User talk:Qwerspam

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia!

I hope not to seem unfriendly or make you feel unwelcome, but I noticed your username, and I am concerned that it might not meet Wikipedia's username policy for the following reason: Use of "spam" may indicate disruptive intent. After you look over that policy, could we discuss that concern here?

I'd appreciate learning your own views, for instance your reasons for wanting this particular name, and what alternative username you might accept that avoids raising this concern.

You have several options freely available to you:

If you can relieve my concern through discussing it here, I can stop worrying about it.
If the two of us can't agree here, we can ask for help through Wikipedia's dispute resolution process, such as requesting comments from other Wikipedians. Wikipedia administrators usually abide by agreements reached through this process.
You can keep your contributions history under a new username. Visit Wikipedia:Changing username and follow the guidelines there.

Thank you. Daniel Case (talk) 14:29, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If my name offends you, you are free to ban me. Qwerspam (talk) 14:51, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that the username is offensive, and we don't really want to ban you since you seem to have been making good contributions to the project. Having the word "spam" in your username is in sort of a grey area in the username policy, and is generally frowned upon unless there's a good reason for having it. It's actually very easy to request a burecrat to change your username. If you're interested, head over to WP:CHU and make a request. Cheers! Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 18:47, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I respectfully decline to have my username changed. 1) I dont believe in bureaucrats and 2) its pretty easy to create a new username on my own. Cheers and stuff. Qwerspam (talk) 19:30, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But they do exist! I understand where you're coming from, so I'm going to go ahead and softblock this account. Please remember to consider the username policy if you choose to create a new account. Thank you! Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 19:37, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

what are you doing? I am trying to edit a page. Yes i know you are almighty, you dont have to make a point in proving it. This is my identity and I would like to keep it. Qwerspam (talk) 19:57, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

October 2008[edit]

This account, Qwerspam, has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia, because of concerns that the chosen username may not meet our username policy.

This is often not a reflection on the user, and you are encouraged to choose a new account name which does meet our guidelines and are invited to contribute to Wikipedia under an appropriate username. If you feel this block was made in error, you may quickly and easily appeal it - see below.

Our username policy provides guidance on selecting your username. In brief, usernames should not be offensive, disruptive, promotional, related to a 'real-world' group or organization, or misleading. Also, usernames may not end with the string "bot" unless the account is an approved bot account.

If you have already made edits and wish to keep your existing contributions under a new name you may request a change in username. To do so, please follow these directions:

Add {{unblock-un|your new username here}} below. This is possible because even when you are blocked, you can still edit your own talk page.
At an administrator's discretion, you may be unblocked for 24 hours to file a request.
Please note, you may only request a name that is not already in use. The account is created upon acceptance – do not try to create the new account before making the request for a name change since we can far easier allocate your new name to you, if it is not yet used. Usernames that have already been taken are listed here. For more information, please visit Wikipedia:Changing username.
In the alternative, you can "abandon" the contributions under this username and create a new account, which is much faster and easier.

Last, the automated software systems that prevent vandalism may have been activated, which can cause new account creation to be blocked also. If you have not acted in a deliberately inappropriate manner, please let us know if this happens, and we will deactivate the block as soon as possible. You may also appeal this username block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below or emailing the administrator who blocked you. Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 19:39, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock|name is not a clear violation of the username policy, and edits to date have been positive contributions to wikipedia}}

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

Well, I think I was a bit too hasty here. Your contributions to the project have been excellent, especially for a new editor. After thinking about this for a while, I'd like to retract the block and offer you, Qwerspam, my apologies for any inconvenience or disruption that I've caused you. I'm not going to close the RSandsteinFCN that Sandstein opened, as it should have the first avenue I purused after engaging you in discussion, not a block. Again, my apologies. Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 02:02, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request handled by: Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 02:02, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see that a block was really called for, here; if they were going to start spamming, they would have done so way before now. It's not as if the very mention of the word "spam" sends Wikipedians into a state of shock, is it? All I see us accomplishing here is the alienation of a blatantly helpful user, without any apparent benefit to the encyclopedia, and that's just not something I can stand behind. – Luna Santin (talk) 20:06, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When I read the name, I read it as a misspelled "queer spam," and interpreted it as potentially disruptive. I'm sure I'm not the only person who will read it that way. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 20:32, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't read it that way... I read it as Qwer's Pam. X clamation point 21:08, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stand by as I refer this case to WP:RFCN. Sandstein 22:24, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did we get tired of blocking for actual disruption, or something? Now we're blocking over imagined possible disruption and misread usernames? If the user was spamming or posting homophobic vandalism, I'd be all for a block... care to point out where either of those has happened? – Luna Santin (talk) 22:29, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

October 2008[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on User talk:TheFabOne. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:57, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i wasnt attacking, I dont know how to get him to stop deleting pages. {vandalism} template seemed accurate Qwerspam (talk) 19:01, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unless done in bad faith, it's a content dispute, not vandalism. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:18, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

so how do I deal with vandalism, as "in bad faith"? Qwerspam (talk) 19:24, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

February 2014[edit]

Please do not add defamatory content to Wikipedia, as you did to Patrice Wilson, especially if it involves living persons. Thank you. Elizium23 (talk) 05:46, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]