Forum:Username policy

As part of an effort to reduce our reliance on English Wikipedia policy pages that have variable applicability to our wiki, I've drafted a local username policy that is a somewhat simplified version of its English Wikipedia counterpart, with additional reference of the Chinese MCW version. I've made a conscious effort to not copy either of them and instead present the policy in a unique way to avoid licensing issues. See the draft policy here. --GIM Dianliang233 (talk) 08:12, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

good policy 👁 Image
Ayaan 08:22, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support, very good draft.  Nixinova   T   C   08:37, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support because I like things being clarified. Especially things with relevance. -- Simanelix ^(T|C) 08:44, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support, though the draft doesn’t mention anonymising at all, despite it being an essential feature for dealing with the absolute worst cases of usernames. It probably should. - Harri / Talk 👁 Image
08:55, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. This has been added. GIM Dianliang233 (talk) 09:08, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Like if my username said what your mailing address is, for example? That would be bad, right? -- Simanelix ^(T|C) 05:12, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

"usernames that contain emojis are allowed" - AntiSpoof does not allow emojis in usernames by default. Actually, it disable all non-script characters in username. See also AntiSpoof.php. -- Leo768 (talk) 09:26, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

I've revised this section – please check if the new version solves this issue. GIM Dianliang233 (talk) 09:31, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support — I don’t see any obvious issues with this one. — BabylonAS 11:37, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Question: How to deal with words that happen to be obscene words in non-English languages? — BabylonAS 11:38, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

I suppose MCW:Assume good faith applies here – so we don't do anything. GIM Dianliang233 (talk) 11:56, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

I’ve meant both intentional and accidental cases — what if a user willingly uses a foreign language profanity? — BabylonAS 05:14, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Then they get blocked. GIM Dianliang233 (talk) 05:23, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Good idea. Not sure how this is unique from the ENWP policy (apart from the affiliations thingy), but otherwise, it's good. -~- Nerdyguy2000   Talk   Edits  15:42, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Even if it's not very different, I personally believe its a good idea to have a version that is accessible without leaving the wiki's website domain. 👁 Image
amethyst_hhh👁 Image
04:30, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support. Ultimately it would probably be a good idea to implement this as a policy on meta though, since user names are global. Unless some wikis want to establish stricter or less strict policies?

I'm not sure if "usernames created before this policy are exempt" makes sense. For most of the cases that are listed, I don't see a reason to grandfather in old accounts, especially given that renaming accounts is possible.

Also, I feel like we should qualify "overly long usernames" somehow, because otherwise it's unclear what exactly this rule means. While MediaWiki has $wgMaxNameChars, it unfortunately measures name length in bytes (it's currently set to 85 bytes on Wikimedia, and I'm not sure what ours is set to, but the default is 255; see also T121604). I think something like "at most X unicode codepoints" (or even "at most X grapheme clusters") might work, but I'm not sure what "X" would be. What are examples for usernames that you think would be too long? | violine1101 ^(talk) 23:02, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Info. The longest usernames I can think of right now are probably "BugsbugsbugsMinecraftWiki" (25 bytes) and "BlockExplorationVideos" (23 bytes) and "IzanTheMinecraftFan" (19). Other long-ish names include "PhoenixAsh89" (12), "Nerdyguy2000" (12, My own name lol), "Madminecrafter12" (14), "Hoangminh2011" (13), "MinecraftBedrockPlayer7" (23, aah!) etc. but those aren't too long. -~- Nerdyguy2000   Talk   Edits  02:44, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

<30 is perfectly reasonable. Long names I can think of are that ‘chicken jockey flint and steel’ user, which is probably around the max that should be allowed.  Nixinova   T   C   02:50, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Yeah. I was really just listing usernames and stuff that are okay. -~- Nerdyguy2000   Talk   Edits  02:51, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Just a reminder that one Chinese character is 3 bytes. Limiting username in bytes is not a good idea. 👁 Image
Wilf233_zhMCW（论·功） 03:07, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

That's why Violine was referring to it as "Unicode codepoint". GIM Dianliang233 (talk) 03:16, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

I think "CHICKEN JOCKEY I AM STEVE FLINT AND STEEL" at 41 characters is too long. Either 30 or 35 should be the limit. Also, I think any username of 20 characters or more is long. "MinecraftBedrockPlayer7" is definitely long. His username stands out when compared to the rest of the chat forum. -- Simanelix ^(T|C) 04:46, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

The examples you've given are certainly long but I wouldn't say it's too long. GIM Dianliang233 (talk) 05:24, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

• I agree that it would optimal that this becomes the global policy, but that would probably require a separate Meta forum discussion. The Chinese wiki already has a significantly stricter username policy.
• The main example I intended to grandfather in would be User:Camman18Wiki. We can reconsider the grandfather rule I think.
• I agree that having a set limit would be good. In the phab task you linked to, ENWP used to have a 40-character limit but this was removed based on the (incorrect) assumption that there would be a software restriction to 64 characters (which has since been bumped to 85 bytes on WMF wikis). Base on absolutely nothing I propose a 50-character limit, it seems like a good compromise.

GIM Dianliang233 (talk) 05:43, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Some older usernames definitely should not be grandfathered. For example, there was that one user who tried impersonating a Terraria Wiki editor which currently makes latter one unable to sign up here under their own username if they wish to. As for Camman18Wiki, if they’re not that Camman (the YouTuber), then I agree that they should better rename their account. — BabylonAS 07:01, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree that it's probably best to just have a local policy for now and maybe think about making it global later.

Regarding grandfathering, I also just thought of the accounts that were renamed during various migrations and have "@legacy123415415121324" suffixes, "gpuser-" prefixes, or similar. So for those it might make sense to have them grandfathered in, if applicable.

50-character limit seems completely reasonable. According to Wilf's list, there's currently only 35 usernames that are longer than 50 chars. | violine1101 ^(talk) 08:51, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support, the current draft looks good — 👁 Image
👁 Image
MetroKopUA (talk) 04:04, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support but I feel like "excessively long" should have an example, albeit a fictional one as to not hurt anyone's feelings 👁 Image
amethyst_hhh👁 Image
04:34, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

I think "CHICKEN JOCKEY I AM STEVE FLINT AND STEEL" is a great example. It's literally 3 popular quotes strung together. It makes some sense as a username, at least if you like the movie. -- Simanelix ^(T|C) 04:47, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes it is, but 1) there is a real person with feelings behind that account, and 2) they'd get grandfathered in anyways 👁 Image
amethyst_hhh👁 Image
04:49, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Did you understnand my comment? I'm saying "CHICKEN JOCKEY I AM STEVE FLINT AND STEEL" is an okay username. It is just a bit too long. "CHICKEN JOCKEY I AM STEVE" would be more reasonable in my opinion, for example. -- Simanelix ^(T|C) 05:14, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Im just saying they shouldnt be publicly used as an example, whether positive or negative, without their explicit permission 👁 Image
amethyst_hhh👁 Image
06:11, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Alright, alright. Maybe I should make an alt account named "really long username please use me as an exmample" then. -- Simanelix ^(T|C) 06:36, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

I really think this should be added somehow:

• A username should not state a command, like "view my wikipage", "learn JavaScript". Nor should it make a statement, like "glow squids are bad". These all could be acceptable usernames, but names like these should be avoided in favor of less direct names. Like "my page is cool", "JavaScript fan", or "glow squide disliker". "my page is cool" would be acceptable, because it is positive and it is opinion about yourself, rather than one about others, or the Minecraft franchise.

Though I don't really know what the best wording would be. But I'm sure there might be someone who would want to use their username in a dumb way. And I honestly don't like chalking anything up to common sense when there is a more descriptive explanation. -- Simanelix ^(T|C) 05:07, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

I don't see the point of adding this rule/recommendation, personally. | violine1101 ^(talk) 08:52, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

“

Notably, usernames in another language are allowed and are not covered by this.

„

Shouldn't a username in another language use whatever character set is appropriate for that language and only use those characters in the appropriate manner for that language? -- Simanelix ^(T|C) 05:09, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

I don't really get what you are trying to say here. If you're trying to say that it shouldn't be allowed to mix-match languages, I don't really see why not. "only use those characters in the appropriate manner for that language" would sound like you aren't allowed to make (intentional) typos/grammar mistakes. Anyway I just don't think what you're proposing is well-defined/makes much sense to be included. GIM Dianliang233 (talk) 06:24, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Good point. There isn't really a way to define it. -- Simanelix ^(T|C) 06:35, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Is "Mymom" an appropriate username, or does it violate "A username should not be misleading" or "A username should belong to an individual person"? -- Simanelix ^(T|C) 05:11, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

I'd say this is an edgy one but it's fine. GIM Dianliang233 (talk) 06:25, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Info Here is a list of all usernames: User:Simanelix/Allusers/Output. -- Simanelix ^(T|C) 05:45, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

This list excludes users who don't have a userpage. Special:ListUsers is a full list; there's also one by @Wilf233 on Discord/Zulip that's sorted by edit count name length. | violine1101 ^(talk) 08:43, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

It's sorted by the length of username. For the one sorted by edit count, see User:Wilf233/Global Editcount Ranking. It only includes users with no less than 50 edits, or the page will be too long to load. 👁 Image
Wilf233_zhMCW（论·功） 08:56, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Oops, yeah, I meant to say name length, not edit count. | violine1101 ^(talk) 09:04, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

One thing I would like to note: On Wikipedia, when a user is blocked for a violation of the username policy, the block reason that is typically given is templated and gives instructions on how to proceed. If the user isn't acting in bad faith, the user will be instructed to create another account (see w:Template:uw-ublock as an example). For more serious violations where the user is obviously here to troll, account creation will be blocked and a message like w:Template:uw-uhblock may be used instead. Both of these templates are on their w:MediaWiki:Ipbreason-dropdown page. So I think we could have a bit of discussion on how we should handle stuff like this. Another thing I would like to suggest is that we could also use the abuse filter to automatically block or warn against certain usernames from being created (e.g. ones with certain profanities or unicode characters). However, we will need to create custom messages explaining why the username is blocked, and we will have to be careful to avoid false positives. CitrusEgg7168 (talk) 07:11, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure we already have such abuse filters for blocking inappropriate usernames, although they don't catch everything of course. | violine1101 ^(talk) 08:53, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

I've now drafted a template for this purpose, see User:CitrusEgg7168/UsernameSoftBlocked. If you want, you can help make changes to this notice. This template is only meant to be used for good faith users who were blocked with account creation allowed. For people who were hard-blocked, a different message would have to be used. CitrusEgg7168 (🍊 ✏️) 23:37, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support 78.212.36.177 12:41, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support the draft is very, very good. 78.212.36.177 12:41, 9 August 2025 (UTC)