, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
It's showing on here --Watcharakorm 10:05, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
- I only see it there if I go to it while already logged in. —Cryptic (talk) 11:19, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
-
- You're right; I'm a dolt. I was looking at plain Special:Userlogin (which is where the "Sign in / create account" in the upper right takes you) instead. —Cryptic (talk) 17:31, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Usernames that will be blocked
Some of the kinds of usernames that are listed in WP:USERNAME#Inappropriate_usernames are not especially obvious to a new Wikipedian. I'm thinking of names like "FooBot", which require some understanding of Wikipedia operations to see why they are inappropriate. The current message does include links to WP:USERNAME, but not directly to the "Inappropriate usernames" section. I propose to add a third bullet point under "Username should not contain:" to include this link. Something like, "Certain other kinds of names related to Wikipedia operations." FreplySpang 14:59, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- Sounds like an excellent idea to me. pschemp | talk 15:10, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- I like. :) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 15:12, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- There. Instead of adding Yet Another bullet point, I put the link behind "offensive, confusing, or unreadable text or characters", which has the useful effect of putting it at the top. FreplySpang 15:52, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- This is indeed a more accurate definition. --Siva1979Talk to me 04:03, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
- There. Instead of adding Yet Another bullet point, I put the link behind "offensive, confusing, or unreadable text or characters", which has the useful effect of putting it at the top. FreplySpang 15:52, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- I like. :) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 15:12, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Move these notes to the right of the form
I was going to suggest an additional note to put in this message, but it occurred to me that that text will probably often not be read, because people don't scroll down the page.
So wouldn't it be better if the content of MediaWiki:Signupend was displayed to the right (or left) of the account creation form (the form with the captcha could be modified to be less wide), instead of below it? --83.253.36.136 15:34, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Suggested additional note
Tip:
Since more than 1,000,000 usernames have already been registered, most common names and words have already been taken. Therefore, be creative when making up your username: Choose an unusual name or word, make a creative combination of words, or modify the name in a unique way (for example by adding a number).
... to help people avoid having their requested names rejected multiple times.
(and see Move these notes to the right of the form above.) --83.253.36.136 16:10, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Sign up instructions
Following a recent spree of improper (per WP:U) company-usernames that have been listed in WP:RFCN, there was a short discussion in its talkpage. It seems that the information that no company names are allowed, is one of the very few restrictions of WP:U that are not explicitly listed in the create an account page. A few concerned editors came up with the proposal to add the following restriction below the "names of celebrities":
- existing company names (including not-for-profit organizations) and trademarks
We think that this will seriously help in limiting the backlog of improper usernames in RFCN and AIV. Furthermore, the selection of those usernames, may actually be in good faith, since people may be creating accounts from e.g. their office. I'd be really mad if I were in their shoes and found myself listed in RFCN or AIV without a warning from the sign up page. Can we include that in the sign up page please? NikoSilver 14:40, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
{{editprotected}}
- Done Cbrown1023 talk 22:52, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. You may want to reposition it below the "celebrities", in case you agree it would be more logical in terms of continuity. NikoSilver 00:04, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- Forgot to tell you, Done Cbrown1023 talk 23:35, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] E-mail address
"Do not use an e-mail address as your username. It will be very visible, and make you a target of spammers."
Haven't e-mail addresses as usernames been technically disabled? —Centrx→talk • 16:45, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
- Well the use of the "@" character has been disabled, but I could still make my username centrx_the_baffled_admn_at_wikipedia.org as my username, thus giving away my e-mail address (and no, that is not my real e-mail address). Cbrown1023 talk 20:48, 25 March 2007 (UTC)