Wikipedia talk:Courtesy vanishing

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by .

Why did "Vanished user" become "Renamed user"

On September 12 2024, "Vanished user" has been changed to "Renamed user" when accounts vanishing. See [1]. 1.129.111.66 (talk) 08:51, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Both were used interchangeably as requested by the user requesting a vanishing. Since late July there's a new vanishing process which standardises some of the process. The Renamed user option is now applied by default and the random string is generated automatically. The creation of redirects is automatic (so no more instances of renamers forgetting to select that option) and, if a user has made no contributions on any project, the whole process is fully automatic. Hope that helps, Cabayi (talk) 19:23, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, aside from that, it's actually impossible to really vanish. The contributions remain, just with a different username ("Renamed user XXXX") attached. In true internet vanishing, even that would go. Just as importantly, many of us are acutely aware that a very significant proportion of people who make a big deal of vanishing actually wind up returning. If people don't want to be here, all they have to do is stop logging in. Or if they need more self-discipline, they can scramble their password and detach email from their account. Risker (talk) 22:46, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is that users began getting blocked because of it, as shown in this example. (The reason, as translated from Portuguese, is an improper username) ـ ـ Cipher Nox (talk) 11:22, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The report on ptwiki placed by Chronus and the block imposed by Igor G.Monteiro on Renamed user 3aa4fe0c77e1279e6d0fa928eac40011 were pointless as the vanishing process automatically applies a global lock on the account.

It appears you took a courtesy vanishing from SilverBullet X on 31 Oct but had already established your new account Cipher Nox (talk · contribs) on 14 Sept. Courtesy vanishing is for users who are quitting Wikipedia forever. It's not the same as a clean start.

Teles, I think this fits in your toolset? Cabayi (talk) 10:57, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cabayi

Done! Chronus (talk) 20:31, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cabayi, blocking was handled by Chronus. I think it would be nice a clarification to ptwiki about vanishing renamed since the chosen pattern is not according to that project’s username policy for regular accounts. I plan to do that soon. —Teles «Talk to me˱_{M @ C S}˲» 13:48, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cabayi Thank you kindly for your insight. To clarify, I did not mention a "clean start." This account was created for specific purposes like this one—initially, to contact ptwiki admins, though I did not receive a response. However, I believe my messages did reach the admin Chronus as per unblock.

My intention here was to shed light on how local wikis handle vanished users’ usernames differently. As you respectfully pointed out, the blocks imposed were and remain unnecessary, given that the account is locked globally.

On a global note, this is precisely why I contributed here about the matter—not only because it aligns with my principles but because I have a conscience and a heart. My aim was to advocate for a unified approach—one that aligns RTV policies across all local wikis, ensuring fairness and consistency.

Warm regards, ـ ـ Cipher Nox (talk) 12:40, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Late response, but one reason it was standardized to the generic "renamed" was to avoid entangling with "vanish" legislation in various jurisdictions. — xaosflux ^Talk 19:15, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Globally locked

According to Wikipedia:Courtesy vanishing#Vanishing from Wikipedia after renaming "The account is then automatically globally locked, preventing any future logins." However, I see that Renamed user d832409fa9d4d3fa580ea2237706ccec (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) made over 900 edits before they were locked. The wording of that makes me suspect that they are not being locked automatically. So should the section be changed? CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 18:44, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The wording there is fine - the account made 900 edits first. Then it was renamed. Then, immediately after the rename, it was locked. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:54, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So what you're saying is that they registered 5 months ago as "User:Original name" and then were renamed and locked today? If so then I really misunderstood that. CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 19:02, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:04, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Is my face red. I completely misunderstood the whole thing. I'm going to go outside and do old man stuff. Wave a stick and yell at ravens. CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 19:07, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One of the mysterious things about Wikipedia - and the MediaWiki software in general - is that when a user is renamed, all of the edits that were made by that user under their old name (going right back to when they first registered) will now show in page histories as being made by the the new name. It's like when you move a page and look at somebody's contributions - the new name for the page is shown against the pre-move edits. For some reason, this doesn't happen in watchlists, where the page name is shown as it was at the time of the edit, even if the page has been moved subsequently. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:33, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]