I am taking the unusual but unfortunately necessary step of closing this RfC early for a failure to follow
WP:RFCBEFORE. This proposal demonstrates a failure to consider how unified login works, among other issues. The user in question appears to have done zero consultation before creating and widely advertising this RfC. I understand the desire to create RfC's on issues we all care about, but these days, most RfC's need at least some discussion ahead of time to work out obvious issues. If there is truly a genuine problem, I suggest that OP first workshop the idea at either
WT:UN or an area like
WP:VPI.
CaptainEekEdits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 05:35, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Should non-
ASCII usernames, going forward, not be allowed on Wikipedia? By "not allowed", this would mean that users from now on who had non-ASCII characters in their username would be soft-blocked (not hard blocked). If they had a transliteration of the non-ASCII characters (e.g. in parentheses afterwards), this would not cause them to be soft blocked, but a lack of any ASCII text alongside the non-ASCII characters (e.g. the Unicode symbols with only numbers/symbols afterwards) would cause them to be soft blocked. thetechie@enwiki:
~/talk/$ 01:52, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Discussion
Support. Felt the need to mark it here as RFC questions should be neutral. I believe that non-ASCII usernames make it hard to find a user's page/talk page for future reference. Not everyone knows how to find specific language characters to do so. I think this would increase the ability to find users without having to worry about non-ASCII characters. thetechie@enwiki:
~/talk/$ 01:52, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose. This smacks of something that could be construed as racism (albeit that would be a stretch). Also, it would be hard to implement this because we can't just block experienced editors on other wikis for coming here. LilianaUwU(
talk /
contributions) 02:09, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Yeah, but someone who has a non-ASCII username won't change it for just one wiki. Also,
unified login is a limitation. LilianaUwU(
talk /
contributions) 02:35, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose - First, the second sentence doesn't follow from the first. ASCII is a subset of Unicode. But this is really just kind of a non-starter per Curbon7. — Rhododendritestalk \\ 02:20, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Rhododendrites: Corrected, sorry. That was a typo. For users coming after this comment, a sentence mistakenly said "Unicode" instead of "non-ASCII". thetechie@enwiki:
~/talk/$ 02:34, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Support - Per nom. As a Global renamer and an ACC admin, this has been to long coming. Communication is hindered by a username that includes a
, just my opinion. - FlightTime (
open channel) 02:23, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I do not support this proposal. As a single login is supported across Wikimedia sites, and Wikipedia is a global community of editors, users should not be restricted to writing systems that can be written in ASCII.
isaacl (
talk) 03:14, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose. Multilingual contributors, for example, should be allowed to use their preferred/native language/birth name when editing enwiki.
Frostly (
talk) 04:03, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose Why would we limit ourselves to a subset of Latin characters? To inconvenience non-anglos? This in no way improves the English Wikipedia, and makes most natural names bannable.
207.212.33.88 (
talk) 04:07, 1 May 2024 (UTC
Oppose You'd end up banning half of Wikipedia with this policy. Especially those active on other projects where a non ASCII username is normal (jawiki, arwiki, or just any other wiki with a language that doesn't use the latin script). The current
WP:UN is more than enough.
Deauthorized. (
talk) 04:29, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I am taking the unusual but unfortunately necessary step of closing this RfC early for a failure to follow
WP:RFCBEFORE. This proposal demonstrates a failure to consider how unified login works, among other issues. The user in question appears to have done zero consultation before creating and widely advertising this RfC. I understand the desire to create RfC's on issues we all care about, but these days, most RfC's need at least some discussion ahead of time to work out obvious issues. If there is truly a genuine problem, I suggest that OP first workshop the idea at either
WT:UN or an area like
WP:VPI.
CaptainEekEdits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 05:35, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Should non-
ASCII usernames, going forward, not be allowed on Wikipedia? By "not allowed", this would mean that users from now on who had non-ASCII characters in their username would be soft-blocked (not hard blocked). If they had a transliteration of the non-ASCII characters (e.g. in parentheses afterwards), this would not cause them to be soft blocked, but a lack of any ASCII text alongside the non-ASCII characters (e.g. the Unicode symbols with only numbers/symbols afterwards) would cause them to be soft blocked. thetechie@enwiki:
~/talk/$ 01:52, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Discussion
Support. Felt the need to mark it here as RFC questions should be neutral. I believe that non-ASCII usernames make it hard to find a user's page/talk page for future reference. Not everyone knows how to find specific language characters to do so. I think this would increase the ability to find users without having to worry about non-ASCII characters. thetechie@enwiki:
~/talk/$ 01:52, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose. This smacks of something that could be construed as racism (albeit that would be a stretch). Also, it would be hard to implement this because we can't just block experienced editors on other wikis for coming here. LilianaUwU(
talk /
contributions) 02:09, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Yeah, but someone who has a non-ASCII username won't change it for just one wiki. Also,
unified login is a limitation. LilianaUwU(
talk /
contributions) 02:35, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose - First, the second sentence doesn't follow from the first. ASCII is a subset of Unicode. But this is really just kind of a non-starter per Curbon7. — Rhododendritestalk \\ 02:20, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Rhododendrites: Corrected, sorry. That was a typo. For users coming after this comment, a sentence mistakenly said "Unicode" instead of "non-ASCII". thetechie@enwiki:
~/talk/$ 02:34, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Support - Per nom. As a Global renamer and an ACC admin, this has been to long coming. Communication is hindered by a username that includes a
, just my opinion. - FlightTime (
open channel) 02:23, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I do not support this proposal. As a single login is supported across Wikimedia sites, and Wikipedia is a global community of editors, users should not be restricted to writing systems that can be written in ASCII.
isaacl (
talk) 03:14, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose. Multilingual contributors, for example, should be allowed to use their preferred/native language/birth name when editing enwiki.
Frostly (
talk) 04:03, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose Why would we limit ourselves to a subset of Latin characters? To inconvenience non-anglos? This in no way improves the English Wikipedia, and makes most natural names bannable.
207.212.33.88 (
talk) 04:07, 1 May 2024 (UTC
Oppose You'd end up banning half of Wikipedia with this policy. Especially those active on other projects where a non ASCII username is normal (jawiki, arwiki, or just any other wiki with a language that doesn't use the latin script). The current
WP:UN is more than enough.
Deauthorized. (
talk) 04:29, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.