UESPWiki talk:Account Pseudonymization Requests

User Subpages

I've a couple of line about the legal nature of deleting accounts taken from wikipedia's courtesy vanishing page, where it is stated in bold that our licenses forbid account deletion. Further, the articles "allowing" for account pseudonymization do not make it a right.

While it's rare for a user with subpages (sandboxes etc) to request such a drastic measure, there's nothing explicitly stating what will happen to them. There's reference to pages created by the user, but this could just as well mean gamespace articles. I think it should be assumed that all subpages that are not archived talk pages would be deleted. The alternatives are that they remain under the old name thus voiding the attempt to vanish, or they move to the new username and never get touched again, thus negating the point of having them.

Also, there should probably be some attempt to explain that users who have never made an edit have little need for such drastic measures, and that they can simply leave after removing any personal data. Unless a user has an uncommon user name that can identify them there isn't really anything that can identify that individual, eg an account named JohnSmith is unlikely to lead someone back to a specific individual if all they did was create an account (as even IPs change). Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 17:22, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

I reworded the bit about pages created by the user. Is that better? I wanted to avoid the term "gamespace" just because there are pages like this one which aren't in gamespace, but where the user who created the page could not reasonably expect deletion if they leave. The concern with deleting user pages is that deletion logs are public, so if a user requests that their pages be deleted, it can point directly at who it was who was renamed, albeit under their new name. Still, that new name might be combined with other historical data to piece together who the pseudonymized user used to be, which is likely to go against what the user is trying to accomplish. I'm actually wondering if we should note that on the page. (Edit: it occurs to me that one solution might be to give admins the right to revision-delete log entries. They could then just revision-delete the deleted user page logs so regular users couldn't see them.)

I agree about explaining that users who haven't edited have little need to do anything significant other than removing their own info, but I couldn't figure out a good way to work that into the text anywhere. If you have a good way of doing that, go nuts. If not, I'll give it some thought myself when I'm a little more clear-headed and see if I can come up with something. – Robin Hood  ^(talk) 21:09, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

I couldn't see an easy way to do it, so I basically rewrote it, though I may have gone into too far, maybe even negating the point of the page. I'm seeing this page as a copy of wikipedia's courtesy vanishing, which still doesn't serve as a replacement for account deletion, its more salting the earth before quitting. The only real counter to personal information is removing the logs from public view, but there isn't much you can do if you use identifiers in your actual account name (beyond this and then hoping someone doesn't play detective). Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 00:22, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

That looks good, though I'm curious what you're referring to with recovering the account. – Robin Hood  ^(talk) 01:00, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia expects the process to be permanent. Should a user return and reveal themselves, even accidentally, wikipedia admins might reverse the "vanishing" and link it to the new account. I don't know if they could make it accessible, but reversing the name change wouldn't be difficult. I wouldn't expect that to happen if the account name contained personal information, and if the user wanted a "clean start" they should request that process instead. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 01:24, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

I think that's only in the event of a clean start where personal info is still available for the user or editing habits make it obvious that it's the same person. In the case of true vanishing/pseudonymization, there would be nothing left to positively identify a returning user as being the same as the old user. (Which brings up another point, that only users in good standing should be able to request this, if we haven't already mentioned that.) – Robin Hood  ^(talk) 01:41, 12 July 2019 (UTC)