User talk:BigHatsForJeebus

My concern about your username (BigHatsForJeebus)

Hello, BigHatsForJeebus, and thank you for contributing to Wikipedia!

I hope not to seem unfriendly or make you feel unwelcome, but I noticed your username, and am concerned that it might not meet Wikipedia's username policy. After you look over that policy, could we discuss that concern here?

Wikipedia username policy frowns upon using the names of religous figures in usernames.

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 asking for a "third opinion", or requesting comments from other Wikipedians. Admins usually abide by agreements reached through this process.
If you decide to just go ahead and change your username, it is possible for you to keep your present contributions history under the new username: simply request a new name here following the guidelines on that page, rather than creating a whole new account.

Let me reassure you that my writing here means I don't think your username is grossly, blatantly, or obviously inappropriate; such names get reported straight to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism (WP:AIV), or blocked on sight. This is more a case where opinions might differ, and it would be good to reach some consensus — either here or at WP:RFC/NAME. So I look forward to a friendly discussion, and to enjoying your continued participation on Wikipedia. Thank you again! -- Diletante 18:07, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jeebus is not a religious figure. Anchoress 18:17, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This users previous name was BongHits4JesusForever, WP:UN also prohibits "Misspellings or spellings of any of the types of names listed above with "creative substitutions"". Jeebus appeared on an episode of the simpsons as homer's mispronunciation of Jesus. I think it is clear what Jeebus is referring to here. -- Diletante 18:24, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Soooo... it's a word that's spelled and pronounced differently from Jesus, but you're objecting because a TV show once used a similar-sounding word to refer to Jesus. How did Homer Simpson spell it? Anchoress 18:28, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are lots of other people called jesus too

I would urge you to continue with your name as is BigHats. Ignore the people more obsessed with conforming to abitrary rules than looking at the contributions you could bring to the community. Wikipedia is over-ran with more rules than the average democracy and its enforcers often appear drunk with power. Your username is not offensive, it is barely a reference to anything. The idea that nobody can make reference to a religious character is frankly laughable. People need to grow-up and stop taking offense to everything. There is nothing to stop you continuing to post entirely without a username, at least you have taken the time to create an account. Thousands don't. ny156uk 21:31, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, with qualifications. With apologies to BHFJ for using her/his userpage as a soapbox, I personally support the discouragement of genuinely offensive usernames, for the reason that it diminishes the credibility of Wikipedia. For instance, when a news media is referring to a Wikipedia editor, or when a student is using a Wikipedia article as a reference (naming major editors), I personally don't want to see them having to display their names with stars to avoid offence. But personally I think there's a huge difference between User:JesusIsAFaggot or User:UncleFucker and the username currently under discussion. I think moderation and good faith should be the first points of reference. Anchoress 21:54, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You should see some of the reports that make it to WP:AIV. People have posted complaints of such innocuous usernames as "PooeyLouie," "Jolenesux," and "SexIsGreat." It's not fair that other editors hold the right to object to specific usernames, but there is a greater concern here. Users who choose names like "Bollocks99" or "BongHits4Jesus" are usually immature kids who don't really contribute anything of value to this encyclopedia. There are other users here who make thousands of helpful contributions, and if even one of them becomes offended at an obviously stupid username, chances are it's gonna get nuked. Welcome to the meritocracy. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 22:10, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I personally am offended by this choice of name. The two before were even worse though (BongHits4Jesus and BannedFromWikipediaButBackForRevenge). I think this name should be banned. If you really want to contribute, you'd do it in a cooperative manner, and in an unoffensive way. My two cents. · AO ^Talk 11:28, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]