Jump to content

Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations/Rejected/1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Anachronist ← Amatulic

[edit]

 Not done I'm sorry, but we are not permitted to usurp usernames that have made edits. It's not a case of "adopting" the edit; in order for you to take the username, it has to be renamed to something else. Our policy is that anyone who has made any edit must be credited for thier work under the username they used to make it, unless they consent to being renamed. We will not be able to perform this change. Essjay (Talk) 07:42, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. Hopefully the policy may someday be modified so that a stagnant account with only one edit several years ago may be usurped, if the account owner cannot be contacted. -Amatulic 18:41, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's more of a technical issue than a policy issue. This will hopefully be remedied soon with the implementation of single unified login. Titoxd(?!?) 02:30, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Diff ← -Slash-

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
– Luna Santin (talk) 05:24, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
information Note: A discussion has been initiated about this request and whether "Diff" is suitable or not. Any input should be given at the talk page link (linked just prior), to keep this uncluttered. Cheers, Daniel.Bryant 05:35, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done User has withdrawn request (see talk page). Essjay (Talk) 03:34, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

62 ← 62 (number)

[edit]
 Clerk note: 62 (number) has been blocked indefinitely by Doc glasgow (talk), due to "pagmove [vandalism]". Daniel.Bryant 22:09, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Essjay (Talk) 03:34, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Josh ← Jpgordon

[edit]

User:Josh has never had any activity. Notification here. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 17:29, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
Cheers. --Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 09:45, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Essjay (Talk) 06:17, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vannic ← Nareklm

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
Done Nareklm 11:00, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've updated the above notice to reflect that [1] Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 11:09, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done User has selected another name and has been renamed. Essjay (Talk) 20:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Ebola ← AndHab

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
– Luna Santin (talk) 00:45, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done - sorry. — Dan | talk 02:33, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ja ← Jaranda

[edit]

I want this username for privatcy issues, it has no edits Jaranda wat's sup 04:24, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
– Luna Santin (talk) 04:42, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

After thinking about it, I prefer the Jarandas username instead so this should be closed. Thanks anyways. Jaranda wat's sup 05:55, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done - Withdrawn. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 19:47, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Death ← Death666

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
– Luna Santin (talk) 19:57, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done — Dan | talk 19:12, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

jmtsantiago → Joseph_Torres_Santiago

[edit]
 Clerk note: That username isn't taken. Depending on which you'd prefer, you can register that account name right now, or repeat your request at Wikipedia:Changing username (this is the usurpations subpage, dealing with account names that already exist). I'd offer to move the request for you, but it's probably better if your account name shows up in page history, if you do opt to repeat it at Wikipedia:Changing username. – Luna Santin (talk) 19:09, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done — Dan | talk 19:21, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Leviathan ← LeviathanK

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
Note: Request submitted on user's second visible edit; see talk for discussion regarding requests submitted by new accounts. – Luna Santin (talk) 18:35, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done - established users only. — Dan | talk 23:44, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Goshzilla ← Goshzillawp

[edit]
  • You say that this isn't your main account on the English Wikipedia; usurpation of usernames is reserved only for users with substantial edit contributions, per the usurpation policy, and this account has very few edits, which may cause this request to be declined by a bureaucrat. If you link to your main account, it may help a bureaucrat decide this situation better. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 19:56, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, withdrawn. I don't want to link to my main at this time... Goshzillawp 21:06, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: manual archival of withdrawn request accidentally deleted from the request page [2]. WjBscribe 19:55, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brownbot ← Cbrown1023

[edit]
Please note that this is an unregistered but account (but I hope to turn it into a registered one) and has no edits. Cbrown1023 talk 01:09, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Clerk note: This exact situation hasn't come up, before: the account has no visible edits, no user talk history (deleted or otherwise), but it does have one log entry, a deleted image. Other than that, no visible contribs, no email set. – Luna Santin (talk) 19:26, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The user has one image upload [3] on January 10, 2006 which was speedy deleted for "no source, over 7 days old." — ERcheck (talk) 19:40, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The target username has Wikipedia user logs entries. Due to licensing concerns, this may be a barrier to usurpation. --Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 00:32, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The "no logs" requirement is due to a technical restriction that cannot be bypassed, unless a developer changes the MediaWiki database layout: the log table is not updated when renaming usernames. Ergo, there's no exceptions to the rule. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 04:32, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done per above. — Dan | talk 07:23, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- ) ← 24.251.234.86

[edit]
Please log in before asking for a username change. I don't think that username meets the requirements of WP:U anyways. Thanks Jaranda wat's sup 05:57, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Clerk note: - There is no user by that name[4] (though a number of similar usernames exist). I'm not even sure if the software will allow you to register such a username, but you can try if you like. Further note that a usurpation is not possible on an account that doesn't exist. --Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 07:10, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Clerk note: - You also cannot reassign edits from an IP address to an account, at least with the current software. That requires developer intervention. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 04:34, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done per above. — Dan | talk 07:30, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blast ← Blast san

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username has made edits to Wikipedia. Due to licensing concerns, this may be a barrier to usurpation.

Blast san (talk · contribs) has tried to illegitimately gain access to Blast (talk · contribs)'s account, according to the talk page. Abeg92contribs 14:57, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, that was another user (an IP—196.1.112.5). Blast 14,03,07 0513 (UTC)

Um, I don't quite know what's going on here (I've read the talk page as well), but this rule is not negotiable.  Not done — Dan | talk 06:01, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ooskapenaar ← EKhayaICT

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.

However, I noticed your only contribs so far have been related to the usurpation process. Abeg92contribs 14:34, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note:: Currently, usurpation is reserved only to accounts with significant edit histories. As Abeg indicates above, your two edits have been related to this process. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 04:45, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done per above =Nichalp «Talk»= 09:14, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am really sorry about wasting your time (Ooskapenaar is me) ... guess I'll go do some edits first.--EKhayaICT 19:24, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Saibot ← Saibot2

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
– Luna Santin (talk) 09:52, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note that usernames with "bot" in them are discouraged per our username policy. --Conti|✉ 15:18, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks for this information. I couldn't think of a better name, though... at least I'll place a note on my user page. Hopefully this won't cause confusion. - Saibot2 22:29, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Since the name implies that it could be a bot. =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:56, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Piggy ← Schweinehund

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.

 Not done — Dan | talk 00:18, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SHL ← Haakan

[edit]
  • Current username: Haakan (talk · contribs)
  • Target username: SHL (talk · contribs · logs)
  • Datestamp: 14:30, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
  • For bureaucrat use: Email user; 1; 2
    Haakan 14:30, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh, Now I for the first time see that user SHL actually HAS made edits. Have tried in all ways to find the edits, both obviously missed that. Truly sorry for that. Hope there is some way to contact SHL though? It would be really nice if I could take over that username (That is if it's OK with the current SHL of course), since it seems he/she isn't really actively using it, and since I'm having username SHL att Swedish wikipedia, meta.wikimedia.org, www.mediawiki.org et.c. // Sincerely, Haakan 14:40, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note:
  • The target username has made edits to Wikipedia. Due to licensing concerns, this may be a barrier to usurpation.
– WjBscribe 15:33, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done — Dan | talk 02:14, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pratik mullick → Prtk2109luv

[edit]
  • You should note that changing your username in this fashion will still allow everyone to see your real name, since the change will be publicly logged. If you just don't want to your name to be immediately visible, this sort of change is fine, but if you have an important reason to be anonymous, such as being at risk of off-wiki harassment for editing in controversial areas, then going this route is probably a bad idea. Just start a second account instead, and don't do anything to link the two. (I hope that my leaving this comment here is appropriate - something like this should probably be noted whenever someone gives this as a reason, and it might be a good idea to feature this issue more prominently in the instructions). --Philosophus T 08:54, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: If, in spite of Philosophus' advice above, you still want to make this request, this is the wrong board to have posted it on. This board is for requesting account names that already exist. Please request a namechange at WP:CHU. WjBscribe 05:10, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done — Dan | talk 02:14, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vaya ← Vayaka

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
--Conti|✉ 15:30, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Clerk note: The target account was only created on 14 February 2007. Might usurpation be a little premature in this instance? WjBscribe 16:50, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done - it seems only fair to leave an account this new alone. If it's still unused in six months or so, a usurpation request might be in order. — Dan | talk 21:30, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jonny ← J2thawiki

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.

 Not done Too premature at this point. Try after six months. =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:35, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GDK ← Gunter.krebs

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.

 Not done Sorry, the user has made an edit. =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:47, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Every Me Every You ← Smbarnzy

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
 Clerk note: The target username has made two strange edits to WP:CHU. See [5]. Will ask the account requesting usurpation to clarify the situation. WjBscribe 21:45, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to be an honest mistake on the part of the user in question - the subject is a fairly young user who created the account by mistake then decided they wanted to switch their identity to it - several admins in his main WikiProjects including myself were consulted and we sent him here. I will contact Smbarnzy to get him to confirm this directly. Orderinchaos78 03:27, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, sorry OIC is correct, i still want it - both accounts are "mine" and i want it to continue as is. LeBarn 05:46, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Given that the requested account now has edits, it will need to confirm that it is willing to be usurped. WjBscribe 05:51, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, im sorry ive actually forgotten the password for the EMEY account! and its not reisgistered to my email! is there anyway around this? everyone knows its meeeeeee :( LeBarn 05:57, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, its SMbarnzy here - ive decided to cancel this usurp i cant be bothered with it anymore. Thanks for all of your help Twenty Years 06:01, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:59, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Argyle ← Pepto_gecko

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username has made edits to Wikipedia. Due to licensing concerns, this may be a barrier to usurpation.
– WjBscribe 18:51, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done =Nichalp «Talk»= 07:00, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Basil ← Pepto gecko

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
– Dan has confirmed that usurpation is appropriate in this case (one edit only in Jan 2002 to a talkpage) [6]. WjBscribe 21:38, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done We need to have a set policy in place to usurp accounts that have single edits or have not edited in a long time. Without a formal discussion on the implications, I'm going to strongly oppose any usurpations for now where edits have been made. =Nichalp «Talk»= 07:10, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MEDIAGUY ← ERICLATINKID1025

[edit]
 Clerk note: The username MEDIAGUY is not taken, however Mediaguy is and has made edits. A request at WP:CHU is possible but a rename probably will not be performed given the similarity. Perhaps an alternative name? Also, user has only made 4 edits other than those to this page. WjBscribe 01:47, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Too similar to Mediaguy =Nichalp «Talk»= 19:12, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mastermind ← Mastermind Elite

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
 Clerk note: User:Mastermind Elite's only edits are in relation to this usurpation request. WjBscribe 14:33, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Usurpations are at this moment reserved for those having made substantial edits. =Nichalp «Talk»= 19:11, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jake ← Jacob Buerk

[edit]

Per [[7]] this user has not made any edits, and I would like to remove my last name from my username. Thanks!

Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.

 Not done per above. =Nichalp «Talk»= 19:09, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cyril ← Cyrillic

[edit]
Note
  • This account may meet the requirements for usurpation (see below)
  • The current owner of the username has been notified of this usurpation request.
  • The current owner of this username does not have an email address specified.
Although this account has made an edit, it was made on 30 July 2001 [8] and was unhelpful. The edit was reverted once spotted. Given these circumstances, the crat who reviews this request may be willing to make an exception in this case. WjBscribe 20:15, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Current policy does not allow usurping an account with an edit. =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:46, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kaja ← KaJanne

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
This user has made only two edits not related to this usurpation request. WjBscribe 22:01, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Currently usurpation request are reserved for those who have made substantial edits. =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:53, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Crayolarabbit ← Polymathematics

[edit]

Note: it's not really usurption, because I'm sure that the user is me, but I cannot remember what e-mail address I used.

Note:

 Not done Current policy does not permit us to rename if an edit has been made. =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:55, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Islam ← Waiting-for-username

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
Further Note: Usurpation is generally reserved for established users. Also, the target username may be used in an inflammatory way by this user (see edit summary here). --Nick—Contact/Contribs 06:14, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the request target username is potentially in violation of the username policy. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 20:09, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Sorry the name is inflammatory. =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:48, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick question, the potential for this user to use the name may be inflammatory, but are you really saying that the word Islam is inflammatory? -Mask 22:44, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, just that having a sensitive word such as "Islam" is inappropriate, and may come off as inflammatory in some cases. Same as a "Christ" or "Jew" username. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 03:50, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BBS ← Brandika

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
Requesting user has only a few edits, but they span over a year -- not a precedent for that, that I know of. Left notice for usurpee. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:20, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Too few edits. =Nichalp «Talk»= 09:01, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

gacl ← gaclbusiness

[edit]

Note: This is my own account. I forgot the password and there is no e-mail set.

Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
– WjBscribe 23:15, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think there's anything we can do in this case, but I may be wrong. Secretlondon 19:01, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done =Nichalp «Talk»= 09:12, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Laurencerowe ← Ldrowe

[edit]
Note:

 Clerk note: This account is a little over 5 months old. Maybe a b'crat will make an exception. Otherwise, just wait a month. --TeckWiz ParlateContribs@ 17:39, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

However it should be noted that the account requesting usurpation has no edits other than those in relation to this process. WjBscribe 17:42, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Though you're right, I think it may be an exception to the about 50 edits rule. It's not really a common name like User:Bob. --TeckWiz ParlateContribs@ 17:44, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done — Dan | talk 00:27, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A ← NYC JD

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.

 Clerk note:-User has a block for some strange reason (citing verifiabilty). I'm going to ask the blocking admin what that meant. However, I'm pretty sure usernames with blocks are hard to usurp. Can a b'crat confirm this? --TeckWiz ParlateContribs@ 17:00, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done — Dan | talk 00:27, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Chameleon ← Prateeksharma23

[edit]
 Clerk note: All requests must be made while logged in to the account that will be renamed; this request was made by 122.162.82.108 (talk · contribs). Please log in to the account that is to be renamed and confirm this request. You should also be aware that to ensure usurped names are used as much as possible, usurpation is usually reserved for accounts that are reasonably well established. The current username given in this request has only made 5 edits to Wikipedia. WjBscribe 09:46, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There was an active user called User:Chameleon who has many more than 5 edits. Secretlondon 18:19, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Requesting user hardly edited and possible confusion with User:Chameleon. Secretlondon 18:21, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rabi ← Rahbee

[edit]

I was hoping to use my first name as my user name, but it seems that it is taken by (as far as I can tell) an inactive user.

Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.

 Not done To get a usurption you need to be an established editor. You only have three edits. Secretlondon 08:26, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what counts as the requirements for usurption for the template - three edits clearly doesn't meet it in my eyes. What were you going on? Secretlondon 08:28, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, that refers to the target username -- indicates it has no contribs and no log entries. I've edited {{cuu}} to (I hope) clear up that point. Good of you to point out that ambiguity. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 18:41, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I made this request on the same day I signed up, because you need a username to make a request (right?)... I was waiting until I got an answer before making edits, I guess that didn't work out. Maybe someone can WP:UCS or WP:IAR, even? :/ Rahbee 00:11, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No we don't do usurptions unless you are an established editor. Secretlondon 07:29, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Darren ← B8amack

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.

 Clerk note:Requester has under 50 edits, and all of them are to here and his userpage only. --TeckWiz ParlateContribs@(Lets go Yankees!) 23:14, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done You've not edited the encyclopedia, just the userspace. Secretlondon 08:21, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Crackerjack ← CrackerjackWannabe

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
As you probably read, usurpation is frequently reserved for established editors, although I noticed you may have contributed under an IP address, before. Final decision is left for the bcrats. Either way, welcome to the project! – Luna Santin (talk) 22:32, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I say not an established editor, so no. Secretlondon 08:17, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have made several edits, but until last week, they were always without logging in. I was talking to HighInBC last week and he said I should make an account. And lo and behold, my name is taken, apparently by somebody who has zero contribs (which means I have infinitely more ;-). I'd really prefer to keep this name as it's something I use *everywhere*... the oldest reference I can find is on USENET about 10 years ago (http://groups.google.ca/group/alt.music.smash-pumpkins/browse_thread/thread/c4f548064b2a3fa1/49daa1c54c0be0d5), but I was using it on FIDOnet long before that as well. If I can't get a name I like, I can just keep submitting anonymously, but apparently it's a good idea to have an account and all... CrackerjackWannabe 21:32, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, which IP addresses are we talking about? If you've made many edits while not logged in, that is taken into consideration. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 07:52, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm on shaw, it would have mostly been 24.68 IP's I think... CrackerjackWannabe 19:09, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have known Mr. Crackerjack(currently CrackerjackWannabe) for many years, and I can say that he is sincere in wishing to contribute to the project in the long term. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 17:06, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I too have known him for ages in the ol' real world, I can certainly vouch for his ability to contribute productively to open source projects (he's one hell of a programmer). In terms of potential to edit, would be invaluable in regards to articles for Linux, Apache, Perl, C, and many other possible technical subjects, and no doubt a productive member overall. -- KirinX 05:30, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks guys... Wow... I have all this potential... but so far I've been wasting most of it on editing articles about children's television shows. ;-) CrackerjackWannabe 16:01, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's what you get for having a baby! Now go scrub the Spongebob article! ;) -- KirinX 16:04, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done I don't see the connection between being able to contribute and having a certain username. I don't like "If I can't get a name I like, I can just keep submitting anonymously, but apparently it's a good idea to have an account and all". If you can't have the name you want then you'll stop contributing? Well to be honest, we don't really care. If you build up a contribution record under a username then come back and we'll rename you. You don't have enough contributions to take a previously registered username. You can have any other.. Secretlondon 21:53, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
While I understand your reasons for not doing this rename at this point, I don't think Crackerjack ever meant to imply his participation was conditional. He even said "I can just keep submitting anonymously", which means he intends to contribute regardless of the outcome here. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 14:12, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
SL, that's not what I said at all. I said that if the contributions werent registered to me (as Crackerjack, not CrackerjackWannabe), I didn't really see the point of them being reg'ed at all... but I definately still see the point in the contributions. :-P BTW what's "enough" contributions?... and in your opinion, or in some document somewhere, or...? CrackerjackWannabe 16:05, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A couple of months or so. Secretlondon 18:23, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
CJ, let me explain, if you gather contributions under your current username, then you will be able to keep them when you eventually change over to User:Crackerjack, they will not be lost. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 18:26, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks SL... so I'm halfway there now... HighInBC - that much I knew... but I'm assuming all my signatures etc will not magically become "Crackerjack" ... gonna be fun to go back and fix all those :-P CrackerjackWannabe 20:14, 14 May 2007 (UTC) &lt-- see, like that one right there! ;-)[reply]
You don't need to. You can always redirect from the old username to the new. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 00:40, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Roger ← Roger Davies

[edit]

"Roger Davies" seems too formal for the Wiki atmos. I'd prefer something chattier and a bit more anonymous, and "Roger" fits the bill. I have "Roger" fr:wiki and it would good to have the same (bilingual) user name here too. The current "Roger" has only posted twice (on his own page) and hasn't logged on here for five years. Many thanks in advance. Roger 09:07, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note:
 Not done Username has edits. Secretlondon 14:45, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adam ← Eslonduf

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username has made edits to Wikipedia. Due to licensing concerns, this may be a barrier to usurpation.
– WjBscribe 03:11, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Username has edits. Secretlondon 14:46, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pastorius ← パストリアス

[edit]
 Clerk note: Usurpation is reserved for established contributors. Your only edits have been to this page and your user page. WjBscribe 22:09, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
However you are going to have to be renamed to something as you cannot have a username that cannot be easily input on an English-language encyclopedia. Secretlondon 10:53, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'd note Pastorius is well established contributor on cs: with (first edit in 2003 and 6000+ contribs in main namespace) and probably wants his a login unified across Wimiedia projects / want's to start contributing on en: under the well known login. (As I was told, the パストリアス is a bit obscure transcription of Pastorius to Japanase).
So I hope that will be taken into account when evaluating the request. --Wikimol 11:57, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Pastorius made two edits on the 19th April 2007 linking his userpage to the cs.wiki account. This seems to suggest that Pastorius already operates this account?... WjBscribe 02:39, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Chosen username has edited within the week. Secretlondon 20:24, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AADDCC ← Eslonduf

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username has made edits to Wikipedia. Due to licensing concerns, this may be a barrier to usurpation. I suggest you come up with a username that isn't taken. Usurpations are usually only performed for established contributors. At present, your only edit to an article was blatant vandalism [11]. WjBscribe 22:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Uhmm, no, that was a while ago, and that's why I want to change my username because I don't want to be known for that vandal. I've made other edits on different pages, such as the Real World/Road Rules Challenge: The Inferno III. ~אדם 05:04, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Are you aware that if you are renamed you will keep your present contrib history under your new name? Also the history of that article will be changed and the edit attributed to your new name... If you want to distance yourself from that edit you will need to create a new account. WjBscribe 05:10, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Are you telling me that I should make a new account to avoid others knowing who I really am? The account AADDCC is banned, so I don't get why it's a problem to let me have it. ~אדם 05:05, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
1. We can't rename you to an account that has edits (AADDCC has edits). 2. Some usernames that have no edits can be usurped. You can only usurp a username if you are an established contributor. 3. Changing your username will reallocate all your old edits to the new username - including the vandalism. If you want to lose the vandalism you'll have to start afresh with a new account. Secretlondon 10:29, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Secretlondon 21:54, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Soum ← Soumyasch

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
Please note that Soumyasch is an admin. It would be helpful if someone updated Wikipedia:List of administrators and User:NoSeptember/admin username changes following the completion of this request. WjBscribe 13:51, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done, withdrawn, per above. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 06:38, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Verily ← Cuivienen

[edit]
  • Current username: Cuivienen (talk · contribs)
  • Target username: Verily (talk · contribs · logs)
  • Datestamp: 14:10, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
  • For bureaucrat use: Email user; 1; 2
    I've been confused fairly frequently with someone else using the same obscure nickname on the internet. It would be nice to have a change. Note that I am an admin, so the various appropriate lists would need to be updated. (I can do this myself if needed.) —Cuiviénen 14:10, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note:
  • The target username has made edits to Wikipedia. Due to licensing concerns, this may be a barrier to usurpation.
– WjBscribe 14:12, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The user has edited following receipt of email to object to the usurpation [12]. This account can no longer be usurped, I have updated the template to reflect this and will notify Cuivienen. WjBscribe 23:49, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Secretlondon 21:55, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony ← AGK

[edit]

anthony[review] 18:59, 21 April 2007 (UTC) ~ AGK 15:57, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
  • ☒N Withdraw ~ Anthony 21:28, 24 April 2007 (UTC
 Clerk note: I have fixed the template given change of current username. WjBscribe 16:02, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You were renamed from User:Anthony cfc about 24 hours ago? Your reason given was "Reason: Widely known as this across other Wikis - generalisation/standardisation". link. You requested on 21:31, 24 April 2007 and I renamed you at 00:58, 25 April 2007. Secretlondon 08:39, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Uncommented Secretlondon 17:59, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Secretlondon 21:56, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

X ← Xiner

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
This account has an entry in their block log that suggests they have made deleted edits:
  • 02:21, August 3, 2006 Xaosflux blocked "X (contribs)" with an expiry time of indefinite (declared as a shared account)
Accounts with edits cannot be usurped. I believe this applies equally to deleted edits. WjBscribe 02:55, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm... I wonder how I missed that the first time I went through with it. It doesn't matter, though - there is a block log, so...

The target username has Wikipedia user logs entries. Due to licensing concerns, this may be a barrier to usurpation. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 22:51, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Secretlondon 21:56, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ghaag ← Ghaag-user

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
 Clerk note: The account requesting this username has fewer than 50 edits. Usurpation is generally reserved for established users. WjBscribe 17:17, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
* As mentionned on my user page I initially created the Ghaag account
* As a result Ghaag do not have a user page on which I could leave a message. I would find it quite ironic to have to create my page with another account in order to get my initial account back
* I also have an account on the french wikipedia using Ghaag.
* My current signature IS Ghaag
* My account name is extremely close as well "Ghaag-user" instead of "Ghaag"
* I have been posting anonymously for a while from 194.159.99.60 (you will notice similarity of contrib) since I couldn't access my Ghaag account.
Ghaag 08:21, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
So you've forgotten your password for your first account? The reason we leave a message on the talk page is to notify them. You may claim to be them but we can't prove that. We don't know what "Ghaag" refers to - it could be a really cmoon name somewhere. Changing your signature doesn't have anything to do with your username. Secretlondon 08:29, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What more do you need ? What can I do to get my idendity back ? Please advise.
Let's imagine another user created the account and hasn't used it over a year. As it happened he hasn't even logged in at all within that year.
Maybe another active and contributing user with a decent claim should be allowed to use that identity.
I did google Ghaag to check if Ghaag was common name somewhere and I am glad to find only limited records regarding my activity on one other rather famous web site. No proof you may argue but another indication at least.
And NO I do not want my page created by another account begging. Nor do I want my first message to be anything else than Welcome.
Ghaag 08:21, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Ghaag 08:21, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
As stated by Secretlondon, there's no way for the bureaucrats to verify that the account was in fact created by you. Just to be safe, a message must be left on the talk page of the requested user. Once the usurpation is complete you are welcome to blank the talk page to remove the usurpation request notification off the visible page and keep it only in the page history. Without the notification, a bureaucrat will not be able to fulfill this request. --Nick—Contact/Contribs 18:16, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Secretlondon 21:57, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whittles ← WhittlesLHS

[edit]
  • Note: I have created this account for the user, in response to comments left on the Unblock list. User is a system administrator at a high school in my area. I told him I'd get this usurpation set up for him. He believes that the original name was created by himself but got caught up in an autoblock. For further information, contact me on my talk page. ⇒ SWATJester Denny Crane. 02:38, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Clarification: I created the LHS account for him. ⇒ SWATJester Denny Crane. 02:38, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
       Clerk note: This request faces two obstacles: (1) the account requesting usurpation has only two edits- usurpations are usually reserved for established contributors, and (2) the target account was only created in February and accounts less than 6 months old are not usurpable. WjBscribe 03:03, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Note: I've verified the user's identity. I just created the account for him today (point 1), because he was caught in an autoblock. I understand it faces obstacles, but I've verified the guy's identity: he really is Scott Whittle, sysadmin for Lincoln High School (which, btw, is right down the street from me.), and I'm pretty well sure that he created the other account, and for whatever reason, cannot access it. Of course, it is up to the crat's discretion, but I'd view this as a case for fudging the rules a bit. ⇒ SWATJester Denny Crane. 03:30, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Whittles account has no block history. Secretlondon 08:42, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Secretlondon 21:57, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trivia ← Glampers

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
 Clerk note: This account has only one edit not connect to this rename request. Usurpation is usually reserved for established Wikipedia editors. WjBscribe 03:44, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Usurption is reserved for established editors. Secretlondon 22:20, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HD ← Z.E.R.O.

[edit]

↔ tz (talk · contribs) 04:33:02, Saturday, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
– WjBscribe 04:37, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Er, you requested a rename last month, and you were renamed the month before that. What is going on? Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 05:47, 28 April 2007 (UTC) [reply]
I requested my username for removing any punctuation and wanted to simplify to only a few characters long. [13] ↔ tz (talk · contribs) 05:40:43, Saturday, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
This all seems very trivial, sorry. If we do allow you to usurp it how do we know you won't want to be renamed to something else next month? Secretlondon 00:10, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Reason: I wanted my username to shorten to only 2 letters and removal of the punctuation of my username. Sometimes when I try to type in my username, I often make a mistake and sometimes end up like this: Z>E>R>O>. This is why I am requesting this usurpation. — tz (Talk) (Contribs) Sun 16:44:16 2007-05-06Withdrawn due to low responsive times. Readding new request at bottom. — tz (Talk) (Contribs) Tue 23:43:52 2007-05-08
 Not done Secretlondon 21:58, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Esperanza ← Esperanza Ortega

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
"Esperanza" is a name still strongly linked by the community to Wikipedia:Esperanza, a recently disbanded project that aimed to build a sense of community. I'm not sure how desirable a rename this would be in practice. Also, I note that your account was only created a couple of days ago and has fewer than 50 contribs. Usurpation is generally reserved for established users. WjBscribe 16:04, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I chose to use my real name; I don't see why that is a problem. I couldn't make a user account for "Esperanza", and it was foolish of me to add my last name. So if you want to disregard this, then by all means go ahead. Esperanza Ortega 16:12, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ultimately the matter is one of discretion for our Bureaucrats (who have the ability to actually perform renames). However in practice where the rename requires the taking over of another account, it has been required that users be reasonably established. Should this request be denied, you may wish to consider another username that isn't taken (which could contain the word "Esparanza" if you wish). If a name appears in special:listusers it is taken, if not you can request a simple renaming at WP:CHU. WjBscribe 16:17, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm....I would normally say that this shouldn't be done considering WP:EA Esperanza was what WJB noted, but it's the users real name. As long as they have a notice about how they're not affiliated at all with Esperanza, I would allow it (though this is my opinion and it's the b'crat who makes the descision). --TeckWiz is now R ParlateContribs@ (Let's go Yankees!) 16:54, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I say that you don't have enough edits to get a usurption but I will happily rename you to a name that isn't taken - whether it includes the name Esperanza or not. Secretlondon 18:01, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done done as a different non-usurption rename. Secretlondon 21:25, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Loveless ← Loveless2

[edit]

about the first requirment, I own an interwiki bot called User:Loveless on near twenty wikis right now (flaged on ab, an, ar, as, ay, be, be-x-old, bi, bug, da, dz, fi, fr, gn, haw, id, ig, ik, jbo, ki, kl, kv, ku, he, my, mzn, nv, pa, pih, pl, rmy, rw, scn, st, ve, xh, zu wikipedias). Since the account here exists but has no contrib, I'd like to usurp it to harmonise the name with the other wiki's account, then I'll officially ask for a bot flag here.

Darkoneko 23:32, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
You'll need to sign this request with user:Loveless2 as well so we can confirm you own that account. WjBscribe 23:38, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
confirmation edit with the bot account (see also). Loveless2 23:39, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Clerk note: Although Loveless2 (talk · contribs) has made only two edits, Darkoneko (talk · contribs) is an established user here and an admin on the French Wikipedia. WjBscribe 23:42, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
We like bots to be called -bot. See WP:BOT. Secretlondon 08:20, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, according to the page, this is recommended but not mandatory. I'm trying to keep the same account name on every wiki, and since I managed to do so on 50 wiki as of yet, I'll try to keep it here as well. Thank you for your understanding.
Darkoneko 08:47, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well I'm not going to rename a bot to anything other than -bot, but there are other bureaucrats. Secretlondon 21:59, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Me neither. =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:01, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Micke ← Micke-sv

[edit]

Reason: This is my username at svwiki (where I am a sysop) and commons, and I would like to use it here as well.

Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
– WjBscribe 17:12, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do I have to do anything else, or will this request be processed "automatically"? --MiCkEdb 08:36, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing else you need to do, its just a question of waiting a little while for a bureaucrat to complete the request. WjBscribe 13:38, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks! I'll await my turn then. --MiCkEdb 17:30, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Micke has returned to life. Secretlondon 06:05, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
On the 17th actually. Maybe 7 days isn't enough.. Secretlondon 06:06, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HD ← Z.E.R.O.

[edit]
Reason: I wanted my username to shorten to only 2 letters and removal of the punctuation of my username. Sometimes when I try to type in my username, I often make a mistake and sometimes end up like this: Z>E>R>O>. This is why I am requesting this usurpation. — tz (Talk) (Contribs) Tue 23:37:15 2007-05-08
Note: You have forgotten to fill in a request for my usupation and you have forgotten to usurp me so I am adding another usurpation. — tz (Talk) (Contribs) Tue 23:37:15 2007-05-08
It is possible that it is not that your request was forgotten, but rather that the bureaucrats who have looked it over do not agree with usurpation per the issues raised below that request. It has not been marked as Not Done, but perhaps this is because it's been left for any other willing bureaucrat to look over. --Nick—Contact/Contribs 03:36, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. The points that you are a renaming junkie still stand. Secretlondon 11:51, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Leaving for someone else to deal with. This user is annoying me. Secretlondon 06:19, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done I'm denying the request. No point loading the servers for a single user's fluctuating whims. =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:03, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P ← Flyguy649

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.

 Not done -- withdrawn by nominee. =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:03, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eleos ← EleosPrime

[edit]

Note: There was no talk page for user:Eleos, so I did not leave a note. The two edits for user:Eleos are test edits with nothing further. EleosPrime 19:16, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Create the page and leave a note. --TeckWiz is now R
I have done so. EleosPrime 22:29, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ParlateContribs@ (Let's go Yankees!) 21:01, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note
  • This account may meet the requirements for usurpation (see below)
  • The current owner of the username has been notified of this usurpation request.
  • The current owner of this username does not have an email address specified.
Although this account has made 2 edits, they were made to a sandbox, in the circumstances usurpation may be within Bureaucrat discretion. WjBscribe 21:14, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But it was just testing in WP space. Maybe an exception? --TeckWiz is now R ParlateContribs@ (Let's go Yankees!) 21:39, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, R, which is why I requested it. I understand that the rule is not to usurp a user who has any edits whatsoever, but it seems that the spirit of the rule is to protect users who are actually contributing, rather than protecting someone who made an account, tried two test edits, and then never came back. R, thank you for your support. :) EleosPrime 22:34, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was under the impression it was due to the requirement of proper detailed attribution in the GFDL license, any edit would be a creative work(though in this case, that would be a stretch). HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 13:59, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, just curious, since it's now the 18th, was a decision made one way or the other? EleosPrime 04:09, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, when accounts are renamed, their edits stay with them. Usurpation is just a double rename. Visible edits are actually the least problematic issue (logged actions and deleted edits are), so the only restrictions are policy-based. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 04:13, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done I think policy says no edits whatsoever so I'm not going to do it. (but someone else may do so) Secretlondon 06:22, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you all for your time and input. EleosPrime 10:47, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pippin of Pie ← Pippin of Pie 2

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username has made edits to Wikipedia. Due to licensing concerns, this may be a barrier to usurpation.
– WjBscribe 21:16, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If a user has made any edits, no matter how minor, and no matter how long ago, that username cannot be usurped. Best wishes.--Danaman5 22:01, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done user was renamed to something else. Secretlondon 22:00, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cameron ← Cameron3

[edit]

Reason: Hello everyone, this is Cameron. I decided to create a Wikipedia account after Ali suggested I should do so. I promise you all that I will contribute positively to this encyclopedia. I would appreciate it if I could use the username "Cameron" rather than "Cameron3" - as Cameron has no edits at this point, and I would prefer a username without a number. --Cameron3 23:32, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
  • This username has not been checked by an administrator for deleted contributions.
  • The current owner of the target username does not have an email address specified.
  •  Clerk note: Usurpation is normally reserved for established contributers though it will be up to the closing crat to decide.
Greeves (talk • contribs • reviews) 23:53, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done requesting usurption was your first edit! Come back in a couple of months. Secretlondon 11:21, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

T ← Wikihermit

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
This user was previously renamed by Nichalp from User:1312020Wikicop to User:Wikihermit on 18 March 2007 [14]. WjBscribe 23:56, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Check the email again. I just confirmed and enabled it. WǐkǐɧérṃǐťTalk to me or learn something new! 23:59, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It means the target username doesn't have an email set :-). I'll clarify the template... WjBscribe 00:02, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you want to be renamed again? Secretlondon 00:31, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think you've seen the first reason I changed my name to Wikihermit. The main reason for my name change to "T" is for simplicity. WǐkǐɧérṃǐťTalk to me 00:33, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You've only been here 3 months (first edit Feb 07) and this would be your second rename. I don't think I'm going to count you as an established editor - especially for one of the much sought after single letter user names.. Secretlondon 21:48, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If I changed my targeted user name, would that help? --WikihermitTalk to me 22:55, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Secretlondon 05:55, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done =Nichalp «Talk»= 13:46, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll just wait until I am able to change my user name to T. You may remove this request for usurp. Thanks! Wikihermit 23:20, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chaemera ← Albo_NL

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username has made edits to Wikipedia. Due to licensing concerns, this may be a barrier to usurpation.
– WjBscribe 11:21, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done =Nichalp «Talk»= 13:50, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


BridgeBuilder ← Reachouttrust

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username has made edits to Wikipedia. Due to licensing concerns, this may be a barrier to usurpation.
Ryan Postlethwaite 11:43, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Clerk note:This user has made less than 5 edits to wikipedia, usurpation is normally reserved for established users. Reachouttrust didn't get banned, he got blocked by me for having a username that was promotional for Reachout Trust, but then Doc unblocked for some reason - discussion on this username is at WT:U, it's been on WP:AN/I so it's hard to judge whether or not the user should be forced to change their name. Obviously it's at the discretion of the 'crats as to whether or not to force a name change, but the reason why I originally blocked at first was because it was against WP:U#PROMOTIONAL. Ryan Postlethwaite 11:35, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's a Conflict of Interest issue. Secretlondon 09:44, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Clerk note: I have emailed the target account to inform them of this request. WjBscribe 16:30, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Clerk note: The target account has responded to say that they not wish their account to be usurped [15]. WjBscribe 14:53, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Michael ← Beneaththelandslide

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username has made edits to Wikipedia. Due to licensing concerns, this may be a barrier to usurpation.
  • The target username has Wikipedia user logs entries. Due to licensing concerns, this may be a barrier to usurpation.
  • Sorry, however the policy is all but set in stone as to no contributions and/or log entries, however a bureaucrat will review this nonetheless. --Nick—Contact/Contribs 04:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done It's about attribution and the fact that block logs etc don't move with renames. We can't do it. Secretlondon 09:47, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any 'higher level' I could appeal to? I understand completely if there's a valid technical reason behind it, but otherwise...? Thanks for the help so far. michael talk 10:22, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've raised this on the Bureaucrats' noticeboard. Secretlondon 11:13, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers. michael talk 11:22, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A bizarre suggestion, but a suggestion nonetheless—why not, since it's a blocked account, move 'Michael' to 'MikeGarcia2', leaving a message that it's name was originally Michael, and then Michael is then available? Or is that too 'out there'? michael talk 11:32, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think your right of appeal is to the Arbitration Committee. Secretlondon 11:38, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hugh ← Hughs

[edit]
Note:
 Not done username has 4 edits, 2 in article space. Secretlondon 09:48, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

S ← Eagle 101

[edit]
I don't understand what you mean my single user login. --R ParlateContribs@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 11:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.

 Clerk note:-Eagle 101 is an admin, it would be helpful if someone updated Wikipedia:List of administrators and User:NoSeptember/admin username changes following the completion of this request. Also, though the block log has about 4 blocks, they all seem to be by mistake. (and one is a block from a compromised account). --R ParlateContribs@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 11:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

m:SUL is what I mean by single user login :) —— Eagle101Need help? 11:31, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You may also want to look at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/H:UL as well. —— Eagle101Need help? 11:34, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You'd better check with a Dev about SUL to be sure but I'm not sure what problem you're worried about. As I understand it the user with the most edits as a username would get the username. So you would be User:S on single login unless there is a User:S somewhere else that has more edits than you. WjBscribe 12:23, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think I'm going to stick with my original name. People recognize me by this name, and by some tests I've conducted off wiki, I would rather not have to tell everyone what my new name is, plus if I did a re-name here, I would also have to do it on meta and about 60 other wikis. Not really within the realm of possibility. :(

CM ← CMummert

[edit]

Now that I'm an admin I would rather if my username was a little less directly connected to my real name. Using my initials seems like a good compromise. I understand that the rename is logged, and have no plans to change old signatures or anything like that - I just think the new name would be less conspicuous. Notes:

  1. Since I'm an admin, the usual changes to the lists of admins would have to be made. Wikipedia:List of administrators and User:NoSeptember/admin username changes
  2. The contributions page lists no edits, the block log is empty, but the log has a few uploads of deleted images. I don't mind if they end up in my logs. I don't think there is a copyright issue since the images are redlinks.

C Mummert · talk 23:47, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • This account may meet the requirements for usurpation (see below)
  • The current owner of the username has been notified of this usurpation request.
  • The current owner of this username does not have an email address specified.
As CMummert said, there are a few image uploads in the logs, but they were all deleted. It's up to the crats. --R ParlateContribs@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 00:01, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Clerk note: It should also be noted that there are a number of edits made by this account that have since been deleted [16]. Neither the logged actions nor these deleted edits will be reattributed should the rename take place (the servers will continue to regard them as by "CM"). The approach in the past has been not rename accounts with deleted edits. WjBscribe 00:15, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Too bad I can't see that :) --R ParlateContribs@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 00:19, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done. I was unaware of the restriction on deleted edits. I retract the request; I'll request a regular rename to a different account instead. I'll also add the prohibition on deleted edits to the list above, since I think this page is the only place that the usurpation requirements are written down. CMummert · talk 00:41, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Plasticup ← Stephen Kenny

[edit]
Note:
It should be noted that the account User:Plasticup was only created on March 29, 2007. As such it may be seen as too soon for this account to be usurped. WjBscribe 21:31, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. I believe we had a discussion on this, which is why we put it into the template. Since we put it in, I've changed it to new=yes. --R ParlateContribs@ (Red Sux!) 21:48, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done =Nichalp «Talk»= 12:50, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rocky ← Rock2e

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
I withdraw my request.--User:Rock2e Talk - Contribs 21:51, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

voltaire ← [email protected]

[edit]

It was clearly a mistake to use my email address as my username, because I get a daily flooding of spam from using it. Also, because I have been using the handle "Voltaire", I feel particularity attached to the name. Even through the user has an edit count of 3, all 3 cases have been minor contributions to userpages in February of 2005. Thanks for your time!!! [email protected] 02:18, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note:
  • The target username has made edits to Wikipedia. Due to licensing concerns, this may be a barrier to usurpation. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 02:36, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Clerk note: (edit conflict) Like he said, the only edits were to userspace, so I don't think that the GNU Wikipedia license would have any affect. Though this is against the rules, the closing b'crat might take take this into account. Also, please use the designated message to send to the target account, not a custom one. A b'crat might want to resend the message if there is a chance of the usurpation. Greeves (talk • contribs • reviews) 02:42, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You also have to consider the account that requests usurpation isn't very old either. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 02:50, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done User name has edits. Secretlondon 05:26, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jeremyb ← LinuxMigration

[edit]
btw, Jeremy and Jeremyb (with capitalization variations) have become my primary nicks on several IRC networks/other wikis/etc. LinuxMigration 09:22, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
 Clerk note: - at present the user requesting usurpation has only made 8 edits, usurpation is normally reserved for established users. Ryan Postlethwaite 10:38, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Come back with more edits under your belt, or request an unused name. Secretlondon 22:03, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Siegfried ← Celtic Emperor

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username has made edits to Wikipedia. Due to licensing concerns, this may be a barrier to usurpation.
– WjBscribe 10:48, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Celtic Emperor has been renamed to something else. Secretlondon 22:21, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shade ← Shade (usurper), Nihiltres

[edit]
If you want to usurp the Shade username, you will first have to create the account User:Shade (usurper). You must have an account already to usurp the username with. I'm not entirely sure a bureaucrat will usurp an account for a Doppelganger account, but you can always try. Wikihermit (Talk • HermesBot) 22:57, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Understood, I created the account and I'm not counting on anything. If a bureaucrat doesn't think it's reasonable, I don't have a problem with a refusal - I want this username mainly because it is another of my primary pseudonyms, and I don't think the user in question plans to edit. Nihiltres(t.c.s) 15:30, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Doppelganger accounts are no longer used as the MediaWiki software that Wikipedia is using has been programmed to not accept new accounts that are too similar to another current username. Therefore, this request should be declined or withdrawn. E talk 22:32, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't a doppelganger request, this is a request for a particular name for a legitimate sockpuppet. Nihiltres(t.c.s) 01:35, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
I'm unsure whether the bureaucrats will be willing to fulfil this request. On the one hand it meets the requirements, but on the other Shade is likely to be quite a popular name. Allocating it to someone who will make little use of it seems a waste. It might be helpful if you gave further details of what you plan to use this account for. WjBscribe 14:37, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As it looks like you won't use it for anything I'm not prepared to usurp it. Secretlondon 23:03, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The problem for which I was going to apply this was resolved, and my primary alternate use doesn't apply yet. If that alternate use applies in the future, I'll reapply appropriately. Sorry for any trouble. Nihiltres(t.c.s) 13:08, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done -- withdrawn by requester -- Cecropia 02:37, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Venator ← Venatoreng

[edit]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.

 Clerk note: Usurpation is generally reserved for established editors. The account requesting this usurpation was created just 4 days ago and has about 10 edits, just under half of which are related to the Changing Username process. --Nick—Contact/Contribs 00:44, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done -- fails to meet policy -- Cecropia 02:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SpindashStudios ← LegendsDX7

[edit]
This request probably won't be completed because your requested names sounds like spam. --(Review Me) R ParlateContribs@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 20:03, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note:
  • The target username meets the requirements for usurpation.
 Not done breaks username policy on commercial names. Secretlondon 15:00, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Changing_username/Usurpations/Rejected/1&oldid=1253715578"