Wikiversity:Community Review/Usurpation of usernames

Usurpation
There has been some question about how we should handle requests for usurpation, esp. in light of Single User Login. Please review the following pages and discuss below. --mikeu talk 13:14, 13 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Changing username
 * Wikiversity talk:Changing username
 * Usurpation requested

Discussion
Speaking for myself (and mikeu, I'm pretty sure), my approach to date has been to be conservative when it comes to usurpation requests, which is to say I haven't granted requests when the target account has edits. Given that there's no clear statement by the community about whether to usurp in other cases, this is the safer course since we can always do one later. Personally I don't see any pressing need to do it in cases where another user has already made edits connected with the target username.

As far as I can tell, there's 3 ways to do it:
 * 1) only allow usurping of accounts that either have no edits at all or where the current owner of the username gives explicit permission
 * 2) allow usurping of accounts which have less than a certain number of edits and/or have been inactive for a certain amount of time, or
 * 3) decide cases that don't fit the first description on a case-by-case basis using something similar to WV:CR.

I think the second way has problems, and the third way might be a bit onerous. --SB_Johnny talk 13:53, 13 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, I have been very cautious in considering these requests due to the lack of a clear statement from the community. Personally, I might be inclined to support the usurpation in cases where there are no significant edits, however this can be rather subjective.  In any case, our request page has been stalled at times and the crats really need some input from everyone on how we should handle these cases.  Number #3 would mostly certainly cause stalling of our progress on deciding on these requests.  While I might tend to go with #2 I doubt we would be able to come up with a set of rules that is clear and everyone agrees upon.  --mikeu talk 14:02, 13 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Just to expand a bit on my prior comment. Option #1 seems to have wide support, though I do have concerns that it might be too strict.  I would support #3 as a sort of appeals or review process for cases that are not so clear cut.  For example, a literal interpretation of #1 would preclude usurpation in a case where an account only has a single edit that was reverted as vandalism.  As someone who clicks the button to make these changes I'd like to have a clear guideline that covers the majority of cases.  But, I do support the idea of having some flexibility in making these decisions.  --mikeu talk 21:11, 16 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree with number 1: Protecting existing user names of people who may some day return and continue editing is more important than giving new users exactly the user name they want. StuRat 14:58, 13 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I think that position may have made sense prior to SUL, or at least there was no good reason to muck things up; but since the implementation of SUL, it's important to look at the effect across projects because it affects editors here who want SULs and it affects editors who might come here (and some come the first time merely because of SUL). If you implement a rule like the above, a person can end up with an account that is unified throughout all but one or two projects because a user years ago made a few edits and left.  That defeats the whole purpose of SUL.  Besides, only very experienced users generally will be able to check a username across all projects for use and then be able to figure out whether particular non-English projects will allow you to usurp if it's registered.  Changing a user name once you have an SUL is not a practical option.  Sure, if you find that on one project there is an active editor by the same name then you picked the wrong name if you intend to edit there, no argument.  But, the meta page on SUL talks about a sort of superiority of claim.  Yes, it leaves that for the individual projects to define, but the implication is simply what I just stated, you can't expect to go stealing away active editor's names.  But there should be some level of discretion for what clearly appear to be abandoned accounts.  By the way, an SUL usurpation really is only relevant to older and less active accounts as active or newer editors will generally have taken the time to obtain SUL accounts by ensuring they had names that were available for SUL (or creating them automatically, thereby reserving the name on most projects).  The crats above know this, but just so it's clear to everyone else, I have an SUL usurpation request pending since last December, so you know that I have a bias.--BewareofDoug 22:26, 13 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree with the first approach. I think the person that registered the name locally has "superiority of claim". I think the first approach is the only way to assume good faith and prevent confusion should a person return some day. If changing a SUL username is hard then SUL should be fixed. SUL could maybe even be changed to allow usernames to be different across projects while maintaining a single login. -- dark lama  14:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)


 * That's a great idea and maybe it should be but it's not. In the particular case that brought this here, the user has no mainspace edits, last edit of about 60 total was over 3 years ago, and the user has another account (also not used in over 3 years) which exists on multiple projects suggesting that that account is (or was) the primary account.  Does your position regarding such an account remain the same?--BewareofDoug 20:23, 18 October 2009 (UTC)


 * In general, I agree with the conservative sentiment towards #1 and #3 - at least until perhaps guidelines can be established for #2. Existing accounts should be not by usurped without permission esp. where there is editing locally and across projects e.g., I might register my kids so they have a username consistent with the rest of their online identities but they might not edit much yet. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 01:50, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

What happens to the edits by an account if it is usurped? Are they still attributed to the username along with the previous edits of the renamed user? -- Jtneill - Talk - c 01:50, 21 March 2010 (UTC)


 * The username is not the same as the account, they are attributed to the proper account. Whether the name says the same thing is another matter and depends on whether the project has its crats edit all the old posts.  On some projects they get renamed to the old account's new name. So, for example, if I were to ever successfully usurp "Doug" on this page, the current Doug account would be renamed to something like "Doug (usurped)" or "Doug (old)" or the like.  The edits would still just say Doug but they could be traced because they would show up in "Doug (old)"'s contributions not mine.  If the project wanted to, as Wikipedia has done in the past (I haven't been involved in name changes there in about a year, so I can't speak to current procedure), the Crats, admins, or a bot, could change all of Doug(old)'s posts to be signed by "User:Doug(old)".  Even the idea that only accounts without significant edits can be usurped is flawed because its stated reason was to comply with GFDL; a statement which shows a serious lack of understanding of the GFDL as well as a lack of understanding of the difference between a user's name and a user's account.--BewareofDoug 20:20, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

What if a usurpation request is received for an account with a few edits a few years ago? It is the last usurpation needed for an active user to have SUL. How do people feel about usurption in this case? -- Jtneill - Talk - c 05:52, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


 * There is no requirement to usurp before you get an SUL and SUL is automatic now and has been for over a year for new accounts. However, the SUL won't act as a Single Sign-on for projects that haven't been unified.  So, I can't merge this account with my SUL account unless the name and password are the same.  If I log onto a project that I have an SUL on and then I log onto a project that I have never been on and there is no User:Doug on that project, I will automatically assume that name.  If I log onto a project that I've never been on before directly and create an account, I'll have a new SUL on all projects.  Actually, if I go from here back to Wikipedia, I will be User:BewareofDoug.  I have unified the account across all projects to protect it, but I do not edit with it except here.--BewareofDoug 20:20, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Practical considerations
Situation: User Y registered years ago, has no talk or user page, and has no edits. Email not enabled. User with SUL Y creates or has account X here, and requests usurpation, X -> Y. I just did this on fr.wikiversity (Usurping Abd there). Granted within one day. They did not require me to notify Y. What that would do is simply create an almost certainly useless user talk page. What has actual 'crat experience been for no-email, no-edit accounts? --Abd 01:16, 30 August 2011 (UTC)