Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names

Navigation: Archives • Instructions for closing administrators • Purge page cache

This page is for bringing attention to usernames which may be in violation of Wikipedia's username policy. Before listing a username here, consider if it should be more appropriately reported elsewhere, or if it needs to be reported at all:

Report blatantly inappropriate usernames, such as usernames that are obscene or inflammatory, to Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention.
For other cases involving vandalism, personal attacks or other urgent issues, try Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents; blatant vandalism can also be reported at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism, which is sometimes a better option.

Do NOT post here if:

the user in question has made no recent edits.
you wish to have the block of a user reviewed. Instead, discuss the block with the blocking administrator (see also Wikipedia:Blocking policy § Unblocking).

Before adding a name here you MUST ensure that the user in question:

has been warned about their username (with e.g. {{subst:uw-username}}) and has been allowed time to address the concern on their user talk page.
has disagreed with the concern, refused to change their username and/or continued to edit without replying to the warning.
is not already blocked.

If, after having followed all the steps above, you still believe the username violates Wikipedia's username policy, you may list it here with an explanation of which part of the username policy you think has been violated. After posting, please alert the user of the discussion (with e.g. {{subst:UsernameDiscussion}}). You may also invite others who have expressed concern about the username to comment on the discussion by use of this template.

Add new requests below, using the syntax {{subst:rfcn1|username|2=reason ~~~~}}.

Tools: Special:ListUsers, Special:BlockList

Reports

Please remember that this is not a vote, rather, it is a place where editors can come when they are unsure what to do with a username, and to get outside opinions (hence it's named "requests for comment"). There are no set time limits to the period of discussion.

Place your report below this line. Please put new reports on the top of the list.

Aurangzebra

Aurangzebra (talk · contribs)

Violation of the username policy as an offensive username. Resembles a play on the word Aurangzeb and Zebra. It may cause disruption by offending editors, especially those from Pakistan where Aurangzeb is revered.^source Did alert the user but they choose not to respond and go on with their editing. Thanks, –𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor _{Ping Me🔔}.

Allow I'm not seeing an offensive username problem here. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:08, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I meant to respond earlier but got distracted. I did not intend to mean harm here; it was just a dumb pun based on a topic of mild interest to me (Mughal Empire) in the past. That being said, I do not really see how this is offensive. By your logic, it seems like any name based on any historical figure should be disallowed because someone somewhere is going to be offended by them. Aurangzeb is not a particularly controversial leader. He was a conservative ruler but many historians believe that he was generally fair and opposed bigotry towards religious minorities (see the lede for the article for evidence). Also, my username doesn't glorify him, it's just a pun. Also, I'm not sure how I would incite editors from Pakistan if they admire him. Even reading through your source, as far as I'm aware, Aurangzeb isn't a dog whistle for Pakistani nationalists. And once again, it really must be reiterated that this is clearly just a play on words. Aurangzebra (talk) 19:26, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My biggest concern lied in you not responding, prompting that you may have ill intentions, which could very well also reflect in your edits later. 𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor _{Ping Me🔔} 19:35, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yea I apologize for not responding but it doesn't take much to see that I don't have any ill intentions past or future if you look at my edit history. I looked through my entire edit history and I've only found 2 instances where I've touched anything India or Pakistan related: one to remove an extraneous comma on the Narendra Modi article and one to fix a citation on the Vishnu Sharma article. Aurangzebra (talk) 19:42, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is only 2 days. People do not have to edit every day, it doesn't show ill intent, considering how marginal this is anyway. Secretlondon (talk) 16:24, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Allow If the editor was editing disruptively in the Pakistan topic area, this might be seen as an aggravating factor. I see no signs of that. Cullen328 (talk) 19:41, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Allow - I fail to see how choosing a username based on a historical figure can be offensive if the figure in question is revered as you say. Where I'm from, Abraham Lincoln is a revered historical figure, but I'm not sure anyone would find a username combining his name with an animal to be offensive. - ZLEA _T\^C 01:53, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Allow this is fine. Secretlondon (talk) 16:24, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Allow Per all of the above. Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 19:20, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Allow, perfectly cromulent name AFAICS. Extra plus points because the name pleasingly recalls my favorite era in English literature, the Restoration, via the heroic tragedy Aureng-zebe (1675) by John Dryden. Bishonen | tålk 20:19, 1 February 2025 (UTC).[reply]