User talk:ManymerrymenmakingmuchmoneyinthemonthofMay

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Legosock ^(talk) 00:47, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked your too long user name

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia, because of concerns that the chosen username may not meet our username policy.

This is often not a reflection on the user, and you are encouraged to choose a new account name which does meet our guidelines and are invited to contribute to Wikipedia under an appropriate username. If you feel this block was made in error, you may quickly and easily appeal it - see below.

Our username policy provides guidance on selecting your username. In brief, usernames should not be offensive, disruptive, promotional, related to a 'real-world' group or organization, confusing, or misleading.

If you have already made edits and wish to keep your existing contributions under a new name you may request a change in username which is quick and easy. To do so, please follow these directions:

1. Add {{unblock-un|your new username here}} below. This is possible because even when you are blocked, you can still edit your own talk page.
2. At an administrator's discretion, you may be unblocked for 24 hours to file a request.
3. Please note, you may only request a name that is not already in use. The account is created upon acceptance – do not try to create the new account before making the request for a name change since we can far easier allocate your new name to you, if it is not yet used. Usernames that have already been taken are listed here. For more information, please visit Wikipedia:Changing username.

Last, the automated software systems that prevent vandalism may have been activated, which can cause new account creation to be blocked also. If you have not acted in a deliberately inappropriate manner, please let us know if this happens, and we will deactivate the block as soon as possible. You may also appeal this username block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below or emailing the administrator who blocked you.

Sorry, cut it down. Bearian (talk) 01:24, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, I thought I did use the template, and considering how one person single-handedly booted me based on an interpretation of policy involving STUFF THE POLICY DOES NOT SAY, I can't see a lot of reason to take time to learn anything else about Wikipedia. Just because you think a long name is confusing doesn't mean that's true. Does policy say you're supposed to block first and ask questions later? Does policy say block people instead of suggesting that they're in violation of policy and giving them a chance to tow the line on their own? ManymerrymenmakingmuchmoneyinthemonthofMay (talk) 02:52, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I object to this user remaining blocked

This user's name has the same number of characters as User:Anticipation of a New Lover's Arrival, The. And, much as we abbreviate that username to "Tony" in conversation, we can come up with something to abbreviate this one to. --Random832 (contribs) 02:54, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

via con dios. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:57, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

For comparison

ManymerrymenmakingmuchmoneyinthemonthofMay
Anticipation of a New Lover's Arrival, The
Can't sleep, clown will eat me
Namewatcher bot limit:234567890123456789

--Random832 (contribs) 02:59, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I strongly object to this username an unnecessarily confusing, please request a change to someone more easily read. Those names have spaces and CAPS making them intelligible at a quick glance. MBisanz ^talk 03:03, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] That said

You really should probably change your name to something just a bit shorter. --Random832 (contribs) 03:03, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Abbreviated signature. 8M (talk) 03:04, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] How appropriate was that?

I still want to know how appropriate it was for someone to block me WITHOUT FIRST SAYING ONE WORD TO ME? Is that how Wikipedia does things? Really? 8M (talk) 03:06, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

By the exact wording of the policy, it probably was a little hasty to block you without discussion. While in a lot (most) cases of username violations, it is entirely appropriate to block without prior warning, I think that in your case some discussion was probably called for. Trusilver 03:10, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) It seems you were blocked because of Wikipedia:Username policy#Confusing usernames. Lengthy names fit under this category of username blocks. There usually isn't any discussion with the editor on the matter. He or she is just requested to either create a new account or request a name change at Wikipedia:Changing username. I suggest you consider changing your username to something shorter. It will awfully difficult for an editor to try to remember your entire username, say if they are trying to search for your edits at Special:Contributions. Also, thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia so far! :) Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 03:15, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

If blocks aren't usually discussed with people first, it's kind of hard to feel like sticking around here. This was a seriously unpleasant introduction. 8M (talk) 03:19, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. For what it's worth I thought the name was quite amusing. Orderinchaos 03:32, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Given that you had made a number of encyclopedic contributions, you probably should have been asked to request a username change or create a new account, instead of being blocked. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 03:36, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Apparently there's no "probably" to it. As someone mentioned on your talk page (which I repeat not for you but for anyone else), the policy says, "confusing usernames are unlike the disallowed usernames above because a confusing username cannot be so inappropriate on its own that it requires an immediate block without at least an attempt at substantive discussion." 8M (talk) 06:11, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I blocked your name, not your account, by using a "soft block." You were still able to edit your talk page, request help, and email others on the web site, including me. I did this because it was inappropriately long and confusing, and in violation of our rule that user names not be confusing. I am sorry that it appeared to be rude, but your actions had the probability of disrupting this site. Please accept my apologies for not contacting you first, and enjoy editing here at Wikipedia. Bearian (talk) 14:32, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Not simply rude. You violated policy while calling a kettle black. 8M (talk) 16:59, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Question

I am intending to try to have policy modified to stop this sort of thing happening. You should be treated more nicely. You should be asked to contribute to a discussion on the appropriateness of your username. Such a discussion should take place, unless your username fits clearly defined criteria for speedy blocking. The template slapped on your talk page should be mor personable. What do you think? This sort of thing happens a lot, but you are unusual in that you are protesting about it. I’m curous. What knowledge of, and interaction with Wikipedia, or other wikis, did you have before last week? --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:54, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I've done some bits of anonymous editing here and there, fixing a few things that grated me while reading articles, but people I know in real life who edit Wikipedia all the time encouraged me to get a user name if I wanted to do anything more than that. 8M (talk) 16:46, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I have proposed a bright line test at a maximum number of charcters at 42. There was formerly a consensus that more than 40 was too long, but now it is left up to the discretion of administrators. Bearian (talk) 15:34, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

42 is the ultimate answer, of course. 8M (talk) 16:50, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

But by the addition of yet more characters, I think the username is less problematic. ie. Many Merry Men Making Much Money in the Month of May. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:56, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually I tend to agree, but right now people are discussing a 42-character limit, so I'm kind of limited without outright bowing to people's arbitrary snippiness just because they don't like the name (even though some people do!). I might capitalize all the Ms. MMMMMMMM (talk) 01:01, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Nice

Seeing your MMMMMMMM sig made me click on your userpage, and I have to say your name is AWESOME. Mine is just so boring, I apparently wasn't thinking creatively when I created my account. Anyways, I'm sorry that there was so much controversy surrounding your account creation. Here's a cookie, maybe it will help some. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 00:13, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

J.delanoy^gabs_adds has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thank you very much! In light of these well wishes, the signature goes from 8M back to eight Ms. MMMMMMMM (talk) 01:01, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

For the record, I like your name better when it is all run together like that, rather than adding spaces, because it makes me want to say it really fast in my mind when I'm reading it, and then I realize what it actually is. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 12:51, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the cookie!

And it was my pleasure. Continued good Wiki'ing! --Tenebrae (talk) 13:13, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "A U.S."

The reason I reverted it (once by the way) was because I was unaware that you do not use "an" before acronyms. But you use "an" before vowel sounds, thats why its "an hour" not "a hour." Rau's Speak Page 20:09, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

But any acronym starting with a "u" has a vowel sound at the beginning. I'm confused. Rau's Speak Page 01:47, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Haha, yes English is my native language, but I am also still in high school. I just always figured the letter started with a vowel sound. Rau's Speak Page 18:18, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] raw 42

Wouldn't it be hard for the software to limit a signature to 42 characters when people use fonts, italics, colors, and whatnot to jazz up their sigs? Doesn't all the language for those goodies have to go in the same box under the user's preferences? Software could limit registration name, sure, but the signature? MMMMMMMM (talk) 01:32, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I believe there already is a limitation on the that. (Just not to 42.) - jc37 01:54, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Canvassing

• How is that not canvassing? MMMMMMMM (talk) 01:33, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

It's actually been discussed at WT:RFA. Though I think it's pretty much resolved now. - jc37 04:09, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

• • I think you'll want to take a look at this discussion and Lady Aleena's response. Thanks. Acalamari 16:03, 13 May 2008 (UTC)