Wikipedia

User:Oshwah/TalkPageArchives/2020-10

< User:Oshwah


You are currently viewing an archive of Oshwah's user talk page from October 2020. 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These discussions are no longer active and were moved here for historical and record-keeping purposes.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.




Article on Producer is still in review from 2+ months

Hi Oshwah, Can you please review one of the article which is in review from 2+ months.

The Article is on The producer/Director named Joseph Campo. I see other people's articles got approval in few days only but mine one is still in review.

Please let me know if you can help in this.

Thanks Gaganmehra93 (talk) 19:32, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Gaganmehra93! Are you referring to this page? Right now, there's a pretty extensive backlog on draft pages and the time it takes for them to be reviewed. I can of course review and approve drafts if I wish to do so, but I typically leave this job up to the approved reviewers to perform that task. This assures that the process is fair, that those who are waiting for their draft pages to be approved are helped in the manner in which the submissions have been received, and that submissions are reviewed by someone who is experienced in this role and does this on a regular basis.
I'm of course not trying to tell you that I'm not experienced with reviewing articles and submissions... I have to be experienced in that role as part of my duties. ;-) I'm just saying that it would be inappropriate for me to bust in, step on their toes, and cut you in line simply because you made a request here. If I did this, not only would I start having hundreds of editors flood my user talk page asking for the same thing, I'd be playing favorites and being disruptive to the process that's already in place. Given my responsibilities and obligations as an administrator, it wouldn't be right for me to do this.
Just hang tight and be patient; your submission will be reviewed, and someone will help you when your submission is next in line for evaluation. I know it might be frustrating, and I know (given the length of wait times that I've seen at AFC) that it can seem like nobody is going to help you (which is not true). My advice for you is to focus on creating or expanding other articles while you wait for this one to be evaluated. Don't sit on this article and twiddle your thumbs; it's not going to make things go any faster. By the time that this draft article is reviewed, you could be submitting two or three other new articles, or have made significant improvements to others. Give it time; someone will help you. :-)
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. :-) Keep up the great work, and I wish you a great day and happy editing. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 06:42, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Question

can we be chatting on wikwpidia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bello habeeb (talk • contribs) 11:05, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Bello habeeb - I'm active on the Wikipedia IRC on the Freenode network under the username Oshwah. Feel free to join #wikipedia-en and say hello! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 06:43, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Urgent support is needed

Hello again Oshwah, you may remember from previous talks that involved Mexico related articles such as the early 2019 conflict that took place in the article Demograpics of Mexico[1][2] or the two conflicts that took place in the article of Mexico [3],[4], sadly I come to contact you because once again there's conflict, now in the article [White Mexicans], it various throwaway accounts and IP adresses but mainly involves two editors:

  • Php2000, whose first edit took place in February 10 2020 [5] and in July nominated the article currently in conflict to deletion [6]
  • Xuxo, whose first edit took place in january 2006, but has less than 500 edits across 14 years [7]

The reason for which I write in the title that support is urgent is because, as can be seen in the edit history [8] the editor Xuxo is aggressively tearing apart the article in matter of minutes under completely unnaceptable arguments, such as claiming that investigations published in scientific journals that collect information on traits such as blond hair on Mexicans "are fake"[9] or that "blond hair in Mexico is not the same as blond hair in Sweden"[10] the editor is also persistently removing historical literary sources under borderline nonsensiscal arguments [11][12] even thoguh I've explained the sources with detail in the talk page [13][14][15]. To this it has to be added up that when I revert Xuxo's edits Php2000 tends to revert back to Xuxo's version with vague arguments [16][17]. The edits of editor Xuxo are, in argument aswell as in the edited content, extremely similear to the edits that the account HueyXocoatzin made to the article "Demographics of Mexico" back in 2019, compare [18] & [19] with [20] & [21] &[22], as you may recall, I've opened a pair sockpuppet investigations around this potential sockpuppeter, one was dismissed due it's huge size [23] and difuse evidence while the other was dismissed on content dispute grounds [24], although it was acknowledged that it ws very likely that the accused accounts were being operated by the same person. Due this, I don't think that the current conflict is the product of a mere misunderstanding but something more serious. Thanks in advance. Pob3qu3 (talk) 23:10, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Pob3qu3 - Without going too far in-depth with what's going on, I can see that the article's edit history shows a lot of edit warring between a group of editors. Pending a deeper look, I've applied full protection to the article for one week to stop the disruption and encourage dispute resolution in its place. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:58, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello!

Crikey, it’s been ages since we last spoke. Hope you are keeping well at this time! Patient Zerotalk 03:31, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Patient Zero! Holy cow! It's been a long time since we've last spoken! How are you? It's really great to see you! Life has been keeping me busy (and this whole pandemic obviously doesn't help), but I've kept healthy and my daily routines, work tasks, and environment aren't high risk of exposure. What about you? What have you been up to? What's been going on with you? :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 04:00, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
It certainly has! I’m doing rather well, thank you! Great to see that you’re still active here, and I’m very glad to hear you’re well also. :D Life has certainly been keeping me busy too - I’ve just entered my final year of my undergraduate Law studies and I’ll be applying to do a Masters this year. I’m really looking forward to that! I’m having to be rather careful in public, being a university student - to my knowledge nobody I know is high risk but one can never be certain, and masks are compulsory in shops here which is good. I’ve been elected to three society committees this year and, over the past year, prior to everywhere locking down, I’d been making some great improvements in my squash playing. I can’t wait to get started again but I know that won’t be happening for a while. Academically speaking, I’m doing a bit of criminology and criminal psychology this year which is already proving fascinating! I do hope I can go home and see my family at Christmastime, though. That’s my only worry about this whole situation, but it’s looking likely the university will let us go home and isolate for fourteen days, which is a relief. Also I’ve got a bit of free time on my hands this year owing to the fact that the previously compulsory work experience module was cancelled, so I’ll be around here on WP a lot more often. :) Patient Zerotalk 20:03, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
Patient Zero - It sounds like you're doing well and that you're keeping healthy both academically, as well as mentally and emotionally. You're staying safe, working a healthy pace toward your academic goals, and you're continuing to maintain hobbies and interests outside of school. I used to lead new student orientations at my college when I was a senior, and because of lessons that I managed to learn (mostly the easy way, thank goodness), I made absolute sure to tell the new students a few important things in every orientation that I held:
1. Having fun is equally as important as working hard and maintaining good grades. If you don't maintain a healthy balance between them and if you lean too far into one direction or another, you'll either completely burn out because you never let yourself relax, or you'll lose focus because you're having too much fun. Either way, I saw potentially great students and who I felt had bright futures fail or leave school due not maintaining that balance. More to come on this...
2. Do what you love. I had students come to me for personal advice many times, and many told me that they were majoring in the field that they were currently in because either "they thought they'd like it", or "they knew would be a high-paying career". I even had students straight-up telling me that they hated college all-together, but that they were told that college is where they needed to be in order to be successful. In all instances, I asked them this: "Do you like and enjoy what you're studying? Do you like and enjoy where you are right now?" In many cases, the answer was no. If they told me this, I'd encourage them to either change their major or leave college. Why waste the amount of money being spent on something so terribly expensive if they don't even like where they were? Even if they were to make it and graduate with the degree in the field they're currently in (which they obviously don't enjoy), they'll find out later in their career that they hate it. How depressing!
3. Get out and socialize. Join clubs that interest you, make friends, maintain hobbies, meet people. Do what it takes to be social. When I was in my second year as a Software Engineering student, I knew many peers who had almost impeccable grades in all of their software and computer classes, but were absolute closeted nerds who didn't socialize at all; they'd hide in their dorm rooms, skip showering and dressing appropriately, and just sit on their computers... At the time, I thought to myself: "Damn, they might be nerds, but they'll have no problem finding any job they want". Boy was I wrong! Employers seek competent employees who can perform their job duties and do so well, we all know that... What I didn't understand at the time was that a significant part of being able to perform those duties was the ability to socialize, communicate, work as a team, be personable, and be able to hold a good conversation without being awkward. Many of these peers did end up finding jobs, but many did not, and never did - simply because they had no social skills at all and were just awkward to talk to. They didn't have that balance (hence, the first piece of advice I'd give), and this lack of skill was their ultimate downfall. A buddy of mine in college was friends with that kind of a person (we'll call him "Frodo"). Five years after we all graduated, my friend and I were catching up, and he told me that he recently went to visit "Frodo". What was "Frodo" doing? He was a pizza delivery driver. My friend went through his closet - there were no professional clothing at all. No dress shirts, no slacks, no blazers, no ties. "Frodo" had either given up, or didn't even know how to properly dress for an interview. He had no chance for success because he didn't have all of the skills needed for a successful career. He was a great software coder, but he fell absolutely flat when it came to the other obligations that were needed.
College teaches you a lot, but my real experience has come from my good days, as well as my bad days, in my career. College is the last time in your life where you can have fun with relatively low consequences, and be "young" and be "a kid". After that, things change a lot. While there's no homework anymore and you start earning paychecks, that freedom, time, and income is replaced with other "adult" obligations that are boring, and quite frankly really suck. I'm glad that you'll be on Wikipedia more often! What have you been up to Wikipedia-wise? How are things here? :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 11:00, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
That is truly some fantastic advice there. Thank you so much! I have indeed been trying to keep healthy and well, especially within these circumstances - if it weren’t for the fact that I have a mixture of in person lectures and seminars as well as ones on MS Teams, I’d be stuck in my flat all day as we’re not allowed to socialise with our societies for the time being unless it’s online. I’ve started going for daily walks as a result 😅 It’s definitely important to maintain a work-life balance. I do work rather hard and I know when to say “I can’t do that tonight because I’ve got an essay to write”, but being able to have fun with fellow coursemates and society members has been great. We can talk to each other about difficult parts of our course and modules and have a laugh playing computer games. :D I really do enjoy studying Law; I’ve wanted to study it ever since I was fourteen years old, and I got into trouble for reading criminal law textbooks in my free time in sixth form, where Law wasn’t available to me as a course, so this was definitely an extra-curricular endeavour at the time. 😂 So I’ve always had a clear idea of what I want to do. It’s looking likely I’ll pass my bachelor’s degree with a 2:1 which I’ll be rather happy with! It’s definitely not a good idea to stay indoors and not make efforts to socialise, you’re spot on. I cannot imagine not owning a suit, as someone who does a lot of mooting and networking with barristers from time to time, that’s not great! Networking is so important from an employability perspective too, as it can help you with deciding on your future career path, but once again it does involve going out of one’s way to socialise. It’s not always easy for some of us - heck, I have Aspergers so I totally get it - but if anything I find networking to be the easiest social “thing” to do as I’m quite formal and professional in those environments. The best advice I could possibly give to freshmen with regards to networking is, don’t drink too much of the free wine. Thankfully I didn’t learn that the hard way 🤣
Thanks! Admittedly some things never change - I’m still doing anti-vandalism work here, and so far I’m finding that to be rather enjoyable. :D Patient Zerotalk 00:15, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
Patient Zero - You bet! Keep up the great work, and definitely keep in touch! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:32, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
Will do! Take care! Patient Zerotalk 02:00, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Namaste!

Hi Oshwah, Thanks for the note! I've (almost) never edited here, but I've lurked enough that I have some idea of what I should be doing! #StayAwesome Nonillion (talk) 06:06, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Nonillion! No problem! Please don't hesitate to reach out to me if you have any questions or need any kind of assistance. I'll be more than happy to help you. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 11:06, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Dalia Dassa Kaye

Hi there, thanks for your message. I'm a big fan of wikipedia (and actually support their work and work with wikimedia) but i have never edited. Dalia's page had numerous errors - misspellings, assertions that were incorrect or incomplete, wrong name (she goes by Dassa Kaye, not just Kaye). So it required a fuller edit, drawn from her RAND profile page. I hope that is okay. Could you restore the edit? Thanks so much. David — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.200.76.65 (talk) 04:06, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi there! Welcome to Wikipedia! While your edit did add some good changes, it looks like it also removed a bunch of important content, much of which was content that was referenced, or the references themselves. Take a look at the article history (link is here), your changes aren't "deleted" or "gone"; all past edits and revisions can be viewed, and you can still pull them up. Your edit is still viewable by clicking here. You can use this information to see what you removed, and make a second attempt at improving the article without removing good content. Please let me know if you have any questions, and I'll be happy to answer them. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 04:22, 14 October 2020 (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 remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Firestar464 (talk) 04:28, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
Firestar464 - Replied. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 04:38, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Re: Butt of Lewis edit

Hi Oshwah,

Thanks for bringing this up! I made the edit because the Precambrian is an eon and not a period. Technically it's a supereon, but people generally call it an eon. It even says so on the Wikipedia page, though if you look at the classification provided by the International Commission on Stratigraphy, they list it as a supereon. Anyway, it's a minor point, but as a paleoclimatologist, I wanted to make the edit. 99.108.226.0 (talk) 21:46, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for letting me know. If your edit was made to fix an issue with accuracy, please feel free to restore your changes. I appreciate you for taking the time to message me and explain. Please let me know if I can help you with anything, and I'll be happy to do so. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:33, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

No subject

Hi, this is Happyegg123 thanks for visiting my user page! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Happyegg123 (talk • contribs) 02:48, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Happyegg123! Welcome to Wikipedia! No problem; I always enjoy welcoming new editors to the project. Please don't hesitate to reach out to me if you have any questions or need help with anything. I'll be more than happy to lend a hand. ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:34, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Have some bubble tea nice hooman.

  Ello this is Happyegg123 thx for looking at my page. Buy me and my siblings plz. Happyegg123 (talk) 14:48, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi Happyegg123! Thanks for the kind message. :-) Wait, what? ...Buy you and your siblings? o.0 ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:46, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Please kindly verify and approve

Hello, please kindly verify and approve my new contribution https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:BJ_Sam_(Singer)# Rubiesar (talk) 15:22, 15 October 2020 (UTC) Rubiesar (talk) 15:42, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Please how I do tag with {{subst:submit}} to ? Can you help me tag? (Rubiesar (talk) 16:47, 15 October 2020 (UTC))

(talk page stalker)   Done Eagleash (talk) 17:01, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
Eagleash - Thanks for taking care of this request while I was offline. I highly appreciate it! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:46, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

2020 CheckUser and Oversight appointments: Candidates appointed

The Arbitration Committee is pleased to appoint the following users to the functionary team:

The Committee thanks the community and all of the candidates for helping to bring this process to a successful conclusion.

For the Arbitration Committee,

Katietalk 03:15, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § 2020 CheckUser and Oversight appointments: Candidates appointed
Congratulations, Oshwah! Very well-deserved. :) Patient Zerotalk 04:09, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, Patient Zero! That means a lot! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 04:24, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
Finally. I was waiting for this. One of the most well qualified users. 67.85.37.186 (talk) 15:47, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
  Agree <3 Folly Mox (talk) 18:21, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
Thank you, 67.85.37.186 and Folly Mox! It means a lot to me! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:54, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
Just learned of this. Congratulations!!   --TheSandDoctor Talk 01:21, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
Thank you, TheSandDoctor! :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:24, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
Congrats. Use it well. —DoRD (talk)​ 18:02, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
DoRD - I plan to, and I won't let you down. ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:46, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

RfC

Could you close this RfC [25]. Everything is clear, thanks. Mikola22 (talk) 18:34, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

It should be also mentioned that the RFC had a sequel and went through it again and consensus was reached Theonewithreason (talk) 20:11, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
My RfC was for ethnicity of Novak Djoković mother based on two sources. This proposal did not pass and this RfC concern ethnicity based only for these two sources. Since there are more sources new RfC is possible based on other sources. My intention was to determine which sources can be used for ethnicity (in this case mother ethnicity). Obviously these two sources can no longer be part of the article. The problem is that there are several sources which exist and they are not respected, but now we can say it officially (which sources are not for the article) and to bring some order to the article. Mikola22 (talk) 06:07, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi Mikola22! Sorry for the delay responding to your request here. I'll take a look at it either today or tomorrow and see what the consensus is (if one exists). ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:53, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
I understand. You don't have a lot of problems making a decision here, because everything is clear, cheers. Mikola22 (talk) 08:19, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
Mikola22 - It looks like there are arguments on both sides here, both in support and opposition to this RfC. I don't think I could easily close this without reading through the arguments in-depth and seeing if a consensus has been reached. Upon first look-through and without going too far in-depth, I don't believe one has been established. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 10:53, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Ok, you tell me if I as a editor (in this RfC) need to do something. Mikola22 (talk) 13:04, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Page about Drillz (Musical Artist)

Hey, you deleted my article about Drillz & I was wondering why you did that — Preceding unsigned comment added by Codeboy256 (talk • contribs) 22:31, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Codeboy256! Welcome to Wikipedia! The content that you wrote had multiple issues. The main issue that should be addressed is that the content appeared to be an advertisement or promotion. This kind of content is not appropriate for a user page. Please let me know if you have any more questions, and I'll be happy to answer them. :-) Thanks - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:53, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

About the Causal inference page

I removed that part in august 2020 "The widely held (but mistaken) belief that RCTs provide stronger causal evidence than observational studies...." because it does not make sense. Anyone who has studied causal inference knows that if your RCT is always gonna be stronger causal evidence than any observational studies. 1: You did not provide any evidence/reference for the claim that observational studies are on par or stronger causal evidence than RCT's. 2: RCT's have been the "Gold standard" in clinical trials for more than a decayed and for good reasons too: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3196997/ just read the background it literally says "randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the best way to study the safety and efficacy of new treatments" I think your sentence will mislead the reader to think observational studies are better the RCT's, which they can be sometimes. But if put both on equal playing ground the RCT's will always trump any observational study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1118259/ "all other things being equal, randomised controlled trials are more able to attribute effects to causes".

Hope this clears things up on why I removed the sentence. best Regards Moha2144 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moha2144 (talk • contribs) 00:24, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Moha2144! Thanks for the message and for letting me know. :-) If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to reach out to me and ask. I'll be more than happy to help you. Cheers ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:11, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi!

Hi! I just wanted to say hello. I've been editing on Wikipedia for awhile but I feel like I want to make more of a community of meeting other editors and the like. I've frequently seen you doing edits, whether that be removing vandalism or posting new content. Just wanted to say hi and hopefully make a new Wikipedia friend. :) PickleG13 (talk) 10:08, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi PickleG13! Thanks for the message, and welcome! You're more than welcome to reach out to me if you have any questions, need help, or just need someone to point you in the right direction. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 10:46, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Please notice

Please check out the Draft:Emiway Bantai (rapper). The article title of this draft has been protected by the administrators. Please publish it under the correct name of Emiway Bantai. 27.63.64.191 (talk) 15:39, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi there! You should file your request here. This will allow for discussion to take place, and the proper procedures to move forward if approved. Thanks :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:14, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Editing the draft and publishing

Dear Oshwah,

Hope you and your family are safe during these uncertain times!

I am editing the page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Shyam_Wuppuluri) and it is not related to me in anyway. I found that the page is neither published (and if it doesn’t meet the requirements: it’s not deleted either). Can you suggest me if there’s a possibility of this page getting published and if not the procedure for deletion?

In any case, thanks for making the world a better place through the support you offer here. You seem to be very kind in general.

Cheers, Roo Pumpuhar (talk) 19:43, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Pumpuhar! Thank you for the message and the very kind words. It means a lot to me. :-) No problem; if it's not related to you, then please don't hesitate to do what you're doing! If you have any questions or need any help, please let me know and I'll be happy to lend a hand. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:16, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

No subject

did you message me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by QUEENBEE12345 (talk • contribs) 22:59, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi QUEENBEE12345! I did not; I believe that I just marked a page that you created as "patrolled". Nonetheless, if you have any questions or need help with anything, please don't hesitate to reach out to me and let me know. I'll be happy to lend you a hand. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:20, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

203.149.75.202

Can user:203.149.75.202 please be blocked ASAP. CLCStudent (talk) 01:09, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

CLCStudent -   Done. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:12, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Cookie!

 

99.116.24.175 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

I did this because you've been contributing to Wikipedia for a long time. Thank you so much for all your hard work! I'm sure all the users you helped are happy right now!

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Hi there! Thanks for the cookie! Much appreciated! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:53, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

No subject

hello — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:74B0:3400:F988:5E0:A66D:8C08 (talk) 22:15, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi there! Is there anything I can help you with? If so, please don't hesitate to let me know. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:54, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Paramount+

Hi Oshwah, an IP-hopper keeps trying to create an article at Paramount+ against consensus. Could you consider semi-protection? Thanks. BilCat (talk) 02:53, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi BilCat! Sorry for the delay responding to your request here. It looks like the edits came from the 2603:9008:1C80:BA76::/64 IPv6 range (where the first half of the IP is the same between each "hop"). It's actually quite normal for many IPv6 address users to frequently change within that range, usually without the user's knowledge or action. They can change from as frequent as a week at a time, to daily, or (especially with mobile IPv6 ranges) every few minutes depending on the user's travel or device status. Because this pattern with many IPv6 networks is normal and very often done without the user doing anything intentional, I wouldn't necessarily call this a case of "IP hopping" from the get-go. Just keep in mind that if an IPv6 user appears to be "IP hopping", that if the first half of their IPv6 address (the left-most four IP blocks) looks to be remaining the same with each "hop", that it's probably not the user doing this maliciously. Now, I'm not saying that users never do this maliciously (lol)... I'm just saying that this regularly happens. ;-)
Now, onto your request (sorry if I digressed too much above). :-) It looks like the editing has stopped, so I'll hold off on adding protection. However, if you do see that disruption there is continuing to occur and is ongoing, please let me know. I'll be happy to take a look and do what's needed to put a stop to it. :-) I hope you're doing well, and I hope you have a great weekend. Cheers! ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:06, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
Ok, thanks and no worries. I was using "hopper" just to indicate the full IP was different each time, not necessarily to mean intent. Anyway, is it possible to block just that range on just that article? I know it is technically now, but asking about this case specifically, if and when they return. Thanks again. BilCat (talk) 03:38, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Help regarding a SPI case

Hi, Oshwah I would like you to help regarding a new sock of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/RejsHajredini95. Thank you ~ Amkgp 💬 19:23, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Amkgp! I apologize for the delay responding to your message and request here, and I also apologize for missing the IRC messages that you sent to me while I was busy. Life got a little bit hectic and unfortunately kept me away from Wikipedia for a short time. :-) It looks like this case has been handled by another checkuser. If you do need my input or help with anything, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be happy to lend a hand. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:08, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Bell table on St Mark's Campanile

Hello Oshwah, I keep reaching out to you whenever I run into a wall. I hope you don't feel pestered. On the St Mark's Campanile page, I would like to move the table with the bells (towards the end) to the left. BUT, when I do, the text of the article (wrapped) is attached to the side of the table. Is there any way to create space?Venicescapes (talk) 12:56, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Venicescapes! I don't feel pestered at all! Helping other users is a core part of why I volunteer here, and I'm more than happy to help you with your edit. :-) Check out the edits I just made here to the article. To flip the table to float from the left, you simply change float: right; to be float: left;. To add spacing outside the table between other text, you'd normally add a margin value to the element. However, it looks like we already have a margin (margin: .46em 0 0 2.00em;)! This margin is coded like this: margin: [top] [right] [bottom] [left]; So, I just moved margin values and changed it to margin: .46em 2.00em 0 0; where the 2.00em spacing is now on the [right] value instead of [left]. Does what I did make sense? :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:25, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
Hello again. Yes, that makes perfect sense. I had no idea it was so simple. Thank you for guiding me along the learning curve. I hope that all is well with you in these troubled times. Kind regards.Venicescapes (talk) 08:15, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi Venicescapes! No problem! You'll learn this stuff and it'll get easier as you gain experience and spend time on this project. It took me awhile, too. :-) These times are certainly crazy, aren't they? I never expected the things that you'd only saw in movies (such as everyone wearing masks or hazmat suits when they'd go outside) would become a reality. It's quite frustrating, but I hope that this doesn't live with us forever and that we learn from this event and put better measures in place should it happen again... and given human history, it most certainly will. Let me know if you run into any more questions or get stuck anywhere, and I'll be happy to lend you a hand. :-) Be safe! ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 08:20, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
I need to play around some more with image placement. Moving the table to the left made it necessary to move other images, and I'm not sure about the end result. At any rate, I now know how to do it. Thank you again.Venicescapes (talk) 11:20, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
Venicescapes - You bet; always happy to lend a hand. ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 10:54, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

"New User"

Haven't been on en wiki for some time now, everything seemed to have changed. I'm feeling lost, can you guide me as to where I can see new Wikipedia updates? --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 23:58, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Thegooduser. I don't believe that too much has changed, but you can get a sense of it all by reading the admin news monthly releases for a generalized summary. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:27, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

hi

oswah you are on teahouse? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Habeeb Bello (talk • contribs) 18:02, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Habeeb Bello! I'm a member of the teahouse, but I admit that I haven't gone there or checked in with people there in quite some time. Why do you ask? Do you need help with something there? :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:28, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

IP: 86.11.51.106

Hello again Oshwah, Could I bring to your attention the activities of 86.11.51.106 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) on various pages - notably the Imber page. They have placed a notice at the top of the article regarding sources. The sources are the BBC and book sources written by reliable sources, as against their comments. I have reverted the notice but note that the IP will not allow comments on their User page, stating "Please do not write here" and "Do not write her, I don't care and it will be blanked". As you have taken action against this IP previously, I wonder if it is time for further intervention? With best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 12:12, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi David J Johnson! I apologize for the delay responding to your message and request for help here. Life has kept me busy lately! :-) It looks like Doug Weller has already handled the matter. For the record, if I had seen this going on, I would've handed a block to this user as well. Please let me know if I can be of assistance with anything else, and I'll be happy to lend a hand! ;-) I hope you have a great weekend, and I'm sure we'll talk again soon! :-D Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:31, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
Hello Oshwah, Many thanks for your message. As you say Doug Weller has handled the immediate problem with this IP. However, I do want you to know how much I appreciate your friendship and help over the years - and no doubt, in the future! Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 10:04, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
David J Johnson! Thank you for the kind words! They mean a lot to me, and I appreciate our friendship as well. Please don't hesitate to reach out to me if I can be of any assistance to you. I'll be happy to help! Until next time... :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 10:56, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

No subject

 

190.113.114.62 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Hi there! Thanks for the cookie! I appreciate it very much, and I hope you have a great weekend! :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:31, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Edit my page

My first film is ‘Demodara Palama’ shot in 1989 There is an article which hates me for long time now so has to be removed. It’s not good for the other chap also who questioned me regarding this article. So many things to be edited please help me Tell me how can I install a lot of details including the photos of the ten awards I received Please help Thanks

I’m about to leave for two weeks of shooting in a forest to end of a TV series -Lakshman Mendis- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.134.216.128 (talk) 01:12, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi there! Exactly what pare are we talking about here? Can you link me to it? Is it an article that you're creating in order to write about yourself? If so, autobiographies are highly discouraged here, and will likely lead to the content being removed. If you're notable, someone else will surely write an article about you - don't worry about that. Otherwise, you could be seen as having a conflict of interest with what you're writing about (since, after all, you're writing about yourself). Please let me know if I'm correct and if you have any more questions. I'll be happy to answer them and help you further. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:41, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Page deletion?

Ashwah, I read your guidelines and sent you an email. No hurry...[but I guess I only have 7 days!] Pls. direct me when you are able...I hope you and yours are well.Onganymede (talk) 20:52, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Onganymede! I received your email. What article was it that you were trying to create? Can you point me to it? ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:33, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
Oshwah, thank you for your reply. Article in question is J. Jaye Gold. I believe tomorrow is day 7 since I received notification, so maybe this is too late to discuss. Do you know if the decision will be made Saturday? Originally I was told the issue was references. I understand now that my references, which were all to his works, we’re unacceptable. I have spend the week researching and have changed them all. Now it appears issue is notability. I believe I cleared up COI issue on my talk page. It would be nice not to have this also flagged, if others agree. But again, it may be too late. Again, many thanks for input/direction. Onganymede (talk) 06:31, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi Onganymede! Thanks for responding with the link. To help explain the articles for deletion process for you: Discussions at AFD will not take the quality of the article itself into account when deciding whether or not to keep or delete it; they take the notability of the article subject into account, which is typically established by the availability of secondary reliable sources that can be researched and found (either on the internet or in print media) that provide primary coverage regarding the article subject.
Think of it like this: If, for example, the Barrack Obama or Abraham Lincoln articles were only a few paragraphs long and didn't provide many or very good sources, these articles would be kept if I were to nominate them for a discussion at AFD. That's because, well, they're notable people... :-) It's quite easy to go onto Google and type those names in - you're going to find numerous sources that are reliable and show that these people are notable. We don't delete those articles under that process just because they're not long enough, don't have great content, or don't have enough sources cited. The articles just need to be expanded and improved. The same principle applies here as well. On the other hand: I could have an extensively-written article about some random Joe person, but if they're not notable, the article subject won't be determined to be notable in an AFD discussion. Why? Because there obviously won't be any secondary reliable sources online or elsewhere that would establish Mr. Random Joe Person as a notable article subject. The quality of the article I wrote about Random Joe could be significantly above-average when it comes to content, but in the end, it won't matter.
In short: There's really nothing you can do to the article itself that will change the outcome of the discussion. Don't go into an AFD discussion with the belief that, if you could improve the article to be "up to standard" before the discussion closes, that there's hope of it being kept. Either the article subject is notable or they aren't - that's what the discussion is created to determine. If anything, take the outcome as a good learning experience. Before you write your next article, I'm sure that you'll be much more well-versed in Wikipedia's notability guidelines, and you'll create an article that will do well. I created a few articles when I was new on Wikipedia, and I was angry and disappointed when they were deleted - it can be really discouraging... All that time wasted. However, I kept with it, and I took the time to know and understand the policies and guidelines and why they're important. In the end, it helped improve my editing and my experience a lot.
Please let me know if you have any more questions, and I'll be happy to answer them. Take some time and read through those guidelines. If you have any questions about them, let me know! I'll be happy to answer them and explain, or clarify anything that's confusing. Don't give up! You're doing well here! This is just a minor setback and you'll be a better editor moving forward. I've been there myself; I'm not here today and with the experience and knowledge that I have because I got everything right and did perfectly. I've made more than my fair share of mistakes. Trust me... ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:23, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
Wow! Thank you much for all the details and your personal experience as well. I have read the guidelines. I know ALOT more now than I did when I first wrote you my anxious email! Did you get a chance to look at the article? I just added two more refs. It's clear Gold has influenced 1,000s of people over 30+ years of nonprofit service work... but there are, to my knowledge, only hard copy letters of thanks (from, for example, the Daughters of Charity in Cambodia, a Syrian refugee school in Turkey, Mae Tao Clinic on Thai/Burmese border, etc.) I assume these can't be incorporated, correct? So, can you tell me what your opinion of the article is--in terms of worthiness of the subject, as written? (Maybe your above advice answered this but I'm not sure if you were mainly clarifying/explaining guidelines, or telling me your opinion, i.e., it's over...better luck next time! Ok, much obliged and look forward to more input. Onganymede (talk) 09:02, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi Onganymede! I'd have to do some research and look for secondary reliable sources in order to determine whether or not I believe the subject to be notable. The article itself is a good start in terms of content, references, neutrality, and overall setup and formatting. It does seem to detract a bit and talk about the organization a lot, rather than the person - but again, it's not terrible. Remember that this is irrelevant when it comes to AFD. They're not looking at the article itself and how it appears. They're deciding whether or not the article subject should even have an article at all in the first place. That's where notability comes in. ;-) My previous message was written to explain how AFD works and exactly what they take into account when making a decision.
The reason I went in-depth with how you'll learn from this and encouraged you not to take this personally or as a reason to give up was not because I felt that the article should be deleted (again, I haven't looked into the article subject in-depth nor done any research). I wrote this to you because, looking at the AFD discussion, it appears that the consensus will be to either delete the article, or move it into draft space. Likely it will be deleted. I would copy the article and put it in your sand box - just so you have something to reference if you forget how to do something with the next article you create. And, who knows, if the article subject does become notable down the road (it happens quite often), you can re-create it again. All is not lost just because it didn't become an article - you can still keep the work you did and reference it later. I did, and it was very helpful. Let me know if you have any more questions, and I'll be happy to answer them. I'll be happy to do some research and give you what I would've said in the AFD discussion if you wish. Just know in advance that I will be honest with you - if I find that the subject isn't notable, I will say so, but I'll also explain why. Such feedback would absolutely not be given with the intent to discourage you, but as a way of helping you understand, learn, gain experience, and come out of this better than you went in. Just let me know. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 15:08, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
Oshwah, Yes, to both.... I agree saving in sandbox is great idea. I'm researching it now, but any easy pointers on how to do that? And, Yes, if you'd be willing and could take the time to look and make a judgement call, I trust your neutrality and your sincerity and would be grateful to hear it. One question, do or can you know if today is the "decision" day?Onganymede (talk) 17:11, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi Onganymede! Just edit the article, copy everything, then go here, paste the text you copied, and voila! You now have a copy in your user space that you can reference. ;-) There really is no "decision day". The typical minimum time for an AFD discussion is 7 days. If there aren't enough participants, or if the discussion is still in deliberation after 7 days (where the outcome isn't clear), the discussion will stay open until all participants have made their statements. In this case, it'll be closed after seven days when an admin gets around to doing so... there's no "time limit". Sure, I can do that. Give me a bit of time and I'll have something to you by the end of the weekend. I have a lot on my agenda. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 18:04, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
Yes pls. take whatever time! Not wanting to add burden to your agenda load! Have a good weekend. Onganymede (talk) 18:56, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi again! The article was deleted today! It seemed that 2 (3?) editors concurred with a "relist," and I have another half dozen sources to add in a week or so when I get access to them... so that might help .... Should I edit in sandbox for now, add the new refs, and then ask an editor familiar with the article to relist or restore? Or...? Hope your weekend was fruitful! Onganymede (talk) 03:13, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi Onganymede! Sorry for the delay following up. Sure, nothing will stop you from editing in your own sandbox. Asking someone familiar with the article about it is never a bad idea. I haven't had a chance to examine the article subject in terms of notability, but I hope to be able to do so soon. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:06, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi Onganymede. After taking a look through search engines and other websites, I would have to conclude with the consensus found in the AFD discussion. I don't believe that there are enough secondary reliable sources available and that provide primary coverage of the article subject itself to assert him as notable enough to have their own Wikipedia article at this time.
I took a look at the references you used in your article as well, and I found that many of the sources you cited don't primarily cover the article subject (meaning that there aren't sources written to primarily talk about or provide coverage of J. Jaye Gold). While there are some sources you cited where he provides a statement or quote that primarily covers something else, I don't see much of anything that primarily covers him. This is a big requirement that editors look for when discussing a subject's notability and when looking for the availability of sources.
If someone wrote an external article, news headline, or another kind of journal or report that covered J. Jaye Gold that could be used as a source, that would count as one (of many needed) that would be considered. However, if someone wrote an online article that covered something else, but mentioned him in passing, such as where J. Jaye Gold provided a statement or quote, or were just mentioned in part of the article, that wouldn't be considered as a reference that primarily covers him.
In time, J. Jaye Gold could become notable down the road, but at this time, I'd have to agree with the consensus found. Please don't think of this as a downfall, and please definitely do not let this make you think that you're not doing well on Wikipedia. The exact opposite is true. Don't let yourself get discouraged, either; I believe that the next article you write will meet the notability requirements simply because you learned so much from this experience. Seriously! We learn the best when things don't work out, and we become experts on subjects when things don't go according to plan. Think about it: If everything went all hunky-dory, sure, we'd learn and gain experience... but we wouldn't take the time to stop and read up on something so far in-depth if things just worked out. Keep positive, and let me know if I can answer any questions or help you in any way. I'll be more than happy to do so. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 10:49, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Oshwah/TalkPageArchives/2020-10&oldid=988937760"