Wikipedia talk:Changing username

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

Validation Tool Update

The existing username validator tool which is linked in this section of the article has some bugs such as not recognising that usernames with trailing or leading underscores or spaces will have those characters removed. This means that it thinks a username such as "Mephie_" is both valid and unique because "Mephie_" != "Mephie". It also does not employ many of the checks used when creating a new username e.g. check for top-level domains, privilege indicators, reserved names or invalid Unicode.

So I cloned the repo (https://github.com/hal609/uv) and published an updated tool on ToolForge: https://uv2.toolforge.org/ which performs these checks.

I would like to request that the existing link is modified to point to the new tool so that potential new usernames can be validated more accurately by users. Mephiie (talk) 00:53, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I updated it to the new tool, if only because the old tool doesn't check for the newly invalid "Usernames starting with ~2". Wondering if it's also possible to have it check for AntiSpoof conflicts as well? —⁠k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 13:45, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Username partial conflict

I'm trying to change my username to User:FMRadio. I've come into a conflict with an obsolete account, User:Fmradio, and I'm not sure how to advance further. If I request a simple username change, I assume I'll be denied like last time because of the similarity to Fmradio. Fmradio only has one edit from 19 years ago. If I request a usurpation, which I'm pretty confident would succeed, I'm stuck with the wrong capitalization. How do I get past the similarly named account and still end up with the capitalization FMRadio that I want?

If there is a specific page that I should have posted this on that I missed, just let me know where I should put this. This seemed most appropriate. Thank you! Phoeromones (talk) 16:28, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Similarity is not a concern here. Although you were renamed twice in August and six months have not yet passed since the last rename, I am willing to make an exception given your contributions. Please let me know if you would like me to proceed with the rename. – DreamRimmer ■ 17:26, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would! Thank you so much for making an exception. Phoeromones (talk) 17:31, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done – DreamRimmer ■ 17:38, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seeking clarification for the term 'established user'

In this section under “Usurpation reqests”, the term “established user” is not defined.

Could someone clarify what criteria are generally meant by an “established user” in this context (for example, account age, edit count, or conduct history)? If there is an existing guideline or commonly applied standard, wouldn't it be helpful to link to it or briefly summarise it in the article?

The lack of an explicit explanation may lead to uncertainty for readers, including users who would otherwise meet the intended criteria but may be hesitant to request a rename, as well as users making requests that are unlikely to succeed due to unmet expectations (for example, see this request). Astley101 (talk) 06:37, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Astley101: There is no official definition of what counts as an "established user". Currently, usurpations are considered on a case-by-case basis, and "established user" is typically at the discretion of the renamer handling the request (see m:Requests_for_comment/Global_usurpation_policy_2#500_edit_requirement). In general, the requirement exists to prevent brand new users from being able to usurp existing usernames, and also to ensure that usurped usernames are put to use afterwards rather than simply being usurped and going unused again. A rough guideline may be at least 100 edits, but this is not a hard rule and exceptions may apply. We may consider usurpation for the alternate account of a user who has more than 100 edits, and may decline usurpation requests from users whose 100 edits were all self-reverts (to prevent gaming the system). Currently, there is no official global usurpation policy, with the last discussion to implement one fizzling out in 2018, but a user who has registered less than 24 hours ago and whose only edits were to request usurpation is not considered established enough to be granted usurpation. —⁠k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 13:44, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see, thanks for letting me know. Astley101 (talk) 04:32, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]