Last modified: 2013-01-24 18:05:05 UTC
The current processes used for enforcing username policy aren't particularly friendly to new users. Part of this is about the language used to inform users about policy violations (which is not a technical issue), but part of it is about the process for implementing the change. See this talk page warning as an example (not singling out the user who's placing it, who is following standard operating procedure). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Talati_Panthaky What I'd suggest as an alternative process: 1) We create a new [[Special:ForceUsernameChange]] page. 2) When a user whose "force username change" flag is set, while they are logged in, all write operations (edits, preferences, etc.) result in a splash screen requesting that the user change their name before proceeding. This splash screen can have friendly language explaining policy in simple terms, and providing a simple input box that checks for naming conflicts. Once the name change is in place, the user can proceed doing what they wanted to do. As an additional checkbox in the special page used by administrators, we could have a "[ ] Require administrative review of new username" checkbox if we don't trust the user to pick a valid name. In that case, the username would land in a review queue.
I agree with Erik's idea for this workflow. Currently there are many reason why a username may be blocked indefinitely as unacceptable on the projects. Most of those reasons assume good faith, but require that a new account name be chosen if the person wants to continue editing. It's cumbersome and no doubt incredibly discouraging to new editors. Administrator review as part of this workflow means that all the currently accepted username blocking reasons (See English Wikipedia's list, for one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Template_messages/User_talk_namespace#Blocks) would be covered, including vandal-type names like "User:FooEditorSux".
This change needs to allow a protest and unblock template to be posted on the User Talk page, requesting administrative review of the block (admins are often over-zealous here). It also needs to be tracked in the logs (either as a username change or as an entry in the block log) for future COI investigative purposes.
