ਵਿਕੀਪੀਡੀਆ:Username policy

"WP:U" ਅਤੇ "WP:UN" ਇੱਥੇ ਰੀਡਾਇਰੈਕਟ ਹੁੰਦਾ ਹੈ। the guidelines on user pages ਲਈ, ਦੇਖੋ WP:UP। the United Nations WikiProject ਲਈ, ਦੇਖੋ WP:WPUN। the File Upload Wizard ਲਈ, ਦੇਖੋ WP:FUW। Userboxes ਲਈ, ਦੇਖੋ WP:Userboxes।

Wikipedia policies and guidelines are developed by the community to describe best practices, clarify principles, resolve conflicts, and otherwise further our goal of creating a free, reliable encyclopedia. There is no need to read any policy or guideline pages to start editing. The five pillars is a popular summary of the most pertinent principles.

Although Wikipedia does not employ hard-and-fast rules, Wikipedia policy and guideline pages describe its principles and best-agreed practices. Policies explain and describe standards that all users should normally follow, while guidelines are meant to outline best practices for following those standards in specific contexts. Policies and guidelines should always be applied using reason and common sense.

This policy page specifies the community standards related to the organization, life cycle, maintenance of, and adherence to policies, guidelines, and related pages.

Derivation

Wikipedia is operated by the not-for-profit Wikimedia Foundation, which reserves certain legal rights (see here for a list of its policies). See also Role of Jimmy Wales. Nevertheless, normally Wikipedia is a self-governing project run by its community. Its policies and guidelines are intended to reflect the consensus of the community.

Role

Policies have wide acceptance among editors and describe standards that all users should normally follow. All policy pages are in Wikipedia:List of policies and guidelines and Category:Wikipedia policies. For summaries of key policies, see also List of policies.

Guidelines are sets of best practices that are supported by consensus. Editors should attempt to follow guidelines, though they are best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply. Guideline pages can be found in Wikipedia:List of policies and guidelines and Category:Wikipedia guidelines. For summaries of key guidelines, see also List of guidelines.

Essays are the opinion or advice of an editor or group of editors (such as a WikiProject) for which widespread consensus has not been established. They do not speak for the entire community and may be created and written without approval. Essays that the author does not want others to edit, or that are found to contradict widespread consensus, belong in the user namespace. See Wikipedia:Essays.

Other pages that can be found in the Wikipedia: namespace include community process pages (which facilitate application of the policies and guidelines), historical pages, WikiProject pages, or help pages (also found in the Help namespace), community discussion pages and noticeboards. These pages are not policies or guidelines, although they may contain valuable advice or information.

Adherence

Use common sense when interpreting and applying policies and guidelines; there will be occasional exceptions to these rules. Conversely, those who violate the spirit of a rule may be reprimanded even if no rule has technically been broken.

Whether a policy or guideline is an accurate description of best practice is determined by the community through consensus.

On discussion pages and in edit summaries, shortcuts are often used to refer to policies and guidelines. For example, WP:NOR, WP:NPOV, and WP:LIVE. Similar shortcuts are sometimes also used for other types of project page. A shortcut does not necessarily imply that the page linked to has policy or guideline status. Additionally, remember that the shortcut is not the policy; the plain-English definition of the page's title or shortcut may be importantly different from the linked page.

Enforcement

ਹੋਰ ਜਾਣਕਾਰੀ: Wikipedia:Enforcement policies, Wikipedia:Active sanctions, ਅਤੇ Wikipedia:Arbitration enforcement

Enforcement on Wikipedia is similar to other social interactions. If an editor violates the community standards described in policies and guidelines, other editors can persuade the person to adhere to acceptable norms of conduct, over time resorting to more forceful means, such as administrator and steward actions. In the case of gross violations of community norms, they are likely to resort to more forceful means fairly rapidly. Going against the principles set out on these pages, particularly policy pages, is unlikely to prove acceptable, although it may be possible to convince fellow editors that an exception ought to be made. This means that individual editors (including you) enforce and apply policies and guidelines.

In cases where it is clear that a user is acting against policy (or against a guideline in a way that conflicts with policy), especially if they are doing so intentionally and persistently, that user may be temporarily or indefinitely blocked from editing by an administrator. In cases where the general dispute resolution procedure has been ineffective, the Arbitration Committee has the power to deal with highly disruptive or sensitive situations.

­Content

Policy and guideline pages should:

• Be clear. Avoid esoteric or quasi-legal terms and dumbed-down language. Be plain, direct, unambiguous, and specific. Avoid platitudes and generalities. Do not be afraid to tell editors directly that they must or should do something.
• Be as concise as possible—but no more concise. Verbosity is not a reliable defense against misinterpretation. Omit needless words. Direct, concise writing may be more clear than rambling examples. Footnotes and links to other pages may be used for further clarification.
• Emphasize the spirit of the rule. Expect editors to use common sense. If the spirit of the rule is clear, say no more.
• Maintain scope and avoid redundancy. Clearly identify the purpose and scope early in the page, as many readers will just look at the beginning. Content should be within the scope of its policy. When the scope of one advice page overlaps with the scope of another, minimize redundancy. When one policy refers to another policy, it should do so briefly, clearly and explicitly.
• Avoid overlinking. Links to policies, guidelines, essays, and articles should be used only when clarification or context is needed. Links to other advice pages may inadvertently or intentionally defer authority to them. Make it clear when links defer, and when they do not.
• Not contradict each other. The community's view cannot simultaneously be "A" and "not A". When apparent discrepancies arise between pages, editors at all the affected pages should discuss how they can most accurately represent the community's current position, and correct all of the pages to reflect the community's view. This discussion should be on one talk page, with invitations to that page at the talk pages of the various affected pages; otherwise the corrections may still contradict each other.

Not part of the encyclopedia

Wikipedia has many policies and guidelines about encyclopedic content. These standards require verifiability, neutrality, respect for living people, and more.

The policies, guidelines, and process pages themselves are not part of the encyclopedia proper. Consequently, they do not generally need to conform with the content standards. It is therefore not necessary to provide reliable sources to verify Wikipedia's administrative pages, or to phrase Wikipedia procedures or principles in a neutral manner, or to cite an outside authority in determining Wikipedia's editorial practices. Instead, the content of these pages is controlled by community-wide consensus, and the style should emphasize clarity, directness, and usefulness to other editors.

These pages do, however, need to comply with Wikipedia's legal and behavioral policies, as well as policies applicable to non-content pages. For example, editors may not violate copyrights anywhere on Wikipedia, and edit warring is prohibited everywhere, not merely in encyclopedia articles.

Life cycle

Many of the most well-established policies and guidelines have developed from principles which have been accepted as fundamental since Wikipedia's inception. Others developed as solutions to common problems and disruptive editing. Policy and guideline pages are seldom established without precedent, and always require strong community support. Policies and guidelines may be established through new proposals, promotion of existing essays or guidelines, and reorganization of existing policies and guidelines through splitting and merging.

Essays and information pages may be established by writing them and adding {{essay}}, {{Information page}}, or similar templates to the page.

Current policy and guideline proposals can be found in Category:Wikipedia proposals, and failed proposals can be found in Category:Wikipedia failed proposals. All editors are welcome to comment on these proposals.

Proposals

ਇਹ ਵੀ ਦੇਖੋ: Wikipedia:How to contribute to Wikipedia guidance, WP:POLL § Policy and guidelines, ਅਤੇ WP:NOTBUREAUCRACY

Proposals for new guidelines and policies require discussion and a high level of consensus from the entire community for promotion to guideline or policy. Adding the {{policy}} template to a page without the required consensus does not mean that the page is policy, even if the page summarizes or copies policy. Most commonly, a new policy or guideline documents existing practices, rather than proposing a change to what experienced editors already choose to do.

Good practice for proposals

The first step is to write the best initial proposal that you can. Authors can request early-stage feedback at Wikipedia's village pump for idea incubation and from any relevant WikiProjects. Amendments to a proposal can be discussed on its talk page. It is crucial to improve a proposal in response to feedback received from outside editors. Consensus is built through a process of listening to and discussing the proposal with many other editors.

Once you think that the initial proposal is well-written, and the issues involved have been sufficiently discussed among early participants to create a proposal that has a solid chance of success with the broader community, start an RfC for your policy or guideline proposal in a new section on the talk page, and include the {{rfc|policy}} tag along with a brief, time-stamped explanation of the proposal. After that, you can provide, if you want, a detailed explanation of what the page does and why you think it should be a policy or guideline. The {{proposed}} template should be placed at the top of the proposed page; this tag will get the proposal properly categorized.

The RfC should typically be announced at the policy and/or proposals village pumps, and you should notify other potentially interested groups. If your proposal affects a specific content area, then related WikiProjects can be found at the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. For example, proposed style guidelines should be announced at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Manual of Style, which is the WikiProject most closely related to style issues. If your proposal relates to an existing policy or guideline, then leave a note on the talk page of the related policy or guideline. For example, proposed style guidelines should be announced at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style, which is the main guideline for style issues. Try to identify the subcategory of guideline or policy (see {{subcat guideline}}). Proposals involving contentious subjects or wide-ranging effects should normally be listed on Wikipedia:Centralized discussion for the duration of the RfC. Rarely, a particularly important proposal may be advertised via a watchlist notice; sitenotices (which are displayed to all readers, not just to active editors) are not used for proposals. RfCs for policy and guideline proposals are normally left open for at least one week, and sometimes as long as a couple of months.

To avoid later complaints about insufficient notice, it may be helpful to provide a complete list of the groups or pages that you used to advertise the proposal on the talk page.

Editors should respond to proposals in a way that helps identify and build consensus. Explain your thoughts, ask questions, and raise concerns; all views are welcome. Many editors begin their response with bold-font 'vote' of support or opposition to make evaluation easier. Editors should sign their responses.

Ending a discussion requires careful evaluation of the responses to determine the consensus. This does not require the intervention of an administrator, but may be done by any sufficiently experienced independent editor (an impartial editor not involved in the discussion) who is familiar with all of the policies and guidelines that relate to the proposal. The following points are important in evaluating consensus:

• Consensus for guidelines and policies should be reasonably strong, though unanimity is not required.
• There must be exposure to the community beyond just the authors of the proposal.
• Consider the strength of the proposed page:
  • Have major concerns raised during the community discussion been addressed?
  • Does the proposal contradict any existing guidelines or policies?
  • Can the new proposed guideline or policy be merged into an existing one?
  • Is the proposed guideline or policy, or some part of it, redundant with an existing guideline or policy?
• A proposal's status is not determined by counting votes. Polling is not a substitute for discussion, nor is a poll's numerical outcome tantamount to consensus.
• If consensus for broad community support has not developed after a reasonable time period, the proposal is considered failed. If consensus is neutral or unclear on the issue and unlikely to improve, the proposal has likewise failed.

Discussion may be closed as either Promote, No consensus, or Failed. Please leave a short note about the conclusion that you came to. Update the proposal to reflect the consensus. Remove the {{Proposed}} template and replace it with another appropriate template, such as {{Subcat guideline}}, {{Policy}}, {{Essay}}, {{Wikipedia how to}}, {{Information page}}, or {{Failed}}.

If a proposal fails, the failed tag should not usually be removed. It is typically more productive to rewrite a failed proposal from scratch to address problems than to re-nominate a proposal.

Demotion

An accepted policy or guideline may become obsolete because of changes in editorial practice or community standards, may become redundant because of improvements to other pages, or may represent unwarranted instruction creep. In such situations editors may propose that a policy be demoted to a guideline, or that a policy or guideline be demoted to a supplement, informational page, essay or historical page. In certain cases, a policy or guideline may be superseded, in which case the old page is marked and retained for historical interest.

The process for demotion is similar to promotion. A talk page discussion is typically started, the {{Under discussion|status|Discussion Title}} template is added to the top of the project page, and community input is solicited. After a reasonable amount of time for comments, an independent editor should close the discussion and evaluate the consensus.

The {{Disputed tag}} template is typically used instead of {{Under discussion}} for claims that a page was recently assigned guideline or policy status without proper or sufficient consensus being established.

Essays, information pages, and other informal pages that are only supported by a small minority of the community are typically moved to the primary author's userspace. These discussions typically happen on the page's talk page, sometimes with an RfC, but they have at times also been conducted at Miscellany for deletion (despite the MFD guidelines explicitly discouraging this practice). Other pages are retained for historical reference and are marked as such.

Content changes

Policies and guidelines can be edited like any other Wikipedia page. It is not strictly necessary to discuss changes or to obtain written documentation of a consensus in advance. However, because policies and guidelines are sensitive and complex, users should take care over any edits, to be sure they are faithfully reflecting the community's view and to be sure that they are not accidentally introducing new sources of error or confusion.

Because Wikipedia practice exists in the community through consensus, editing a policy/guideline/essay page does not in itself imply an immediate change to accepted practice. It is, naturally, bad practice to recommend a rejected practice on a policy or guideline page. To update best practices, you may change the practice directly (you are permitted to deviate from practice for the purposes of such change) and/or set about building widespread consensus for your change or implementation through discussion. When such a change is accepted, you can then edit the page to reflect the new situation.

Substantive changes

Talk first. Talk page discussion typically precedes substantive changes to policy. Changes may be made if there are no objections, or if discussion shows that there is consensus for the change. Minor edits to improve formatting, grammar, and clarity may be made at any time.

If the result of discussions is unclear, then it should be evaluated by an administrator or other independent editor, as in the proposal process. Major changes should also be publicized to the community in general; announcements similar to the proposal process may be appropriate.

If wider input on a proposed change is desired, it may be useful to mark the section with the tag {{Under discussion|section|talk=Discussion Title}}. (If the proposal relates to a single statement, use {{Under discussion-inline|Discussion Title}} immediately after it.)

Or be bold. The older but still valid method is to boldly edit the page. Bold editors of policy and guideline pages are strongly encouraged to follow WP:1RR or WP:0RR standards. Although most editors find advance discussion, especially at well-developed pages, very helpful, directly editing these pages is permitted by Wikipedia's policies. Consequently, you should not remove any change solely on the grounds that there was no formal discussion indicating consensus for the change before it was made. Instead, you should give a substantive reason for challenging it and, if one hasn't already been started, open a discussion to identify the community's current views.

Editing a policy to support your own argument in an active discussion may be seen as gaming the system, especially if you do not disclose your involvement in the argument when making the edits.

Conflicts between advice pages

If policy and/or guideline pages directly conflict, one or more pages need to be revised to resolve the conflict so that all of the conflicting pages accurately reflect the community's actual practices and best advice. As a temporary measure during that resolution process, if a guideline appears to conflict with a policy, editors may assume that the policy takes precedence.

More commonly, advice pages do not directly conflict, but provide multiple options. For example, WP:Identifying reliable sources says that newspaper articles are generally considered to be reliable sources, and Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) recommends against newspaper articles for certain technical purposes. Editors must use their best judgment to decide which advice is most appropriate and relevant to the specific situation at hand.

Naming

The page names of policies and guidelines usually do not include the words "policy" or "guideline", unless required to distinguish the page from another.

See also

• Wikipedia:List of policies and guidelines
• Help:Contents/Directory § Community standards and advice, a descriptive directory of community norms and advice for editors
• Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikipedia policies and guidelines, a listing of policy and guideline proposals advertised through Wikipedia:Requests for comment
• Wikipedia:Centralized discussion, a centralized list of ongoing policy discussions
• Wikipedia:The difference between policies, guidelines and essays, a discussion of policies, guidelines and essays
• Wikipedia:Perennial proposals, proposals that come up very often
• Wikipedia:Product, process, policy – the place of policies in Wikipedia
• Wikipedia:Template messages/Wikipedia namespace for the templates associated with each type of policy page.
• Help:Introduction to policies and guidelines, an introduction to the major policies and guidelines for very new users.
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide § Advice pages about advice pages written by WikiProjects
• Wikipedia:Principles, an index of essays about the community's principles and values

Further reading

• Mission statement - The Wikimedia Foundation
• Wikimedia values - The six values of the Wikimedia Foundation
• Wikimedia founding principles - Principles generally supported by all of the Wikimedia communities

This policy describes what kinds of usernames are acceptable on the English Wikipedia and how unacceptable or doubtful usernames can be dealt with. It also specifies that a user account should be used only by one person, and that in most cases one person should use only one account.

You choose your username when creating a user account. All contributions made using that account will then be attributed to the chosen username (contributions made while not logged in to any account are attributed to the user's IP address). It is also possible to request a change of username, and have your past contributions re-attributed to the new name.

This policy applies to usernames on English Wikipedia. However, in most cases you will be able to use the same username and password to log in to other language Wikipedias and other Wikimedia Foundation supported projects. See Wikipedia:Unified login.

Introductory clip on usernames

Guidance for new users

ਫਰਮਾ:UsernamePolicy

Your username is a nickname that will identify your account and thereby all of your contributions to Wikipedia. It can be your real name if you so choose, but you should be aware of the risks involved in editing under your real name before choosing to use or disclose your real name on Wikipedia. Wikipedia usernames are case sensitive, but the first letter is always automatically capitalized. By default, your username appears in your signature on posts to discussion pages. For further details on signatures and how to customize them, see Wikipedia:Signatures.

You must keep in mind that, once chosen, a username cannot be easily changed, and changing your username doesn't hide your previous username from all of the edits that you've made while using it (such as the signature of your previous username that you left on any talk pages, messages, discussions, and replies). For example, if "Dr. Franz Schröder" is your real name, and you choose this to be your username, your real name and doctorate will be evident on your edits, on history pages, and (unless you change your signature) on all posts, messages, and replies that you make to talk pages and discussions. It is highly recommended that you read and understand the section on using your real name as your username before you decide to do so. Likewise, reusing a name here which you also use on other sites may be as revealing as using your actual name.

You will be required to specify the username that you'd like to use when you are creating a new account, and you will subsequently use it (together with your password) to log in to that account. Once you have an account, you may create a user page, titled "User:XXXX" (where "XXXX" is your username), to provide relevant information about yourself to other Wikipedians. You or any other editor may also create a user talk page, titled "User talk:XXXX", that people can use to contact you.

The MediaWiki software will not allow you to register a new account with a username that is already taken by another account, nor will it allow you to register a username that is too similar to another account. You can check whether or not a username is already taken; if the username is not listed when you enter it into the username search, it means that the provided username is not taken. Please note that the page does not return usernames that are too similar; it only returns a match if the exact username you enter is already taken. You may still be able to obtain a username that is too similar to another account under certain circumstances; see § Similar usernames below.

Your username can be virtually any string of characters (subject to a few technical limitations). However, it should be a name which other users will be comfortable with and which does not interfere with the project. A controversial name may give a bad impression to other users, and avoiding this is in your own interest. This page describes certain types of usernames that are specifically disallowed, primarily because they can be considered offensive, misleading, or promotional, or imply that the account does not belong to an individual.

Inappropriate usernames

ਫਰਮਾ:Policy shortcut This section lists the types of usernames that are considered inappropriate. The same criteria also apply to signatures.

These lists are not necessarily exhaustive. Use common sense in applying these rules; a username containing a word that may seem offensive in one context may have a very different, more benign meaning in another. For guidance on how to deal with inappropriate usernames if encountered, see § Dealing with inappropriate usernames below.

Disruptive or offensive usernames

ਫਰਮਾ:Policy shortcut The following types of usernames are not permitted, and will be immediately blocked upon discovery, because they are disruptive or offensive:

• Usernames that are likely to offend other contributors or cause disruption to productive Wikipedia processes or discussions, or make harmonious editing difficult or impossible to achieve; e.g. by containing profanities, or referencing highly contentious events or controversies.
• Usernames that are blatantly profane, violent, threatening, or sexually explicit, or that advocate or encourage any such behavior (including acts that are deemed by most societies as either extremely immoral, criminal, or illegal).
• Usernames that deliberately offend, dehumanize, attack, demean, disparage, discriminate, or support or advocate any such behavior toward any race, religion, gender, sexual identity, sexual preference, political affiliation, or social group or status, or imply the intent to do so. Examples include:
  • Usernames that contain discriminatory attacks, racial slurs, or pejorative terms
  • Usernames that praise highly contentious people, groups (also known as "hate groups"), or events—future, past, or present—that currently allocate, have allocated, or plan to allocate efforts or resources toward afflicting direct discriminatory, social, physical, or emotional harm toward those who identify as part of any of these groups.
• Usernames that contain or imply personal attacks, or imply the intent to personally attack, harass, or threaten other Wikipedia editors.
• Usernames that appear intended to disrupt legitimate Wikipedia discussions and processes by provoking negative emotional reactions from other editors (also known as "trolling").
• Usernames that show or imply the intent to vandalize, disrupt, or engage in bad-faith edits or behaviors that are clearly not intended to help build, expand, or grow the encyclopedia in a positive or collaborative manner.

These accounts, upon their discovery, should be immediately blocked by administrators, and consideration should be given, with appropriate judgment, if the username should be redacted from any logs or edit revisions - especially if they're grossly offensive or destructive in nature, and likely to offend many editors. Note that usernames that are inappropriate in another language, or that represent an inappropriate name with misspellings and substitutions, or do so indirectly or by implication, are still considered inappropriate.

Usernames with libelous, contentious, or non-public information

ਇਹ ਵੀ ਦੇਖੋ: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons § Remove contentious material, ਅਤੇ Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons § Usernames

The following types of usernames are not permitted, and will be immediately blocked upon discovery, because they violate highly important and serious Wikipedia policies:

• Usernames that contain contentious or disparaging statements about another person (whether they be another editor, a notable living or recently deceased person, etc).
• Usernames that are clearly libelous, contain blatantly false or disparaging statements or accusations about another person, or constitute blatant violations of Wikipedia's policy on the biographies of living people.
• Usernames that contain any non-public, private, or personally identifiable information about another person, or contain any other information that would be deemed appropriate for suppression by an Oversighter; e.g. usernames that state what the password to the account (apparently) is.

These accounts, upon their discovery, should be immediately blocked by administrators. If such usernames are libelous or contain information that is usually suppressed (such as disclosure of non-public personal identifiable information about another editor, or blatantly libelous statements made about a notable living person), the username should be suppressed from all logs by an Oversighter to protect Wikipedia and the subjects involved from any kind of negative fallout or harm as a result of the account or username creation. Requests for removing attack usernames from logs should be reported to the global Stewards team for evaluation and private removal from all WMF projects. This can be done either via IRC in the ਫਰਮਾ:Channel channel or via email to the stewards VRT queue at ਫਰਮਾ:Nospam.

Misleading usernames

ਫਰਮਾ:Policy shortcut The following types of usernames are not permitted because they may be misleading in a way that disrupts the project:

• Usernames that impersonate other people (see § Real names and § Similar usernames below).
• Usernames that give the impression that the account has permissions that it does not have; e.g. by containing the terms administrator, bureaucrat, steward, checkuser, oversight, or similar terms, such as admin, sysop, or moderator.
• Usernames that imply that the account has explicit ownership of certain articles, content, or topic areas, or that they have any kind of "power", "command", "control", or "authority" over other editors, or that a different level of accountability and application of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines should be enforced (such as implying that certain policies do not apply to them).
• Usernames that could be easily misunderstood to refer to a "bot" (which is used to identify bot accounts) or a "script" (which alludes to automated editing processes), unless the account is of that type; such as ABC Bot, XYZ script.
• Usernames that give the incorrect impression that the account is officially affiliated with the Wikimedia Foundation; e.g. Foo (WMF), Bar (Wikimedia Foundation)
• Usernames that resemble IP addresses (as these are expected to designate non-logged-in users), timestamps, or other names which would be confusing within the Wikipedia signature format.
• Usernames that appear similar to naming conventions used by community administrative processes, such as those starting with Vanished user (see Wikipedia:Courtesy vanishing).

For accounts with usernames that are in this category, you should assume good faith in cases where the username could be interpreted ambiguously. For example, a new user whose career is as a sysop might include that in their username, unaware of the policy prohibiting it. An attempt to discuss the username policy and concern with the user, and a request that they change their username should typically be attempted before considering further action. In cases where the violation of policy or the user's intent is clear, or likely created in bad faith, you should exhibit the use of common sense and fair and level-headed judgment when determining the appropriate action to take. These clear violations should be reported by following the instructions on Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention.

Promotional usernames

"WP:ORGNAME" ਇੱਥੇ ਰੀਡਾਇਰੈਕਟ ਹੁੰਦਾ ਹੈ। the convention for organization names ਲਈ, ਦੇਖੋ Wikipedia:Naming conventions (companies)।

ਇਹ ਵੀ ਦੇਖੋ: Category:Wikipedians who are indefinitely blocked for promotional user names

The following types of usernames are not permitted because they are considered promotional:

• Usernames that unambiguously represent the name of a company, organization, website, product, musical group or band, team, club, creative group, or organized event (e.g. TownvilleWidgets, MyWidgetsUSA.com, TrammelMuseumofArt, OctoberfestBandConcert2019). However, usernames that contain such names are sometimes permissible; see § Usernames implying shared use below. (Usernames which represent the subject of a biographical article are not considered promotional; see § Stage names)
• Email addresses and URLs to domains or websites (especially if they promote a commercial web page) and don't simply identify a person. Although usernames that only contain plain domain names on their own (those that do not include the top-level domain, such as .com, .net, .co.kr, etc. at the end) are sometimes acceptable (such as when the purpose is simply to identify the user as a person), they are inappropriate if their primary purpose is to advertise, promote, sell, gain support, or increase the attention or user-base audience of any person, company, market, product, channel, website, or other good or service. This includes any kind of websites that function in order to generate any kind of income or revenue for the owner. Examples include Patreon links or links to pages asking for donations, or revenue-generating click-thru links to vendors. All pages that are built or designed in one or more of these manners should be considered a commercial web page, and hence considered inappropriate for a username.

A user who both adopts a promotional username and who engages in inappropriate advertising or promotional edits or behaviors – especially when made to their own user space or to articles about the company, group, or product – can be blocked from editing Wikipedia, and are often blocked much sooner than users who engage in only one of the two behaviors. In such cases, administrators should examine the user's edits to decide whether or not to allow them to create a new username. If there is evidence that the user would continue to edit inappropriately under a new username, the blocking administrator should enable the "autoblock" and "prevent account creation" block settings. Otherwise, the user should be offered the opportunity to create a new account or have their current username changed. Before taking action, any disagreements as to whether a particular username is acceptable or not should be discussed at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names first.

Usernames implying shared use

ਇਹ ਵੀ ਦੇਖੋ: Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry § Role accounts

Because Wikipedia's policy states that user accounts cannot be shared between more than one individual, the following types of usernames are not permitted because they imply shared use:

• Usernames that are simply names of companies or groups are not permitted (these also fall under § Promotional usernames above). For example, ABC Inc or XYZ Foundation or Foo University.
• Personal usernames that imply shared access, such as Jack and Jill, are not permitted.
• Usernames that are solely the names of posts, positions, roles, or job titles within organizations, such as Secretary of the XYZ Foundation, are not permitted, as such posts or positions may be transferred or held by different persons at different times.

• However, usernames are acceptable if they contain a company or group name but are clearly intended to denote an individual person, such as Mark at WidgetFactory, Jack Smith at the XYZ Foundation, FacebookFanatic87, etc.

Remember that promotional editing is not permitted, regardless of any account's chosen username. The conflict of interest guideline advises all users to exercise caution if editing articles about businesses, organizations, products, or other subjects that they are closely connected to. If you choose to edit articles that are in any way related to your company or group, you will need to carefully follow Wikipedia's advice on editing with a conflict of interest.

Non-script usernames

ਫਰਮਾ:Policy shortcut The following types of usernames are not permitted due to the difficulty with some web browsers in viewing non-language Unicode characters:

• Usernames that contain emoji.
• Usernames that are considered to be emoticons or otherwise "decorative".
• Usernames that use any non-language symbols. This includes:
  • Symbols and characters unrelated to the list of writing systems.
  • Symbols and characters that are on the block lists at Unicode symbols.

Note that this restriction does not apply to signatures, which are governed by Wikipedia's policies on the use of signatures.

Confusing usernames

ਫਰਮਾ:Policy shortcut Some usernames appear problematic without fitting clearly into any of the above categories. This is often the case with confusing or extremely lengthy usernames, which are highly discouraged but which are not so inappropriate on their own as to require action.

Confusing usernames can often be a red flag for other problems. An editor with a confusing username or signature may be blocked sooner than usual for other inappropriate behavior, such as disruption or vandalism, if their confusing username contributes to the disruption.

Exceptions

Some usernames that appear to be in breach of this policy have been allowed to stand by consensus because they were created before a change in the policy that would now prohibit such names (see grandfather clause). If you find an apparently problematic username being used by a long-standing editor, it is likely that the matter has been discussed before. Please search that user's talk page (and archives if applicable), and the archives of the administrators' noticeboards and requests for comment on usernames, before deciding to take action as described below.

Dealing with inappropriate usernames

ਫਰਮਾ:Policy shortcut If you encounter an inappropriate username as described above, there are various actions you might take. Use common sense in making your choice, and avoid "biting" newcomers.

No action necessary

If the name is not unambiguously problematic, it may be sensible to ignore it. Assume good faith, and also note the exceptions in the section on inappropriate usernames. Also, except in extreme cases, it is probably not worth taking action unless the user has made at least one recent edit.

Talk to the user

If you see a username that is problematic but was not obviously created in bad faith, politely draw the user's attention to this policy, and try to encourage them to create a new account with a different username. If you want, you can use the {{subst:uw-username}}, {{subst:uw-uall}} or {{subst:uw-coi-username}} template for this.

Request for comment

If, following an attempt to discuss a problematic username with the user, there is still doubt or disagreement as to whether the name is appropriate, you may open a Request for comment on the username, inviting other users to discuss the issue.

Report blatant violations

If you believe that a username needs to be immediately blocked and is an obvious violation of policy, you can report it to Usernames for administrator attention. This page should only be used for clear and egregious username violations that merit an immediate block and without any discussion or warning beforehand.

Do not both warn a user account or discuss the username and your concerns with a user account, and file a report against the user account at Usernames for administrator attention at the same time. A warning or discussion by another editor should be perceived as an invitation or an encouragement for the user to change their username or otherwise resolve the matter at-hand, while filing a report against the account invites a block to be immediately placed and without warning or discussion beforehand. These two actions directly counteract with one another; performing both actions can cause confusion, frustration, and the biting of newcomers where the assumption of good faith likely should have been the preferred initial response.

Report other problems

If the user with a bad username is breaching other policies, such as those against spam or vandalism, follow up using those policies rather than reporting the username. If the user is editing in a biased or promotional way on a subject they appear to have a connection with, report them at the Conflict of Interest noticeboard.

Usernames for administrator attention guidelines

Usernames for administrator attention (UAA) is a noticeboard for drawing attention to abusive usernames quickly. See Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention/Instructions for information on how to place or resolve UAA reports, including the options that are available to administrators.

Remember that blocking a new user is not actually something we want to do, it is something we do when it is needed to protect Wikipedia from harm. Generally, editors whose usernames are a technical or borderline violation of the Username policy should be given an opportunity to discuss the username and how they may register a new username. However, users who are reluctant to register a new username and are otherwise showing a positive history of contributions to Wikipedia should be allowed to continue editing in a positive fashion and the matter should be dropped. But this exemption does not apply to editors who have a clearly offensive username, disruptive or vandalizing edits, or edits that show a history of problematic bias or conflict of interest.

Other particular types of username

Real names

"WP:IMPERSONATE" ਇੱਥੇ ਰੀਡਾਇਰੈਕਟ ਹੁੰਦਾ ਹੈ। impersonation regarding signatures ਲਈ, ਦੇਖੋ WP:Signature forgery।

ਫਰਮਾ:Policy shortcut Minors and children are strongly discouraged from creating accounts with usernames that are their real names, any nicknames which might be traced to them, or that contain any personally identifiable information. Furthermore, all editors  – regardless of age  – should take the time to carefully consider the risk and consequences before doing so. Usernames with this information significantly increase the potential for harassment, especially if these accounts edit in controversial subject areas. In some countries, editing Wikipedia can be illegal, and using this information can put you at risk of legal consequences. While it is possible to rename your account later (see Changing your username below), a record of your previous username remains permanently.

Do not edit under a name that is likely to imply that you are (or are related to) a specific, identifiable person, unless it is your real name. If you have the same name as a well-known person to whom you are unrelated, and are using your real name, you should state clearly on your userpage that you are unrelated to the well-known person.

If a username implies that the user is, or is related to, a notable, identifiable or well-known person, the account may be blocked as a precaution against impersonation until the user's proof of identity is provided.

If you have been blocked for using your real name, please do not take offense; we are trying to prevent somebody from impersonating or harassing you, or someone you may share the same real name with. You are welcome to use your real name, but in some cases, you will need to prove that you are who you say you are. You can do this by sending an email to info-enਫਰਮਾ:No spam bluewikimedia.org. Be aware that emails are handled by a volunteer response team; it can take some time before you'll receive a reply. Do not send unsolicited scans of your passport or driver's license to the volunteer response team. Instead, you should contact them to find out the best way to prove your identity. The best way will vary, but could be by using a mail address on a domain name that belongs to you.

Stage names

Users may use a self-identifying stage name, pen name, or other nickname as a username, provided that it uniquely identifies a single person. This is not considered promotional, even if commercial performances or publications are made under such a name, unless the user makes promotional edits within Wikipedia about themselves, their projects, etc. However, a user may not use someone else's stage name as a username, as per the § Real names section of this page.

Usernames with non-Latin characters

ਫਰਮਾ:Policy shortcut

ਇਹ ਵੀ ਦੇਖੋ: Wikipedia:Unified login ਅਤੇ Wikipedia:Signatures § Non-Latin

Users with usernames in non-Latin script writing systems are welcome to edit Wikipedia. There is no requirement that usernames must be in English or that Latin script characters must be used. However, such usernames may appear illegible to other contributors to the English Wikipedia, and not every user's keyboard or input device may have immediate access to non-Latin characters. In addition, sometimes certain characters may not display correctly. As a courtesy to other contributors, and to avoid possible confusion or mis-identification, users with such usernames are encouraged to provide a Latin-character transliteration username on their userpage, and/or as their signature.

For technical reasons, usernames containing any forbidden characters (# < > [ ] | { } /, as well as @ : =), are not possible. Usernames also cannot contain sequences of three or more consecutive tildes, as these are used to generate signatures, and cannot contain underscores.

Similar usernames

ਫਰਮਾ:Policy shortcut Usernames that are very similar to existing ones cannot be registered normally – but if you do want to use one, you may request its creation at Wikipedia:Request an account. Usernames that are similar only to unused or inactive accounts should not be a problem. Special:CentralAuth can be used to check for such usernames. The program that checks for similarity is a bit over-sensitive—if the username is different enough as to prevent other people from confusing the two users, the request should be approved. One should not choose a username that implies a relationship with an existing editor (unless the account is actually owned or the relationship is acknowledged by the editor themselves).

If your username is similar to that of another contributor or an article, you may wish to provide some form of disambiguation, such as by adding {{distinguish}} to the top of your user page.

Commonly misspelled usernames

If your username is commonly misspelled, consider helping people by adding redirects to your actual user page and talk page from the misspelled titles. You may wish to consider registering the misspelled username as a doppelgänger account to prevent it from being registered by someone else. The software prevents registration of certain names that are found to be too similar to existing ones; if you cannot register your doppelgänger username for this reason, you should visit Wikipedia:Request an account.

UseModWiki-era anonymous users

ਫਰਮਾ:Policy shortcut UseModWiki, the software used on Wikipedia throughout 2001 and in early 2002, treated users who edited without logging in or providing a screen name differently from modern-day MediaWiki. Anonymous users in that time were treated in one of two ways:

• Domain names: Up until about March 2001, an editor with an IP address "192.0.2.34" that was associated with domain name "host.2.34.example.net" would have their edit logged as being by "host.2.34.example.net". Examples of this are office.bomis.com, dhcp-22-128.lclark.edu, and cnts2p46.uwaterloo.ca. Contributions by users with these usernames are affected by T2323. These usernames are usually indefinitely blocked on sight, as a) they don't make good usernames in light of the above criteria, b) they were never true usernames in the first place and would thus have been abandoned with changing software, and c) modern software is such that an innocent contributor editing from the "host.2.34.example.net" server would not be affected by a block of "User:host.2.34.example.net".
• Redacted IP addresses: An editor with that same IP address that was not associated with any domain name (or all UseModWiki edits after about March 2001) would have their edit logged as being by "192.0.2.xxx". The Phase II software also exhibited this trait. Examples of this are 209.69.30.xxx and 62.110.183.xxx.

Shared accounts

ਇਹ ਵੀ ਦੇਖੋ: Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry § Role accounts

ਫਰਮਾ:Policy shortcut Any user account should represent an individual and not a group (and an individual should normally only have one user account; see next section). Sharing an account – or the password to an account – with others is not permitted, and evidence of doing so will result in the user being required to stop the practice and change their password, or in sanctions (up to and including the account being blocked), depending on circumstances. For accounts being used to represent a group or organization, see § Promotional usernames and § Usernames implying shared use above.

Exceptions to this rule can be made for non-editing accounts approved to provide email access, accounts approved by the Wikimedia Foundation (see list), and bot accounts that are maintained by more than one contributor, provided the existence of such an arrangement is made clear and has consensus.

Using multiple accounts

ਮੁੱਖ ਸਫ਼ਾ: Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry § Legitimate uses

It is recommended that contributors not use multiple accounts without good reason. For example, a user may wish to create an alternate account for use on public computers as a precaution to keep their primary account more secure. Contributors operating any sort of automated editing process should do so under an alternative bot account. It is recommended that multiple accounts be identified as such on their user pages; templates such as {{User alternative account}} or one of a selection of user boxes may be used for this purpose.

The use of multiple accounts outside of established policy for doing so is known as sockpuppetry, and is not permitted. For example, multiple accounts may not be used to comment on proposals or requests, cast votes, or engage in edit warring. Because policies apply to individuals, not accounts, blocked or banned users must not use sock puppets to circumvent a block; doing so will result in an extension of the block or ban.

Changing your username

ਫਰਮਾ:Policy shortcut Usernames can be changed by global renamers; requests should be made at Wikipedia:Changing username. User accounts with few or no edits might not be renamed, as it is quicker and easier to simply ਫਰਮਾ:Signup.

Once a username has been changed, existing contributions will be listed under the new name in page histories, diffs, logs, and user contributions. Signatures on discussion pages will continue to use the old name; while these can be changed manually, it is not recommended unless a contributor wishes to remove as much information as possible about their former name for privacy reasons. In such situations the old name will still be available in old versions of discussion pages, unless revision deletion is used and log entries are hidden from public view. Username changes are listed in the user rename log and the global rename log.

Deleting and merging accounts

It is not possible to delete user accounts, as all contributions must be assigned to some identifier, either a username or an IP address. Editors seeking privacy per courtesy vanishing / right to vanish can usually have their accounts renamed and their user pages (and, in exceptional cases, user talk pages) deleted.

It is not currently possible to merge more than one user account together and combine them into one user account on the English Wikipedia.

See also

• Wikipedia:Identification
• Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention
• Category:Wikipedians who are indefinitely blocked for a violation of the username policy
• Wikipedia:Naming conventions (technical restrictions)#Restrictions on usernames § Notes
• m:Help:Unified login