"== The signature issue ==

Could we discuss this and perhaps come up with a compromise?   chi? 
Like what? —→talk • 
I was proposed something like User:White Cat/ (formerly Cool Cat) redirect by User:David Levy. I like that suggestion for two reasons. #1 it satisfies the valid concerns of people such as yourself. A definite ""Cool Cat"" link is left behind. #2 it satisfies my desire to ""empty"" 'Cool Cat' userspace. 
Should a bot with a bot flag make the modifications marked as a minor edit it wouldn't even trigger ""You have a new message"" or show up on watchlists (unless user wants to explicitly review bot edits). 
  chi? 
The concern is that there is no reason someone should not be allowed to create a redirect from your old user page to your new user page, regardless of whether top-facing talk page revisions have a link to it. I think you should be perfectly free on your new user page to say nothing whatsoever about your old user name; the issue is the other direction. If you are suggesting that a bot go through every use of your signature to change it to point to ""→talk • 
You may want to respond to the two posts I made earlier: 
I am quite confused in what you're seeking. Should the redirect stay if I get my current userpage deleted? I can get my userpage deleted if it is put as a precondition to get the redirect deleted.
Although it is sane and logical, I do not believe there is any policy/consensus to back up your ""archives should never be altered except under very special circumstances that are beyond an ordinary username change"" logic. Archives would have been full protected if that was the case.
  chi? 

It has been proposed several times to fully protect archives. The reason it is not done is because 1) it would be a large burden that is generally not necessary because few people try to change the contents of archives and even common vandalism in archives is almost non-existent; and 2) there are legitimate edits to be made to the page, even outside of removing real names or potentially libellous statements, such as archiving additional sections, re-factoring, or changing headers, that would be impeded by protecting the page and likewise create additional burden if there were a scheme to have administrators protect and unprotect these pages. —→talk • 

Let me get this straight, now you are changing your sig to use a different subpage in your userspace when you have not even changed your username? Where does it end? —→talk • 

 Wally the Green Monster 
Hey,
I'm not sure why you keep deleting the Wally the Green Monster edits. Susan Widak is the orginal creator of Wally and holds copyrights form the mid-1990's. Her hats, t-shirts, biibs, cups, pants, etc. were all sold at in around fenway park for roughly 5 years. I'm gonna actually scan some of her designs for your overview. I'm not sure who you are, but don't you think it's slightly out of line to erase all of this factual information that's being posted???

First, your addition needs to be verifiable in published third-party sources, like books and magazines, references to which should be included in your edit. See Wikipedia:Verifiability for more information. Second, your addition needs to be written in a neutral point of view. The beginning of the paragraph is fine in this respect, but everything after ""Although Susan humbly refuses to claim credit..."" is written as though it were an addressed letter from you personally to the world. See Wikipedia:Neutral point of view for more information. —→talk • 

 Can you help me? 

I would like you to take a look at ''''''