QUOTE(wikiwhistle @ Sat 9th August 2008, 9:02am)
QUOTE(Gandoman @ Sat 9th August 2008, 12:13pm)
Actually, they would - editing an article with the same name as your username is considered promotional and prohibited by the username policy. I doubt that this would be applied to established users though.
Not so. Only if it's the name of a company or business can an account risk being banned largely for the username alone if its edits seem to be promotional. People are allowed to contribute under their real names even to their own articles, this was clarified to me only the other day when I tried to get blocked on username grounds someone who'd written an article about themselves.
Indeed, it is not prohibited. Many notable people have edited their own article. There's a template that is added to the talk page of their BLP that indicates they have edited it. Close attention should be paid to ensure they are editing within policy, which is rarely the case, and is what eventually gets many of them banned, if not from the project, at least from their own article. It has nothing to do with the username policy. The only such concern there is that they must prove their identity through OTRS in order to ensure they are not being misrepresented by an impostor.
QUOTE(Alex @ Sat 9th August 2008, 9:40am)
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Sat 9th August 2008, 12:15pm)
QUOTE(LaraLove @ Sat 9th August 2008, 7:47am)
I'm surprised he didn't even edit much in the beginning. That seems odd to me. I mean sole
founder and all. You think he would have put some greater effort into it. It's like he was just the financial half of a partnership with someone or something like that...
That's one of the things I'm puzzled by. If I had created Wikipedia, I'd want to ensure it was full of articles - as detailed as possible - soon after it launched before somebody else with better PR skills came along and stole the idea!
are some of his early edits, when his username was in CamelCase. He was busy-ish.
Or perhaps a lot of his early edits are lost. It's strange how the earliest edit in the database is this
Ah, lost history. That makes a lot more sense. I looked up Larry Sanger's edits... you know, that random guy, and I was surprised to see that he had less than 800 edits. I thought he played a much bigger role in the very beginning of the project. Thanks for pointing that out, Majorly.