Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names/Pothead12345

The following discussion is an archived debate of the username below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the discussion's talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Consensus to allow, no policy violation ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 15:52, 4 April 2007 (UTC)  [view]

[edit] Pothead12345 (talk · contribs)

Previously listed incorrectly. I have no opinion myself. G Donato (talk to me...) 14:57, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

• Note The instructions say to specify which part of the policy it is violating, I will contact Wikihermit. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 15:00, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
• Meh - No contributions. --Abu-Fool Danyal ibn Amir al-Makhiri 15:03, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
• The guy does pottery? He likes to play poker? He has a certain haircut? Measures electrical resistance? I think this is a good illustration of how this process has become way too bureaucratic. >Radiant< 15:04, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

• Comment User name is a drug reference. It also violates "performing or endorsing violent real-world actions." Under gangs it states: "Transnational organized crime groups may be involved in crimes ranging from drug trafficking, human trafficking." I think the user should change the name because it will probably create problems in the future. What if the user becomes an admin? How would most people feel talking to an admin named Pothead? The numbers "12345" are not random, but have no real significants. Wǐkǐɧérṃǐť(Talk) (Contributions) 15:10, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Well duh it might be. But it also might be any of the other things I mentioned. Besides, drug use is not a violent action (stuff makes ya mellooooow, y'know). If the user becomes an admin? Well, we have plenty of wonky admins already. >Radiant< 15:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
• Allow, no policy violation. RJASE1 ^Talk 15:14, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
• Allow - That is a serious serious serious stretch for real life violent action. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 15:16, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
• Allow - agreed with the others; no real policy violation here. Jayden54 15:17, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
• Allow. WP:U does not ban drug-addled names. Coemgenus 15:19, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
• Allow; no violation. Shouldn't have been brought here. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 15:23, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
• Strong allow no policy violation, drug is far from violent action, the nominator should be cautioned for abusing process (not this procedural nominator, but the actual one). Wooyi 15:41, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the entries talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.