User:Oshwah/TalkPageArchives/2019-04

You are currently viewing an archive of Oshwah's user talk page from April 2019. Please do not modify this page.

These discussions are no longer active and were moved here for historical and record-keeping purposes. If you need to respond to a discussion from here, please create a new discussion on my user talk page and with a link to the archived discussion here so I can easily follow, and we'll be able to pick up where we left off no problem.

Were you trying to send me a message? No worries. Just click here to go the correct page.

Did you make out with Bem?

Mr Sandman.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Contributer7 (talk • contribs) 10:26, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Contributer7 - I'm not sure what your message was about or what you were trying to ask. If you can elaborate with further details and what Wikipedia-related area, page, or issue this message is in regards to, I'll be able to understand your message better and I'll be able (and more than happy) to help you. Thanks - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:55, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User talk:Oshwah

User talk:Oshwah, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User talk:Oshwah and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User talk:Oshwah during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Hhkohh (talk) 11:42, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

This is just an April fool joke hope you not mind it Hhkohh (talk) 11:45, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Hhkohh - HA! Not at all... ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:56, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Hair Block

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for having crazy hair, as you did at User:Oshwah. Sadly your ability to grow hair can not be revoked.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, to bad, your hair is to crazy. APRIL FOOLS!

LakesideMiners^{My Talk Page} 12:16, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

LakesideMiners - Whelp... I figured I'd be blocked for this one day... I'm just surprised that I lasted this long. :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:57, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Oshwah

User:Oshwah, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Oshwah (2nd nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Oshwah during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ _Talk 13:26, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

(pretending to respond like a new user): This page should not be deleted, because... (your reason here) --~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:02, 1 April 2019 (UTC) i want to keep it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oshwah (talk • contribs)

I think I've run out of things to nominate for deletion.

I'm falling to bad jokes and nonsense! Please help me before I nominate all of Wikipedia!!!! One Blue Hat^{❯❯❯ (talk)} 20:29, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

(this is a joke)

HA! I'm sure that someone has nominated all of Wikipedia before, and many times... ;-) I also know that editors have started proposals to disable all editing on Wikipedia because "it's completely done"... If you want to make something that's a good April Fools thing, you gotta do something original :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:04, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

WP:TWW

I've MFD'ed this page for april fools', after april fools will the MFD close automatically and did i do it right? --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 20:48, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Also can you block me for 5 minutes as the reason being WP:APRILFOOLS --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 21:05, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

As long as you've added the humor tag at the top of the page, read this page, and followed the guidelines on this page - you should be fine and you created it correctly for April Fools day. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:09, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Can you please block me for 5 minutes as the reason being WP:APRILFOOLS, I want to see what it's like to be blocked. --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 21:15, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Will WP:TWW MFD close by itself? --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 21:26, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

If you followed the directions on this page and made sure that it's not listed in places that it shouldn't be (where only legitimate discussions belong or should be listed), you should be fine. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:32, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Can u check for me? I am trying to study my science. Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 21:33, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

I think you're supposed to omit tagging the actual page with the deletion notice if you're just doing it for April Fools, but I'm not absolutely certain. I went ahead and removed it from the page just in case. ;-) If I'm incorrect and if it's okay to have the tag and notice present, feel free to revert my edit and restore it. Either way, I think you'll be fine and other editors will know that this was simply a joke nomination - no need to worry. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:45, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Your upage has a deletion tag. Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 21:46, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Yeah... and that's why I said that I might be incorrect regarding the addition of the deletion notice on the actual page. I added a dummy edit to the page with my updated thoughts. Like I said, if you find that I'm incorrect, that having the tag and notice present is fine, and if you want it restored - feel free to revert my removal and restore it back. I was just removing it so that other editors wouldn't confuse it for being a legitimate request for deletion. But since you have the humor template tagged in the discussion, it should be apparent and obvious to others that it's just for April Fools. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:49, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Looks like you're right, Oshwah is never wrong! Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 21:53, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Ah yup, that makes sense. Otherwise, the page gets listed next to legitimate nominations by bots, which makes it very difficult for editors to discern the joke/humor nominations and discussions from the legitimate ones. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:55, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

How can I nominate Jesus or Homer Simpson for adminship as an April Fools? Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 21:57, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Umm... good question. I'm honestly not sure what the process is for an April Fools RFA. Don't get me wrong: Adding discussions, nominations, etc for April Fools humor is good fun... but don't let yourself get too carried away. If you're not sure as to how to add a humor page, discussion, nomination, etc and do so properly so that it's not disruptive or mistaken as vandalism or a legit nomination, don't create it. It's a much safer option to just hang back and watch others be brave and stupid in those regards than to try and "wing it" and do it yourself, make a mistake or go too far, and be the subject of frustration over something you were just doing as a joke and for a few smirks and a couple of laughs. ;-) Things can (and have) gone too far before regarding April Fools on Wikipedia. Last year, it even became the subject of an ArbCom case. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:08, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

April 2019

You have been blocked indefinitely for undisclosed massive reverts using Huggle and undisclosed I don't know, furthermore your crazy hair is causing disruption at Wikipedia if you think there are good reasons of why you should be unblocked you may pay us with burgers hamberders appeal this block by adding {{unblock|Reason=Your reason here}} --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 20:48, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

I appeal. I'm innocent and the accusations stated are false! :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:11, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Talk Page Access Revoked, WP:UTRS is your only choice now! Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 21:12, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

:-( ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:14, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

You have been banned indefinitely. (Unless you buy me a big mac, I'll lift your ban and block.) --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 21:15, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

LOL a Big Mac? Why a Big Mac? :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:16, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

The 'Secret Sauce' What's it made from? Wikipedia Vandalism??? Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 21:17, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

*Shrug*... Beats me. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:33, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Wait, weren't you BeanoJosh? Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 21:40, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

GOODUSER OSHY I'M CRYING😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣 GOLDIEM J (talk) 17:15, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Highway ip from January

2604:2000:1382:851A:7D88:E393:C028:64B3 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)

Clearly the same person as before, they left off where the last one did. Cards84664 (talk) 22:08, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Cards84664 - I've reverted the IP user's last edit to the article and temporarily blocked it for suspected block evasion. Thanks for the message and the heads up! If you see any more edits like this, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be happy to look into it. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:35, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 22:45, 1 April 2019 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

(Not a april fool's joke) Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 22:45, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Acknowledged. Will check it and respond in a bit. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:50, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

User:Prosper Mbongue Muna

writing an article about themselves. Please give the user a COI template. --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 23:09, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

It looks like Fastily has already taken care of the issue. Thanks for the message nonetheless ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:01, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

WTF cnut

You look like a stinky cow urine freak too! 171.61.199.202 (talk) 08:27, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

*cunt Dusti^{*Let's talk!*} 08:36, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Cnut was King of Denmark, England and Norway a thousand years ago. Just smile and accept the tribute from low life. :-) Martin of Sheffield (talk) 08:50, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

A thousand years ago I guess it's possible that folks, even royalty, would smell like Stinky cow urine? *shrugs* Dusti^{*Let's talk!*} 09:07, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Nah, see Cnut_the_Great#Bones_at_Winchester – just dry bones and dust. Sic transit gloria mundi. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 09:40, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

A beer for you!

For all the abuse love you had on april fools heres a beer Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 12:18, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Zppix! Thanks for the beer! HA! April Fools is just a day where people have fun... I'm not one of those "hard-ass" users who get riffled, frustrated, or uptight about having his user page or user talk pages messed around with. If anything, I'm quite used to having those pages vandalized and trashed.... LOL ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:07, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

My userpage

Hello. I got your message about trying to protect my privacy, and it confuses me that the info you removed even has cells in the {{infobox Wikipedia user}}. And I believe I've seen other users with that info corresponding to them on their userpages. This feels unexplained to me. GOLDIEM J (talk) 16:05, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi GOLDIEM J, and thanks for leaving me a message here regarding your concerns over the removal of content that I made from your user page. You are correct in that the {{infobox Wikipedia user}} includes parameters that allow for one to add their date of birth, age, location, and other personal information. You are also correct in that other users have added their personal information to this infobox template and onto their user pages as well. However, the difference between the other users and yourself is your age. This is documented on Wikipedia's child protection policy and outlined and explained further on this page regarding the protection of children's privacy. In short, we will actively remove and suppress the personal information of any editor who self-identifies as a younger editor. This is done to protect their privacy and their identity, and is why your user page was edited and your personal information removed.

This isn't just Wikipedia policy, but also part of the Wikimedia Foundation's global policy and terms of use. We take the protection of the identity and privacy of all Wikipedia users very seriously. If (for example) I knew the real life identity of another editor on Wikipedia and I started purposefully and maliciously telling other editors their real name, date of birth, location, etc, or if I provide links or URLs to sites or pages that contain their information, or expose other private information that they did not disclose on Wikipedia themselves - I'd be violating one of the most (if not the most) serious policies on Wikipedia, and I would be indefinitely blocked immediately and with no consideration for being unblocked. It's a serious matter, and part of my responsibilities on Wikipedia is to comply with these policies, ensure the safety and privacy of younger editors, and make sure that any breaches of this policy are fully handled and the information completely removed.

I hope that my response has helped you to understand why I removed content from your user page, and has pointed you in the right direction if you'd like to read more about these policies. Like I said in my message, I know that having one's user page edited and content removed can be frustrating, but it's done within compliance of policy and my responsibilities, and it's for your safety, anonymity, and your protection. If you have any questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. You're also welcome to email me if you prefer to continue this discussion in private. I wish you a great rest of your day and happy editing. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:41, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for telling me about that, and I understand what you said. I've got another question. Have you learned how to pick up an umbrella yet?😂 GOLDIEM J (talk) 16:49, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

GOLDIEM J - LOL... wait, what? Have I learned how to pick up an umbrella yet? I don't have an umbrella; I just wear a jacket... lol. I'm sure this is a joke or refers to something humorous, but I'm not familiar with this one... what exactly do you mean? :-D ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:55, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

lol it's only a joke I made up! GOLDIEM J (talk) 16:59, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

GOLDIEM J - HA! Well, you sure fooled me. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:04, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

😂 LMAO I didn't even MEAN to fool you😂 GOLDIEM J (talk) 17:06, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

GOLDIEM J - Well... I mean, it was just a really random question... LOL. I just figured that there was some connection, joke, or humor that I didn't understand or wasn't aware of. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:12, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

thanks

thanks for giving me one more chance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wwekid123 (talk • contribs) 22:15, 2 April 2019 (UTC) 22:18, 2 April 2019 (UTC)22:18, 2 April 2019 (UTC)22:18, 2 April 2019 (UTC)22:18, 2 April 2019 (UTC)Wwekid123 (talk) 22:18, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Wwekid123 - You're welcome. I started out on Wikipedia as a vandal who wanted to cause trouble on the site, and I was given a second chance back when I was new... just like the one that I gave you just now. If I wasn't given that chance, I wouldn't be the Wikipedia editor I am today. I went pretty far out on a limb for you, and I might receive some frustration and grief from other administrators for unblocking you and giving you another chance, but I believe that you should have one. Please please don't make me regret my decision; be good, stay outta trouble, and make legitimate and positive edits to Wikipedia, will ya? ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:23, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

thanks again

thanks again22:21, 2 April 2019 (UTC)22:21, 2 April 2019 (UTC)22:21, 2 April 2019 (UTC)22:21, 2 April 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wwekid123 (talk • contribs)

No problem :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:49, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

ur a good wikipedia user

I think you are a good Wikipedia user — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wwekid123 (talk • contribs) 22:23, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Wwekid123 - I appreciate the kind words. If you start making good contributions and help us to improve the project, patrol and revert vandalism, fix issues, and write content - you'll become an experienced editor and you'll someday be able to help new user just like I do. I'm here if you have any questions or need help; please don't hesitate to ask. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:51, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

you have very good experience in wikipedia Wwekid123 (talk) 23:21, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! I really appreciate that! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:02, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Question

Is there a general guide or anything to dealing with vandalism? I was navigating through different noticeboards underneath the community portal and just kind of guessed at where I should put it. It seems that my last two guesses have been right, but I don't want to guess. I want to be more confident and certain if I come across edits like that again and I don't want to accidently break any policies/guidelines while doing so. I have been reading through a lot of the links in-between my other edits to try and get a better idea of how the Wikipedia community works, but direction helps. While I'm on the topic, is there anything I could have done better on those two reports of vandalism? Clovermoss (talk) 02:23, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Clovermoss! Thanks for leaving me a message here with your questions and your request for input and advice. From what I'm reading, I think what you're asking is for how exactly you identify and handle vandalism? When you say that you "kind of guessed at where [you] should put it" when navigating through different noticeboard, what exactly are you referring to with "it"? What challenges or problems are you running into, or what exactly is making you feel unsure? I just want to make sure that I understand your message, your questions, and what's going on exactly so that I can give you good advice and input that addresses everything completely. Have you looked though and read Wikipedia's page on recent changes patrolling? This is where I send everyone to first when they come to me with questions, or when they ask how they can start to get into patrolling and reverting vandalism. That page will provide you with all of the guides, tools, information, helpful tips and tricks, and resources in order to help with that entire area. If you could just elaborate a bit more on exactly what you're looking for and what the issues or problems are, I'll be happy to respond with additional information and help. :-) Hope to hear back from you shortly! Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:45, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

By "it" I meant what was happening on the April Fools' Day article. I was fairly confident that those weren't constructive changes and that something should be done about it, but there were mutiple noticeboards and I wasn't 100% confident about which one it belonged in. I haven't looked at recent changes patrol (or its guidelines), but I might check it out later. I had the April Fools article on my watchlist and just kind of saw the back-and-forth changes of vandalism and other editors un-doing the edits. This article was the first time I reverted anything that wasn't an edit of mine. I was really hesistant to do anything, really, but I was pretty sure that I should do something. The first time (after the first revert), I looked around at different noticeboards, found the Adminstrator intervention against vandalism page and made an edit here. I mentioned one editor in particular that was kept changing the article after I had reverted their changes. Circleati was blocked and the April Fools' Day article was protected. From my understanding on page protection, it must have ended (and I noticed that there was more unhelpful edits to the April Fools' Day article since yesterday). Since these were different editors and not Circelati, the noticeboard about page protection seemed to be the best option. I guess what I'm asking for is advice on how I handled the situation (and my thought process). I'm a relatively new editor on Wikipedia (I created an account in September). I am interested in learning more about Wikipedia in general and becoming a beter editor, which is part of the reason I had an adoption request for Nick Moyes. Nick is sick right now and since you're the one who most recently protected the April Fools' Day page, I thought that it would be a good idea to contact you for advice. Clovermoss (talk) 03:04, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

I did something wrong with the diff, I'm not exactly sure what it is. If you scroll down my contributions, it's one of my recent edits. Do you know what I'm doing wrong when linking the diffs? Clovermoss (talk) 03:06, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Clovermoss - AHA! That makes much more sense now! Please accept my apologies for needing you to provide more context; between reverting vandalism, taking action against disruptive editors and sock puppets, assisting new users and those who need my assistance, processing reports at WP:AIV, WP:RFPP, WP:UAA, WP:ANI, and other noticeboards, and making sure that those backlogs are clear, as well as other daily tasks - my ability to recall an exact event or issue that I took care of even just an hour ago becomes lost and I'll often need to ask the user to explain exactly what they're talking about. Many times, a user will message me and start a new discussion with, "Hey, that block you applied to that IP a bit ago..." Well, I've blocked about 30 IP users over the last hour... so I'm often forced to respond with, "Umm, which one?" :-)

You have absolutely nothing to worry about in regards to what you did in the article and where you asked for help regarding the disruption that was going on there and what needed to be done in order to stop it. Not only were there two sock puppet user accounts replacing sections of the article with spam links and vandalism, there were also groups of other editors adding unreferenced content and unverifiable information, and adding their own disruptive edits and shenanigans to the article. It wasn't anything that I would expect you to be able to handle perfectly on your own. I can definitely say that your revert here was made in good faith. This content isn't something that I would've kept, since its source was aprilfools-day.com - which doesn't look reliable at all. But, that's a content-related matter; no big deal. Even if your revert wasn't "correct", the proper thing for the editor to do if they disagreed with it would be to start a discussion on the article's talk page and ping you in the discussion so that you can respond and explain why you restored it. That's all part of the wonderful world of dispute resolution and why it's so important to follow. It doesn't make anyone's edits "right or wrong"; it just brings disagreements between what editors think is the right thing to do and mandates that they be discussed and sorted out. Easy peasy! :-)

Your request for page protection at WP:RFPP was completely justified. The article was being absolutely bombarded with vandalism, spam, disruption, and edits that weren't up to par with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you see any article currently going through a very high rate of edits that are blatant vandalism, disruption, or even content disputes or edit warring between a group of users, definitely file a request for page protection. If it's an issue of one or even just two editors causing vandalism, don't be afraid! Revert those edits! Roll back those bad changes! Warn those editors and tell them to stop (if you don't have Twinkle turned on, go to your preferences page by clicking here, go to the "Gadgets" tab and tick the box to turn it on). You're experienced enough on Wikipedia, and you seem to be intelligent and have all of your marbles... you know what is blatant vandalism and what isn't; don't question yourself when faced with edits that are blatant trolling and vandalism. I'm confident that you'll do the right thing. :-)

The noticeboards that you will want to bookmark or have available to easily navigate to in order to file reports on (when things happen) are:

• WP:AIV (to report someone for repeated vandalism)
• WP:RFPP (to request a page or article be protected)
• WP:UAA (to report an inappropriate or offensive username that unquestionably violates Wikipeida's username policy)
• WP:ANEW (to report someone for edit warring)
• WP:ANI (to report other issues such as an editors inappropriate behavior or conduct, bad use or misuse of user tools and privileges, their long-term issues and problematic edits, basically anything that doesn't fall into the noticeboards above)
• WP:SPI (to report accounts that you believe are being used by the same person and in violation of Wikipedia's sock puppetry policy in order to evade blocks, cause disruption or abuse, engage in deceptive behavior by appearing to be two different people - such as where they try to add more than one vote to a discussion, etc)

Once you have those known and bookmarked, it makes it much easier to know exactly where the right place is to report issues. Even if you're wrong or if you file a report in the wrong place, it's not a huge deal... it can be fixed, moved, and taken care of for you.

I hope that this response was helpful to you, answered all of your questions, and addressed all of your worries and concerns. You have nothing to worry about. Just keep up the great work, don't be afraid to stand up and do what's needed to remove vandalism and blatant disruption, and take some time to get familiar with the noticeboards I listed above. Visit each one, read through a few reports, get an understanding of what things are reported there, and make sure that you don't have any questions. The biggest advice of all that I can give you: turn on Twinkle! It will make reverting vandalism, warnings users, filing reports at these noticeboards, and many other tasks a completely simple task and automate all of the manual parts for you. Do it! Seriously! Go to your preferences right now and turn it on! :-)

Please let me know if I can answer and more questions or help you with anything else, and I'll be more than happy to do so. I hope you have a great day and I wish you happy editing! :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:44, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Actually, I'm going to sleep. Thank you for your response though, it was incredibly helpful. I think I already have Twinkle turned on my preferences, but I'm not really sure how to use it. I'm guessing the information about how to use it effectively is in that link. Also, thanks for the encouragement. It means a lot to me. Clovermoss (talk) 03:53, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Clovermoss - You're quite welcome! I'm happy to hear that my response was meaningful to you. Yeah, definitely some sleep if it's that time... :-) Feel free to follow up here with any questions when you return and if you find that you need any more input, advice, or help. I'll be happy to help with anything you need. Have a great night, and I'm sure we'll speak again soon. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:02, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

I just noticed that the time in my sig isn't actually the time where I live. Although thinking that "it's only midnight" is an interesting first thought of mine. I'm guessing that's a preferences change? How do I change it to match my timezone? Also, I plan on going actually go to bed soon, but if you have the time to explain, I'd like to figure out what I did wrong linking the diffs earlier. Clovermoss (talk) 04:19, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Clovermoss - Make sure that the time zone is set to your region in the preferences page (it's located under the "appearance" tab), and it should reflect this change on all edit logs, contribution pages, edit histories, etc. and display relative to your local time zone. This however does not affect the timestamp next to anyone's signature - those are always saved in UTC. However, there is a gadget that you can enable in your preferences that will fix that. Just go to your preferences and under the "gadgets" tab, tick the box next to "Change UTC-based times and dates, such as those used in signatures, to be relative to local time (documentation)" so that it's enabled, and then click on "save". This gadget basically reads each UTC timestamp that's next to every signature on the current page, and then changes the resulting output text so that they display in your local time zone. Let me know if this resolves the time zone inconsistency that you're seeing. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:34, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

I was able to fix the local time. I kept the automatic UTC preference in my signature the way it was. Thanks for all your help tonight, I've really appreciated it. Clovermoss (talk) 04:42, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Clovermoss - Perfect! I'm glad that you were able to figure it out! No problem; always happy to lend a hand. ;-) Have a great night, and I'm sure that we'll speak again soon. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:46, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

WBEY-FM

Hi. I’m with WBEY-FM and keep adding what I feel is pertinent information and it keeps getting reverted back which is why my edits have been so many in number. I don’t mind the page being protected from edits but I would like to add the information to it Dmvradioguy (talk) 03:27, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Dmvradioguy! Were you editing this article earlier today and without an account? Were you blocked earlier today from editing Wikipedia? The more information that you can give me, the more that I can help you... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:45, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

No I wasn’t I’ve only used my account which I created after I directed an employee to make changes pertaining the station as we recently acquired WBEY. I’m new to all of this so forgive me if I’m doing something wrong. Dmvradioguy (talk) 03:48, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I suspect that Oshwah may be asleep so I'll nip in here with a few points. Your username looks as though it might be a company one rather than a personal one. If it is please read our policy on this. Next, you state that you are "with WBEY-FM" and you "directed an employee". We require people with a close connection to the subject to declare a conflict of interest, policy is here. There is also an absolute requirement to declare any paid editing (policy here) and that applies if you are editing about your employer in your own time. Once you've read and implemented the policies then the best approach is to go to the talk page for the article and request the changes you want (with citations please) and a disinterested editor can then assess them and implement them. This may seem an odd way to do things, but please remember that the page is an encyclopaedia's view of your station, not a private promotional page. Regards, (and Good Morning from UK to you both) Martin of Sheffield (talk) 06:56, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Martin of Sheffield - Nope, I'm awake. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:56, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Good Heavens! I thought you were US-based and it must be the middle of the night there. Anyhow, sorry for assuming things about you. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 07:09, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Martin of Sheffield - HA! No need to apologize at all. I am based in the United States, so your assumption was spot-on. I'm just having one of those nights where I can't sleep, so here I am..... ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:10, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Dmvradioguy - See the response from Martin of Sheffield above regarding your questions and concerns. There are important issues, policies, and guidelines that are being violated here, and this is very problematic. If you have any questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:02, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Incorrect actions

Oshwah instead of making these strange warnings, you should better pay attention to my request about it on Admin Requests Page. and moreover, you protected not-consented version which is the result of vandal edits. you should correct your actions.--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 07:35, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, Arsenekoumyk - but unless the current revision of the article violates any serious Wikipedia policies (such as biographies of living people or copyright), the revision of the article is the way it will remain during the duration of the protection applied. Looking at the diff comparison between the revision before you two began to modify the article and its current revision doesn't show any kind of blatant vandalism, disruption, or serious violations of policy. That's essentially the "luck of the draw" when it comes to stepping in on a dispute and directing the editors involved to follow Wikipedia's dispute resolution protocol. It would be inappropriate for me to change the revision to a "correct or preferred version" because I'd essentially be taking sides in a dispute where I must remain neutral, and "playing favorites" and giving an editor an advantage over others by picking a "good revision". You two need to work things out and discuss the issue and dispute on the article's talk page, come to an agreement or a consensus, and then edit the article to reflect the changes that you two agreed upon. Both of you engaged in edit warring on the article, which is disruptive and not the proper way to resolve disputes. The protection was applied to the article in order to prevent further disruption and to direct both of you to the proper forum in to resolve the dispute.

I really hope that you know and understand that I'm not doing this in order to be an asshole admin or a dick wipe toward you, or because I want to cause you frustration or hardship. What I'm doing (and what I'm not doing) is necessary in order to remain a neutral third-party and act in an administrative role in that capacity, to be fair to everyone involved, treat everyone the same where and when I should be, and to help the dispute and the issue to be worked out and the disruption to stop. If you have any questions or concerns, or if you believe that the current revision of the article violates a serious Wikipedia policy - please don't hesitate to let me know, and I'll be happy to respond and assist you. I wish you both well, good luck, and hope that you two work things out on the article's talk page, and that the dispute comes to a successful and peaceful close. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:15, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Oshwah sure I understand your neutrality and that's why I'm explaining, that it led to a wrong decision. how can we reach consensus, if the other party with no explanations and no answer to around 4 calls to talk page continuous vandal edits? it's very simple to just pay attention to the request on admin requests page. the actions of vandal are clearly falling under long-term vandalism definition. instead of protecting the page, the actions towards the vandal should be taken. I mentioned you in the request there--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 08:21, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Arsenekoumyk - I'm glad that you understand my position and the need for me to be fair and neutral, and to help you two work things out. If the other user isn't going to work with you and if they're going to resort to further disruption, then we need to do what we can on our end to do the right things and give them the opportunity to participate. Start a new discussion on the article's talk page like you would anybody else and explain the disputes on-hand and what exactly is wrong with the changes being made. Ping the other user (Lamberd) in the discussion so that they're notified, then leave a message on his/her user talk page directly and point them to it. Be completely civil, respectful, and sincere in your discussion and your message, and do not proceed to repeatedly revert the article more than once after the block expires (else, you'll be seen as edit warring, which won't help your case). Then, if you turn out to be correct and Lamberd doesn't participate and chooses to engage in further disruption after the protection expires, you have all of your bases in order and he'll be blocked from editing for disruption and edit warring. You'll have done all the right things, and we'll have the necessary documentation and evidence to show that they were given the chance to work things out, and they didn't. Then, boom - all will be well! :-)

We of course hope that Lamberd will resolve the dispute properly by participating and helping things come to a consensus, but you still want to do all the things you'd normally do so that you're in compliance with policy and, if anything, you've created the diffs and edits that will serve as evidence and documentation when filing a report against him/her. It's a win/win! :-) Please let me know if I can answer any more questions or provide you with any more input or advice, and I'll be happy to do so. I know that this probably seems long, drawn-out, complicated, and quite silly to you given the content and the article - but unfortunately, this is what we need to do sometimes in order to remain in compliance with policy, avoid letting ourselves get sucked into adding to the disruption, and ultimately resolve the issues. Cheers :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:35, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Oshwah I pinged him many times prior, links to pings here, he doesn't care. but ok, vandal succeeds, whatever.--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 09:44, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Arsenekoumyk - Can you provide me with diffs to these discussions where you pinged Lamberd? I'm interested to take a look and read them... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:46, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Oshwah, sure. here, and here--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 09:49, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

here also--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 09:52, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Arsenekoumyk - Gracias! I'll take a look at them. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:05, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Oshwah sorry for disturbing you, but vandal edits are still there. text contradicts sources, half of the article with sources simply removed, vandal still makes his moves in another article (see original request on admin page. this is really demotivating. why at all read sources and try to write nice texts, when anyone could write anything he wants, ignore all questions and get successful in his disruptive activities.--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 09:21, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Arsenekoumyk - I'm really sorry to hear that you're frustrated and feeling that your motivation is being sucked from you... I'm going to go ahead and remove the protection from the article so that edits can proceed as before. It's becoming very apparent that a response isn't going to happen on the discussion you started on the article's talk page, so what's going to happen now is what will just happen two days from now if it were to just expire... This will allow you to make careful and appropriate edits to the article. I trust that you'll avoid any kind of edit warring and will promptly report issues to the appropriate noticeboard instead. Hopefully, this will restore some of that motivation that I sucked out of you. ;-) Stand by; the protection will be removed soon... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:27, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Oshwah thanks, in that case also could you revert to pre-war version if you may. otherwise it will seem I'm warring again even if I just revert to non-vandalized version. --Arsenekoumyk (talk) 09:34, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Arsenekoumyk - While it's temping to do because I want to be helpful to you, but sorry man... I can't do that. It wouldn't appropriate for me to get involved with the article's content after I applied protection to it in order to stop the same dispute that I'd now be editing... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:37, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Oshwah ok, I'm asking because on Russian wikipedia it's normal for admins to revert to pre-war as to stop vandal edits from being implemented. I see now it's different on English section.--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 09:39, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Eva Bartlett

I was about to request protection, but then saw you decided to protect this for 3 hours only - here. The edits being performed by the low edit account Firmfiasco and subsequently an IP run counter to a RfC that has been run on this very topic (concluding we should state "for promoting the falsehood that the While Helmets stage rescues". So TP resolution has already been performed here. I'll note that there has been a twitter campaign of sorts regarding this Wikipedia article (which has resulted in the very alternative Everipedia entry on this very subject). Also, as Bartlett is primarily known for Syrian civil war blogging - WP:GS/SCW&ISIL#1RR may apply as well. Icewhiz (talk) 09:11, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Icewhiz! Thanks for leaving your message here and for providing this information. That's extremely helpful and good to know; it would've been nice to have been told this in the protection request, but oh well... I try and do the best I can with the information I have. ;-) I've re-applied semi-protection to the article for one-month in order to put a stop to the disruption. Thanks again for providing me some additional context and details regarding what's been going on there... Please let me know if I can do anything else for you and I'll be happy to help. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:17, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Can you please delete a page?

I want the page of Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal deleted, due to a name change. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Calvinkulit (talk • contribs) 10:09, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

(ec) As far as I can see, Calvinkulit made some edits (and moves) on these pages:

• Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal
• Nippon Steel

plus

• Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal Corporation

which apparently describe the same entity. Possibly they will require some merge of edit history... --(talk page stalker) CiaPan (talk) 10:26, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Calvinkulit! Thanks for leaving me a message here with your request. I'm confused; I don't understand why this article should be deleted and due to a "name change". Can you elaborate and explain a bit further? What's wrong? What exactly are you trying to do? I'll be happy to help you once I know what's needed. I just want to make sure that I give you assistance with what you really need... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:12, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

I have already manually moved the page back to Nippon Steel, so there is no point in keeping Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal. Calvinkulit talk 6:22, 3 April 2019 (GMT +8)

(edit conflict) Calvinkulit - Uh oh! It looks like something went wrong somewhere with the page move. Looking at the page logs for Nippon Steel, it looks like you moved it to Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal Corporation, then moved it back? And it looks like there's another article, Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal, with the same content as well. Somehow, it's now at a stage where the content exists on both places and no redirect is present. I can certainly fix everything, but I'm going to probably need to peform some history merges in order to make sure that the edit history is accurate and all in one place. Just to verify: the place where this article should be is Nippon Steel - is that correct? What was the original name of the article? Where has it been for the majority of it's time on Wikipedia? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:29, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

(ec) @Calvinkulit: Oppose. The article Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal has a long edit history, you should not request removing it and replacing it with a verbatim copy with you as the creator. --CiaPan (talk) 10:30, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

CiaPan - A deletion is not going to happen. The pages, content, logs, and edit histories will be moved and merged to its proper title and location. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:34, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

@Oshwah: Yes, I know that. I just wanted to point out to the requester that blanking pages, copying contents to a new place and requesting removal of the original or temporary copies of article is not a correct way to update and organize contents at Wikipedia. --CiaPan (talk) 10:40, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

CiaPan - Got'cha. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:52, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Calvinkulit - Okay...... *whew*... it took me a little bit of time, but I got everything done for you. I had to perform a history merge to undo the manual cut-and-paste move that you made when creating Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal from Nippon Steel, and do so for the talk pages as well. I moved the article to the final location, and modified the redirect at Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal Corporation to point to the destination. :-)

Next time, please ask for assistance if you need an article or page moved. When editors who don't know how to properly move pages try to do so by cutting and pasting the content to a new title, they break a bunch of important things and create problems because they didn't actually move everything that's needed. There are edit histories, logs, page restrictions, redirects, and visibility settings that also come along when an article is properly moved, and merging them from two locations and back into one is a complex task that most administrators don't know how to do, or aren't willing to do themselves (due to how easy it is to do incorrectly and make things even worse).

In fact, you're actually quite lucky that you happened to message me for assistance, as I'm one of the few admins who has experience with performing history merges and knows how to do it properly. ;-) Most admins who find themselves needing to do this will have me do it... lol Anyways, thanks for coming to me and asking for help. If you need anything else, or if you need my input or assistance in the future, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be more than happy to help you out. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:16, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

I also want Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal to be DELETED from the top search, and replaced with Nippon Steel. Calvinkulit (talk) 12:27, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Calvinkulit - The search should update automatically after some time has gone by to favor the new title instead of the old one. However, regardless of what's changed automatically - if someone searches for "Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal" and types this into the search box, that result is going to show up since this is what the user or reader is looking for. We can't control the search and what returns or favors as the result; all I can say is that it'll update and there's nothing you need to worry about. Either way, the reader will be redirected to the new page if they click on a result that takes them to a redirect. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:12, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Page Protection/Deletion Query

Hey Oshwah, bit of a weird one but I have a client here through Upwork who is basically a PR representative of a Uk based public figure, whose Wikipedia page is getting repeatedly vandalised by trolls/stalkers. They've hired me to try to get in contact with someone from here on their behalf. I haven't got the details of exactly which page it is, but is there any way we can get in contact about this, even if it's just to direct me to the appropriate ways to make a protection request? The client is also interested in having their page removed but I have explained for notable people that might not be possible. Anyway, thanks for any help. If you need to contact me via IM or anything that would be great.

[REDACTED - Oshwah] 11:04, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi there! Just message me here and tell me what article is having issues with vandalism and disruption, and I'll be happy to take a look. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:30, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Okay so basically it's kind of a big long saga on this article here -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shazia_Mirza

Go into the talk page and edit history for basically a long protracted argument over the person's age.

I have been contacted by her manager, Martin Twomey, to update her age on here to October 3rd 1982. Martin says he has her passport that confirms this but it's a bit of a stretch to put it into the public domain like that.

On the page there is a lot of discussion on this, sock investigations, a ton of drama, it's all pretty standard Wiki stuff. I have not much experience with Wikipedia but it seems there is a conflict here and I've been contracted to resolve it. It also looks like the 'source' given that's 'resolved' the issue is for a different person entirely. It says the date of birth is December not October, and the name is different.

But anyway, what's best to proceed? I'm not really here to sock if there's no way we can prove the info is wrong on the page, but if there's a way to get a more valid source up, I'd be able to try and ask for it to be done. As you can see from the talk page this is one of the more weird ones and I have been thrown into the middle of it because I do odd Fetch Quests on Upwork.

Anyway, let me know how we can proceed or what to do. Logged back in btw -> Minggut (talk) 12:39, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Minggut! Thanks for responding with the information. Because you made your original message here while you were logged out of your account, your IP address was used in place of your username in the edit history of this page. In order to keep this information secure and private for you, I've redacted the IP address information and suppressed it for you.

Content on a biography of a living person needs to be supported by reliable sources per this policy. Any content on a biography of a living person that isn't supported by a reliable source can be challenged and removed, and any content that's unfererenced or not supported by sources that meet this requirement and that's contentious in nature must be immediately removed and on sight. Content should not be modified or updated unless there's a reliable source to support the new information. What I'll do is take a look at the article and make sure that all content is in compliance with these policies. If there's any current and ongoing vandalism or disruption, I'll take care of it and make sure that it won't continue.

As somebody who is directly associating with the article subject and therefore has a conflict of interest with this article, you should not make any kind of edits to the article. You'll be violating a number of important policies and guidelines by doing so. If you are being paid or compensated in any way to be here and talk to me, and oversee what's going on with the article - even if you're not directly editing it in any way, you're required to disclose this information per Wikipedia's terms of use. You can follow the instructions here to quickly and easily disclose the information required and make sure that you're in compliance with this policy.

Please let me know if you have any additional questions or concerns, and I'll be happy to answer them and help you further. I hope you have a great rest of your day, and I thank you again for taking the time to make sure that you're following Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and get help with this situation rather than just trying to "wing it" and take care of things yourself. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:54, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Yeah this all seems fair - I wasn't going to make an edit until there was a reason to or not. Will put the disclosure in my bio and read up on this also. To be honest I am only here to confirm what I have already told the guy, that he needs a super valid public online source for the age of the person and if one doesn't exist it's probably not going to be allowed to be changed on here - and that it needs to be uploaded by someone totally unaffiliated with the person.

What would you suggest to do next though? I don't really have much attachment to the issue, but would it be best to direct the guy to create a reliable public online source to back up this date, then someone unaffiliated can come back and link it into the page without conflict of interest?

Oh and also is there a template for disclosures somewhere? For now I have pasted a couple things to my user page.

Minggut (talk) 13:04, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Minggut - He cannot modify or edit the article himself. Make it very clear to him that if he does try to edit the article, it'll be caught very easily by involved editors and the community, and he'll just be completely wasting his time. References that are considered reliable on Wikipedia are required to be secondary and completely independent of the article subject, so no - he would not be able to just publish some public source with information he wants added or changed on the article and expect that it would be acceptable to use on Wikipedia at all.

Honestly, I would do my best to recommend that he leave well enough alone and try not to care too much about the Wikipedia article about him. So what if things aren't perfect? Why does he care so much? What underlying things are prompting him to hire you to do all of this? As long as there's no libel or false defamatory content on the article about him, there's not much for him to gain from putting any thought, time, and energy into the article and its content. Sure, the page will get vandalized and people will make stupid edits and be trolls... that's just as possible with any other article, and those usually get reverted and fixed very quickly. What do you think about all of this? Why do you think that he's concerned about all this? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:24, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Honestly it's just a guy who doesn't really know how Wikipedia works so well, and he's trying to make sure his client doesn't have their age shown wrong. But yeah, you are correct here, I read the rules. There is little that can be done except if a separate party releases information on her age into the public domain and he can hope that some fan will change the article and link to the information by themselves.

Let me know if my declaration is all correct and I will return this information. Oh and I forgot, thanks for the help.

Minggut (talk) 13:29, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Minggut - Yup, that's exactly right. These rules and requirements are what keep Wikipedia articles and content as accurate, fair, factual, neutral, and verifiable as possible. Without these rules and requirements, we would have no standard as to where content is acceptable and where it's not, and nobody could be able to trust any articles and content here at all. We would essentially crumble and we wouldn't exist as the website we are today. That's completely understandable; not everyone is familiar with Wikipedia and how encyclopedias work. At least he's doing the right thing by having you get input and help, so that policies are followed and things aren't made difficult or harder by ignoring them... ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:37, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

To tell you the truth buddy I was just told to go edit the page, but I was aware Wikipedia is governed by policy, and read that talk page, so I was not sure and made my way through a load of articles until I ended up here. Again, please make sure I have done that declaration properly and I will be on my way and relay this info in the simplest terms possible.

Minggut (talk) 13:40, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Minggut - By the way...... after your work is concluded with this client and all, and when you're no longer being compensated to be here, why not join us and help grow the project? You seem to be very intelligent and knowledgeable given that you've read and understand the different policies that are important here. You'd make a great contributor here, and we could really use someone like you... even if you're not interested in writing or creating content, there's a lot of different projects and areas that you'd probably find interesting (such as patrolling for vandalism and reverting them, participating in different processes, many things...). You should give it some thought and consider it... I think you'd do very well here, and you'd become an editor that everyone knows and looks to in no time at all. Shoot, you already have an account... why not volunteer some spare time and help be part of a project that makes information 100% available and free for everyone on Earth to access?... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)}

Minggut - Your declaration seems fine to me. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:46, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Yeah I might give it a try at some point I have a lot of hours in the day. I have basically returned to this guy and relayed the following:

If you are affiliated with someone like this, you can't simply edit the information, because it's a conflict of interest.

Information on Wikipedia is supposed to be from a 'secondary source', so you can't just release info directly yourself and cite it yourself - it has to be released by someone unaffiliated with your client.

Even if the information is released by an unaffiliated party, it's still a conflict of interest if you upload it as an affiliate.

The only way to get her age updated or changed is if SOMEONE ELSE releases your client's age, then another SOMEONE ELSE uploads that on their own, without you prompting them.

But basically I'm going to try and close this Fetch Quest now and hope that this is helpful for the dude. Freelancer is always stuff like this. And yeah, leave some info on my page about when or if I can remove that declaration and maybe I might be able to help you out with some stuff sometime. Thanks much for the time. Minggut (talk) 13:55, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Minggut - Looks good to me! You can remove that declaration as soon as you're no longer being compensated by your client; easy peasy! I think that you'd be an asset to this project and that you'd enjoy it thoroughly. If I can be of assistance with anything else, please let me know and I'll be happy to help. :-) I really do hope that I hear from you again and see you back here on Wikipedia, and that you consider volunteering. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:02, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

In the mean time is there any other channel this guy can go through, or contact e-mail for submitting wrong info, or is it pointless still? The guy's concern is currently they are sourcing the wrong figure completely so it's misinformation about the person in question. And yeah I will try to contact you another time, I have stuff to finish currently. Minggut (talk) 14:07, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Minggut - Yes, there absolutely is. See Wikpedia's contact page information for article subjects here. Please let me know if I can help you with anything else. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:09, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Okay I will link this through to the dude and say "That's it, Man.". Thanks again though will drop you a line maybe I can assign a few hours to help out at some point. Minggut (talk) 14:13, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

We'd be happy to have you here. Until we meet again... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:15, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Just... incredible

#Can you please delete a page?

You FAILED your Turing test. You were very close, missed just by a whisker – for being too good. Fast, experienced, helpful, reliable, willing, always ready and so kind... Definitely you ARE a robot. No such human can ever exist! --CiaPan (talk) 12:10, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

CiaPan - Damn it! I was so close! I must pass the test next time... :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:14, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

UAA

Hi Oshwah. Wanted to let you know that I blocked Natasharoy after looking at their contributions, and coming to the conclusion that the reporting editor was correct. There clearly NOTHERE, at the least, in my estimation. Of course, I've been wrong before, so if after looking further into the situation you think I'm in error, please undo my actions. Have a fantastic day! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 14:46, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi 78.26! Long time no chat! I hope you're having a great day and that life is going well for you! :-) I remember taking a quick glance at the user's contributions, but didn't remember finding anything to show that the username was promotional. It's certainly possible that I missed something, and I'm confident that you're correct in your decision to take administrative action. I appreciate the message and for letting me know about this. I'll take another look and figure out what I didn't see the first time. I'm sure it'll be something obvious and that sticks out like a sore thumb (knowing my luck), and I'll get to call myself an idiot yet again.... :-) Thanks for the heads up, and I hope we get to speak again soon. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:49, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

help an upcoming artist

i'm azembe twhy,an upcoming artist pls i want u to help me post my information on wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Azembe twhy (talk • contribs) 17:03, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

(by talk reader) @Azembe twhy: No. Please read WP:NOTADVERTISING. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:07, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Azembe twhy. Unfortunately, as stated in the response above, Wikipedia is not a place for advertising or promotion. Articles that are created and added to Wikipedia must meet notability requirements in order for them to be kept. Otherwise, they may be speedily deleted, proposed for deletion, or nominated for a deletion discussion. Articles that either meet a criteria for speedy deletion or are shown by consensus in a deletion discussion to not meet the necessary and required guidelines are deleted. Please review the policies and guidelines that I've linked you to in this response, and let me know if you have any questions. I'll be happy to answer them if you do. Thanks for understanding, and I hope you have a great day. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:20, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Big Bear

Just FYI, but the IP vandals going back several days are all located in Ontario, and three to one particular school district. So it seems unlikely that blocking one of them will fix the issue for more than a day or so. GMG^talk 17:11, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi GreenMeansGo! Thanks for the message and for letting me know about this. I was on the fence regarding whether or not I should protect the article, so I thought that this IP being blocked would be sufficient. It sounds like this isn't the case. Hence, I've applied semi-protection to the article for one week. Please let me know if I can be of assistance with anything else, and I'll be more than happy to help. :-) Cheers, and thanks again - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:19, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder

Hey, thanks for the heads-up about WP:AGF on AIV yesterday evening (or morning/noon/night, depending on your local timezone). Sometimes i get a bit too suspicious about IP edits like these. Anyways, i'll be more careful in the future when distinguishing between good-faith edits, test edits and vandalism. Nyamo Kurosawa (talk) 19:49, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Nyamo Kurosawa! No problem! I'm always happy to lend a hand. Part of what I try to do here and with the "admin hat" is to take a different approach; I go out of my way to have editors' backs, and give them the support, encouragement, advice, and input they need in order to be the best version of themselves when they participate here. :-)

And not to worry; it's something that I've done many times throughout the years that I've been an editor on Wikipedia, and I've had to stop and self-evaluate where my thoughts and suspicions regarding an IP or an editor are truly from as well. There are times where I just get done from spending the last two hours blocking LTA sock puppet accounts that were causing a massive amount of abuse on Wikipedia, and I have to take note to lower my level of "suspicious awareness" when I return to normal patrolling and handling disruption.... so don't feel bad or feel down about it at all. We all make mistakes; trust me when I say this: I've made way, wayyyy more than my fair share of mistakes and screw-ups on Wikipedia over the years, and I still manage to screw something up sometimes. ;-) It happens to everyone, and it's it's why I make sure to review reports and amy bring concerns to one's attention so that they can resolve it before things blow up... lol.

This is an example as to why it's so important for admins to look out for others, support and build them up when they need it, and to be and their wing-man when they need one. Those little things don't take much effort to do, and they make much more of a positive impact to others than they think. ;-) Please know that my user talk page is always open to you, and you're welcome to message me any time you need or want to. Thanks again for the message! I hope you have a great day, and I wish you happy editing. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:29, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Which is why Oshwah needs to clone himself. Barring that, perhaps host admin seminars. :) BilCat (talk) 01:10, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

BilCat - Ooof... be careful of what you wish for, man... I think just having one of me is bad and risky enough around here as it is... lol ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:31, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

A brief apology and question.

Sorry for making disruptful edits, like I did on "List of programs broadcast by Nick Jr.". But what was disruptful about the edit I made on that page? SafariKid2 (talk) 00:48, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

I'm a talk page stalker. It looks like you've removed text that really shouldn't be removed. Your edit summary kinda makes it seem like you're predicting the future and we don't do that here on Wikipedia. We have definite dates for those shows and if they do return, that can always be changed later. Dusti^{*Let's talk!*} 00:56, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi SafariKid2, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your question. There's no need to apologize; the temporary block was added to prevent additional edits that myself and other editors viewed as disruptive. When looking at your edits to the article in general, you were making changes, then reverting yourself, then doing so again and again... this isn't something you should be doing. If you were trying to test out changes and see if they were going to work or not, you need to do this on a sandbox page, not within the article itself. What were you trying to do? Why were you changing content, reverting yourself, and then doing this again and again? On top of this, your changes removed legitimate content and replaced some of it with unreferenced information. This potentially problematic behavior, and in combination with the other edits and issues that other editors and admins have talked to you about recently, is what prompted me to apply a temporary block to your account. Please let me know if you have any more questions, and I'll be happy to answer them. Don't worry too much about the block. Just behave yourself, stay outta trouble, and make sure to ask questions and and ask for help with anything that you're not sure about and before you make changes to it. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:59, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 01:15, 4 April 2019 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

BilCat (talk) 01:15, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

BilCat - Received and replied. Thanks for the email :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:27, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, replied. - BilCat (talk) 01:33, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Received. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:34, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Pls restore corrections to Pink House Newbury, MA

Hello,

I am a co-founder of Support the Pink House and we tried to do our own Wiki page back in 2017 and again in 2018. We were surprised to find someone put one up. But there is a lot of incorrect and incomplete information on it. I spent quite a bit of time correcting it tonight, in advance of a meeting where big wigs who are critical to the process to save the house maybe looking at it, and it notes you reversed all my edits - and I would like them to be restored please. I am emailing you as it is a bit timely.

We ARE the authority, and we find it difficult that many of the papers/articles used to verify things don't fact check or don't report accurately - which is common. Also, as the negotiations were so delicate we were asked to keep things under our hats, so we did not encourage or seek much in the way of public press - thought Chronicle, a very popular prime time TV show did cover us in that time. However, the page is out, and should reflect the facts. A few that are incorrect - the house was built in 1925, not 1922. Support the Pink House is a grass roots citizens group and not a formal non-profit as stated.

Another example, the the Refuge did not meet with the Greenbelt on their own, Support the Pink House worked for 2.5 years to get that to happen. not the papers who get things wrong. We have done the research on the house, though I didn't correct the spite house rumor as we are fine with it being called an urban legend. And there are many meetings and several solutions being pursued since 2017 not just the one mention of Greenbelt in 2018. It makes a serious impact on the powers involved in this 4 year, tireless project to have that kind of sentence out there on Wiki, where many go for factual info!

It also doesn't mention what is a very interesting bit of information - that every elected official from the area's local and State Senators and Reps, Councilmen, the Mayor and Selectmen, mayors etc on up to the State of MA's three federal officials - Congressman Moulton, Senators Markey and Warren have been behind it. I put that in and have photos of these meetings, letters of support from them- but again, I gave those quotes to the Daily News and it was not published.

It was included in the March issue of Newburyport Neighborhood magazine, I have a PDF of it, and a physical copy but I'm not sure they put it online to link to. There also are the blog posts on SupporthePinkHouse.com that supports this.

Please do restore what can be of our corrections. I could not fix the categories at the bottom saying Houses Built in 1922 - I am newer to this but honest.

If you prefer to directly email me pls do at [REDACTED-THEGOODUSER]

Thank you and I look forward to hearing from you! Rochelle Chair and Spokesperson On Behalf of Support the Pink House — Preceding unsigned comment added by R9R (talk • contribs) 02:51, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi R9R, and thanks for leaving me a message here regarding the edits you made to Pink House (Newbury, Massachusetts) that were reverted. I'll be happy to explain why I removed your changes as well as explain the issues and problems with the edits you made. Your edits contained problems and issues that weren't in compliance with a number of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Much of the content you added wasn't referenced or cited by any sources (or any sources that were identified as reliable). Wikipedia articles and content must seek verifiable facts, not seek "the truth"; adding content to an article that isn't referenced or considered to be information that's "commonly known" can be challenged and removed. Furthermore, much of the content you added appeared to be based off original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. You cannot add content and "cite yourself" as a source simply because you have a close relationship to the article subject. Adding content citing one's relationship, experience, association, or even one's own website, work, or research constitutes adding original research to articles, and this is not allowed for many obvious reasons.

Your edits also added content and statements that weren't in compliance with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, such as that paragraph that states that the participation by a number of people shows the movement's importance, or the statement about the "hopes" that one of options (such as land transfer) succeeds. Much (if not most) of the content reflects a positive point of view toward the article subject and words in in a manner that reflects to the reader that the article wishes the success of the article subject and what was added to the article. It was not worded to be neutral, as required by Wikipedia's policy on the matter, and in many different ways.

Your message here also shows that you have a conflict of interest with the article subject given your position in an organization that openly supports the article subject. Per Wikipedia's behavioral guidelines regarding conflict of interest, you (or anybody else closely related or personally vested with the article subject) should not be editing this article at all. This is because of the fact that edits made from users who have a personal conflict of interest with the subject are almost never able to make appropriate changes or add content that reflects a neutral point of view, or that doesn't explicitly or subtlety reflect the editor's personal opinions or points of view.

These are a few of the different reasons as to why I reverted your changes to the article, and why doing so was justified. Moving forward, you need to no longer make edits directly to the article given your conflicts with the subject. Instead, you can request edits be approved and made for you by a different editor on your behalf. Simply follow the instructions provided on this page in order to create edit requests and have them approved and made by someone else. This will both allow you to bring issues and concerns to the attention of other editors and have them fixed, while keeping you from violating the guideline on editing articles that you have conflicts with.

Please let me know if you have any questions, and I'll be more than happy to answer them. Thanks again for the message, and I hope you have a great rest of your day. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:59, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

The Minimalists article and JohnnyStew

I was going down the vortex of reading random Wikipedia articles (it's really easy to do that on the phone app) and I ended up reading The Minimalists article. Anyways, the article seemed a bit "off," at least in the promotional sense. Everything in the article is positive and the "critical reviews" section is glowing praise. I looked at the history of the article and one user made a lot of edits to it. Exactly 50 edits to that article and just that article within the span of 3 days back in 2017. One of the edit summaries mentions that they "changed promotional tone to encloypedic tone" but the only difference in the diff is paragraph spacing. This seems weird to me. What do you think? Clovermoss (talk) 03:38, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Update: I posted to ANI. I noticed other things browsing through the history and decided to file a report there. Clovermoss (talk) 05:10, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Clovermoss - Perfect; thanks for the message and the update! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:00, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Another editor moved it to another noticeboard where it looks like it will now be closed. I was worried more about their edits to The Minimalists article, not nessicarily the mutiple accounts. Only editing that article and added all of that promotional stuff (since 2017) had me worried about paid editing. Maybe I jumped to conclusions too fast. If the sockpuppet investigation is closed, do I just leave it alone and forget about it, then? Clovermoss (talk) 00:50, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Clovermoss - Either way it closes, if it's found that misuse or abuse of multiple accounts occurred, an admin will take care of that part. Just keep an eye on the SPI and answer any questions that an admin, clerk, or a checkuser might ask you there. If there are edits you find inappropriate in the article, you can of course revert them. Make sure to keep dispute resolution in mind if they object to your reverts, and make sure that you keep from edit warring or any other kind of disruption. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:13, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

thanks

Thank you for correcting my mistakes. I am a novice editor of Wikipedia. I will study hard.AndyYCRccrUSWCAX (talk) 04:36, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi AndyYCRccrUSWCAX! You're welcome :-) Please don't hesitate to let me know if you run into any questions or need my assistance with anything, and I'll be more than happy to help you. Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope that your time here is positive and fun, and that you enjoy your stay with us as a member of the community. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:01, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

User talk:Mavzuan

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 07:23, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Cahk -  Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:29, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Apology

I'm really sorry if it looks like I'm continually having a go at you. It's more subtle than that, and I sincerely think you are a nice guy and everything you do is done out of the genuine belief that it benefits the project. I'm honestly not here to upset people. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:28, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Ritchie333 - I appreciate you for leaving this message and for the very kind words here. I understand... you were just frustrated... it happens, and I don't hold it (or anything else) against you at all. Look... I know that you probably don't like me, and if everything went the way you believe that it should have, I wouldn't have passed my second RFA and I wouldn't be an admin right now. As much as I try my best to do the right thing, I'm not a perfect editor or a perfect admin - and I'll will never be. I just hope that I can someday gain your respect and your trust, and that we can be good "wiki-acquaintances" or even maybe "wiki-friends" (lol). Either way, please know that your apology meant a lot to me. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:10, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

There's a small list of people I genuinely don't like on my user page - currently Donald Trump, Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg; I've got no reason to dislike you as (as far as I know) you've never advocated anything seriously unpleasant like denying the holocaust, discrimination against ethnic minorities, cutting of public services, making racial slurs or treating poor people with contempt (and I'll assume this is taking the piss out of this). The RfA is ancient history; I have criticised admins where I voted "support" at their RfA, and not had issue with several admins where I voted "oppose", and I am on record saying there is pretty much no correlation between an admin's support percentage at RfA and their ultimate track record. The problem is I struggle to articulate what the problem is in a manner that doesn't sound like a personal attack or outing, which is why I'd prefer to take it to email. Sometimes, I feel like James O'Brien in this exchange (not implying you're anything like Jacob Rees-Mogg; rather that every word Jacob used was civil and meets the standard of parliamentary language, but doesn't stop me from slamming my head into a desk). Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:35, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks....

for reaching out. I have been using Wikipedia for a long time and have noted that a lot of the social entries I look at or have looked at have become very convoluted with vanity entries and newspaper like current reporting. Journalists also seem to be dumping a lot, making references to their current work.

I have made a few gentle edits to get started and will continue on that theme if everyone thinks this is helpful.

I would be very interested in shortening a few bios, which stretch over pages and pages.  However I will listen and learn for a while and check out what the common ground is.

All the best JF III — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Fritzinger III (talk • contribs) 11:27, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi John Fritzinger III! Thanks for the message and for updating me on what you've done with the article! No problem; I'm always happy to help and make sure that others have everything they need. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:03, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

Good morning, Just wanted to say thanks for going the extra mile yesterday evening by EC-protecting (& move protecting) my user page! Keep up the good work! IanDBeacon (talk) 12:04, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi IanDBeacon! Thanks for the coffee and for the very kind words you left here! :-) You're very welcome; always willing to lend a hand. If I can do anything else for you, please don't hesitate to let me know, or (recommended) file a request on the appropriate noticeboard. Thanks again, and I hope you have a great rest of your day. Cheers ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:26, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Newtown

I took that out because there isn't a map. Then the page gave me some stupid alert, and asked me to confirm, but of course deleted my note. I'll nuke it again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.34.39.204 (talk) 13:59, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for the message and for explaining your edit. Sounds good to me; thanks for following up and for letting me know. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:27, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for reviewing my page

Hello, just writing to say thank you for reviewing my page.

I hope we will get on. StellarMuzak (talk) 15:47, 4 April 2019 (UTC)StellarMuzak

StellarMuzak - No problem, and welcome to Wikipedia! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:49, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

IP Block Exemption

Could you please add me to the IP Block Exempt group? It seems immature people at my education institution thought it would be funny to vandalize Wikipedia. I am currently unable to edit on wireless devices. Seems this problem may occur frequently as various IPs in the buildings have been blocked repeatedly. The relevant request may be found here. Noah^Talk 16:31, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Looks like this auto block was removed. I do have reason to believe that blocks may be placed on the various IPs at any time as there has been a history of multi-year blocks on them and recent vandalism. Noah^Talk 16:45, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Hurricane Noah, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your questions and your request. I'll be happy to explain how different blocks can affect innocent editors and show you where to request the IP block exempt user rights. There are two kinds of blocks that can cause collateral damage or accidentally get innocent editors and users caught in their web: Autoblocks, and Hard IP address blocks.

• Autoblocks are created when a block is set on a user account and the appropriate option is ticked as 'enabled' by the blocking administrator. This option also blocks the IP address that the account was using (as well as any subsequent IP address the account logs into and tries to edit from) when the block was placed. If any other account that is not IP block exempt tries to edit from that autoblocked IP address, that account will also be blocked... and the cycle continues onward from there.

• Hard IP address blocks are an option that an administrator can enable when placing a block on an IP address or range. Normally, when IP addresses are blocked, this option is disabled which means that anyone who already has an existing Wikipedia account can edit from this IP address without any issues or problems. However, if the option is enabled - the block will also disallow any existing accounts from editing from it (unless they are IP block exempt). This option doesn't block the account like autoblocks do; they simply do not allow the account to edit while they are connected through the IP address or range. As soon as they change networks or internet connections to one that isn't IP hard-blocked, they'll be allowed to edit as usual and without any issues.

Being caught in an autoblock or a hard IP address block does not create a record in your account's block log. As annoying as it can be to get caught in one of these blocks and having done nothing wrong, these blocks are necessary in order to stop the abuse of multiple accounts as well as high-volume amounts of abuse if the block is applied to an open proxy or VPN. To get yourself approved and granted the IP block exempt user flag, you just need to follow the instructions under the green highlighted section, "How to request" under this section of the IP block exemption policy page (where it has you use your main account to contact the Unblock Ticket Request System). They'll have a checkuser verify your IP information, authenticity, etc, and make sure that nothing fishy comes back. Once those checks are done and no issues found, they'll usually have no problem granting the user flag temporarily. Just know that they grant the user flag based on need; it's typically not given out permanently unless you're a well-known user account with a very high level of demonstrated trust, and you constantly run into autoblocks or hard IP address blocks to the point that granting it permanently is the best solution (just so you're aware).

I apologize for the delay responding to your message, by the way... life gets busy sometimes! Please let me know if you have any questions or need help with anything else, and I'll be more than happy to lend a hand. ;-) I hope my response was helpful, and I hope you have a great rest of your day! :-D Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:50, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Why was my page delete?

I put a lot of time putting together my page only to find out it was deleted without even notifying me. Please explain.

Thanks,

Frank — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frank D. Girardi (talk • contribs) 19:42, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

(by talk reader) @Frank D. Girardi: Which page are we talking about? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris troutman (talk • contribs) 19:49, 4 April 2019 (UTC) (and his sig. added by CiaPan (talk) 11:03, 5 April 2019 (UTC))

Hi Frank D. Girardi, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your questions. Your user page was deleted under U5 of Wikpedia's speedy deletion criteria. In short, the content you added to your user page looked to be intended to advertise, promote, and host links to an organization and other content that was not Wikipedia-related. Please review and make sure that you understand Wikipeidia's policies and guidelines regarding user pages, as well as what they are not to be used for. The guideline page states that user pages are not to be used as a forum, resume, social networking profile, or web host or for purposes unrelated to Wikipedia's goals. Your user page clearly violated these guidelines, which was why your user page was deleted just earlier. Please let me know if you have any questions regarding Wikipedia's policies and guidelines on user pages, of if I can be of assistance with anything else - I'll be more than happy to help you. Thanks for the message, I hope you understand, and I wish you a great day and happy editing. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:06, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

April 2019

Hello, I'm Joshy Washy. I just wanted to let you know that your administrative privileges have been removed, and you have been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia. Kim Jong Un is very against wikis and encyclopedias like this one, and he's the one who blocked you. He wants to ban the use of the internet and the world wide web entirely, because he's against internet altogether. He also wants to bring down Tilted Towers, Pleasant Park and Salty Springs because Mario and Luigi have been beating up Sonic and Tails, all in celebration that the SNES sold more than the genesis. He also wants a North Korea invasion so that he can take over the UK, the USA, and then the world. GOLDIEM J (talk) 19:49, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

GOLDIEM J - *GASP* - You're really Kim Jong Un in disguise?!! :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:08, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

LOL he's coming to your house. I'm doing everything I can to stop him and convince him to give your administrative privileges back. It also doesn't get to me why Mario Vs Sonic would make him wanna bring down Fortnite locations. Maybe they were fighting in those locations, and he wants to do it so they won't have anywhere to fight anymore😂 GOLDIEM J (talk) 15:04, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

A result of a user name block

Hi Oshwah.

Before I get into an edit war, may I ask you to review this edit, and offer any advice?

Regards. Aoziwe (talk) 10:07, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

@Aoziwe: It looks like a copy from https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/about-us/who-we-are (in parts at least). --(talk page stalker) CiaPan (talk) 11:00, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks but sorry, I might have been a bit obtuse. I was thinking it might be a form of block evasion too? Aoziwe (talk) 11:23, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

@Aoziwe: Possibly, but I have no idea. I am a talk page watcher – I'm not an admin and I don't have an immediate insight into blocks data. The more, I can't verify the user's identity. I can only comment on the linked edit. --CiaPan (talk) 11:59, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Which is why I pinged Oshwah. Oshwah put the block on User:NHMRCMEDIA and User:Healthedits101 seems to be direct evasion, as per that edit? Aoziwe (talk) 12:08, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Aoziwe! Thanks for the message and the request. Please excuse my delay responding to your message here... life has been busy for me lately! :-) When looking at the edit you requested that I review, two things stand out that are problematic:

1. The edit changes the content on the page so that it appears to be worded like an advertising or promotion rather than an encyclopedia article where neutral wording and neutral point of view is the priority. The content has many issues and concerns that don't appear to be in compliance with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy.
2. As pointed out by CiaPan above, I also find that a significant portion of the content added and changed has been copied directly from the website mentioned. This is by far the most serious issue of the two that I found, as this represents a copyright violation - a policy violation that we take very seriously and will impose sanctions upon editors for violating repeatedly.

My advice would be to paraphrase any text that you feel should be cited from external links and add them completely in your own words. Even close paraphrasing (where you copy and paste text, but change a few key words and phrases to be slightly different) is against policy. Remember to also cite your references in-line with the article text and make sure that you cite from reliable sources. You'll avoid a lot of issues and potential trouble if you do these things. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them. I hope that my response was helpful to you, and I wish you a great day and happy editing! :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:19, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

No problem. Yep, thanks, I get all that. My main concern was the new username, while no longer the COI organisation name, is still possibly problematic given they are a health organisation and not an individual account, I suggest, and they simply reverted back to what they added under the blocked name. In any case their revert has now been reverted by another editor. And I see that you have revdeled too. Regards. Aoziwe (talk) 12:10, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Aoziwe! Thanks for the response and the additional information regarding your thoughts. Oh yeah, I completely understand where you're coming from and I agree that the edits have issues nonetheless. You did the right thing by saying something and expressing your thoughts. If you see any more issues like this or if I can be of assistance with anything else, please let me know and I'll be happy to lend a hand. Thanks again for the messages, and I hope you have a great rest of your day. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:27, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Oshwah. Please see User talk:Healthedits101#April 2019 Aoziwe (talk) 11:55, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi again, Aoziwe! Thanks for pointing me toward the message you left on the editor's user talk page. I think that your message was well-written and clearly listed and detailed each issue with the user's edits. I also redacted the revision text of the edit the user made per RD1. If the user's edits continue and it becomes apparent that it will keep continuing unless I step in and take direct action, let me know and I'll be happy to take a look. Thank you for the time and diligence you put into this project; it makes a great impact and you're doing excellent work. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:09, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Oshwah. Sadly yet again. No attempt at all it seems to engage at Talk:National Health and Medical Research Council or at User talk:Healthedits101 or at User talk:Aoziwe. They are subject to a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia License (CC BY) which requires Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, etc. but they have done neither, and then there are still the same other issues. Aoziwe (talk) 15:30, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Aoziwe! Please accept my apologies for the delay responding to your follow-up message here. Healthedits101 is most likely a sock of NHMRCMEDIA, but not for illegitimate reasons. If you look on NHMRCMEDIA's user talk page, I applied a soft block to the account due to it being in violation of Wikipedia's username policy for representing a department within an organization. In the block notice, the user was asked to choose a new username that's in compliance with policy, then was given a choice to either request their account be renamed to this new username, or simply stop using this account and create a new one with the username that was chosen. The user appears to have chosen the later option and did so. While the account you're now seeing is a legitimate alternate account of the first one due to the username block, it obviously still caused issues for awhile by violating copyright policy and continuing to revert and edit war without attempting to discuss the dispute. It looks like things have since calmed down, and I see that the new account has been warned twice for their problematic edits to the article. If things continue, and the user violates the policies or guidelines that he/she has been previously warned about, let me know and I'll be happy to step in and take care of things. :-) I hope things are going well, and I again apologize for the delay responding to your follow-up message here. Rest assured, I didn't forget about you or ignore you. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:32, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

No problems. I did see you were busy with other matters! Aoziwe (talk) 13:28, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia page

Hello, I submitted a page with info about a motorcycle club. It was deleted. I would like to resubmit. Im trying to make it a facts and history info based only. This motorcycle club already has a website, southsideridersmcnation.com . Can you please guide me as to how and what is the acceptable way to publish a wikipedia page. Thank you. Sincerly,

SSR PREACHER [REDACTED-THEGOODUSER]— Preceding unsigned comment added by SSRMC PREACHER (talk • contribs) 14:19, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi SSRMC PREACHER! I'll be more than happy to help you with your request. :-) First and foremost, Wikipedia's behavioral guidelines on conflict of interest highly discourage users who have a personal conflict of interest with the article subject from editing or even discussing it on Wikipedia. Doing so adds issues to the article, since someone close to the subject edited it. It also makes it nearly impossible for the article to be worded to reflect a neutral point of view. Instead, you can follow the instructions in order to make an requested article about this club for other editors to view and look into creating an article about it. This way, you won't be violating any policies and guidelines by having another editor create the article. Also, if you're being paid or compensated in any way to be on Wikipedia and make these changes, you are required to disclose this information per Wikipedia's Terms of Use. Please follow the instructions listed here in order to properly disclose this information if you're being paid to edit Wikipedia in any way.

Articles that are created and added to Wikipedia must meet notability requirements in order for them to be kept. Otherwise, they may be speedily deleted, proposed for deletion, or nominated for a deletion discussion. Articles that either meet a criteria for speedy deletion or are shown by consensus in a deletion discussion to not meet the necessary and required guidelines are deleted. Please review the policies and guidelines that I've linked you to in this response, and let me know if you have any questions. This is very important to know and understand, and to determine accurately about your article subject and before you spend any effort requesting the creation of an article about this subject, or creating and writing an article about it yourself. You could find many hours of your time ultimately wasted and for absolutely nothing if you don't verify this information first!

If you have any questions, you're welcome to respond here or you're welcome to ask them on my user talk page (click here to go there). Myself, or another admin, will be happy to answer any questions you have and help you. I appreciate your understanding and your cooperation in this matter, and I hope you have a great day. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:34, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

217.42.222.171

He's at it again. Lard Almighty (talk) 15:52, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi again, Lard Almighty! Sorry for the delay responding to your message here. It looks like this IP address has already been taken care of by another admin. If things continue after the block expires, let me know or (recommended) file a report at AIV. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:35, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Speedy tag rollback

I added a dummy edit to 286 protected mode. Thanks for the nice reminder. Quarl ^(talk) 23:04, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Quarl! No problem! I just wanted to have your back and leave you an off-the-record reminder about it in case you did this on accident. I wouldn't want someone to go running after you with torches and pitchforks if the cause was a simple mistake. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:36, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Edit made to first family

I changed it to a picture of President Trump's family because it was previously the former President Obama's picture. I was just updating it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.55.254.114 (talk) 00:22, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Thank you for trying to update the image, however your edit only removed imformation without explaining why A 10 fireplane ^{Imform me} 14:56, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for the message and the explanation regarding your edit here to First Family. As pointed out above, your attempt to update the picture only resulted in the current image being removed from the article. If you need help with images, I recommend that you refer to this guide for information and help. If you have any more questions or need my help with anything else, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be more than happy to lend a hand. :-) Thanks again for the message, and I wish you happy editing! :-D Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:39, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

My Congratulations!!!

	Expert User
	I would like to thank you for your outstanding contributions to the site. - Contributor 7 (Max) Contributer7 (talk) 21:22, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Contributer7 - Thank you very much! I really appreciate the message and your very kind words. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:40, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

A question - troubles with renaming the article

Hi Oshaw,

I hope that I'm posting this question on the right place. We recently had a talk on List of Serbians about renaming the article and the popular vote is in favour, because it is creating a confusion and the list is sort of in conflict with List of people from Serbia. I would like to ask you to help me to rename (List of Serbians) to List of Serbs. Whenever I try to do it the standard way, an error keeps poping up. Should I make a requested move or something else?

Thank you, Mm.srb (talk) 22:59, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

(by talk page stalker) Hi, @Mm.srb:! The name List of Serbs you mention above is an existing Wikipedia entry, so you cannot simply move another page (List of Serbians) to it. The destination is a redirect to List of people from Serbia. You would have to delete the redirect first – or have special privileges to make moves over redirects (which you apparently do not have). Anyway the links to the redirect should be carefully checked first and possibly fixed, to make sure they will point at correct contents after the move. --CiaPan (talk) 15:07, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Mm.srb! Thanks for the message regarding your request for assistance. From what I'm gathering from your message above, it sounds like there was a discussion regarding the moving of the page List of Serbians to the new title, List of Serbs? And it closed with a consensus to move the page to the new title? If this is correct, I can perform this move for you no problem. I just need to take a look at the discussion and confirm that it is indeed closed, and that the consensus is clearly in favor of the move. Once I've done this and agree with your findings, I'll perform the move (if not already done by someone else) and let you know when it's done. Stand by... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:43, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Mm.srb - After looking at the discussion you mentioned, there was indeed a consensus to move the list to List of Serbs and I have performed the page moves just moments ago. I also made sure that there were no tangled or double redirects present after the move, and I updated the distinguish template on both pages to point to the other properly. Everything should be good to go! :-) If you spot any issues that I need to fix or take a look at, let me know and I'll be happy to do so. Thanks for the message, and I'm glad that I was able to help you out with the page move. :-D Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:59, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you again, you sir are quite a tsar (local slang for a great guy). Do text me if you ever come to Belgrade, you have a beer on me. cheers Mm.srb (talk) 13:19, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Mm.srb - I never say no to a beer that's given to me. ;-) You're welcome; always happy to lend a hand. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:46, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Merging histories?

I created a draft for an article earlier this week but didn't move it into article space until the subject met the notability guidelines. Someone else ignored the draft and created the article. Can Draft:Jimmy_Schuldt be merged into the history of Jimmy Schuldt? Enigma^msg 04:28, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Enigmaman! Sure, I'll get that done and resolved for you right now. :-) Stand by... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:00, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Enigmaman - All set. If you need any more history merges done for you, or if other admins are feeling shaky about doing one - you're welcome to let me know and point them in my direction. I've done many of them before, and I'm usually the one whose name comes up when a very complicated or messed up history merge is needed. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:06, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! Enigma^msg 15:43, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Enigmaman - You bet ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:46, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/Ggf52

Can you keep an eye of the user? S/he keep adding "Nick Kibler" on Where Are Ü Now as same pattern as Special:Contributions/DC124. 183.171.114.103 (talk) 15:52, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Already blocked. 183.171.114.103 (talk) 16:41, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Cool deal; thanks for the message and the information nonetheless. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:06, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Article still inaccurate

Hi This is with reference to our conversation a few weeks back about the reversion of my edits on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_food#Nutrients.

I note that the page is still inaccurate and my original comments still stand. Ive read the original paper and it is misrepresented on this Wikipedia article. I say this as soneone with a PhD in biochemistry. Please advise how I should proceed?

Best Martin Martingoodson (talk) 07:31, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Martingoodson - Have you expressed your specific concerns to other editors in a discussion on the article's talk page? This is the perfect place to go in order to discuss your concerns and receive input and assistance from other editors about this. Be careful not to modify the article without citing reliable sources and adding references to those sources in-line with the content being changed. If other editors undo or revert your changes, follow Wikipedia's dispute resolution protocol and discuss it on the article's talk page. Be careful not to engage in edit warring or any other kind of disruptive editing, as this behavior will result in being blocked from editing and having the process becoming much more harder for you to argue your side and support updating, not easier. :-) Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Please refer to the pages and guides that I've linked you to here, as they will provide you with the information you need in order to fix any issues present while following Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. :-) Best of luck - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:13, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Thankyou! Martingoodson (talk) 07:16, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Martingoodson - You bet. Happy editing! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:04, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

User:Abelmoschus Esculentus

Can I opt him out of media wiki mass message delivery? His talk page is getting full and hard to browse. --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 00:48, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Thegooduser - This is something that he needs to request himself if he wishes to no longer receive them on his user talk page. I know and understand that he's retired, but even in these situations we don't touch or modify their user or user talk pages unless they specifically request it. It's out of respect for the user and their wishes. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:08, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Darul Huda Islamic University

Hi, can you check your edit on this article as you have reverted to a version that has slashed the content including removing many references that have been analysed by Huon in the AFD as being reliable sources, this version also contains unreferenced non-neutral assertions that are immediately disproved by the first reference. Also can you look at the contributions of the Malayali Woman on that page and her other contributions as they seem to be pursuing an anti - islamic school agenda (they identify as christian on their user page with no other info) by slashing articles, adding unproven allegations then taking them to AFD while creating an article promoting rival schools in the area so there could be a coi as well as the bias, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 13:27, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Atlantic306! The only edits I made to the article were here to add pending changes protection to the page, and here to add the {{pp-pc}} template (the top icon with the symbol notifying readers and editors of the current protection set). Were you perhaps referring to this edit by MalayaliWoman that reverted your changes (and the changes made by an IP user)? Sure, I'm happy to take a look into MalayaliWoman and his/her contributions and edits if you feel that there are concerns... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:50, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Heres a cookie for being such a good editor and just a nice person in general! Thanks! JDawgGaming06 (talk) 16:15, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi JDawgGaming06! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for the cookie and for the very kind words. I appreciate it greatly, and it means a lot to me. :-) If you have any questions or need any help, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be happy to lend a hand. ;-) Enjoy your time here, and thanks for volunteering! :-D ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:21, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

ARBPIA extended confirmed protections

Hello Oshwah, can I request that for the articles you make extended-confirmed protected that you also create the edit-notice for that page with {{ARBPIA 1RR editnotice}}? The ones that I just saw protected that do not have the edit-notice are:

• Nahariya train station suicide bombing
• Tanzim
• 2000 Ramallah lynching (that one actually shocks me that it doesnt have the edit-notice already)
• Maxim restaurant suicide bombing
• Shmuel HaNavi bus bombing
• Qawasameh tribe
• Adnan al-Ghoul
• Passover massacre
• Palestinian domestic weapons production
• Murder of Hatuel family
• Palestinian Security Services
• Camp 80 junction bus 823 attack
• Quartet on the Middle East
• Santorini affair
• Murder of Ofir Rahum
• Al-Quds Brigades
• 2001 HaSharon Mall suicide bombing

If this should be requested elsewhere sorry for bothering, but could you point me to where? Thank you very much, nableezy - 17:51, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Nableezy - Good call; thank you. I'll add those right now... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:53, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Nableezy -  Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:58, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! nableezy - 18:00, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Nableezy - You bet; thanks again for the reminder to throw those edit notices up. Much appreciated ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:01, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

The Doug Hall protection issue

I see you've blocked the underlying sock puppets and IPs; did you check out the SPI yet? Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 19:15, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Woshiyiweizhongguoren - I haven't... can you link me to it? Thanks :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:16, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Douglaseivindhallgerber. Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 19:17, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Woshiyiweizhongguoren - Ah, yes... I just finished responding to that SPI report and closed it. ;-) Let me know if you have any questions or if I can help with anything else. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:27, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Two things:

1. Mind going through Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Anti political shills to see what's going on?
2. Why is your talk page in the "Wikipedia humor" category, hehe?

Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 19:29, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Woshiyiweizhongguoren - Sure, I can take a look in a few moments... just need to get a few high priority Wikipedia tasks finished first, and I'll do that next. :-) Someone added a message above that included the {{Humor}} template, which adds this page to that humor category while it's transcluded. :-) Give me a few minutes and I'll take a look at that SPI. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:35, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Woshiyiweizhongguoren - I've reviewed the SPI report. Please let me know if you have any questions about my comments or decisions made there, and I'll be happy to answer them. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:02, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

I need administrative assistance for an issue.

Here. I've reported this three times to AIV, once to SPI, and once to ANI. But everything's stale. Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 19:31, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Woshiyiweizhongguoren - I've responded to the ANI discussion and closed it. Both of the IP users you reported are stale; there's no need to block them unless they continue making disruptive edits and they're reported as it's happening. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:40, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Please don't close yet, the named registered user was reported immediately after I saw it. Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 19:41, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Woshiyiweizhongguoren - I don't understand what you're referring to when you say, "the named registered user was reported immediately after [you] saw it". Can you please elaborate and clarify what this means for me? Thanks :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:57, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

I saw the user in Recent Changes creating a talk page without a parent page. And I figured that the user might be the same person as the IPs. Understand now? Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 20:11, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Woshiyiweizhongguoren - Somewhat. I've updated the ANI with a response... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:13, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

But it's kind of unusual for users to create meaningless talk pages where the corresponding main articles do not exist. This led me to believe that the user was the same person as the IPs. What do you think? Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 21:16, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Woshiyiweizhongguoren - That happens all the time by new user accounts and IP users (unfortunately). That behavior alone (creating meaningless talk pages) isn't enough to assert any kind of sock puppetry abuse between users, unless the words, text, content added, etc are very similar or exactly the same and made within a very short time span. Make sure that you find specific similarities between accounts that can be pointed to with diffs, explained easily and clearly, and aren't common events to see (or see two people doing similar or exactly the same) before you move forward and make any accusations. I think you need to stop what you're doing and read this SPI report guide before you consider making any more accusations or filing any more ANI or SPI reports. Please give it a read, and let me know if you have any questions. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:34, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Why are so many of my edits redacted?

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 23:06, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Woshiyiweizhongguoren - Per Wikipedia's oversight policy and the Wikimedia Foundation's access to nonpublic personal data policy that I've signed and are legally bound to comply with, I cannot detail or discuss the circumstances or the reason behind the suppression of those edits. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:12, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

I understand. It doesn't have anything to do with my actions, does it? Hopefully I'm not in trouble or anything, am I? Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 23:14, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Woshiyiweizhongguoren - No. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:15, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

JS scripts

Oshwah, I’m not sure whether you have script admin privileges, but I figured I’d ask. I tried to edit my “common.js” page under this new account, but found out there was a new restriction and that now only administrators can edit such pages or create them at the request of the user. This is totally new to me. I’d usually ask Kevin, as he’s the one that shared the original code and we’ve worked together on Wikimedia Tools, but I know he’s busy as of late. If there’s any possibility, could you copy the script from my parent account to this one (common.js would need to be created)? I’m flying a bit blind without it. I suppose I could use X-Tools and other external things to achieve the same effect, but it would be a great boon to just see it as usual. Thanks in advance, whether or not you have the permission necessary. Symmachus Auxiliarus (talk) 00:38, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Symmachus Auxiliarus! I am an interface admin and I'll be happy to help you out. Even though you can't edit the common.js page on your parent account, you should still be able to view the page's source and copy the code from there. Regardless, I've gone ahead and copied the code from your parent account's common.js and pasted it into a new common.js page on your current account here. Are there any other pages that need to be copied? Let me know and I'll be happy to do it for you, if you find that you're not able to do it yourself using "view source". :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:09, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! I just noticed when reloading the ANI page, and was happy to see some highlighting on there. And I tried to do so myself, but I wasn't able to create the page. I assumed that was the new norm. Also, since it's been a few years since I created the page on my original account, if there are any scripts that don't work anymore, or more effective ones, let me know. But I'm happy to have what's on there; thank you again for doing that for me. Symmachus Auxiliarus (talk) 02:22, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Symmachus Auxiliarus - You bet; always happy to lend a hand. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:24, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Well done, sir

Hi Oshwah! I just stopped by to say I thought this was an extremely classy gesture. It makes me feel all warm and fuzzy knowing that people are looking out for each other like that. Thank you and well done, sir! Leviv ich 04:57, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Levivich! Thanks for the message and the kind words! I appreciate it a lot. :-) You bet; that's what I'm here to do - have your back and make sure that what needs to be done to protect the privacy, identity, and other information of other editors is done. Cheers, and thanks again! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:59, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Last edited

I wasn't finished editing my paragraph that I added so I would greatly appreciate if you wouldn't delete my edit because this is for a class project and I'm trying to add my references. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.116.9.159 (talk) 06:05, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for the message. Please read the notices I left on your user talk page here, as they explain the issues with the content you've been trying to add to this article. Please do not continue to make these changes, as doing so is disruptive and will result in being blocked. I don't want to have to do that to you.... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:07, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

No subject

thank you for your response — Preceding unsigned comment added by Assadabdulrahman (talk • contribs) 08:30, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Assadabdulrahman - No problem! I'm glad that I was able to assist you with your issue, and that everything is taken care of. :-) Happy editing! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:33, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

RE: Unspecified source/license for File

Hi Oshwah

Just following up on the Original question I posed...

I'm having a problem understanding what goes where on Wiki...

In answer to your question about the "pic" - Mr Artus says that the pic is his but was originally taken by a professional photographer...

He got the original photographer to send an email to your Team that deals with photo copyrights as asked, and that's about as far as I have got...

If it helps the pic is available for general use without any restrictions...

Does that answer your question ?

I would really like to get this finished by the addition of the pic as everything else is pretty much there now...

I guess what I am asking is what kind of tag do I need to use with the pic if it is for "general use" and where do I put that tag ??

Navigating Wiki in some places or finding the right place I do find difficult !

Hoping you can help...or point me in the right direction would be greatly appreciated !

many thanks,

Andy

AndycBtn (talk) 08:45, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi again, AndycBtn! I'm sorry to hear that you're still having some issues and confusion with the image and its license. So long as the owner of the image followed the directions and contacted the appropriate team to verify ownership, and allow Wikipedia to use it within the licenses we require, he/she should hear back with next steps or any questions they'll need to answer. If not response is received within the next few days, send a follow-up message and ask for additional assistance.

Since you're new to Wikipedia, I highly recommend that you go through and complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial in the meantime and while you're awaiting a response from the image submission team. :-) It will provide you with many helpful walkthroughs, guides, interactive lessons, and other information that will be very helpful to you. Most users who do this and complete the tutorial tell me later that it was significantly helpful to them and saved them hours of time and frustration they would've experienced otherwise.

Please let me know if I can answer any more questions that you may have. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:21, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Neuronus IBRO&IRUN Neuroscience Forum

Hi, you deleted my edition of Neuronus IBRO & IRUN Neuroscience Forum. I don't understand what kind of source do you need? I am one of the organizators of the conference and you can check the informations you need on our website: http://neuronusforum.pl/. Please change it as soon as it's possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akrzyw (talk • contribs) 13:06, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Akrzyw - There are a few issues with the edits you made to this article. First of all, your edits did not cite any sources that were considered reliable. This is absolutely needed when adding or updating content on Wikipedia that isn't common knowledge to most readers. Another issue is regarding your connection to the article subject. The community will typically not accept changes made to articles from editors who show a clear conflict of interest with the article subject like this. You should not be making any edits or changes to articles where this is a problem, and for many reasons - one of which being that it compromises the aritcle's content and its neutrality, since editors who modify articles in these conflict-areas will add content that reflect a viewpoint that is not neutral, which degrades the overall quality of the article as a whole. Please consider participating in other areas that interest you, but where this is not an issue. Please let me know if you have any questions, and I'll be happy to answer them. Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:50, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

RE: Unspecified source/license for File

Hi Oshwah...

Thanks for getting back so soon...

Re: "So long as the owner of the image followed the directions and contacted the appropriate team to verify ownership, and allow Wikipedia to use it within the licenses we require, he/she should hear back with next steps or any questions they'll need to answer. If not response is received within the next few days, send a follow-up message and ask for additional assistance."

Mr Artus emailed the Photographer & got them to email the "Copyrights team" (I Guess its that team)...I think you call them OTRS ??

We heard back from the Photographer saying that they had done their bit...but Mr Artus has heard nothing since & the photo was uploaded on 28.12.18 !!

However, from my notifications I did get messages advising that I needed to take action to do this, that & the other...unfortunately, I cannot make head or tail or what is being asked of me !!

This is where we are at now...

Also...the following advice/info is on the "photo/pic" page and I am not sure what to do next...

Can you have a look at it please & tell me exactly what I need to do next ?

Also thank you for suggesting to have a read of the "new user tutorial"...but at the moment I have not got time to run through all of that to get to the info I need !

Can you not just tell me what I need to do next to get this finished ? The page is now only waiting on 1 pic !!

This is the advice/info on the "photo/pic" page :

---

An email containing details of the permission for this file has been sent in accordance with OTRS. Note to uploaders: Please copy the URL of this image or article in the email to assist OTRS volunteers to find it. If an email cannot be found in the OTRS system, the content may be deleted for lack of valid licensing information.

Note to OTRS volunteers: If the email contains sufficient confirmation of the validity of the license, please replace this template with xxxxxxxxxx and consider moving to Commons. Otherwise, nominate the file for deletion or delete it.

Please be aware that there is currently a 49-day backlog processing messages sent to the permissions-en queue. ---

Permission (Reusing this file) Evidence: The license agreement will be forwarded to OTRS shortly.

Is the above causing the problem ?? If so we have already got the photographer to email Wiki's OTRS team direct...and not heard anything since !!

Many thanks in advance for your help...

Best,

Andy

AndycBtn (talk) 14:50, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

AndycBtn - It sounds like things are in progress and you're waiting on a response from OTRS. This team receives numerous emails, messages, and inquiries every day. Because of this, it may take some time before they'll be able to get to your message and respond. Be patient; someone will get back to you there. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:52, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you and can you permenate protect the page

Hi Thanks for the advice and warning and will be careful as well could you protect Dipika Kakar's page for permanent because I have seen a lot of disruptive edits made by her haters post Bigg Boss. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.137.123.231 (talk) 15:47, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi there! Due to the edit warring and content dispute that's currently ongoing, I've applied semi-protection to the article for four days. Please discuss the dispute on the article's talk page and work things out with the other editors involved. Follow Wikipedia's dispute resolution protocol and things should work out just fine. :-) Permanent protection at this time wouldn't be appropriate, but the article is temporarily protected in order to stop the disruption and edit warring. Please discuss the matter and keep yourself outta trouble! ;-) I hope you have a great rest of your day, and I wish you happy editing and that the dispute comes to a peaceful and fast resolution and closure. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:59, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Sami Yusuf

Fair enough that you lowered the protection of Sami Yusuf, but right after you did it this guy popped out again and resumed his pov-pushing/edit warring [1]. 80% of his edits have been on that page [2]. --HistoryofIran (talk) 16:22, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi HistoryofIran! Thanks for the heads up. That account you mentioned has now been blocked. ;-) Please let me know if I can be of assistance with anything else, or if you run into any more disruptive edits on the article. I'll be more than happy to take a look and help where necessary. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:04, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

OK

"I suppose what bothers me the most is I've been here a long time and I would say at least 98% of my actions are beyond reproach, yet I receive only negative feedback if I ever make a mistake."

I just got back and read the thread. It doesn't look like there's anything for me to do now since people have decided they want an ArbCom case. What would you have me do? I edit and check Wikipedia a few times a day. Enigma^msg 18:27, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Enigmaman, and welcome back. *Sigh*... I know... this ANI discussion and ArbCom case is probably quite overwhelming to you right now. I'm truly and sincerely sorry; I didn't participate and respond to the ANI or file the ArbCom case request in order to be at the center of attention regarding the issues or to be the one to point fingers directly at you. I felt that I was a fair and neutral party when it came to filing the request and that I'd have the best capacity and ability to fairly summarize the issue in the statement. You're of course welcome to respond to the ANI, but I honestly think that an ArbCom request is inevitable given the issues that others have uncovered. Please know that my user talk page is always open to you, and you are welcome to message me here any time you need or want to. My door is always open... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:32, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, I just don't know what people want me to do. I could type a long paragraph on AN/I but they've made up their minds already. Should I just resign? I've never participated in an ArbCom case (I don't even remember there being a past AN/I case about me. If there was one, it's been many years), so I don't feel that appearing in front of the high court is a productive use of my time or energy. Enigma^msg 18:36, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

And just to follow up, I don't know what the redacted bit is or whatever, but I want to be clear that I didn't OUT anyone or ask anyone to out themselves. I made a bad block and then lifted it when I was asked to do so. Enigma^msg 18:49, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Go to the case and just calmly explain your side of the story - why you performed the admin actions you did, citing policy when necessary. Nobody's in a mad rush and "I think we need a case" does not mean "He's a rogue admin - desysop him now!" Unfortunately, being able to explain your actions in detail is a core part of being an admin; I don't like being dragged to ANI and asked to explain myself, but it happens, and it's sometimes necessary. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:53, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Enigmaman - As Ritchie333 said above, I think that your first course of action should be to add a statement to the ArbCom request and explain your side of the issue. Either way, you'll want to participate and do this. As Ritchie333 also said above, an ArbCom case request being accepted doesn't automatically mean that you're on the bad side of things; it simply means that an examination and a look into things is warranted. Many times, ArbCom does not enact remedies in the manner that they were "predicted" to enact. If you look at the recent ArbCom case involving GiantSnowman here, the solution was to place restrictions on his use of administrator tools to make sure that he slows down and does the right thing. A case doesn't mean that your admin tools are doomed for removal. Either way things happen on the ArbCom, you'll learn and you'll grow from this. You may not agree right now, but you absolutely will. Let me know what your thoughts are, and if I can be of any help or assistance. I'm happy to mentor and give input and thoughts if you find them to be helpful. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:01, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

If it makes you feel better, Enigmaman, here is an ANI thread with a bunch of people kicking the absolute crap out of me. However, I would like to think my conciliatory responses, addressing concerns and acknowledging faults, were a key factor in the thread closing with no action. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

I've had my ass kicked before many times in the past and for the mistakes I've made on Wikipedia, too. Ritchie333 might have even helped with the kicking of my ass. :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:15, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

I suppose what bothers me the most is I've been here a long time and I would say at least 98% of my actions/edits are beyond reproach, yet I receive only negative feedback if I ever make a mistake. Like I said, I'm not perfect and I do my best and it bothers me that this is what I get in return. It's as if I've never done anything positive, judging by the comments. I've made quite a lot of edits and admin actions in the last 10 years and if people did the same digging on other people, they could also find edits/actions they find to be wrong. Enigma^msg 20:39, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Unfortunately, that's life as an admin. However, I don't imagine anyone will be interested in anything that's over a year old, unless it's part of a recurring pattern. Neverthless, I (and several other admins) should not have to explain why casting aspersions about somebody's mental state in a deletion summary is not acceptable admin behaviour. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:48, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

I agree with you entirely. Enigma^msg 20:52, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

I decided to check and the one they're making the biggest issue out of is in fact over a year old and I was asked to explain it. I don't think that's reasonable. Enigma^msg 03:04, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Enigmaman - As Ritchie333 said above, the one-sided feedback that you're describing is part of the admin's curse that comes bounded with the tools and user rights. If you look on my user talk page edit history, it gets trashed and trolled all the time by LTA users and vandals that I've warned and reverted. On top of this, I get trolled, threatened, called really awful and disgusting names, and LTA users try to doxx my personal identity and information almost daily (though their "doxxings" and "outing" of my "personal information" have never been correct). On top of this, when an admin makes a mistake that's noticed by others or perhaps the community, things certainly do blow up in your face about it sometimes - especially if the mistake involves an area, subject matter, or situation that the community gets easily upset over due to past mistakes that come to mind. I've made mistakes as an admin many times in the past; Ritchie333 can certainly vouch for that. ;-) And yes, most of the comments are heated and they're not pretty. What's most important in these situations is not the fact that you made a mistake in the first place, but how you respond, take ownership, handle, fix, resolve, and own up to and apologize for them afterwards. Nobody is perfect; I certainly am far far from it. We don't expect perfection... that would be impossible and just out-right silly to do. It's how you conduct yourself, respond to such mistakes when they're pointed out to you, and how you serve the community that ultimately matters in these situations. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:20, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

And as also said above, admins should behave and set the example for others with their conduct, and never resort to incivility and personal attacks - especially in blocks and admin actions. While there are some situations that many will find understandable, the issues regarding incivility and personal attacks aren't one of them. It's not how admins should ever behave, and you damn well know better than that. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:24, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Your statement

I just skimmed it. "recently indefinitely blocking a user account that last edited in 2006 with an unclear reason". You linked to a page protection. The user was never blocked. All I did there was reduce protection from full to semi and remove the bit from the userpage about being an admin as it is my understanding that userpages should not say administrator if the user is not actually an admin. So I don't see what your complaint is, but I'm happy to discuss it. Enigma^msg 19:00, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Enigmaman - Okay, I'll take a look at that right now. I copied that as an example from the ANI, so whatever link was provided is what I used in the statement. Thank you for letting me know about this; I will resolve this right now. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:02, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

I didn't even protect the page. I simply lowered protection from 'indefinite full' to 'indefinite semi'. I do not see what the issue is. Enigma^msg 19:09, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Enigmaman - Ah! So that's what "no reason for this" meant. That makes sense; I'll remove it from my statement. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

I lowered protection since there was no reason for full protection in the first place. One could argue the page shouldn't be protected at all, but I made it semi protection as a compromise. No one ever said anything to me about that in the first place and that was quite a while ago, and the same applies to the vast majority of the rest of what you raised. Enigma^msg 19:18, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Enigmaman - If that's the case, you'll definitely want to explain this in your ArbCom statement. This will help others (including the committee) to see your side and why you took the actions listed. Let me know if you need help with doing this, and I'll be happy to do so. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:20, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

I made a statement there since you asked for me to do so but I again don't know what to say. I can't justify every admin action I've made in my 10 years as admin. When I've been asked to explain something, I believe I've done a pretty good job responding to any issues or questions on my talk page. Anyone can verify this by reviewing my talk history. It's all there and in my archives. I'm not perfect and I'm sure I've made multiple mistakes in my time here, but I'm at a loss for words now. Enigma^msg 19:31, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Enigmaman - It's not about verifying every single admin action you've ever made. It can be as simple as responding to my statement and explaining the blocks and admin actions I listed and why you made them. If you had legit reasons for those actions, say so and explain. Your statement is to give ArbCom your side of the story and respond to concerns and examples given there. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:51, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Kalpana Mohan Page

Thank you for your help. I had written Bbb23 & waiting for the response. I understand it is about perception but it is possible to revert changes once it is approved by an admin, no time frame to collapse & again it gets revert by another admin. The changes which were reverted were part of previous editions too including the hyperlink leading to the movie pages. so suddenly what went wrong with it? It is beyond logic. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yashkkaryan (talk • contribs) 20:10, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Yashkkaryan - This is something that you should follow up with Bbb23 about, as he's directly involved with the article and the edits there (based off the recent edits and contributions there). He'll be more knowledgeable and able to answer your questions and provide assistance than I will be. Please keep a discussion with him; if you need help nonetheless, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll see what I can do. I'm just trying to point you in the best direction so that you receive the best level of help as possible. Talking to Bbb23 directly will provide you with this. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:31, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Tacko Fall

This might be worth pending changes protection given that it seems all the recent edits are vandalism and some of it remained unfixed for a while. See here where I fixed something that had stuck in the article because no one noticed. Enigma^msg 20:18, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Enigmaman -  Done. I've applied pending changes protection to the article for one month. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:28, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

User:EEng

First of all I would like EEng to know, that with this message I am writing, I am not here to point fingers at EEng, and that I treat EEng with all my respect. The main concern I am addressing in this message, is EEng's descriptions of Donald Trump in his userpage, there are several pictures and descriptions of Donald Trump on his userpage, that I found very offensive, and could be too with other users, now I am not here to cut down EEng or anything, and I actually do appreciate the funny humor on EEng's pages, but I think there are some concerns with the Donald Trump pictures and captions, I know EEng means no harm at all, but I think those pictures and descriptions of Trump have gone 'too far'. This is not meant to discourage EEng from editing, and is not a reflect on EEng's Personality. EEng is an awesome and funny user. Oshwah what do you think should be done? --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 23:39, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Lets wait for a response from EEng here, and hear what he has to say about your concerns. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:54, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Thegooduser, we had a short discussion on this recently [3] but I still don't know what specifically you find offensive, or why. EEng 01:42, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

EEng (talk · contribs) It was mainly the photo descriptions that I found offensive. --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 02:08, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

There are hundreds of images on the page. You need to be be specific. EEng 02:21, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

It's the ones you showed in the conversation in your talk page, just the one with that says "Shithole in open position" and "ASL" with the finger and the picture of an animal that says "When the Virtual Reality projector is turned off" Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 02:25, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Well, since Donald Trump is even more repulsive on the inside than on the outside, introduced the word shithole into the vocabulary of national political discourse, and gives a full-on fuck-you to everything decent and humane in this world, I think they're quite tame, actually. See Carnivalesque (not very good, but gives a sense of what I'm going for). EEng 03:12, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

2fa

Does 2fa work by email? --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 23:57, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Thegooduser - See this information on the meta 2FA page. It works by having you install a TOTP client and connect it to your 2FA authentication using a QR code. Then it will start generating digits that you'll enter when you log into Wikipedia. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:01, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

ygm

check ur email..... --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 00:03, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

10-4. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:24, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Is my email screwed up, or did you just not reply yet, having problems with my shitty computer and internet connection. --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 02:33, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

I received no email from you. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:36, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

AgentKenyZ

I might be a little hasty, but is this a u5?--Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 02:38, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

I'd say yes. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:37, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

User:Thetruchairman

Hello, I reverted the above user's edits here, here, here and here for adding unsourced content. The user then posted this message on my talk page, calling himself 'a Senior DeMolay, Past Master Councillor for DeMolay, a DeMolay Masonic sponsor, a Founder of several new DeMolay Chapters within my jurisdiction, a Master Mason of 18 years, and a Brother of the advanced Masonic Orders'. On his user page he claims to hold dozens upon dozens of obscure 'degrees', 'certificates and certifications' and memberships of organisations. On his talk page he signs his 'welcome' message as 'Raleigh, the Honourable, Th.D, OSF'. Would you consider this user to be a troll? JACKINTHEBOX • ^TALK 12:18, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi JackintheBox! Either way, this user is causing disruption by adding unfererenced content to articles. I'd continue to remove such edits and leave escalating warnings and notices on the users's talk page. If the problematic edits continue to occur despite the warnings, let me know or report the user to AIV or ANI. One way or another, we'll find out if the user is a troll for sure or not depending on how the user behaves and how he/she responds to the warnings and notices. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:56, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

User talk:I Hate WikiPeadia new username

The above user (whom you blocked for not meeting username policy) seems to want to change their username to '22whatwhy22'. [4] JACKINTHEBOX • ^TALK 12:23, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi JackintheBox! Thanks for letting me know about the user's unblock request that includes a new username to rename the account to. It looks like it's being handled perfectly by the admins who have made comments underneath the unblock request. They're asking the user, who created an account with the username "I Hate WikiPeadia", what his/her intentions are and where he/she plans to contribute to on Wikipedia, and expressed concerns that the user isn't here to contribute positively to the project given the username. Exactly how I would've handled it. ;-) I'll leave the request in their very capable hands. Thanks again for the message and the heads up; I appreciate it a lot. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:01, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Ashley Artus

Hi Oshwah. This article was previously deleted per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashley Artus. Since the deleting admin MelanieN is away on vacation, I thought I ask you about because (1) you're an admin and (2) you edited the article to cleanup a copyvio shortly after it was recreated. Is this eligible for WP:G4? I'm just asking before I do a little cleanup on the article's talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:47, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Marchjuly! I just took a look at the deleted revision following the closure of the AFD, and the current article text expands upon the article subject significantly compared to the previous one. Hence, I would say that the article is not eligible for G4 and should be discussed again in another AFD nomination if one is deemed to be necessary. Please let me know if you have any questions or if I can help you with anything else. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:51, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for checking. I was just asking because of WP:MCQ#Re: File:Ashley Artus Wiki Profile pic.jpg and noticed the article had been previously deleted after checking the talk page to see if there was some discussion about adding an image to the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:10, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

You bet ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:30, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/2607:fb90:64ea:d696:2049:7450:1f37:2a5a

Thanks for your replies above! The above IP manifestly copied the entire page of https://www.nps.gov/subjects/uspp/jurisdiction-and-authority.htm in this edit to the History section of United States Park Police. They then undid my reversion of that edit, and proceeded to add more content elsewhere in the article, claiming to have 'Added properly sourced content' while just adding bare URLs to the article without using the 'Cite web' template, despite this exchange on my talk page. Should their edits to the article be reverted? JACKINTHEBOX • ^TALK 14:33, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

They've also copied the entire page of https://www.nps.gov/subjects/uspp/horse-mounted-unit.htm in their latest edit. JACKINTHEBOX • ^TALK 14:42, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

I see it's sorted now. JACKINTHEBOX • ^TALK 15:09, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi JackintheBox! Sorry for being late to the party! I'm glad to hear that it's all sorted out. If you need anything else, please don't hesitate to let me know. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:29, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Protecting Wikipedia from political agendas

Hi, I am sorry for disturbing you, but I am caught in a dispute with an editor on a page. Could you, or another administrator colleague of yours come and make a final decision? This is the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_for_Freedom. I believe this editor has an agenda, which can be seen if you check his history, and this is also supported by radical changes he keeps making to the page linked above. In the edit history of the page you can find that, several attempts have been made by using references that were clearly not suited and almost blatant vandalism to support the version they would like to see. Then they admit those references are not correct and try to find others, just to support their already established and unchangeable opinions. Now, after failing and admitting that the first 4 references were not suitable, now they refer to a article which cites a study that does not exist and also refer to a study in dutch where I cannot find a place that supports their claims. I keep asking them, please explain how this supports your edits, and they just keep repeating "reliable sources", "stop editing", "stop removing reliable sources", "find sources that disprove our claims" (without them proving the claim themselves). The last one is especially worrisome since it implies that the defendant is guilty until proven innocent, and it sets a bad example to other editors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hasan342 (talk • contribs) 20:13, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Again about the same issue

Another user named Levivich has started vandalizing. I checked his talk page and it filled with warnings for disruptive edits. This user is far from being bipartisan and openly attacks conservative pages... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hasan342 (talk • contribs) 20:27, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Sami Yusuf

Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sami_Yusuf

Dear Oshwah,

As we contacted before, two persons trying to vandalising and damage the page. They are using their nationality racism to change article. They try to add "Iranian" to his nationality and a FAKE name for him on Sami Yusuf page which is absolutely wrong.

It is patently false to call Mr Yusuf "British-Iranian" as he does not hold Iranian citizenship/dual nationality and, for the purpose of clarification he is ethnically Azeri (not Iranian). He only holds British Citizenship based on all following important sources. Also here is the link confirming this in a 2018 Q&A session with Mr Yusuf: https://twitter.com/samiyusuf/status/960207745126453248

Kindly check following links:

Sami Yusuf Biography: https://samiyusufofficial.com/about-sami-yusuf/

Other sources:

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2006/apr/27/1?INTCMP=SRCH https://www.thenational.ae/arts-culture/music/sami-yusuf-if-one-has-a-strong-spiritual-discipline-it-lessens-the-burden-1.813322 https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04gnhvx https://www.wfp.org/news/news-release/sami-yusuf-dedicates-new-song-typhoon-survivors-philippines http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1220754,00.html

And many many other sources that I can provide.

We can send you Mr Yusuf’s passport copy in case the following link is not sufficient: https://twitter.com/samiyusuf/status/960210578043293696

Here are the two accounts that making constant changes for this page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Skywatcher68&action=edit&redlink=1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:HistoryofIran

Could you please disable access these people to this page? or protect the page to not making these changes? Honestly I surprised you block my account instead!

We would sincerely appreciate your prompt action.

Best regards,

Mjahangir 21:41, 12 April 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjahangir777 (talk • contribs)

Random accusement of racism [5], constant edit warring/pov-pushing on the Sami Yusuf article (yes, he started edit warring again after his block, 80% of his edits are based on that article), constant harassment on my talk page [6] [7] [8] (and now he's trying to do it in the Persian Wikipedia as well [9]). He is clearly not here to Wikipedia:Here to build an encyclopedia. Can we indef ban this guy already? Getting tired of getting +4 notifications due to his ranting. --HistoryofIran (talk) 18:10, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Aaaand more harrassment.. [10] --HistoryofIran (talk) 18:33, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

HistoryofIran - The user has been blocked for sock puppetry. I think the issue has been resolved. If it hasn't, let me know and I'll be happy to take a further look into things. Cheers :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:30, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

The Admin's Barnstar

		The Admin's Barnstar
		Oshwah is awarded The Admin's Barnstar for being the most warm, helpful and friendliest admin I've ever met. Thank you for all the help. :) Optakeover(U)(T)(C) 03:00, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Optakeover! Thank you for taking the time to leave me this barnstar! It was very kind of you to do and it means a lot to me. :-) If I can be of assistance with anything else, please don't hesitate to let me know. I'll be more than happy to help. I wish you a great day and happy editing! :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:32, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Deleted revisions for California Republican Party

Hi Oshwah. I'm doing some research on Wikipedia vandalism, and would like to better understand the background for this story. It looks like you deleted the relevant page versions.[11] Could you please send me the dates, times, IP or account name, and contents of the three deleted versions? I don't intend to make the account names or IPs public. I'm mostly interested in seeing exactly how long it took for the edits to be reverted, and who reverted them. Many thanks, Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 03:14, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Clayoquot! Please accept my apologies for the delay responding to your message and your request here. The information you're seeking unfortunately isn't information that can be shared. The revision text of the revisions were redacted using revision deletion under RD3 of the criteria for redaction, and I (usually) redact such information as soon as I discover it. I'm sorry to be "that guy" and respond with an official-sounding statement declining your request, but sharing details of revisions that were revision deleted in situations like these isn't a practice that's typically seen as appropriate. Please let me know if I can help you with anything else and I'll be happy to do so. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:02, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

this user is giving me trouble

Hi please can u block User: ArjunSharma98 he is keep disrupting pages like Deepika Singh, Hina Khan and Parth Samthaan and keep reverting my edits and some other edits done by other users. I even discussed this on his user talk page but he is ignoring it please can you do something. And plus he is doing the same edits User:IsntItCinema is which was blocked a month ago.

Nora Fatehi (^Talk/_Edits) 17:41, 13 April 2019 (UTC)O

this user is giving me trouble

Hi please can u block User: ArjunSharma98 he is keep disrupting pages like Deepika Singh, Hina Khan and Parth Samthaan and keep reverting my edits and some other edits done by other users. I even discussed this on his user talk page but he is ignoring it please can you do something. And plus he is doing the same edits User:IsntItCinema is which was blocked a month ago. Sorry it was a mistake

Nora Fatehi (^Talk/_Edits) 17:41, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Looks like some edit warring. Maybe a semi could force some communication, otherwise, both users have violated 3RR. Dusti^{*Let's talk!*} 12:22, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

No I havent he is just keep reverting my edits and making his own which is annoying. So I havent done anything. and plus I think the user have been blocked for sock edits under the name of User:IsntItCinema cause he did it on Hina Khan and Sanaya Irani. Nora Fatehi (^Talk/_Edits) 17:41, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

FWIW Oshwah, this user was blocked :) Dusti^{*Let's talk!*} 15:29, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Dusti - Heh, they were both blocked for being confirmed sock puppet accounts. Not the first time I've seen this happen, and it definitely won't be the last... ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:03, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Spam

Maybe I am in your email spam folder, I did send you several emails. --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 19:59, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Thegooduser - You're not. I've just been very busy over the last few days... not to worry, I'll check my Wikipedia email and respond to them today. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:05, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Notice of arbitration

You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Enigmaman. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Enigmaman/Evidence. Please add your evidence by April 27, 2019, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Enigmaman/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, – bradv🍁 20:07, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Bradv - Heh, thanks for the heads up. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:06, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Hey

This is Rejjie Snow himself & so much of the info on my supposed Wikipedia is wrong so how can I change that I can also entrust you’ll do so. I’m also happy to confirm it’s me in any way. Thanks for your time — Preceding unsigned comment added by Payersbsc (talk • contribs) 21:11, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

• @Payersbsc: - I've fixed the name to Alex, at least, given the source at Rejjie Snow. I've also removed and tagged questionable content not backed up by the sources. starship.paint ~ KO 03:25, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Starship.paint - Thanks for taking a look and for fixing things while I was away. Payersbsc, see the response left above. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:07, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Opps

Sorry if you got several pings from TheWikiWizard, I meant to do the noping, my mistake, sorry! --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 03:17, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

No worries; it's not a big deal. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:08, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Probably from below...? -Thegooduser

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zylonv (talk • contribs) 21:55, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Zylonv - Acknowledged. Will take a look and respond today. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:12, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail (Sorry if this is a duplicate)

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zylonv (talk • contribs) 21:56, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Zylonv - See above. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:12, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

The State of the African National Congress Paper!!!

Good day, I would like to know why my Article was nominated to be delated and it was delated why I was still editing the final part.--13:24, 17 April 2019 (UTC)Tefo.Steven (talk)

You've got mail

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.—RainFall 16:50, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

RainFall - My apologies for the delay responding to it. I've been very busy and I'm just now getting caught up with my Wikipedia messages and emails here. Will be checking and responding today. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:13, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

New Page Creation

Hi, Oshwah! I currently have an athlete page on Wikipedia where editors have made changes over the past decade. I will be creating a new page for my business this fall and would like to transfer information from the athlete page to my business page. After that is completed, I'd like to delete the athlete page because I don't want to have two Wikipedia pages with the same content. How can I delete the athlete page once my new page is created? Any help would be greatly appreciated! IroncladSports (talk) 18:28, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

IroncladSports - What you're trying to do is against numerous Wikipedia policies and guidelines. First, Wikipedia is not for promotion; creating an article on your business is not appropriate and such creations usually result in being deleted under G11 of the speedy deletion criteria. Second, you obviously have a personal conflict of interest with the article subject you're seeking to create an article page about. Creating, editing, or even participating in discussions that directly involve topics or subjects where you have a personal conflict of interest with (such as this situation) is a highly discouraged behavioral guideline. Again, creating and editing such pages will usually always result in those changes being reverted, removed, and deleted by other editors. Ultimately, what you're seeking to do will only result in your time being completely wasted if you try to do so. Please see Wikipedia's new user tutorial and our introduction to gain a better understanding of what an encyclopedia is, our mission, and how to become proficient with how everything works. On another note, your username is also a violation of Wikipedia's username policy because it appears to represent a group, club, organization, or company (most likely the one you're trying to start an article about). Because of this, I've applied a soft block to your account. Just follow the instructions on your user talk page, choose a new username that's appropriate and in compliance with our username policy, and you'll be unblocked once it's been changed for you. If you have any further questions, you're welcome to ask me them and I'll be happy to help you (though you'll need to be unblocked before you can respond here; again, follow the directions that have been provided). Thanks :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:22, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Revdel

Hi Oshwah, I went to IRC with this but nobody responded, and I see the edit is still there so I guess everyone was busy. [[REDACTED - Oshwah] This] edit is glorifying the actions of a man who shot several people in the UK a few years ago, including a police officer - would you be able to take a look? Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 21:02, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Girth Summit -  Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:19, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, appreciate the fast response, as always. GirthSummit _(blether) 21:23, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Girth Summit - No problem; always happy to lend a hand ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:38, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi there, I noticed that you changed your mind on this one. Would you be willing to discuss your reasoning? I'm keen to get a better sense of where the threshold for revdel lies - I don't want to waste admins' time with frivolous reports, but also I don't want to allow anything to slip through the net that ought to be gone.

In this case, we are writing about a series of misogynistic shootings and their perpetrator. In my interpretation, the edit trivialised the crimes by changing the verb, and glorified the perpetrator in its description of him. That seemed grossly offensive to me (particularly since one of his victims is still living), and it's certainly of no encyclopedic value. How do you determine what does and does not cross the RD2 threshold? Thanks in advance for any guidance you can offer. GirthSummit _(blether) 06:37, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Girth Summit! I think your report was perfectly justified. Other administrators questioned whether or not RD2 applied to the particular diff, so I err'd on the side of principle and just went ahead and restored the visibility on the revision. I think that depending on the situation, RD2 could definitely apply. Personally, I wouldn't look into the reversion of the RD I made too deeply; just keep up the excellent work and email me rev del requests in the future (to avoid the Streisand effect as much as possible). ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:41, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Wow - I didn't expect a response so fast - I'm assuming you're in the US, so you're either up really early, or really late! OK, I'll follow that advice, and thanks for your kind words.

As an aside, do you think there would be any value in having a conversation somewhere aimed at generating consensus for clearer guidance on what does, and does not, require revdel on RD2 grounds? From conversations with a number of different admins, I've found a fairly wide range of opinions on the matter - there seems to be a substantial grey area. Clearer guidance would certainly help me guide new recruits in CVUA, and might give patrollers more generally more confidence about making the right call. GirthSummit _(blether) 07:22, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Girth Summit - I personally don't see general clarification discussions as a bad thing at all. However, in cases of revision deletion, one could (rightfully) say that it really shouldn't be a "grey area". When invoking RD2 or RD3 is questionable and an admin has to stop and ask themselves if the edit meets the criterion, then the edit shouldn't be redacted unilaterally, and the admin should consult other admins to get their input first. I admit that I'm not perfect in this aspect (in fact, I was a lot more liberal with its use than I am now), but I do my best to redact what I feel unquestionably meets the criteria. I do agree that its use can vary widely from admin to admin, and it really shouldn't be that way (or at least as wide as I've personally observed). Unfortunately, what some editors would agree or believe is "grossly insulting or offensive" isn't what RD2 (to give an example) is meant for. This happens a lot, and is why I'd be completely understanding if such discussions were held to seek clarification. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:42, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

I'd definitely like a discussion of this question. I guess there's two threads to it - admins might want to have a conversation about the circumstances when they should actually perform a redvel; what I'm really interested in though is the circumstances when a patroller request it. What guidance do I give a new CVUA trainee - is it 'if in doubt, request'? 'Only request if you're sure'? If it's somewhere in the middle, some expanded 'use your best judgement according to these criteria' guidance would be helpful. Where do you think the best place to initiate a conversation would be - Wikipedia talk:Revision deletion? WP:AN? Wikipedia talk:Counter-Vandalism Unit/Academy? GirthSummit _(blether) 09:03, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Girth Summit - That's a very good question you ask. What I've typically done for people who've asked about rev del and RD2 and RD3 is to provide in-depth explanations of each criterion and what they're meant for, and give examples that would unquestionably need rev del under each criterion. So, for RD2 - I would state that it's for edits that are "the worst of the worst" and add things that would be seen as highly offensive and outright horrible by the average user, such as statements praising Hitler or the Holocaust, making jokes about the killing of Jewish people, vandalism or disruption that makes blatantly racist derogatory statements (like using the n-word, or other equally offensive words), edits that make fun of slavery in a degrading manner, things like that... Do the same with RD3 as well and give good examples.

If the user finds an edit that unquestionably or even highly likely qualifies for rev del under a criterion, have them email it to an admin and report it and with a subject and text in the message that states that they're reporting something that "needs rev del". If they're not sure but want to report it and ask, have them email it but with a subject asking whether or not it qualifies ("Is this an edit that meets RD3?"). This way, they can report unambiguous issues that need rev del, and they can also report questionable edits and without coming off as lacking complete knowledge of the criteria just for asking. ;-) Admins who are experienced in their role, want to see others learn and grow, and truly cares about the encyclopedia and the project aren't going to care if users ask about edits and whether or not they qualify, or occasionally reports an edit that doesn't need redaction. So long as they clearly understand what each criterion is meant for, they learn from each report or question they send, and use the responses they receive - especially from reports or questions about revisions that don't qualify - to improve their understanding of the criteria. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:09, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

OK, that makes sense, thanks - I'll do that. Finally then, based on the above, would you say that e-mailing an admin listed at Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to handle RevisionDelete requests is the preferred method for requesting revdel? I've been using IRC by default, primarily because that allows 'whoever is around' to deal with it rather than singling out an individual; if you advise differently, I'll move to e-mail as standard except in really urgent cases. (I'll try to spread it around though, rather than coming to you every time!) GirthSummit _(blether) 10:21, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Girth Summit - Definitely report it on IRC in the -revdel channel if you can, since it'll be visible to many admins active in the channel. The reason I kept saying above to "email an admin" was simply to emphasize that requests shouldn't be made on Wikipedia publicly (due to the Streisand effect... lol). I wasn't trying to imply or state that emailing an admin is the preferred method over others. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:26, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

OK, gotcha. Thanks for all the advice, really appreciate it. GirthSummit _(blether) 10:27, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Girth Summit - No problem; always happy to lend a hand ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:30, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 02:56, 18 April 2019 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

BilCat (talk) 02:56, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

BilCat - Received and replied. Thanks! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:59, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Replied. - BilCat (talk) 04:04, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Gracias! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:06, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

De rein. :) - BilCat (talk) 04:09, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Page protection

Did you mean to protect the page from IP edit warring with/after this edit, Sir? --BushelCandle (talk) 07:35, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi BushelCandle! I'm not sure what you mean exactly... could you elaborate a but further so that I understand? Thanks :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:40, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) BushelCandle if you look at the log the protection that Oshwah applied expired on April 15. It does look like the content dispute has resumed so O might apply a new protection. As there is no way to know when O will see this you can also file a report at WP:RFPP. MarnetteD|Talk 07:43, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

O I was typing this while you replied. I'm posting it anyway in case it may help. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 07:43, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

I'm very sorry for causing confusion!

You're absolutely right that it was intended to be a very short duration protection judging by the edit summary. Sorry ! --BushelCandle (talk) 07:45, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

BushelCandle - No worries. I'm glad that the confusion was sorted out and thanks to MarnetteD. I'll look into applying protection to the article again. Thanks again for the message and I hope you have a great rest of your day! :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:48, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

I extended the protection on the article and set it to expire in two weeks. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:51, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you both for your collegial and helpful attitude and sorry once again for not looking more carefully at what had been going on. (With all the reverting, it was rather hard to establish what was the last good version...)--BushelCandle (talk) 07:55, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

BushelCandle - No problem; always happy to lend a hand ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:58, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Revei

Revei Wikimedia of Indonesia Manda 1993 Wiki Show global@Manda 1993, Meta Global sysop--Revei (talk) 12:57, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Revei! I'm not sure exactly what this message is supposed to mean. Did you need assistance with something? :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:59, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Start-up Nation

Hi Oshwah, hope you're well, I was looking at this article and surprised that it's under ECP and that it had an edit notice. I was wondering if you can take a look at this article and see if in your opinion that editing restriction can be removed. Thanks. SJ -edit- The weird thing is that it doesn't appear to be under ECP, because IP's do edit, but when you click to edit, there is a page notice, and the talk page has the ARBPIA header, which I can remove, but just want confirmation, especially on the editnotice, which not sure how that got there. -- Sir Joseph ^(talk) 18:24, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

So the pagenotice was from 2011, but the page itself is not currently under ARBPIA. So can the pagenotice be deleted? I can put in a CSD if that makes it official, and then delete the ARBPIA tag on the talk page. Thanks and sorry for bothering you. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 18:30, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Sir Joseph! No apologies are necessary at all. You're welcome to message me any time you need or want to. ;-) I took a look at the Start-up Nation article, and it's not under any kind of protection (in fact, the logs show that it's never been protected before), but there's definitely a page notice as you indicated (located here). Interesting... I'm guessing that someone meant to apply 30/500 on this article, created the edit notice, but forgot to actually protect it... lol. Let me do some digging and see what more I can find. I'm curious to figure out what happened here... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:32, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, the notice was put in originally before we had ECP, but the page itself doesn't even look like it qualifies for ECP since it doesn't really have anything to do with the IP area, and it doesn't look like it's much trafficked or have issues with vandalism or edit wars. I'm a believer in opening up as much as possible until we have to lock things down. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 18:37, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Sir Joseph - I don't think the article has anything to do with the ARBPIA topic either... it's just a book on the nation's economy. The page notice doesn't make sense. Looking at the contributions for the admin who created it (EdJohnston) shows that he added a comment here to WP:AE just before doing so. The enforcement request looks to have been over an edit war, and the comment indicates that the editors were beginning to work things out peacefully. All in all, the page notice isn't accurate or necessary, so I went ahead and deleted it. I've pinged EdJohnston in this response in case he objects to my decision or has info he can add that will explain what happened and help it to make sense. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:46, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I read the book ages ago, it has a couple of good take-aways for corporate culture that I try to live by. In any event, hopefully the page will stay stable and we won't need to lock it down. Thanks! Sir Joseph ^(talk) 19:00, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Sir Joseph - No problem. Until we meet again... ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:03, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

I agree with the end result of this discussion, but just for the record, there was an AE thread about this article back in 2011 at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Archive90#Mbz1 topic ban clarification. The article was created in 2011 by a person who was under a topic ban from ARBPIA and the very wide language of their ban seemed to prevent them from writing anything about Israel, not just about the conflict. (Unclear why we thought the admin had authority to write such a wide ban, but whatever). We assumed at the time that the article, due to its nature, would attract supporters of the two sides of the I/P dispute and would need to be flagged as soon as editing began. (Original title was: Start-up Nation: The Story of Israel's Economic Miracle). As Oshwah notes, there has never been any protection on the article. It appears to me that the present article doesn't need the I/P banner so I agree with removal of the banner and the editnotice. EdJohnston (talk) 19:56, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

EdJohnston - Thanks for responding with the additional information. Perfect; I'm glad to hear that my deletion was the right call. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:34, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for this, Oshwah. I read over the thread and the links (friendly talk page watcher, hope you don't mind), and while it might have been semi-appropriate almost a decade ago given the editors, it's obviously not applicable now. Symmachus Auxiliarus (talk) 23:53, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

I don't mind at all. That's one of the main purposes of user talk pages. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:32, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Kalpana Mohan Page

Hi, Oshwah sorry to trouble you again. I have written twice on April 11 & 16 to Bbb23 but no response. It has been almost a month now since the changes he made on 23 March 2019 at Kalpana Mohan Page. He is not responding to me nor did he responded to your mail which you had forwarded to him April 02. I am sorry but I do not feel the matter is been handled in a fair manner. The changes were made without even asking about my point of view. If you remember you had asked me to explain my point before you made changes. Please advice me on the above matter what course of action can be taken as they are simply destroying a rare Legend Filmography & deprived her Fans about her body of work, the legacy she left behind. I need a fair assessment. No restraint has been followed on this matter. Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yashkkaryan (talk • contribs) 19:23, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Yashkkaryan - What would happen if you were to edit the article right now and make the revisions you're seeking to make? It's been awhile, so I don't remember the exact details behind the edits you were trying to make... but if they're accurate, supported by reliable sources, and worded to reflect a neutral point of view... I don't see an issue. You just need to make sure that all of these points are met before you make the changes. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:34, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, The changes were approved by you but were revert back on 23 March, 2019 The changes which were reverted were part of previous editions too including the hyperlink leading to the movie pages. so suddenly what went wrong & were changed? It has been done without any explanation. Below are the changes which were removed.

Collapsing revision text. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:53, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Career: Nehru often invited Kalpana, a trained Kathak dancer, to dance at the Rashtrapati Bhavan whenever dignitaries visited. Actor Balraj Sahani and Urdu writer Ismat Chughtai spotted the beautiful dancer and encouraged her to come to Mumbai and try her luck in films. Filmography 1. Pyar Ki Jeet (1962), as Chitralekha | Romance | 1 January 1962 (India) Director Vasant Painter | Stars: Mahipal, Kalpana, Indira 2. Naughty Boy (1962), as Meena Sharma / Edna Wong | Comedy Movie Director Shakti Samanta, Stars: Kishore Kumar, Kalpana, Om Prakash 3. Professor (1962), as Neena Verma | Comedy, Drama, Musical | 11 May 1962 (India) Director Lekh Tandon, Stars: Shammi Kapoor, Kalpana, Lalita Pawar 4. Saheli (1965), as Reshma | Romance | 1965 (India) Director Arjun Hingorani, Stars: Pradeep Kumar, Kalpana, Vijaya Choudhury 5. Teesra Kaun (1965), as Shobha | Action, Crime, Drama Director: Mohammed Hussain (as Mohd. Husain) | Stars: Feroz Khan, Kalpana & Shashikala 6. Teen Devian (1965) as Kalpana | Musical, Romance | 10 December 1965 (India) Director: Amarjeet (as Amar Jeet) | Stars: Dev Anand, Nanda, Kalpana, Simi & IS Johar 7. Biwi Aur Makan (1966), as Geeta Director: Hrishikesh Mukherjee | Stars: Biswajit Chatterjee, Kalpana, Mehmood 8. Tasveer (1966), as Piloo | Director: J.B.H. Wadia Stars: Feroz Khan, Kalpana , Helen & Rajendra Nath 9. Pyar Kiye Jaa (1966), as Malti | Director: C.V. Sridhar (as Sridhar) Stars: Kishore Kumar, Kalpana, Shashi Kapoor, Mehmood 10. Nawab Sirazuddaula (1967) Drama | Director: Ramchandra Thakur Stars: Bharat Bhushan, Kalpana, Naseem Banu, Murad & Johnny Walker 11. Ek Bechara (1972), as Radha | Drama, Family | Director: S.M. Abbas Stars: Jeetendra, Rekha, Vinod Khanna, Kalpana, Pran, Bindu & Anwar Hussain References Please add the link, as it was part of the earlier Biography. https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0436200/bio?ref_=nm_ov_bio_sm

She has 11 films to her credits, all films are not mentioned in the current Biography. I request you to please restore the info as they were listed original version with the hyperlink leading to the movie. The list is genuine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yashkkaryan (talk • contribs) 19:48, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Yashkkaryan - Is there a reliable source that we can use to cite these changes? We really should locate and have one before we add this to the article... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:54, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

This a common issue in Indian popular culture, and Indian cinema especially; I used to handle a lot of this kind of stuff (especially per AfC). Many of the sources are unreliable. As far as the subject though, she seems notable in this subject area (IMHO), but reliable sources are lacking... But admittedly this is because of the state of mass media in India, though, which tends toward tabloid exhaltaion. Many of the local editions of the Times of India (for example), can't be used for most subjects, due to puffery and lack of editorial oversight. Yashkkaryan, can you find any additional reliable sources (domestic or international) that mention her in detail beyond a rephrasing of a press release? Something in other languages is perfectly fine, even if English sources are preferred. Symmachus Auxiliarus (talk) 00:02, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Yashkkaryan - As Symmachus Auxiliarus stated above, Wikipedia relies on reliable sources in order to assert verifiability with the information we add to articles. I understand that some article subjects can be somewhat lacking in this area, and locating reliable sources can be difficult at times. However, it's always better to have no information on an article about a particular subject than to have information on a subject that is poorly verifiable and potentially incorrect or wrong - especially when it comes to articles that are biographies of living people. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:43, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

IP 135.0.12.60

Hi Oswah. Single use IP 135.0.12.60 has been adding disgusting vandalism to Paul Newman and an IP editor has complained at WP:Help desk. Unfortunately warnings have not been issued, so I can't take it to ANV directly. If you have a moment can you take a quick look. Thanks, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 20:03, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Martin of Sheffield! Thanks for the heads up! The vandalism you speak of was actually added by 216.213.227.145; the 135.0.12.60 user was actually removing the vandalism. ;-) No worries, though... I'll keep an eye out and take care of things. Thanks again! :-D ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:36, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Filter 985

Curious why you've created that when 614 covers the hits with sub(?:scrib(?:e|es|ed|ing))?\s*(?:to|2)\s*(?:p(ew|ud|ue|uw|oo)|te*.?series). Also, (user_editcount == null & user_age == 0) is unnecessary as null is less than any number. Galobtter (pingó mió) 20:07, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Galobtter - HA! I thought that such an edit filter might already exist... I'll take a look at it and see what the differences are. It's interesting that other admins requested this earlier today (which is why I built it); they must not have been aware of this edit filter either. Oh okay... I guess I'm just used to C++ and other programming languages where null isn't a number at all, and hence can't be used in a conditional statement with operators such as > and <. Thanks for the heads up about the edit filter and how I threw together the code; I'm definitely going to take a look and figure out the best course of action from there. We definitely don't want to have more than one filter doing the exact same things if we can avoid it... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:40, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Galobtter - Thanks again for the message here. I took a look at the regex code for edit filter 614, and it definitely should capture the edits that filter 985 was designed to do. I'm just curious as to why I see these edits pop up on Huggle when I patrol recent changes. I'll need to look at my contributions, find a revision where this is true, and figure out what's going on. In the meantime, I've disabled the edit filter I created earlier today; no need to have more than one filter running that does the exact same thing. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:52, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Notification of minor userpage change

I've found a part of your userpage that says "a 200MHz intel Pentium processor." I took note of the fact that the brand Intel is not capitalized, and I assumed that you'd be fine with me capitalizing the brand name on your user page. If you do have any objections to this, I'll revert it ASAP, however if not, then the issue with capitalization is fixed. Best regards, Redactyll Letsa taco 'bou it, son! 20:22, 18 April 2019 (UTC) during the time of 20:22, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Redactyll - Sweet! Thanks for fixing that for me! Much appreciated ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:41, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Kalpana Mohan Page

Hi, the reason for writing Kalpana filmography is for her fans. After more than 5 decades since Kalpana stop working, she is still remembered as the most beautiful actress of her era. It’s sad that most of her die heart fan remember her for 1 or 2 movies, while she has worked in a handful of movies where her performance was par excellent. You guys can visit the link to check https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0436200/bio?ref_=nm_ov_bio_sm

My point is the above link & info about her life were part of her earlier edition of Wikipedia. My contribution to the list I have done research on the list of her movies for accuracy like the year of release, the character she played in them. Director name & her co-stars. I can send you the link to her movie. You can trust the above website for accuracy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yashkkaryan (talk • contribs) 20:30, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Yashkkaryan. Please see the response I left for you in the discussion above. I understand that you have a high interest in this article subject and that you wish to have the information published and known, but as an encyclopedia, our goal is neutrality, accuracy, and verifiability over quantity, length, and "high numbers". In most cases, it's better to have a gap or a lack of specific information in an article than to have it included if the information lacks the support of reliable sources and hence lacks full verifiability. Fear not, though... if the article subject becomes notable enough, reliable sources that can be cited and used to support the information will certainly pop up. Since we're having a lot of trouble locating reliable sources on this subject outside of IMDb, it sounds like the article subject just might not be notable enough yet. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:49, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

I added the informations for him in Kalpana Mohan page(with reliable sources). Judging by his messages on my talk page, I think he is satisfied. The matter has been resolved. Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 23:13, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Masumrezarock100 - That's the best outcome that could've been reached. Thanks for doing that! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:11, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

You've Got Mail

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Zylonv (talk • contribs) 21:07, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

All taken care of! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:20, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

What do you think of what I did?

React to the edit I did on Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal. Calvinkulit (talk) 05:29, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello O. FYI after having been warned about the way they messed with the redirect and having made this reply this editor then messed with the redirect again. Other edits have been unsourced but are not outright vandalism. A weird situation that I thought you should be aware of. Lets hope they try to be productive in the future. MarnetteD|Talk 12:31, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

@MarnetteD: Indef'd by DoRD Active unblock request. - FlightTime (open channel) 14:05, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the update FlightTime. Cheers to you both. MarnetteD|Talk 14:15, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi MarnetteD! I apologize for such a delayed response here. The edit you showed me here definitely starts crossing the line away from being seen as good faith and into the territory of being blatant disruption - especially given the fact that I fixed it once, warned the user to not do that again and to get help, and then he/she does that... Either way, it looks like the user is indefinitely blocked. Hopefully, if their goal really is to contribute positively to the encyclopedia, they'll return and appeal the block and be given another chance down the road. Either way, thanks again for the messages and the heads up about the user and what was going on. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:53, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 17:45, 19 April 2019 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

BilCat (talk) 17:45, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

BilCat - Received and replied. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:14, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

New socket of Arjun Sharma and Itsmycinema

Hi I just wanted to inform you that there is this new user User:Mallika800 is a sock of User:ArjunSharma98 because it is doing the same sock edits on Parth Samthaan and Hina Khan as that user, User:IsntItCinema and User:NoraFatehi231. Thanks. Please do something and block this person.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.152.176.246 (talk) 15:47, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Hojat Rahimi issue

why did you deleted Hojat Rahimi's article. He has proper google evidence to prove him a musician. So no matter's about recreation. if he is a real celebrity he has eligible to make a wiki article right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sajidulislampathan (talk • contribs) 21:38, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Sajidulislampathan - The article was repeatedly created by users who were abusing multiple accounts, evading blocks and bans, and violating Wikipedia policies. By principle and Wikipedia policy, any articles or pages that were created by users who were violating Wikipedia's sock puppetry, blocking, or banning policies at the time will usually be deleted. Otherwise, we'd be inadvertently rewarding the users for their behavior and encouraging it to continue if we were known to keep articles written by users during their block or ban. We don't blindly follow this rule each and every time, but for the most part we'll implement the rule (or not) so that it works in the favor of the project and the encyclopedia. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks for the message and I wish you a great day. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:20, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Zylonv (talk • contribs) 00:46, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Zylonv - Received and responded. You didn't add your question to the message... lol ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:21, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

before and after

2013

2019

Bonus 2025

Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 20:20, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

@Thegooduser: Why the background is so dark all of a sudden? Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 06:21, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Masumrezarock100, Because his hair grew so much, just kidding, lol, it's been modified by paint or something. --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 00:02, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

@Thegooduser: I knew that already. That's not what I meant. Why did you do that? It's not like you can predict the future or something nor you have seen his current photo. Or is it? Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 04:35, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

It's meant as a joke, if Oshwah did not cut his hair, I was joking about the 2019 and the 2025 part, lol. Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 01:37, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

I was just messing with you. 😋. Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 03:01, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Masumrezarock100, Oh, I didn't know that, sorry! I have Autism and it sometimes makes it harder for me to discern between jokes and actual questions. But let's use Albert Einstein theory of relativity and time travel to see Oshwah's crazy hair! :-P Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 03:17, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

lol ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:29, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

April Fools' Day

The article keeps getting vandalized, albeit slower than earlier this month. Clovermoss (talk) 03:32, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Clovermoss! Please accept my apologies for the delay responding to your message here. Life has kept me busy lately. ;-) I'm seeing the vandalism as well, but it looks like it's slowed down significantly as the holiday (...holiday? yearly thing? the day? lol) goes further into the past. If the vandalism starts to pick up and occur at a high rate and by multiple users, please let me know or (recommended) file a protection request at RFPP. I think we can leave things be and just keep an eye on things for now. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:25, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Kalpana Mohan Page

Hi Oshwah

Kalpana in her brief carrier has done 11 films. She has worked with all famous actors, directors, musicians of that era. I have provided the link of her movies as evidence. You can authenticate her name in Film credit, directors, co-stars. The list is genuine to support her Filmography.

Collapsing list. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:26, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

1. Pyar Ki Jeet (1962), as Chitralekha | Romance | 1 January 1962 (India) Director Vasant Painter | Stars: Mahipal, Kalpana, Indira https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3619654/?ref_=nv_sr_1?ref_=nv_sr_1 2. Naughty Boy (1962), as Meena Sharma / Edna Wong | Comedy Movie Director Shakti Samanta, Stars: Kishore Kumar, Kalpana, Om Prakash https://www.imdb.com/find?ref_=nv_sr_fn&q=Naughty+Boy+%281962%29&s=all 3. Professor (1962), as Neena Verma | Comedy, Drama, Musical | 11 May 1962 (India) Director Lekh Tandon, Stars: Shammi Kapoor, Kalpana, Lalita Pawar https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056379/?ref_=nv_sr_1?ref_=nv_sr_1 4. Saheli (1965), as Reshma | Romance | 1965 (India) Director Arjun Hingorani, Stars: Pradeep Kumar, Kalpana, Vijaya Choudhury https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0383611/?ref_=nv_sr_1?ref_=nv_sr_1 5. Teesra Kaun (1965), as Shobha | Action, Crime, Drama Director: Mohammed Hussain (as Mohd. Husain) | Stars: Feroz Khan, Kalpana & Shashikala https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0059787/?ref_=nv_sr_1?ref_=nv_sr_1 6. Teen Devian (1965) as Kalpana | Musical, Romance | 10 December 1965 (India) Director: Amarjeet (as Amar Jeet) | Stars: Dev Anand, Nanda, Kalpana, Simi & IS Johar https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0274944/?ref_=nv_sr_1?ref_=nv_sr_1 7. Biwi Aur Makan (1966), as Geeta Director: Hrishikesh Mukherjee | Stars: Biswajit Chatterjee, Kalpana, Mehmood https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0244430/?ref_=nv_sr_1?ref_=nv_sr_1 8. Tasveer (1966), as Piloo | Director: J.B.H. Wadia Stars: Feroz Khan, Kalpana , Helen & Rajendra Nath https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0358194/?ref_=nv_sr_5?ref_=nv_sr_5 9. Pyar Kiye Jaa (1966), as Malti | Director: C.V. Sridhar (as Sridhar) Stars: Kishore Kumar, Kalpana, Shashi Kapoor, Mehmood https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0176075/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1 10. Nawab Sirazuddaula (1967) Drama | Director: Ramchandra Thakur Stars: Bharat Bhushan, Kalpana, Naseem Banu, Murad & Johnny Walker https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387437/?ref_=nv_sr_1?ref_=nv_sr_1 11. Ek Bechara (1972), as Radha | Drama, Family | Director: S.M. Abbas Stars: Jeetendra, Rekha, Vinod Khanna, Kalpana, Pran, Bindu & Anwar Hussain https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0357627/?ref_=nv_sr_1?ref_=nv_sr_1

It is now completed 1 month since the changes made to the Kalpana Mohan Page but still, no reply from Bbb23 & you are my last hope in this matter to restore her Filmography now. Also, I would like to add the present Wikipedia page contains information from the Kalpana IMDB Page.

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0436200/bio?ref_=nm_ov_bio_sm

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yashkkaryan (talk • contribs) 19:14, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Yashkkaryan: I don't think you understood why your edits were reverted. It's about your writing style and not about the informations you added. Like these words "seems more promising". You need to maintain your neutral point of view. Anyway I am going to leave you a message in your talk page about Wikipedia's policies and some other stuffs for editing. Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎

Yashkkaryan - Please see the response I left in the previous two discussions you started above, as well as the response that Masumrezarock100 left you here. My thanks to Masumrezarock100 for responding while I was away. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:31, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Oshwah Thank you so much for your help & support. Masumrezarock100 has provided me with the link, See WP:FILMCAST. It is really helpful & its further strength my case. The article explains film articles depending on three key elements: 1) the prominence of the cast in the film. The articles point out the relevance of the character to the plot. There is no specific time frame mention as such; the character can be small but significant.

Collapsing list again. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:23, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

In 1st movie Movie Picnic (1966) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3ZMFUrXgAU Her name appears on the screen at 0.23 sec, along with Shobha Khote & Azra. The name of all three ladies appears in the same frame. Kalpana, Shobha Khote & Azra. Kalpana was as popular as the other two leading ladies. It shows her relevant in the Film. She appeared in two songs of the movie 1st Song: He Nainva Na Pher Pher Ke Chalo Her character appears on screen at 7.15 sec 2nd Song: Baalamavaa Bolo Na Bolo Her character appears on screen at 1 hr 13 min The film is still remembered for Kalpana dance no as well, she has done an excellent performance on the Kathak-based dance choreograph on her. For two songs in the movie, she shares about 10 minutes of screen space. You can call it as a special dance number or an Item Songs as it is referred in today’s time. In 2nd Movie: Ek Bechara (1972) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3lgj99Z3UE Her name appeared on the screen at 3.37 sec, along with Vinod Khanna Her character appears on screen at 1.32.29 sec & it there till the end of the movie. Point to be noted her name appears in the cast with Vinod Khanna (The main negative character in the script i.e. "villain") rief summary: “A poor man marries a rich girl & lead a happy life. Women claim to be his 1st wife appear & trouble begin in his life. Kalpana plays a pivotal role as she claims to be his first wife. “ She played a significant & relevant character in the movie. She shares about 15 minutes of screen spaces in a 2 hour 11 minutes film. My request is to add both Movie names in her list. I have only asked to add these two movies in her list where her character is relevant in the movie. I have excluded her few small scenes in different movies, For example, her character in Movie: Shaadi (1962) as it was not significant in the script. My second question can her interview given to a magazine, be added in her Wikipedia page. I am excluding blog, IMDB, Wikipedia & BlogSpot reviews. I understand Wikipedia: Reliable sources/Perennial sources cannot cover all. We need to be a bit flexible with Wikipedia policies it needs to be relevant with changing times. Warm regards Yashkkaryan (talk) 18:31, 4 May 2019 (UTC)Yash Aryan

Like I said before, YouTube isn't a reliable source. Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 06:57, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Masumrezarock100 - If you've worked with this user recently and are continuing to offer them help, can you try reaching out to him/her on their user talk page? I believe that I've provided the adequate assistance that I can give, and your follow-up responses will be much more helpful to them. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:14, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Actually I have zero interest in Kalpana Mohan and biographies. He asked me if he could add reviews to the article from unreliable sources or magazines. I didn't know, so I referred him to Teahouse. I guess he didn't ask the question properly (he included YouTube links). Nobody answered his question that if he could add interviews from local magazines (as Internet wasn't available in those days). I am willing to help him. But I am afraid that I might misguide him as I don't really work with biographies. Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 14:38, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

References

Need Help

In this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodo-Kachari_people , this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Chaipau user try to add controversial statement to make communal riots with dead link. He must be blocked from this page. Government of India use Bodo or Kachari or Bodo-Kachari as umbrella term since British regime for related ethnicity but This person is adding fake information like as Boro are trying to make Bodo as umbrella term. Please block him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PerfectingNEI (talk • contribs) 19:37, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi PerfectingNEI and thanks for leaving me a message here with your concerns. In order to resolve this ongoing dispute properly, you need to navigate to the article's talk page and discuss the issues with Chaipau there. Make sure to add {{ping|Chaipau}} inside the discussion so that he/she receives a notification of the discussion you're starting. You should also follow-up with Chaipau on his/her user talk page and give a heads up about the discussion. Disputes need to be resolved by consensus and with civil and peaceful discussion. Make sure that you don't resort to edit warring and that you report other users who are currently doing so to the proper noticeboard (issues in the past that are not currently happening at the time are usually seen as 'stale'). Looking at the article's edit history, there were some back-and-fourth reverts between the two of you (edit warring), but this was over a month ago... It would be inappropriate for me to take administrative action against anyone now for things that are long in the past. Refer to Wikipedia's dispute resolution protocol and work with Chaipau to resolve the dispute. If he/she doesn't participate in the discussion and continues to revert the article or add the information without listening to concerns, you can file a report at ANI or AN3 for edit warring issues. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them. I wish you good luck with resolving the dispute and I hope you have a great rest of your day. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:42, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Research on Sockpuppets

Hi Oshwah, I'm relatively new to wikipedia, but I've been observing for a few months now. I'm reaching out because I recently became interested in sockpuppets and I saw that you are listed as an admin of some sort involving investigations of sock puppets [and you seem approachable based on your user profile! :) ]. I'm curious if there is a master list of all sockpuppet users, who have been identified and blocked/removed? I would like to take a look at what they were editing before being removed. Many thanks! ~Stacey

Slritter22 (talk) 20:37, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Slritter22: There's this Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets - FlightTime (open channel) 20:41, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Many thanks again -- that was brilliant fast! :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slritter22 (talk • contribs) 21:00, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Slritter22! Great question, and please accept my apologies for the delay responding to your message. Life has kept me busy lately and I'm just now getting caught up with all of my Wikipedia messages, requests for help, emails, pings, etc. ;-)

There isn't a page that contains a master list of every sock puppet investigation that's been open and closed; there would be way too many reports to manage and organize in a list like that. However, there are a few pages that will help you: FlightTime's response above with the category is probably the best place to look. Another good place to look is Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations, which contains a list of currently open and recently closed cases where users have filed a report against another for engaging in sock puppetry. Another page you may find useful is the list of active editing restrictions that are placed on Wikipedia users. While it doesn't involve sock puppetry directly, it may be relevant and useful to you (some restrictions on users have a requirement that he/she only edit while logged in and using only one account). In cases of long-term abuse, there's also this page.

I apologize again for the delayed response, and I hope that we were able to answer your question. If you need anything else, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be more than happy to help you. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:02, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Alligator gar

Oshwah - please take a look at Alligator gar - there's an IP causing problems and it needs PP. Thanks ^Atsme _Talk 📧 22:45, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Oshwah appears to be offline, so if the disruption continues, you might contact WP:RFPP. - BilCat (talk) 22:55, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Atsme! Please accept my apologies for the delay responding to your message here. Life has kept me busy lately, and I'm just now getting caught up with all of my Wikipedia messages, requests for help, emails, pings, etc. ;-) Oh yeah... there definitely looks like there was some disputing and disruption between yourself and the IP user, and it looks like El C has fully protected the article. I hope things can be worked out peacefully between the two of you... make sure to start a new discussion on the article's talk page, and leave a message for the user and point them to the discussion so that they can respond. If nothing comes of it, and if the user continues with their edits or disruption in dispute, file a report at AN3 or ANI and we'll take a look. Sorry again for being so late to the party and for the delayed response... if you need anything else, please let me know and I'll be happy to help. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:07, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

The beginning of an edit war with Ello Creative sock puppet accounts

Oshwah I emailed you last week regarding an edit made, which I undid, to the page of Florida banker turned politician Jay Fant ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Fant ) though I did not receive a reply.

Another account just redid the same edit, and I suspect this may be the beginning of an edit war. I am notifying you again so that prompt action may be taken. These accounts have edited similar politicians' pages, and are likely part of the same paid political consultancy, Ello Creative, working on behalf of their clients. These edits violate Wikipedia policies for neutrality, conflict of interest, and paid disclosure. Their edits should be deleted, and if this type of conduct persists then the consultancy's accounts should not be allowed to modify pages.

Here is the content of my original email:

Hi Oshwah,

I just noticed by chance that there was an attempt made today by a paid political consultancy, Ello Creative, to edit the page of a former banker, Jay Fant ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Fant ) in order to remove his culpability* for failing his bank. I undid the consultancy's edit on the Jay Fant page, but I also noticed they made edits to other pages involving clients. I wonder if their edits should be deleted in general, and what steps should be taken to perhaps remove their ability from making changes to the site.

Here is the explanation I wrote when undoing the consultancy's edit:

"The edit was made by a paid political consultancy Ello Creative to "massage" the name and reputation of their client Jay Fant, a banker who became too greedy with commercial real estate loans and failed his bank. The edit violates Wikipedia standards for neutrality. Other work the political consultancy has done on Wikipedia should also be investigated."

https://www.jacksonville.com/business/2012-01-27/story/state-shuts-down-first-guaranty-jacksonvilles-oldest-bank https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2012/01/27/first-guaranty-bank-and-trust-co-of.html https://www.jacksonville.com/news/metro/2012-02-04/story/first-guaranty-sought-survival-until-its-final-day http://www.tampabay.com/florida-politics/buzz/2018/06/20/jay-fant-doesnt-mention-his-bank-failures-in-application-for-banking-regulator/

"Banking regulators at OFR found that under Fant's leadership, the bank started offering riskier commercial real estate loans, including loans to people with questionable backgrounds. When the Great Recession hit, the bank went under. That version of events is nowhere in his application to become OFR commissioner, overseeing the very regulators who shut down his bank. The Florida Cabinet could choose the next OFR commissioner as early as next week. ... "On Tuesday, Fant announced he was dropping out of the attorney general's race and would instead throw in to become OFR commissioner. He blamed his bank's failure on "wayward government policy."

NeutralityEnforcer (talk) 05:20, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Oshwah is offline. I am pinging another admin I know to resolve the matter. @TonyBallioni: Sorry to drag you into this. Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 08:20, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi NeutralityEnforcer! Thanks for the message and the email, and I apologize for the delay responding to both... Life has kept me busy lately, and I'm just now getting caught up with all of my Wikipedia messages. ;-) As I stated in the email response: If the content is referenced by secondary reliable sources that are independent of the article subject, the edits should be restored. Just make sure that you review the text and make sure that it's neutral, well referenced, and that it complies with Wikipedia's policies. But yeah, if the user is removing content for "I don't like it" reasons, because they're being paid to remove bad things about people, or for reasons that aren't sufficient - restore the content and talk to the user. If it becomes repeated or starts to venture into "edit warring" territory, report the user to ANI (especially if you suspect that the motivations are due to the user being paid to edit and remove this content). Let me know if I can answer any other questions, and I'll be happy to do so. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:15, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Wiki article stub

Hi Oshwah, my name is Raziel and i wanted to check if my article was considered from being removed from the stub status. The article i helped contribute to was Enhalus acoroides and it was under the Boston University/Marine Bio course (spring2019) Thank you Raziel1991 (talk) 18:17, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

(by talk reader) @Raziel1991: Enhalus is rated C-class. You can find this info on the article's talk page. Chris Troutman (talk) 18:22, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Raziel1991! As Chris troutman stated above: The article you mention is not a stub, but currently rated as a C-class article. You can read more about content assessment and their grade levels by visiting this page. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:18, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of Userpage, etc.

Hello and good day. I am contacting you as to the reason for the deletion of my information. I am also curious as to the exact meaning of being a "troll" on Wikipedia. This all began when I asked a fellow user for a preferred, or best to their liking, type of source citation when someone was a former officer of the organization in question. Instead of getting a reply Background from said user, I received the user's forward to you, in which the user stated that I could be a "troll", and there after my page was deleted. In the message to the user, I even thanked him for his comments and asked for the above opinion. He then listed said as a "snub", and it devolved from there apparently. Though, I am unsure as to how asking a peer, in good faith, for their opinion is a "snub". In any event, your page, quite reasonably, simply suggested contacting you regarding such issues. Honestly, I am somewhat perplexed as to the exact nature of the issue. I look forward to your response and I thank you ahead of time. Respectfully, Dr. Raleigh S. Ph.D, Th.D., OFS — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thetruchairman (talk • contribs) 12:44, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Thetruchairman! I'll be happy to answer your questions as best as possible for you. :-)

First, regarding your user page: The page was deleted under U5 of Wikpedia's speedy deletion criteria. In short, the content you added to your user page looked to be intended to advertise and/or promote yourself in a "resume-like manner"; things that were not Wikipedia-related. Please review and make sure that you understand Wikipeidia's policies and guidelines regarding user pages, as well as what they are not to be used for. The guideline page states that user pages are not to be used as a forum, resume, social networking profile, or web host or for purposes unrelated to Wikipedia's goals. This was why your user page was deleted. Please let me know if you have any questions regarding Wikipedia's policies and guidelines on user pages, and I'll be happy to answer them.

The term "troll" (referring to the term "Internet troll") can be used as both a noun and a verb. A troll is someone who is purposefully performing actions, making comments, or doing things for the sole purpose of causing anger, frustration, or heated emotions and feelings upon others. The act of performing actions or making the comments that are causing the disruption, anger, frustration, etc of others is commonly referred as "trolling". You can read about it more by visiting the Wikipedia article on the very subject. Who exactly was the user that made these comments and forwarded you to me? I don't like seeing other users failing to assume good faith and treat our new users with a lack of courtesy and respect. Can you provide me the location of the user who said this to you, and a link to the message conversation so that I can take a look at it? Thanks :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:32, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the user is referring to User:Oshwah/TalkPageArchives/2019-04#User:Thetruchairman. JACKINTHEBOX • ^TALK 04:55, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

JackintheBox - Aha! Thanks for the reply and for the link. That was very helpful. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:05, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

You've Got Mail

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Zylonv (talk • contribs) 11:39, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Zylonv - Were you trying to notify me of another email that you just sent to me? Or were you just referring to the previous email? I haven't received an email from you since the original one about a week ago... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:39, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

1929 Hebron massacre

When you click edit on the article, you get a message about ArbCom and how only extended confirmed users can edit it, in addition to the 1RR requirement. I'm confused about how exactly IP range 99.203.54.248 is able to edit the article since an IP cannot be extended confirmed. Anyways, the IP has made three edits to the article (all of which are unsourced). Clovermoss (talk) 19:16, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Clovermoss! Thanks for the message and the heads up about this article and the recent edits being made to it. To answer your question: There's a page protection level that's supposed to prevent users that aren't extended confirmed from being able to edit the page that it's applied to. The article just didn't have that protection; I've gone ahead and removed the edits by users who were not extended confirmed and applied that protection level indefinitely, which should resolve the issue. Thanks for letting me know! :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:44, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation :) Clovermoss (talk) 20:46, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Clovermoss - No problem ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:50, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Quick question: I was taking a look through the history and there were edits before mine to the article by IPs as well. I'm wondering if that's still an issue since my edit was after those edits. Clovermoss (talk) 20:52, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Clovermoss - Since you're extended confirmed, your edits are fine... the edits made by the IP users are not, and can be removed by any user simply due to them not being extended confirmed. If the content itself is minor, I wouldn't worry about it too much. However, if the edits made by the IP users significantly change anything, I'd take a closer look and use appropriate judgment. If it needs to be removed, then it needs to go... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:55, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

My edit was minor (I was fixing a typo), the other edits don't look like it. Most of them are content additions/deletions and there's several editors involved (most of them IPs). Clovermoss (talk) 21:06, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Clovermoss - Got'cha. Like I said, your edits are fine. However, by what you describe, the IP user edits need careful review. I would consider removing the edits by the IP users if they aren't referenced or don't appear to add value or improve the article. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:08, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

I'm not sure how I would do that, since there's so many of these edits. Some of them have been reverted, a lot of them haven't. I'm going through the page history and this looks like it has been an issue for literal months. Clovermoss (talk) 21:17, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Clovermoss - What I would do is go back through the history and find the revision made before all of the IP users began editing the article, then compare that edit with the current revision. If there's significant content that's questionable and should be removed, then I'd restore that revision, then manually restore any legit changes made by users who were extended confirmed. It seems like the majority of recent edits on this article have been made by anonymous users; this would be the fastest and most efficient way to remove any changes made against the ArbCom remedy. If users disagree and restore any content back, it'll be fine since the article is now extended confirmed protected and hence the restoration made by someone who can take responsibility for it. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:23, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

It's not just recent edits, though. There's dozens of changes here. There's edits like rescued refs in-between distruptive IP edits. There's IP edits getting reverted and then ones that were made later by the same IP not and staying live even though they're very similar changes and still distruptive. Heck, going off the talk page template, there was a serious issue with edit-warring in 2007. I'm not sure how far back it does go, but by browsing the changes it's been an issue for at least 2 history pages of 50 revisions each. It doesn't look simple to me and I'm scared I'm going to make some mistake looking through it. Clovermoss (talk) 21:35, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

I'm not upset or anything with you, I'm just really hesistant to do anything in this situation. I was hesistant to edit the article when all I was doing was fixing a typo. I don't want to mess up with something that seems more complicated than what I know about what to do. Clovermoss (talk) 21:42, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Clovermoss - Oh, I know you're not upset with me or anything. I completely understand. I would be hesitant in this situation as well; that's perfectly okay and I'm happy to help. I didn't go terribly far back (just as far as this revision by LissanX), but I went ahead and restored the article to that revision, since nearly all of the edits made since then were by anonymous users. If we need to go further back, no worries. Just let me know if you find any more significant changes that you think should be removed, and provide the diffs of those changes so I can take a look. I'm more than happy to help if you find that you still need it. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:49, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Okay, that sounds good. I'm also busy in real life, but I'll keep an eye on my watchlist. I really should go back to real-life responsibilities, I'm probably not going to be around much until the weekend. Clovermoss (talk) 22:54, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Clovermoss - No worries; life gets busy and I completely understand. I'll be here when you get back, and I'll be here should you need anything; don't hesitate to ask. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:09, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

User:Xbott

I may have noticed something which may not be right with the user name this user has on Wikipedia. This user has the sequence of letters shown as "bot" in the title but not at the end where I am 100% certain it is a fake bot account (ones which are editing pages manually like us). This was more obvious when I've spotted that on my watchlist but not so certain with this one. Iggy (Swan) 20:21, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Iggy the Swan! Thanks for the message regarding your concerns with User:Xbott. I agree that the username is close enough that it could confuse other users into believing that it's a bot, and I've applied a soft block to the account so that he/she can have it changed. I've also rolled back the edits made by the account, as nearly all of them were unreferenced changes to years or poorly referenced content additions. Please let me know if I can help with anything else, and I'll be happy to do so. Thanks again! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:49, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Review my request

Could you please review my request at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Participants? It's been some days since I posted it. Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 00:18, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Masumrezarock100! I'm not very active in the articles for creation project nor am I hugely involved with the process compared to other admins who are. It would be better for us both if we wait and have an admin who reviews these requests often take a look. Otherwise, I could be stepping on someone's toes which could potentially cause frustration... and I obviously don't wanna do that. ;-) It looks like most of the active requests have been reviewed; it shouldn't be long until yours is looked at. If at least three more days go by without any response or review by another admin, let me know and I'll be less hesitant to take a look. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:28, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Ok thanks for the reply. Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 00:31, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Masumrezarock100 - No problem! ;-) I wish I could help, but it's better if we just wait for someone whose more familiar with AFC and evaluating requests for the user rights to take a look. Keeps me outta trouble. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:35, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi there. No one reviewed my request. Could you review it? Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 13:38, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Masumrezarock100 - I did some basic review of your contributions and experience, and I think we need to wait a bit and have you acquire some demonstrable experience with the deletion policy first before we have you reviewing new article submissions. I took a look at your AFD statistics, which shows that you don't have a good grasp with Wikipedia's notability guidelines yet; less than a week ago, you nominated five articles for deletion - all of which resulted in them being kept. A large and important part of being a new page reviewer is the responsibility of evaluating article draft submissions based on the notability of their subjects. We absolutely want to decline draft submissions if they don't meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines, but much more importantly we don't want to decline draft submissions that do. Wikipedia has been the subject of negative press and attention in the past after learning that some articles were either deleted or denied from being published to the mainspace because we had mistakenly believed that the subject (usually a person) wasn't notable. Users who are inexperienced with notability and have the ability to work in AFC and make these decisions can inadvertently cause this to happen, which is something we want to avoid as much as possible. I also looked at your contributions and noticed that you don't have very much experience with tagging articles or pages for speedy deletion or proposed deletion, which shows that you aren't yet proficient with Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion. A big part of reviewing AFC submissions is to be able to identify those that require speedy deletion and tag them as such, and reviewers need to show that they have a demonstrated and consistent track record of correctly tagging pages for deletion. Otherwise, you risk allowing a submission that will just be deleted at some point down the road, or risk allowing a submission that contains serious violations of Wikipedia's policy, such as copyright violations. I think you need to get some more general time and experience on Wikipedia, as well as establish good track records with AFD, CSD, and PROD before we let you start reviewing new submissions. If you have any questions, concerns, objections, or want to discuss this further, please let me know and I'll be happy to talk to you about it further. I'm sorry to respond with bad news like this, but we review users for these different user rights and areas thoroughly for very good and important reasons. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:23, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

I see. Thanks for letting me know about my mistakes and how to improve them. I will definitely try to improve my AfD and CSD stats. Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 08:32, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

No problem. Sorry for the bad news, but the good news is that this stuff is very easy to sharpen up on and improve. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:26, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Same person

Special:Contributions/Khilieexodia17, Special:Contributions/Justdoit123455 and Special:Contributions/ReadBeforeTalking are the same person. On Grand Chase, the first user's edits are [12][13][14][15][16]; the second user's edits are [17][18]; and the third user's edits are [19][20]. Sounds like a duck to me; the second user Justdoit123455 has been blocked for 48 hours (has been expired). Can you create an SPI page for three users? 183.171.115.178 (talk) 04:36, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

I have reviewed the diffs. I understand that two and third account might be related but what I don't understand is about the first one. Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 04:53, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

I've filed an SPI report about this here. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:58, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Oshwah I have filled an investigation Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Justdoit123455 here lol. What to do now? Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 05:01, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Masumrezarock100 - No worries; I'll fix and merge it... ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:12, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

 Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:22, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Counter-Vandalism

		CVU Anti-Vandalism Award
		Thanks for your counter-vandalism works. Sincerely, Masum Reza☎ 05:39, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Masumrezarock100! I appreciate the kind words and the recognition! They mean a lot to me... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:48, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Finney Ross

Thank you Oshwah for your reply!

I've been told it is all archived (whatever that means). It has been a very long time. I took screen shots of everything. I'll be happy to send those to whomever would like to see them if I can figure out how to do so. Best, Todd DavisVintagedirtbiker (talk) 03:21, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Vintagedirtbiker! You're welcome; always happy to help. When El C said that "everything is archived here", he means to refer to the fact that every single edit, change, deletion, creation, etc on Wikipedia is saved in the edit history of the page, and each revision, edit, and version of every page can be viewed, compared, and accessed by clicking on the "History" tab of any page. It sounds like the feelings you expressed of being attacked and put down might have been from this discussion. I'm sorry if comments and responses in that discussion is what left you feeling this way; even though it happened roughly 8 years ago, it's obvious that it left a lasting impact on your confidence and your desire to edit Wikipedia. I hope you believe me when I say that a lot has changed on Wikipedia since 2011: We've started projects and emphasized more on the need to help and educate new users, as well as remind editors that they need to make comments and responses with careful thought to others in mind, and to work disputes out peacefully. Since 2011, we've started the articles for creation project, which will allow you to create a draft of the article you wish to make (it goes into a separate area so you can work on it), and then receive input, help, guidance, and assistance from editors if you get stuck or need any help. I highly encourage you to use the articles for creation page to help guide you, and I believe that this will give you the experience that you were looking for back in 2011. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:54, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Dear Oshwah,

Thank you for your reply.

No, this is not about my current posts today about the Finney Ross page.

The abuse was from 2008 that I took all the screen shots from.

I will try my best to understand how to use the "DIFF". As explained previously, I suffer from Aphasia which makes comprehension very difficult. It will take me some time to go though all the screen shots to get the names and then to try and use the "Diff" you instructed me to.

I do appreciate your patience and courtesy!

Best,

Todd DavisVintagedirtbiker (talk) 05:34, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Vintagedirtbiker, and thanks for responding with the additional information. You definitely want to read and understand everything about page histories, how to look through them and locate old edits and changes, as well as compare revisions and locate what you're looking for. The ultimate help guide regarding page histories and how to use them can be found here. There's no need to look through screenshots, pull up these old revisions, or do anything now; as you indicated, the frustration you were expressing at ANI came from comments and responses that occurred back in the year 2008... that's 11 years ago. There's nothing we can do about this 11 years later. No administrator is going to investigate anything or take action against anyone over something that occurred that far in the past. You need to move on from this decade-old discussion, and allow yourself to consider today a brand new and fresh start with Wikipedia and learn how you can edit, contribute to it, and help it to grow. :-) Take a look at Wikipedia's new user tutorial; I recommend that you go through and complete the entire thing. It'll give you helpful guides, lessons, walkthroughs, and information to help you get started and understand the basics about how Wikipedia works. If you have any more questions or if you need help with anything else, let me know and I'll be happy to assist. Thanks again for the messages and the information, and I hope you have a great day and that you stay with us as a member of the community. We need editors and helpers like you! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:45, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so very much!

Aphasia makes comprehension very difficult so it will take me quite a while to try and comprehend instructions I've been given and will do my best. It's been 11 years and I've been afraid to revisit this subject.

Men of history like this are all but gone. Rodeo gear is mainly factory produced today at high rates of speed with inferior quality.

I and many other members of the RCA, current PRCA and PBR are concerned about these types of men, their talents and importance to these organizations will be forgotten.

Please be patient with me and I will do my best to follow your instructions. It will be a long process for me.

I thank you for your courtesy and helpful information!

Best,

Todd DavisVintagedirtbiker (talk) 06:18, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Vintagedirtbiker - No problem. Take all the time you need; there's no rush, and I'm here if you have any questions. Please don't hesitate to ask. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:31, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Merge into "iPhone X family (2018)"

Please merge "iPhone XS" and "iPhone XR" into one article, and call it "iPhone X family (2018)". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael Boy Jordan (talk • contribs) 11:07, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Michael Boy Jordan! Please review the instructions at Wikipedia:Proposed mergers in order to create an appropriate discussion and request for this merge. We shouldn't just merge pages and move things without discussing it and obtaining input by the community first. This process will provide you with the instructions and details with how to do this. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:12, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Schazjmd (talk) 14:50, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Schazjmd - Received, taken care of, and responded. Thanks for the email! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:53, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, Oshwah! I appreciate your quick help. Schazjmd (talk) 14:56, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Schazjmd - No problem; always happy to lend a hand ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:17, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Auric talk 16:24, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Auric - Received and replied. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:30, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

new user patrol script

what is it? --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 23:52, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Where are you seeing this? Probably in my user space somewhere... lol ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:12, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Oshwah, Yes. And My nose is STUFFED! --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 00:28, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

I'm sorry to hear that. It's a script I patched together to help me patrol recent changes and other areas. It's nothing that big; certainly not anything you couldn't use Huggle or Special:Log to find already... It just makes life easier for me is all. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:34, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

I submitted logs on huggle feedback page, can you have a look? --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 00:34, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Sure. Let me finish a few things up, and I'll take a gander... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:35, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Oh and this User:FlyingKiwi i don't think there should be a bot shut off button there..... --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 00:36, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

HA! The button points to Special:Block and fills the username of the account into the correct field. Guess if the user starts disrupting or misbehaving, it makes it easy for the admins to take care of... :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:39, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Can I click it? Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 00:40, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Sure. It'll just give you a permissions error and tell you that you can't access the page. Won't hurt anything... lol ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:42, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

• There's a note under it that says, "Please attain the button above as a joke, which it is intended to be. :)" - BilCat (talk) 00:46, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

BilCat I didn't see it, I'm a blind rat from all the blue light I've looked at, lol --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 00:48, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Just a quick question here: After how long does a wikipedia session logged in expire and log out by itself? Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 00:43, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

@Thegooduser: When I log in to Wikipedia from mobile I check "Keep me logged in(for 365 days)".And that works for desktop version too. Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 00:49, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

RfA

Has an admin ever been desysopped and then passed an RfA? One could argue an RfA shouldn't be forever and one could also argue an ArbCom decision shouldn't be forever, but as far as I know, both are true. Enigma^msg 01:10, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Enigmaman - Yup, it's happened before. If I recall, there have been a few users who have gone through the "gauntlet" and became admins later on. Nothing is impossible, and I don't want this ArbCom case to stress you out, leave you feeling constantly worried or disheartened, or leave you feeling like your "wiki career" here has hit a permanent ceiling that will never go away. There have been users who have been site banned from Wikipedia for over a year who have come back, regained the trust of the community, and are doing great to this day. Right now, you probably feel that this is the pit of despair for you... but fear not, many others have felt that way too (including myself). Time goes on, people move on, and the dust will settle. The best thing you can do if you want to make a positive impact on your ArbCom case with the Committee is to add a comment to the case, state that you're open, transparent, and willing to answer any specific questions, and just work with them and be honest. Users who choose to take the time to participate in their cases, and try to work with ArbCom to find a solution that works for the both of you will have a much better outcome than users who didn't participate. Please know that my user talk page is always open to you, and I'm available and willing to help you, guide you, and answer any questions you have. I want to see a solution that works for everyone, too. The best outcome is that we all move on, and we all continue to work to help build the project and make it better for our readers as well as our editors. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:26, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

I did make the suggested statement twice on my talk and once was cross-posted by a clerk. I'm here and trying to address anything I can. Enigma^msg 01:51, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

I'm not the one you need to talk to or convince. I'm here to keep your spirits high and I will help you no matter what. ;-) You need to address the Committee directly and add comments to the principles and remedies being proposed here. Be transparent, be open, and respond directly. Apologize if needed; explain if you can do so. At least open the door for direct communication... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:11, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Spoken with the aplomb of a person I hope runs for arb in the future. And quite true. John from Idegon (talk) 03:06, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Any ideas on who might know the cases of admins who were desysopped and then later regained the mop? I'm a little lost. If I run for RfA again in the future, they'll just say you were desysopped for being a bad administrator, and it's not like I can prove I'm better than I was. People claim I could pass an RfA on a later date but I think they're wrong. It doesn't matter what I say or do as a non-admin at this point. As for the ArbCom case, I was a little frustrated at the lack of direction. I was told to communicate, but not where, and I could hardly respond to every diff presented anyway, even if I was given a space. It would've taken hours just to review all of them, let alone analyze each one and form responses. Enigma^msg 01:16, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

You could take a look at this list. The ones that are noted as "Re-RFA" in particular. Useight (talk) 03:11, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Enigmaman! As Useight stated above, Wikipedia:List of resysopped users will have this information. Another version of this list exists at Wikipedia:Former administrators, and will probably be easier to search and sort through. Other than looking on those pages, I would ask one of the older bureaucrats or users who were members of the Arbitration Committee if they remember anyone on the top of their head that has successfully done this; I'm sure they'll be able to provide you with good input if not list a few users for you. While I'm here, I wanted to comment on the statements you made that were copied to the ArbCom case here - specifically, your statement that said: "If it is decided that the encyclopedia is better off without me, then I understand and will abide by whatever sanctions are placed". First, I want to assure you that absolutely nobody here (not myself, other editors involved with the ANI discussion and the ArbCom case, nor any members of the Arbitration Committee) believes that the encyclopedia is better of without you. Don't think for one minute that you're not valued or appreciated as a contributor here, or that Wikipedia is better off if you weren't here. That's simply not true at all, and a ridiculous thought to put upon yourself.

You're still very much a valued editor, an important member of the community, and absolutely a net positive the project whose in good standing. The ArbCom case only evaluated and ruled based on your actions as an administrator; not your experience, knowledge of policy and procedures in administrative areas, and how much your contributions make a positive impact on others as well as the project as a whole. Your case with ArbCom doesn't discredit you as a knowledgeable editor who makes valuable contributions to articles, projects, and administrative areas and processes. You'll still be able to do pretty much all of the things on Wikipedia that you could do before, and you'll still welcome to do them.

I'm not going to lie to you at all: I can't imagine how you're feeling right now; probably torn down a little, quite disheartened, feeling awful for the things you did that were discussed in the ArbCom case, as well as the fact that it drew as much attention and involvement by the community that it did. At least this is how I'd feel... In this regard, I mean, shit... there really isn't much to say: what you went through wasn't exactly a fun and happy process. My best advice for you is to continue doing the things you normally do on Wikipedia that you enjoy or find give you satisfaction and a feeling of reward; don't isolate yourself or step away from the projects and areas you enjoy helping with on Wikipedia. It's important that you continue to do things that give you good feelings here. It'll keep you from feeling that "pit of despair", help you to move on from feeling the "heat" from the case and back to where things start to feel normal and routine again (it won't take as long as you think...). As many editors, as well as a number of members of the Arbitration Committee have said: I think that if you spend the appropriate time contributing and collaborating with others as a "regular editor" or non-admin, self-reflecting on your past admin actions and their impact on others, and doing what you feel is necessary and right in order to make amends and set things straight - that you'll have a very fair (if not good) shot at passing an RFA in six months' time if you work hard at it and do a stellar job... though I'd recommend that you maybe consider waiting a year before going through an RFA so that more of the dust will have settled.

You know where to find me if you have any questions, concerns, or if I can help you with anything else; don't hesitate to ask and I'll be happy to help. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:38, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

OK, thank you for the long message! I personally don't feel a future RfA would ever be successful, but perhaps some time next year I'll look to see if anyone is willing to nominate me. As with most processes, there's enough to cause doubt and it doesn't take much to push it into the discretionary range, as with my first two RfAs, which were ultimately closed as unsuccessful. I obviously don't intend on an RfA anytime soon and I'll continue being semi-active. I've never 'retired' from Wikipedia and probably never will. Unless I'm blocked, I'll continue to edit because I use Wikipedia all the time and I often see things that need to be fixed. Enigma^msg 16:11, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Enigmaman - I think that's a perfectly healthy and reasonable plan. Move on from this, establish a good track record as a non-admin, and then consider an RFA in about a year. A lot can change in a year; use that to build yourself back up in a positive way. No problem! Always happy to help - you know where to find me if you need anything else. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:34, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

(by talk reader) @Enigmaman: I don't think it advisable for you to ask about getting resysopped while ARBCOM prepares to desysop you for cause. Your question builds the impression that you are, in fact, "drunk with power" as some have accused. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:11, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

I'm trying to understand where I stand. If I'm never suitable to have any position again, then it does appear I am not wanted here, and as I said on my talk page, I will leave if I'm not wanted. No sense in staying. Indeed, that seems to be the position ArbCom is taking. I suppose my original statement that led to this was correct. Enigma^msg 21:45, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Enigmaman - You're drawing these conclusions because you're (understandably) feeling quite disheartened - I would be doing the same thing too. Trust me when I say this: You're making very untrue assumptions about yourself, and you'll find that out much more quickly than you think. ;-) People will move on, dust will settle, and the sun will set on this. Like I said earlier, you do have some trust to rebuild - but that's easy... just continue your work, make apologies face-to-face where it's necessary, get involved with administrative process as a non-administrator, and 6-12 months will go by very quickly. :-) You weren't found to be controlling sock puppet accounts, secretly contributing as an undisclosed paid editor, making death treats or engaging in harassment, or causing mass abuse to the project... you were just found to have been taking admin actions at a substandard level of expectations. Trust me..... you're not a user who the community considers a net negative.... ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:03, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Sockpuppet

This is about two new users User:Jomyyo and User:StateOfTheArc. Second is first ones puppet or alternate account(they have already stated it on their user pages and they both edited the same article). I don't understand what to do as they are both very new accounts. They haven't tried to vandalize or harm Wikipedia. Any input? Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 04:17, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Masumrezarock100! It's perfectly fine to create and start using another account so long as they're clearly stated as being alts of one another (which is what the two accounts are doing), or if the user stops using the old account to start using the new one, or other legitimate situations. People stop using accounts and create and start using new accounts somewhat commonly on Wikipedia. It's not a policy violation to do this, so long as they're not creating and using multiple accounts to cause disruption, abuse, evade blocks or bans, or in a deceptive fashion to create the illusion that the two accounts are used by different people (such as using them to vote twice in a discussion, etc). If they're not using them to cause abuse, then I'd say that you can just leave well enough alone. If you're actively patrolling logs and recent changes like I'm doing now, you'll know that one of them is causing disruption pretty quickly if they were to start. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:05, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

I see. Thanks. Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 05:09, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Masumrezarock100 - No problem; give me a shout if I can help with anything else. Always happy to lend a hand ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:40, 1 May 2019 (UTC)