User:Rhododendrites/signature rfc drafting

=Version 2=

RfC: usernames in signatures
The following three questions concern the extent to which customized signatures should be required to display someone's full username, or an easily recognizable abbreviation/variant. ~

Background
There have been several discussions concerning customized signatures which do not correspond to someone's username and the impact they may have on other users (for example).

Editors have expressed that the guidelines at WP:CUSTOMSIG/P (namely A customised signature should make it easy to identify your username and It is common practice for a signature to resemble to some degree the username it represents) have proven ambiguous and are frequently ignored. While guidelines are not firm rules, they are intended as generally accepted standards that editors should attempt to follow, following common sense and absent a good reason not to. If a guideline can be ignored without reason, the consensus behind that guideline should be reconsidered and the guideline updated where necessary.

This RfC is to determine what consensus is around this subject, and its result should then be reflected in the language at WP:CUSTOMSIG/P, up to and including removing the two bulletpoints.

This RfC does not concern stylized text or text in addition to the username.

Question 1
Should a customized signature be required to display someone's username in its entirety, without changes?

Notes:
 * A response of "no" would mean that abbreviations, variations, and other names are permitted instead of the username.
 * Per the scope of this RfC, an answer of "Yes" would still allow nicknames, variations, translations, or other names in addition to the username, as long as they are clearly separated.

Question 2
If there is a consensus against Question 1 (if signatures are not required to display the username in its entirety, without changes), should signatures be easily recognizable to a new user as referring to the username they link to?

This would disallow signatures with minimal or no resemblance to the username, for example signing another name entirely, but would allow shortened names and variations as long as the connection would be obvious to most new users. If you answer "Yes", please indicate whether there should be an exception for usernames written in a non-Latin script, following WP:NLS.

Question 3
If there is consensus in favor of either question 1 or question 2, should they apply to all signatures, or only those which were not in use prior to this RfC.

This is included because some have argued that users who have used the same signature for an extended period should be "grandfathered" in (i.e. given an exception).

Discussion (usernames in signatures)
=Version 1=

Main question
Should the name in a customized signature generally correspond to the username it represents?

If yes, which of the following statements do you agree with (select all that you agree with):


 * A. The username must appear in its entirety, without changes.
 * B. A signature can include an abbreviation instead of the full username. (such as RUS or Rando)
 * C. A signature can include a variation of the username instead of the full username (such as elpmaxE or X&MPL)
 * D. Abbreviations and variations must present a name that most users (including new users) could easily understand to represent the username.
 * E. If abbreviations or variations are to be used, the displayed name must be registered to the user as a doppelgänger or be ineligible for registration (to avoid displaying a name which is the same as a different user's username).
 * F. If a username uses non-Latin script, the signature must include the username itself, but can additionally include a Latinized version.
 * G. If a username uses non-Latin script, the signature may include a Latinized version instead of the username.
 * H. The user page link in a signature should include only the username (or abbreviation/variation, if applicable), and no additional text.

Note: Other issues related to signatures (colors, fonts, inclusion of other text/messages outside of the username, inclusion of other links, etc.) are outside the scope of this RfC.

Applicability
If there is consensus for any of the above, to whom should it apply?


 * 1. All users are expected to follow the consensus of this RfC.
 * 2. Signatures in use prior to the closure of this RfC may continue, but all future signatures must follow the consensus of this RfC.
 * 3. None of these rules should be enforced.