User talk:WA at BAC

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia because your username, BermanAndCompany, does not meet our username policy. '''Your username is the only reason for this block. You are welcome to choose a new username (see below).''' A username should not be promotional, related to a "real-world" group or organization, misleading, offensive or disruptive. Also, usernames may not end in the word "bot" unless the account is an approved bot account. You are encouraged to choose a new account name that meets our policy guidelines. Alternatively, if you have already made edits and you wish to keep your existing contributions under a new name, then you may request a change in username by:
 * Adding on your user talk page. You should be able to do this even though you are blocked, as you can usually still edit your own talk page. If not, you may wish to contact the blocking administrator by clicking on "E-mail this user" on their talk page.
 * At an administrator's discretion, you may be unblocked for 24 hours to file a request.
 * Please note that you may only request a name that is not already in use, so please check here for a listing of already taken names. The account is created upon acceptance, thus do not try to create the new account before making the request for a name change. For more information, please see Changing username.

If you feel that you were blocked in error, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Daniel Case (talk) 05:36, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Why was "WA_at_BAC" not allowed when Username policy explicitly allows that. See "However, usernames are acceptable if they contain a company or group name but are clearly intended to denote an individual person, such as "Mark at WidgetsUSA", "Jack Smith at the XY Foundation", "WidgetFan87", LoveTrammelArt, etc". Ryan Vesey 20:39, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * You may have a valid point, and I would not attempt to defend my position in the face of reasoned argument; but I would point out that not only was the username clearly a reference to the company, but his only edit had also been a promotional article for said company. --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 21:30, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The promotional aspect becomes an issue of a hard block vs a soft block (BermanAndCompany, what I mean by that is a soft block only requires a username change while a hard block involves a bigger issue of promotional edits). I wouldn't find his one edit to be promotional.  He removed a category, the inclusion of this was contentious because the company is not declared as a lobbying organization and the article didn't even mention the dispute (dispute seen here).  We also encourage names like WA_at_BAC because it makes the COI clear.  An example of an editor with a similar username can be seen at.
 * This is my suggestion. We unblock this account and allow a rename request to WA_at_BAC.  Require that any content related edit with this account be made as a suggestion on the talk page using Request edit.  Spelling and grammar edits directly to the article are fine immediately.  In addition, I feel that if the editor should like to edit other Wikipedia articles normally, a separate account should be created.  That account could not make edits to articles related to BermanAndCompany broadly construed.  This would be a legitimate role account since the policy says "Such accounts are permitted only if the account information is forever limited to one individual, however, policy recommends that usernames avoid being misleading or disruptive."  This account is clearly limited to one editor, the new username is not misleading or disruptive in any way, and it would be a legitimate alternate account because one is used only for COI edits.  We could also have this be the only account, but require the requested edit template on articles related to BAC (again broadly construed). Ryan Vesey 23:55, 13 December 2012 (UTC)