User:Oshwah/TalkPageArchives/2019-01

Ray Sawyer
I understand about referencing and I meant to, I apologise for not, but I don't understand what was controversial about adding that Ray Sawyer passed away, I had received the message from his own fb spokesperson related from his wife and kid and don't know what the controversy would have been? A great start had passed I thought people should know. I've edited other items on wiki in past years, never been in trouble for anything I added to a page. Again I'm sorry I didn't see the reference I did mean to and usually would.

Micki Frazier RaysKid (talk) 00:05, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi RaysKid! No worries; I understand your confusion and I'll be happy to clarify and explain. When editors add a death date to a biography of a living person and without citing any references or sources, it's treated and handled as a serious violation of Wikipedia's BLP policy and just like any other edits that attempt to add unreferenced content that's controversial or contentious. For all we know, the edits could be attempts to vandalize or add blatantly false information to Wikipedia directly, or they could be edits made in good faith by editors but based off of information or sources that are unverified, compromised, or otherwise purposefully publishing false or hoax information so that it a becomes a wide-spread hoax that's published everywhere. Wikipedia has been the subject of media attention, news coverage, and active discussion throughout the internet a number of times in the past and due to the fact that we updated the article of a famous person to state that they were now dead and without citing a source or properly checking the validity and origin of such information. We basically fell prey to death hoaxes that were widely spread throughout the internet, and we could have avoided all of the embarrassment and trolling that comes with the subsequent media attention if he had simply followed our policies and held others accountable for not doing so. We absolutely cannot allow this to happen, and this is why your edits were reverted, treated as serious violations of Wikipedia's BLP policy, and hidden from public view. If you have any questions or concerns, please let me know and I'll be happy to help you further. I hope you have a great rest of your day, and I wish you happy editing. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   23:28, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Ok Osh - thanks for the explanation. It all came down to my not adding the reference and again I apologise for not adding that!! I have managed serious sites myself, and once I even aspired to follow a career in journalism - and know it's A MAJOR NO-NO in the writing world not to cite sources!! I promise I won't have a lapse of memory like that again.

RaysKid (talk) 12:51, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Oshwah!


Happy New Year! Oshwah, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Iggy (Swan) 00:28, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.


 * Hi Iggy the Swan! Thanks for the new year wishes, and I hope your new years celebration was both memorable and safe. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   23:31, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Oshwah!


Happy New Year! Oshwah, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

– Davey 2010 Merry Christmas / Happy New Year 00:30, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.


 * Thank you for the holiday wishes, Davey2010. I hope that your holiday was fun and stress free and your new years celebration both memorable and fun. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:15, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * You're welcome Oshwah :), Thanks so much :) And I hope you have a fantastic 2019 :), Take care, – Davey 2010 Merry Christmas / Happy New Year 19:31, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Part username
Several years ago - I think more than 10 - I spent some time on wiki helping refine the MSN Groups article, of which I was an avid member from their inception till their closure. My username was nuttybird2000, and there was even a short page created for nuttybird2000.

I continue to use wiki thru the years - it's my 'go-to' dictionary online, that's how much I trust it. I know it is well patrolled and vandals and errors don't last long, therefore the information is 99.9% correct!

I had not found any reason to edit a page till very recently (I've forgotten now what it was, but it was before Ray Sawyer) - and now I notice the nuttybird2000 userpage is gone, and I can't find any have of my ever having been here! (Being gone so long is the reason I think that I sort of 'lost the feel' for editing the pages and made such errors today)

Can u explain how removals of past users and such works?

RaysKid (talk) 00:32, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi RaysKid! Wikipedia's new user tutorial does very well with explaining how this works in-depth, and providing you interactive lessons to get you comfortable with navigating through the edit history of pages and use diffs, revisions, and logs to find things you need from past edits. In a nutshell, every edit or change that's saved to an article or page is stored as a 'revision' to the article's edit history page. The history page lets you compare changes between revisions, review every edit that's been made on the article, and restore old revisions or revert back to better ones. Instead of doing a petty job explaining all of this through a message response to you, I'll refer you to the new user tutorial, as it does a much better job explaining this and giving you interactive lessons and tasks to help you get used to everything. In a nutshell: nothing is ever truly "deleted" on Wikipedia; anything that's removed from an article can be found in the history and reviewed or put back. So to answer your question directly (and technically) Wikipedia handles deletion by not actually performing any. ;-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:23, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Finding earlier edit
Ok while I'm asking questions -

I mentioned on another post to u that I had recently edited another article and now I'm having a brain freeze and can't remember who the actor was.

I remember we used to have our own used pages that we would see all our check - is there one page will have all edits I make on it?

Also I seem to remember each article used to have its own chat page - where all the editors for that particular page could chat with each other about the efforts they made, etc - I don't see anything like that now?? RaysKid (talk) 00:46, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi again RaysKid! I'll be happy to explain how this works, but (as I said above) you'll want to go through that tutorial I pointed you to in order to get a full level of understanding and experience with using it to your (and the project's) advantage. :-) As I summarized in my previous message above, all edits and changes that are saved will add a 'revision' to the article's edit history, which you can use to pull up any and every edit ever made to the page in the past, compare previous revisions, restore the article to a previous or old revision, and other very useful actions. Every article and page will have their own edit history that you can visit, as well as their own talk pages that you can navigate to in order to add discussions and collaborate over. You'll be able to see two tabs on pretty much every page that will take you to those places. This also includes our user and user talk pages as well - you'tr absolutely correct. There's a lot more to explain and show you, but (as I said in my previous response) I'm going to defer you to that tutorial and encourage you (again... lol) to go through and complete it. It's exremely helpful and you'll learn a lot of new, good, and important things here. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:36, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Another Favor
Would it be at all possible if I could ask you to semi-protect List of fictional wolves for a while? The page is a favorite target of an IP-hopping vandal, "Pete is a wolf" vandal, and having the page and other favorite haunts semi-protected for long periods of time is the best way to stop it.--Mr Fink (talk) 00:48, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Apokryltaros! I just took a look at the article and another admin beat me to it and applied semi-protection to it. Please let me know if I can help you with anything else and I'll be happy to do so. Happy new year! :-D  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:06, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Ah, is a real super mensch.  I will do so as soon as I think of something other than recommending you try making "Cinderella Truffles".--Mr Fink (talk) 04:42, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Oshwah!


Happy New Year! Oshwah, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Thanks, and have aHappy 2019! from L3X1 ◊distænt write◊  01:11, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.


 * Hi L3X1! I appreciate the holiday wishes you left me above! I hope that your holiday was fun, stress free, memorable, and safe - and I'll see you again soon. ;-) Best -  ~Oshwah~  (talk)  (contribs)   17:39, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!
BilCat (talk) 01:15, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * BilCat - Received and replied. Thanks for the email :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:18, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Edit
The person I added did graduate from this school...its also where I go and he grew up in my hometown — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.255.9.239 (talk) 01:48, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Taking the vandalism and disruptive nature of your edits out of the equation, you can't cite your own experience, relationships with others, or any work that you've written and/or published yourself. What O mean to say is that you cannot "cite yourself" as a source and to justify the addition of content or argue the retention of it. This constitutes original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. All content added to Wikipedia must either be attributable to a reliable source, or (in many cases when adding content that isn't common knowledge) cited in-line and directly attributed to a reliable source. Hence, when you try to use your "personal knowledge" to justify adding content, or when you argue that the content should stay because "you've been there before" and hence you know it's real... these all constitute original research, and any or all of such content that is found should be removed. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:52, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Oshwah!


Happy New Year! Oshwah, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Hhkohh (talk) 01:48, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.


 * Wish you have a successful training on SPI clerks Hhkohh (talk) 01:48, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi again, Hhkohh! I appreciate the message and the holiday and SPI wishes. :-) I hope that you had a great holiday season, and I'm sure that we'll run into one another very soon. :-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:53, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Oshwah!


Happy New Year! Oshwah, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

The SandDoctor Talk 02:05, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.


 * TheSandDoctor - You'll be pleased to know that my new years was fun, and that I managed to survive it. Thanks for the new years wishes and I'll probably bump into you somewhere on Wikipedia very soon as we always do. :-P  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:58, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm glad you survived it, I know of several who would be rather disappointed if you didn't. You're welcome! Just....next time....please don't bump into me so hard. My shoulder is still sore . -- The SandDoctor Talk 22:25, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Oshwah!


Happy New Year! Oshwah, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

SemiHypercube 02:21, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.


 * SemiHypercube - Thanks for the new year wishes! I hope yours was memorable and safe. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:27, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Al Toney iii
I accessed the electronic files for Worcester District Court,with the 1462CV001159 number,it takes you right to the entire court proceeding,is that sufficient to prove that this is truthful? Thank youDaubje (talk) 02:38, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Daubje - Thanks for working with me in follow-up discussions here below and for adding a link to the content on the article. Much appreciated :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:27, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Jock Mahoney
I am unclear as to why you removed my edit. Sally Field makes the allegation in her current memoir. It is referenced on her own page. It is certainly as much a part of his story as any of his film credits particularly since the allegation is made by someone who is notable in and of themselves.

From the Sally Field page under "Early Life"-

Following her parents' 1950 divorce, her mother married actor and stuntman Jock Mahoney. Field alleged in her 2018 memoir that she was sexually abused by Mahoney during her childhood.[2][3] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:2E21:AE00:FDDF:3C41:85F:D8F (talk) 03:10, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Umm... That's because you added very contentious content to this article without a reliable source being cited in-line. That's why I removed your edit to the article.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:29, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Al Toney iii
I am disappointed in the outcome.I pasted a link to the actual court decision but apparently the truth doesn't suffice,as you removed it anywayDaubje (talk) 03:22, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Daubje - Stand by; I'll take another look and check again. I didn't see any direct links or URLs to the court documentation, but I'll verify this for certain in case I'm wrong...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   03:23, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Daubje - I'm just updating this discussion for future readers here. Thanks for working with me in follow-up discussions on my user talk page here and for providing a link to the content in question (diff). Much appreciated! :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   11:22, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Happy New Year!
Happy New Year! Hello Oshwah: Thanks for all of your contributions to Wikipedia, and have a great New Year! Cheers, ― Abelmoschus Esculentus talk /  contribs 05:32, 1 January 2019 (UTC) Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year snowman}} to people's talk pages with a friendly message.


 * Abelmoschus Esculentus - I appreciate the new years wishes, and I hope your new years celebration was both memorable and safe. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:41, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Happy New Year !

 * Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year elves}} to send this message


 * Kpgjhpjm - Thank you for the new years wishes and the fun fact... lol. I hope you had a memorable and safe new year and that 2019 treats you well. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:42, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Deleted user page AEK1961
I am at a loss as to why you felt it necessary to delete my user page. I have been engaging with a number of other admins with no problem. All I am trying to do is understand the way you work to get corrections on a page. It does seem that multiple inputs are arbitary and disconnected to the input of others. . . Pls advise —— — Preceding unsigned comment added by AEK1961 (talk • contribs) 07:07, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi AEK1961! Thank you for leaving me a message with your questions and concerns regarding the deletion of your user page. I went ahead and took another look at it, and I'm inclined to agree that you're correct and that I perhaps misread a sentence or something else that made me believe that deletion of your user page was the right action to take. I've gone ahead and restored it for you. Please accept my apologies for what happened, and please do not hesitate to let me know if I can help you with anything else. :-) Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   07:27, 1 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Thank you, I appreciate your response but have to ask why on earth multiple, seemingly unconnected admins, can dabble like this. From my perspective the whole process of engagement is marked by disconnected individuals taking a variety of contradictory actions some of which come across as deliberately obstructive to the point of bullying. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AEK1961 (talk • contribs) 07:31, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi again AEK1961! I'm not sure what you're referring to exactly. Can you elaborate a bit more and provide a few examples so that I can answer your questions? Thanks :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:43, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Quite simple really, different individuals seem to take unilateral action based on their interpretation of posts etc. This is done whilst others, previous to their intervention have signalled approval and thanks for my transparency in the detail I provided and we were moving the editing of the page I was interacting with forward. Beyond that in editing the page different individuals would add their 'edit' which was without reference to anyone else, including one who it transpired had a COI. In doing this referenced evidence was ignored and more detail requested despite an earlier editor being satisfied. On to of this I found myself previously barred, prior to your intervention, as a first response by another admin for infringing a rule that was not apparent until the multiplke reference pages referenced were investigated. AEK1961 (talk) 22:20, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi AEK1961 - Depending on the request and the actions to be taken, editors and administrators are allowed to use their discretion to edit pages and carry out certain tasks, so long as they're compliant with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. It's a founding principle of Wikipedia that editors are encouraged to be bold and not worry so much about every single rule or worry about being punished or scolded for editing in good faith. Your edits might be reverted and someone might message you to let you know about your edit and what it may have done wrong or incorrectly, but we completely understand that you're new here and that you obviously won't know every single Wikipedia policy or guideline - I still don't. It's also a founding policy that no editors have any ownership of content, so anyone is free to edit any page or project they please if their aim is to improve it. :-)


 * Most policies and guidelines do not require a discussion first until another editor reverts the edit or action and takes issue with it. If somebody else does and you disagree with them and still think that your edit was correct and did not violate any policies, you both need to follow Wikipedia's dispute resolution protocol, discuss the matter with each other in a civil manner, and come to a peaceful consensus. Editors are free to undo the edits of others and disagree - in fact, this is the correct action to take on certain pages pending a discussion, such as biographies of living persons, but you also are free to start a discussion with the user (usually on the article or page's talk page) and the other editor is expected to respond and explain their actions. This also applies to administrators and any actions that they take as well. While dealing with discussions and issues between yourself and other editors can be frustrating, conflicts and disagreements between editors is inevitable; that's why it's expected of all editors to discuss disagreements, and also why edit warring is disallowed and considered disruptive.


 * Since you're brand new to Wikipedia, I highly recommend that you go through and complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial before doing anything else here. It will provide you with many helpful walkthroughs, guides, interactive lessons, and other information that will be very helpful to you. Most users who take this advice and complete the tutorial tell me later that it was significantly helpful to them and it led to them being saved hours (if not over a day's worth) of time and frustration they would've experienced otherwise. If you have any more questions or concerns, please let me know and I'll be happy to discuss them with you and help you further. Thanks again for the message and your responses - I'm more than willing to work with you and help you with any questions or concerns. :-) Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   18:41, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

No subject
Just having a bit of fun...(do it back) GOLDIEM J (talk) 08:34, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi GOLDIEM J! HA! Thanks for the trout, and I hope you had a fun and safe new year. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:44, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Lol you're welcome😅 Happy new year 2u2. GOLDIEM J (talk) 16:36, 10 January 2019 (UTC) (can't believe it took you that time to notice it)

duff mckagan
What was the source that said he was known as Duff "Rose" McKagan? Was the singer known as Axl "McKagan" Rose? I just read Mr. McKagan's autobiography, "It's so easy (and other lies)", and I can tell you he was NEVER known as "Rose". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.177.181.249 (talk) 08:50, 1 January 2019 (UTC)


 * What is the source of this autobiography?  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:48, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Oshwah - Re Ziggy Stardust album release date
Hi there My web page is www.5years.com (The Ziggy Stardust Companion) I specialise in that album and the 16 June release date does not agree with any references or Bowie books I have read in the last 20 years. I did see it crop up recently in a booklet for the Five Years boxset (2015) but again I think thats a very recent mistake which has now been repeated on Wiki Happy to keep chatting about this. regards Mike Harvey [REDACTED - Oshwah] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.97.169.186 (talk) 09:29, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but this constitutes original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. Please review this policy, and make sure you understand that Wikipedia requires reliable sources to support the information. Please let me know if you have any questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:52, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Claire Wineland
Hi there..thank you for your note regarding a change I made to my daughters Wiki page. This is the first time I have done any Wiki editing and would love to understand what edit you were referring to so I can try to adhere to policies. Melissa.Yeager1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Melissa.Yeager1 (talk • contribs) 12:46, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Melissa.Yeager1, and thanks for the message! Since you're brand new to Wikipedia, I highly recommend that you go through and complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial before you spend time making any more edits or changes. It will provide you with many helpful walkthroughs, guides, interactive lessons, and other information that will be helpful to you. Most users who take this advice and complete the tutorial tell me later that it was significantly helpful to them and it led to them being saved hours (if not over a day's worth) of time and frustration they would've experienced otherwise.
 * On a side note, I saw in your message above that the article subject you're editing is of your daughter. Please know that this represent a clear conflict of interest issue here when you do this. 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 more questions, and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a great rest of your day and happy editing. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   13:26, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Will absolutely do the tutorial, thank you for the information. I am just trying to make sure her page is accurate and I don't see what you mean about conflict of interest but will educate myself on the wiki world. Is it ok if I upload a different picture? It is a family owned pic, just more recent than the one there.  If you don't have time to reply, no worries, I will research  my questions.  Happy New Year (Melissa.Yeager1 (talk) 19:31, 1 January 2019 (UTC))
 * Melissa.Yeager1 - Go through the new user tutorial first before you decide to do this. There are copyright issues that need to be known and sorted out before you do this. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:53, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Link page
Hello Oshwah,I will put my piece in again with a link,if you don't feel that meets the authenticity issue,then I'll just stop because there will be no other thing I could add,thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daubje (talk • contribs) 12:54, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Daubje! That sounds perfectly fine to me! I believe that this was the only issue, so adding a reliable source would resolve the concerns expressed. :-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   12:58, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Discussion
My name's quite similar to yours. Joshua. GOLDIEM J (talk) 13:07, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hey man! Happy new year! Indeed; your name does sound pretty similar to my username now that I sound both of them out loud and think about it... ;-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   13:37, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Really does doesn't it? Happy new year to you 2😀 GOLDIEM J (talk) 09:39, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Link
Thank you,I fixed it.In the future I will make sure I get all the facts to show up in the references and such. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daubje (talk • contribs) 13:08, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Daubje - Thanks for following up with me here and for letting me know that you modified the article. Looking at your edit here, I see where you re-added the summary of the events and mention some details of the court case and ruling, but I still don't see where you added a citation and with an external link to a web document or page where this information is stated and verifies what you added here. This is what I meant when I told you here that a reference is needed. Were you able to locate an external link or URL that points to the court case documentation that you're trying to source? Let me know.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   13:36, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

I have put a satisfactory reason in the edit summary.
^ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 51.37.57.129 (talk) 14:56, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there! Thanks for leaving me a notice here regarding your edit to the Young adult fiction article. The reason I reverted your edit to the article was because of what I noticed when looking at the overall edit history of that article. You removed content from the article and immediately reverted yourself twice. After I saw that you had removed nearly the same content a third time, I felt that it was the right thing in my capacity as someone who was patrolling recent changes because I thought that you may have been having issues or that you might have needed help to properly do what you wanted to do. I saw your edit summaries and (in normal context) I wouldn't have given your edit summaries much thought and I would have simply moved on to the next edit on my plate. When I said in my edit summary that your edit summary didn't seem "sufficient", I simply meant that, given your repeated circle of edits to the article that were ongoing, there seemed to be other issues that weren't being explained and I was going to try and work with you to see what's going on. Unfortunately, what often happens given the level of things I patrol, take on, and handle when others ask me for help, I got sidetracked with an urgent request and I wasn't able to follow up nearly as quickly as I planned on doing. My edit summary could also have been much more clear with what I was trying to say; I left it assuming that I'd be following up with you right afterwards. Looking at it today and given that I didn't, I'd understand how it could have been interpreted to mean that you had left no summary at all - which obviously isn't the case. It looks like the content is going into dispute due to the number of editors that are becoming involved with the issue at-hand. I hope that things get resolved peacefully and that the right decision is made and with the quality of the article's content, and the project as the primary focus. Thanks again for the message, and I hope my response here explained my thought process and that you now understand that I as only trying to step in and try and help. ;-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   19:06, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Tree of Life (album)
Hello. I created the article Tree of Life (album) in the past which was later deleted but someone written it again under Tree of Life (Audiomachine album). Could you merge them? Eurohunter (talk) 16:52, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Eurohunter! Sure, I can do that for you right now. Stand by...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   16:56, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Eurohunter - ✅. Please don't hesitate to let me know if I can help you with anything else, and I'll be happy to do so. I hope you have a great day and I wish you happy editing. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:00, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Eurohunter (talk) 18:01, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Eurohunter - No problem; always happy to help. ;-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   18:29, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Ossett
The information on the page Ossett about Ossett United F.C. was out of date and I edited it to correct it. Sorry for not adding the information, do you mind if I revert the edit back to what I edited it as? Thank you! Hiitsmebobby (talk) 19:04, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Hiitsmebobby! No worries; please don't apologize. :-) What edit are you talking about specifically? I can't seem to find it...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:57, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * It said in the sport section that Ossett Town and Ossett Albion were still two separate clubs but from the start of the 2018-19 season, it was one club under the name Ossett United. I edited it to correct it, and my edit was reverted for not putting a suitale comment. Cheers. Hiitsmebobby (talk) 15:25, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Hiitsmebobby! Ah, okay - I understand now. Your edits were reverted because you did not take the time to locate a reliable source and cite it in-line with your changes. Any edits that add or modify content that's beyond typical knowledge should be cited by a reliable source. This is needed in order to establish a high degree of verifiability - otherwise, people who read and review the article can't assess the accuracy and legitimacy of its content. This is a founding principle that makes Wikipedia a reliable place for readers to visit. Otherwise, nobody would bother to visit this website at all. :-)


 * I see that your account is over a year old and that you've made a good number of contributions so far. However, if sources, edit summaries, and other things like this confuse you or if you need a refresher on the basics, just go through and complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial and it'll help resolve that. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk)  (contribs)   19:09, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

External link
Thank you,I added the link to Massachusetts Court Electronic Access and put it under [6] with the referencesDaubje (talk) 20:05, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Daubje! No problem; always happy to help. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:58, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Template talk:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:TheWikiWizard
Hi Oshwah. If you can/don't mind can you review my request above? Thanks. -- Thegooduser  Let's Chat  🍁 21:43, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thegooduser - Sorry for being late to the party, but it looks like Xaosflux has already responded to your request. If you have any questions, I'd direct them his way. Best -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:02, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

John McTiernan
Hi Oshwah,

Regarding the change of edit I made, I find your change to be inaccurate, and biased. Perhaps you believe McTiernan is a “former” filmmaker, but I do not. So how do we rectify that?

Calling someone, who is alive, “former” is not correct. Much akin to your sabbatical while in school.

Please leave the “former” omitted.

Thanks.

FactsMatter1 Factsmatter1 (talk) 03:49, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Factsmatter1 - Someone who is still alive can be a "former" employee of a career path. They can change careers, retire, or quit - so please know that you don't have to be dead to be a "former filmmaker". In fact, someone who is no longer alive should still be called a filmmaker, etc. - the word "was" will imply that they're now dead. Please let me know if you have any questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:07, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

hookworms edit
What part of the edit were you not happy with? I thought everything was cited ok. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.205.194.219 (talk) 16:56, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there! Please see the response I made to you on your user talk page, as I explain everything there. :-) Best -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:02, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

hookworms edit
What part of the edit were you not happy with? I thought everything was cited ok. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.205.194.219 (talk) 16:58, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * It looks like we've already resolved your concerns on your user talk page. Please let me know if this is not the case and exactly what wasn't resolved and I'll be happy to help you further. Best -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:08, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

User page deleted
Hello!

After editing an article, I started working on a user page, so people could see my credentials (just like I show my students how to check the credentials of Wikipedia writers).

Imagine my disappointment to see you deleted if for being a personal webpage. Three sentences about myself constitutes a personal page? How shall I word it so it remains?

Yourfavoritelibrarian (talk) 17:00, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Yourfavoritelibrarian! I apologize for misinterpreting your user page in regards to WP:NOTHOST and WP:UPNOT. To explain and to put things into perspective: Unfortunately, many editors will create an account, add stuff to their user page (either a bunch of stuff about themselves, a bunch of blatant advertising, or something that are serious violations of policy. They'll add this content, make no edits to Wikipedia outside of that page, and then they'll leave. Part of what I do is review these pages and remove the ones that need such. I misinterpreted your user page as one of those places, and for this I owe you my apologies. I'm restoring the content you added to it now; give me about two minutes and you'll be able to see it as you could before. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:07, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Yourfavoritelibrarian - I've restored your user page as promised. Please let me know if you have any additional questions or concerns and I'll be happy to discuss it with you and make sure that everything is answered and addressed. Thanks for leaving me a message and for bringing this to my attention, and I hope you have a great day and I wish you happy editing. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:10, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

ORIGIN OF MAGARS
IT WAS MISSED - KHAM LANGUAGE IS A ORIGINAL LANGUAGE OF MAGARS WHICH IS IN TIBET ORIGIN. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.215.39.49 (talk) 17:30, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * The reason I reverted your change was because I didn't believe that it was part of the template. If you look here, your change broke the template and this is why I reverted it. If you have questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. :-) Best -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:13, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Changes to Bob Cranmer page
I maintain the Bob Cranmer page. Mr. Cranmer wrote a best-selling book titled "The Demon of Brownsville Road" which has its own Wikipedia page. People who are not aware of this occasionally add to his personal (political career) page facts that are related specifically to his book, which is referenced on the career page. Mr. Cranmer is a former notable politician and his personal page primarily covers his career. Details about his involvement with his book are covered at length on the book's page. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sceneridge (talk • contribs) 18:23, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Sceneridge, and thank you for leaving me a message here with your input. When I read your edit summaries left with your removal of content, I interpreted them incorrectly and thinking that you were saying that the content should be removed simply because the article subject doesn't like it, which was the reason why I reverted them back. Now that I read them a second time (as well as your explanation here), I understand now what you meant and I'll leave you to it in order to fix and improve. Please accept my apologies for the misinterpretation, and I wish you a great day and happy editing. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   18:27, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for watching the page. Best regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sceneridge (talk • contribs) 18:36, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Sceneridge - You're welcome. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:14, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello
Happy New Year! Hope you have a successful 2019, plus why have you givin me two warnings when I have only done 1 edit? 81.156.238.15 (talk) 18:41, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there! I just took a look on your user talk page, and I honestly don't know how that managed to happen. You're correct; you should have only received one warning for the edit you made...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   18:43, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * You're lucky you ran into Oshwah, who's a nice guy. I might have blocked you on the spot. Drmies (talk) 18:44, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * You're correct with that Drmies, he's very nice, why can I not edit my user page. 81.156.238.15 (talk) 18:47, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

You edited my section! Don’t steal my section 81.156.238.15 revert it back to where I wrote it again! 124.168.227.180 (talk) 06:30, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * what was that about? Tommy has a great username (talk) 17:10, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Alexandra Trusova
Hello, Oshwah. You deleted some of my contents. Russian nicknames, or diminutives, are simply short forms of the given name. As opposed to full names used in formal situations, short forms of a name are used in communication between well-acquainted people, usually relatives, friends, and colleagues. Short forms emerged in spoken language for convenience as a majority of formal names are cumbersome.

Sasha is often the nickname used for a person whose given name is Alexander (male) or Alexandra (female).

Alexandra Trusova is known as Sasha Trusova. So I changed her name as Alexandra "Sasha" Vyacheslavovna Trusova. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AsamiSato28 (talk • contribs) 18:57, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi AsamiSato28, and thanks for messaging me and for explaining your edits. So long as it isn't disruptive and that it's referenced, that's fine by me and what's most important. If you haven't already done so, feel free to undo my revert and restore your changes back to the article. Please let me know if I can do anything else for you, and I'll be happy to help. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   19:00, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

my edit
dear oshwah, i am ahmad omar's daughter, and i was researching when i accidentally found this article on wiki (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_Omar). i was thrilled to see my father online, and i thought to myself, let me add two images of him that are saved in my personal laptop. these images are personal and are mine and i assure you copyright regulations will not be violated. i am confused as you have repetitively deleted the images i have uploaded and the minor changes i made such as the spelling of my father's name, saying i needed to cite it and provide a source. the images are personal and the information is personally confirmed accurate. i would appreciate it if you allow me to edit my fathers article a tiny bit and add a few images. i was also thinking i might add more about his life in his biography later, so i need your authorization to continue to edit. thank you, jana husamk festok — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janahusamk (talk • contribs) 19:09, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Janahusamk - Sorry, but there are two issues here. Your relationship with this article subject represents a conflict of interest, and anything you add to the article represents original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. Please review these policies and guidelines and let me know if you have any questions. Since you're brand new to Wikipedia, I highly recommend that you go through and complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial before you spend time making any more edits or changes. It will provide you with many helpful walkthroughs, guides, interactive lessons, and other information that will be helpful to you. Most users who take this advice and complete the tutorial tell me later that it was significantly helpful to them and it led to them being saved hours (if not over a day's worth) of time and frustration they would've experienced otherwise. I hope you take my advice. I hope you have a great day and I wish you happy editing. :-) Best -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:27, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Shahbaz azmat khel
Yes i am sure my editing is right and also currect about shabaz azmat khel. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 43.245.9.8 (talk) 19:10, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Is there a reliable source that you can link me to that supports what you added?  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:27, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Anu Malik page
Hi Oshwah, As you can see, there were sources including India Today and the Times of India backing the changes that I made. Are these not reliable sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.30.254.157 (talk) 19:42, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there! When I was reviewing the changes to this article, all I saw was this edit that added this information and nothing else; I wasn't aware that you had already cited references. Please accept my apologies for the mix-up, and please let me know if you have any additional questions or concerns and I'll be happy to help answer and discuss them with you. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk)  (contribs)   19:46, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Grr!
Would you quit beating me to reverts? :) (talk to) Gaelan('s contributions) 20:09, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Gaelan - LOL :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:28, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

same except it's with literally every admin (or whoever does the reverts) ever Tommy has a great username (talk) 17:12, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Media portrayals of transgender people
Hi Oshwah, I'm editing this page to follow Media portrayal of lesbianism and Media portrayal of LGBT people as mentioned in the talk page. I've moved the lists to the appropriate list pages List of transgender and transsexual fictional characters and List of transgender characters in film and television so nothing is being lost. SpeakForMe (talk) 20:18, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi SpeakForMe! Cool deal; thanks for the heads up and for letting me know. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:29, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Blue
What happened to the blue background in your page? -- Thegooduser  Let's Chat  🍁 22:45, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thegooduser - It was cut off by someone inserting an improperly-formatted template. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:30, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Well fix it, My OCD's going nuts. lol. -- Thegooduser  Life Begins With a Smile :)  🍁 02:32, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I just did... lol  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:46, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so much for undeleting my page; here's a big ask
Hello Oshwah!

Thank you so much for undeleting my user page. Editing the Siegel page was the most exciting thing I did over break and having a username will be super useful when I teach the freshman about how to search the history of edits to a Wikipedia article. Here's a question: is it possible to change the author credit of my first edit on the Ralph Siegel page from my IP address to my new username? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ralph_Siegel&action=history You should be able to see that I'm writing from that IP address right now: [REDACTED - Oshwah]

Or do I just let it go and start editing other stuff?

≈≈≈≈ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yourfavoritelibrarian (talk • contribs) 22:47, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Yourfavoritelibrarian! I apologize for the delay responding to your question here. In short, it is not possible for anyone to modify past edits, revisions, or logs, and change them manually to something different. If this were possible, it would greatly reduce the confidence and reliability of each revision if this were possible. However, if you want your IP address hidden for privacy reasons, email me privately with this request by clicking here and I can do that for you. It will only suppresss the information, not modify it to be something else. I wish you well with your teachings, and I thank you for using Wikipedia to do so. :-) Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:37, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Remove Vandalism on Talk page
please remove the vandalism you forget on 72.69.164.229 user talk? Carl Tristan Orense (talk) 23:39, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Carl Tristan Orense - ✅.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   23:41, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Racist attack
Hello can you please advise where I can file an official complaint about racist and bigoted language used by. This user has engaged in racist as well as religiously sectarian and communal language where the section was about clothing, but turned it into a Hindu vs Muslim argument. Using crude, disrespectful and bigoted language like "Hindu garbage". This is not acceptable in Wiki. Please let me know how I can file an official grievance regarding the user's racist attitude. Calling someone or someone's culture "Hindu garbage" is unacceptable. (Highpeaks35 (talk) 01:59, 3 January 2019 (UTC))
 * Hi Highpeaks35, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your questions and concerns. The comment by Fowler&fowler you linked above doesn't seem to be anything that he/she meant to purposefully say in order to be uncivil or racist toward those who identify as Muslim or Hindu, or anything against India (although I'd understand if you took things that way; the comment could have certainly been worded much better). I'd advise talking to the user directly by leaving him/her a message on their user talk page here - just be civil and express your concerns appropriately and with a positive mindset and I'm sure that this will be quickly and easily resolved. If you're not satisfied with the outcome of the conversation between the two of you, you're of course able to file an official report at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents to express your concerns (though I'll predict that the majority of the responses will be similar to the one I said above - that it wasn't an intentional attempt to be uncivil or racist). I wouldn't consider this an issue that needs a report there, but you have the right to file a report nonetheless. If you have any more questions or concerns, let me know and I'll be more than happy to help you. Thanks again for the message and I hope things get resolved peacefully and with a quick exchange of positive words with Fowler&fowler. :-) Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:56, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Deletion
Hello, i recently uploaded my user page as i would like to get a wiki set up in my name, and the page was deleted almost immediatly.after.

I was wondering why and can it be reuploaded.

If not may i have the text from the document? Just as i spent a while on it and would like it, thankyou :). — Preceding unsigned comment added by TH Noah (talk • contribs) 05:11, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi TH Noah, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your questions and concerns. Your user page was deleted due to violating Wikipedia's policies on user pages (specifically, what you cannot have on your user page) as well as Wikipedia's policy on what Wikipedia is not to be used for (specifically, this section). User pages are supposed to be primarily focused on Wikipedia-related content and information, and not supposed to contain excessive content about yourself personally or contain mostly non-Wikipedia-related information (such as what your user page had). This is why your user page was deleted twice (by both myself, as well as Fastily later that day). Please let me know if you have any more questions or concerns and I'll be happy to answer the and help you further. Thanks again for the message and I wish you a great day and happy editing. :-) Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   05:00, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

User talk:G PULLAIAH COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY
You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 09:35, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Cahk! Sorry for the delay responding to your message here. It looks like the disruption has stopped since your report, so I'm going to go ahead and just leave things as-is. Otherwise, had I responded during the time it was going on, I would've revoked talk page access as you requested. Keep up the great work, and I'm sure we'll speak again soon. :-) Best -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   05:02, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

IRC assistance
Hello, how can a user get banned from accessing IRC? I recently was going to get onto #wikipedia-en connect, but apparently the screen says "you are banned". It seems annoying, however I am not sure how to resolve the trouble. Normally is a user told whether they are banned, because I thought usually a user would be notified. Can anyone be happy to help me understand the request? Because I only am there to talk to you, because it was in relation to the topic ban. Are you able to explain this to me, because I'm not certain. Also I can access other ones no problems :)

Also another quick one, how many users are needed to achieve consensus if a user was doing a topic ban. For example, if a user was being proposed ban from automobiles, do they need to have a set amount of votes. As i guarantee theres going to be an unfair advantage, as it'd be mainly Vauxford and others. I would like you to give me a quick hand. Cheers -- Eurovision Nim (talk to me)(see my edits) 13:20, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi EurovisionNim! Thanks for leaving me a message here with your questions and concerns. I'll be happy to answer them and make sure you've received help with your concerns. What IRC client were you using at the time to connect to #wikipedia-en? If you were attempting to use Freenode's WebChat interface (the built-in web IRC link you see on Wikipedia at many places), the ban you saw could have just been coincidental. During times of extreme abuse from users who are using the web IRC interface to cause disruption to the channel, ops will place a temporary ban that will disallow anyone who is unregistered with Freenode and using the web IRC interface from connecting. If you are currently in the channel at the time the ban is placed and it affects you in any way, you are notified of the ban as soon as it becomes effective and you're removed from the channel. If you attempt to join the channel and you're affected by a current ban, you will be disallowed from joining and you'll see an error notification with a reason for the ban. If more than 24 hours pass and you're still unable to join the channel, you can speak to a channel operator and inquire about your issues by joining the #wikimedia-ops channel and following the instructions that are displayed as soon as you enter. Please let me know if you have any more questions or concerns, or if I can help you with anything else. I'll be more than happy to assist you and make sure that all is well. I hope you have a great day and I wish you happy editing. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   05:12, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Ray Sawyer (again)
I know why u removed my edit of the Ray Sawyer page, I forgot to cite my sources, that's clear to me. But I don't know why in the re-edit of Ray Sawyer Date of Death the DATE is NOW INCORRECT!?! Just because I didn't cite the source doesn't mean my information was incorrect, I did explain to u where I got my info.

According to Ray's official Dr Hook featuring Ray Sawyer Facebook page Ray passed away Monday morning December 31, 2018. NOT December 28 as it is now showing. This was posted to said Facebook page, related thru that pages moderator from Ray's wife Linda a few minutes after he passed Monday morning and is where I originally got the information I used to edit Ray Sawyer page that day (but forgot to include source). Could someone please fix that, I don't dare touch it again I don't like nasty notes lol.

(If you're uncomfortable with using the Facebook page as a source, u can also check Google)

https://www.google.com/search?q=Ray+Sawyer+dies&oq=Ray+Sawyer+dies&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l2.8826j0j4&client=ms-android-metropcs-us&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

Much Appreciated

RaysKid (talk) 23:01, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank u for changing the date of death for Ray Sawyer to the correct one.

RaysKid (talk) 14:06, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi RaysKid - No problem; I was simply fixing the issues on the article and restoring the revision text to an appropriate state and with these issues removed. What you probably saw was the article's text during the time that I was attempting to resolve everything. If you have any more questions or concerns, let me know and I'll be happy to work with you and make sure that all is well. Thanks for the message and I wish you happy editing. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   05:14, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

I need your help to inform me why you recently deleted my article
Can you help me to edit the itel Mobile article I have created. I think it was narrated in objective way and the whole content has reliable references. So could you have me with this article? Your comments must be useful to me. Thank you so much!

02:52, 4 January 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.117.97.4 (talk)
 * It appears that the article you're referring to has been deleted. Check the deletion log to see the reason and read more information about how to avoid this issue in the future. Alternatively, you can use Wikipedia's articles for creation process to create a draft page and allow yourself time to expand the article and submit it for review and approval to be published. Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   05:57, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for creating WP:IDT
I think it is an excellent resource and refer to it often when I am patrolling recent changes. Thanks again and happy 2019! S0091 (talk) 17:12, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi S0091! Thanks for the message and for the very kind words. It took quite some time for me to create this page fully, and I'm very pleased to hear that it's providing good help and assistance to others. If you have questions, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be happy to answer them and help you. Thanks again for the message and I wish you a great day and happy editing! :-D  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   05:59, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Hi SoapWithRope! I appreciate the barnstar and that you recognized that I wasn't trying to give you a hard time when I initially blocked your account because of the username you chose. I'm happy to that it was able to come to a peaceful resolution and that you're still active and editing Wikipedia. I hope you have a great day and I wish you happy editing. :-) Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   06:01, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Looking at possible and massive sockpuppetry on an article
Users Arnoc80 (oldest account), Atanuchaks, and Soumyaschaks introduce the same information constantly (peacock information about a specific person that may or may not be relevant to article), which has been reverted many times. There are also many IPs that do it, such as: 106.207.31.38, 27.61.97.85, and 106.207.101.151. Can you take a look at these three accounts and the IPs? I'm not experienced enough to file a SPI report on the matter. Thank you!

The article in question: Hetampur There are so many diffs, I'll get back to you if I can, but please take a look at this. Arnoc80 is banned, but I fear the article may be hit with even more massive sockpuppetry attacks. Thanks for your time. Neo t / c 16:34, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Neolytical! Thanks for the message and for letting me know about this. I'll take a look and see what's going on... :-). Best -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   06:04, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Neolytical - Thanks again for bringing this issue to my attention. There's definitely no question in my mind: The accounts and IP users you listed above are definitely either the same person or a group of people that joined as meat puppets. The users have been dealt with, and I thank you again for the message. If you see any more issues like this, please don't hesitate to let me know or file a report at this noticeboard (just follow the instructions). Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   06:29, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail

 * Received and replied - thanks! :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   06:30, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Cardano ready for submission?
Hello , I pinged you, because I saw you where also previously engaged in Cardano (cryptocurrency platform) talks: contribution. Thank you for your input so far. Do you think this article is ready enough to be submitted as an article for creation? Or do you have any suggestions? If so, please post your comments or just your approval on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_talk:Cardano_(cryptocurrency_platform)#Ready_for_submission? this talk page]. Thank you, --FlippyFlink (talk) 11:03, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi FlippyFlink, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your question. The extent of my contributions to this article was simply to redact some revisions that contained content that was in violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. It appears that the link you gave me was to a page that has since been deleted - can you verify that you've provided a correct link and with correct spelling? Remember that page titles are also case sensitive - so a page titled "Example Page" would be different than a page titled "Example page" (note the lower-case 'P'). Let me know, and please don't hesitate to respond with any questions. Best -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   06:35, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi, Thanks for your reply. The link is ok, but my question was to review this new draft page. If you have any remarks on that new Cardano page, please leave your comments on this talk page. --FlippyFlink (talk) 07:46, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi again, FlippyFlink. Weird; I must've confused the link provided in your message with the link provided in someone else's... seems to work fine now... Okay, will do! Thanks for the response and I hope you have a great rest of your day. :-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   07:48, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Greninja listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Greninja. Since you had some involvement with the Greninja redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Paintspot Infez (talk) 13:35, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   06:36, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

re: Innovation of Industrial Internet of Things
Sorry to keep bugging you, but I had some follow-up questions about the article merge, which can be seen on the talk page. Thanks. — AfroThundr (u · t · c) 13:36, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
 * AfroThundr3007730 - No problem, and no apologies are necessary. I'll take a look there shortly. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   06:37, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Your recent reversion of my edits to the article Dodge Viper
I understand your removal of the (thats a lot of damage) comment which was simply an experiment of a new wikipedia user, seeing how far you could go. The comment was going to be removed after a few weeks, however I fail to comprehend your removal of my addition to the clay moulding section of this article. I hope that you will understand and fix this anytime your not in a hurry.

Sincerely ProForzaman12 — Preceding unsigned comment added by ProForzaman12 (talk • contribs) 19:34, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
 * ProForzaman12 - Are you referring to this specific edit? The reason it was removed was because I didn't feel that it was content that's attributable to a reliable source; instead, it felt like original research (or content added based off your findings, experience, relationships, research, or findings). If this isn't the case and if I'm mistaken, please let me know and provide a reference to a reliable source and I'll be happy to add the content back to the article and cite the reference for you. :-) Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   06:40, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Re: Kenneth C. Martis
Hi Oshwah - I left a reply to your message in December and haven't seen a reply from you. Did I do something wrong in the way I replied to your question? Thank you Cybeleta (talk) 20:38, 9 January 2019 (UTC)cybeleta

User talk:Cybeleta Re: Kenneth C. Martis The Historical Atlas of United States Congressional Districts: 1789-1983 The Historical Atlas of Political Parties in the United States Congress: 1789-1989 Thank you for your message explaining the need for more information for my edits. This is my first series of edits and I am learning the process. I have some questions about explaining changes: If Kenneth C. Martis provided information to fill in knowledge gaps, would it be appropriate for me to state that when I am making updates? This will be true for all my edits and is verifiable through him sending an email or giving a contact number. Is there a way to restore the edits that I made to those pages or should I redo the edits? Thank you Cybeleta (talk) 16:19, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Cybeleta, and thanks for leaving me a message here in response to the question you asked on your user talk page. Since your response didn't include a mention of my username, I wasn't notified that you had responded and asked questions. Generally, you want to include an edit summary with all of your edits and messages, and you want to briefly explain what you're changing on the page (or... "summarize your edit" - hence the name). :-) Edit summaries help other editors and users to understand what you're changing and why, and leads to less edit reverts and confusion. Can you clarify what you mean in your response when you said, "If Kenneth C. Martis provided information to fill in knowledge gaps..."? Are you saying that this person is giving this information to you in order to update the article? Or are you simply saying that you're citing or referencing a source and you're adding the information from those sources? If you're using sources to update the article, you simply just need to cite them in-line with the text you're adding. You also want to double-check that the sources you're pulling this information from is considered reliable per Wikipedia's guideline page here. Please clarify your statement for me and elaborate further when you can, and I'll be more than happy to help you. I just want to make sure that I fully understand your statements and that my answers are accurate. :-) Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   06:51, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Your help is needed
Hello Oshwah My name is Waqar and I'm new here. I recently created this account to edit and revamp the ACCA page (which you also did recently) and most of the other accountancy bodies' pages. Let me tell you that the ACCA page was full of clutter. But I am here to ask for your help as I'm a novice in all of this Wikipedia stuff, though I would really like to learn. So here are my questions:


 * 1) My page at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Waqar_Hasan_Siddiqui shows a red link for Talk and Sandbox why?
 * 2) What is a Sandbox?
 * 3) How can I prevent non-users to edit the ACCA article without giving any reference (recently some fools edited it without any proper reference which led to misinformation, and it's quite frequent; it's also getting quite annoying)
 * 4) What is the procedure to protect or semi-protect an article (I've seen a lock on a couple of articles before)

Please keep the answers as simple as possible. I know there is help available in Wikipedia pages but those are a bit lengthy, plus they contain a jargon which will take some time to master. I visited your page and am inspired by your dedication and the number of stars you got, but not your hair :) Hope to hear from you soon. --Waqar Hasan Siddiqui (talk) 15:30, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Waqar Hasan Siddiqui - Have you tried going through Wikipedia's new user tutorial? That place should be simple and it shouldn't have any jargon - it's meant to be for brand new users who aren't familiar with Wikipedia. Give that a try and let me know how it works for you. If you still need help or still need help with the questions you asked above after completing the tutorial, let me know and I'll be glad to answer them. Welcome to Wikipedia! :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   15:38, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Offensive message on my talk
left me an offensive message on my talk page. As I have never seen this account before, they only logical explanation in my mind is that this account is a sock. I can only privately suspect editors who this might be, as I have no clear evidence to suspect editors of being the master, so I can't file a sockpuppetry report, so what should I do? -- Ted Edwards  21:54, 10 January 2019 (UTC) On seconds thought actually, I think there might be only one person it could be, so should I email you and give the reasons I think it might be them? -- Ted Edwards  22:32, 10 January 2019 (UTC) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=&diff=prev&oldid=877782958
 * Hi TedEdwards! I apologize for the delay responding to your messages here. I was busy recently and I'm just now catching up on all of my Wikipedia messages and emails. :-) If you have evidence that the user is engaging in sock puppetry abuse, file a report at Sockpuppet investigations with the information and as much evidence and detail that you can provide. This way, the issue is officially reported and can be handled using the proper process. Just expand the "How to open an investigation" instructions near the top of the SPI page, add the account username of the parent user account (the account that you believe that this user is a sock puppet of), and fill in the information after clicking "Submit" and the report will be created for you. I also suspect that this account is completely up to no good, but if there are other users involved that are connected to this person, we should definitely file an SPI report so that all of the accounts can be blocked, not just one of them. ;-) I'll look into the account's contributions in the meantime. Please let me know if you have any questions or if you get stuck anywhere in the process of creating the report, and I'll be more than happy to help you. Thanks for the message, please forgive my delayed response, and I wish you happy editing. :-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:51, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * No problems. However, now I'm not so sure who the master is, and I don't feel anymore that I have strong enough evidence to incriminate anyone as the master yet; I only feel certain that Oinkmachine is a sockpuppet of someone. All I feel I can say is that I assume I've done something the master didn't like, and I also assume the master has edited Doctor Who articles before (Doctor Who (series 11) is the only article we've both edited). Also it wouldn't surprise me if the master has been uncivil to me before. So is there anything that can be done in this situation, other than keep looking at what Oinkmachine does? -- T<small style="font-size:60%;">ed E<small style="font-size:60%;">dwards  00:15, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * TedEdwards - I just left a warning on his/her user talk page regarding the uncivil message that was made towards you. I don't think that sock puppetry is occurring, but the user's conduct is not acceptable. Keep an eye on them (revert bad edits but don't bother the user or do anything to antagonize), and if you notice any more edits that are disruptive and need attention, let me know and I can take things from there. We don't want to have the attitude or demeanor that we "want someone to go" and that "we should get them out of here", but we don't have to stand for uncivil conduct or edits that are blatantly disruptive. If it continues, the user will be held accountable. Let me know how things go, and don't hesitate to message me if I can assist with anything else - I'll be happy to do so. :-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk)  (contribs)   04:31, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Why?
Why revert my changes? If a YouTube video where the YouTuber says they are Bi isn't evidence enough then what is? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69 BigOof 69 (talk • contribs) 00:16, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Youtube is not a reliable source ― Abelmoschus Esculentus  ( talk •  contribs ) 08:35, 11 January 2019 (UTC)


 * (ec) Someone's personal statement, even if made in public, is a primary source, and as primary it is not reliable. Wikipedia is not interested in what people want to say about themselves, just what others say about them. See WP:SOURCES & WP:PRIMARY. -- CiaPan (talk) 08:41, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Both responses above are correct. I owe a big "thank you" to both (CiaPan and Abelmoschus Esculentus) for responding to this message while I was offline. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:55, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

User 190.247.105.108 is attacking me
Hello, I would like to report 190.247.105.108 because he is attacking me. I told him to refrain from disruptive editing but he started attacking me. See this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:VictorTorres2002&diff=877884509 He sweared at me in the edit summary. Also I've already reported him at the AIV and I'm just waiting for the block of the IP. VictorTorres2002 (talk) 14:39, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
 * UPDATE: The IP user that I was reporting to you was just recently blocked for a month becuase of his actions by attacking fellow Wikipedia editors and as of the result. The IP became blocked again for the 3rd time. VictorTorres2002 (talk) 05:04, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi VictorTorres2002! I apologize for the delay responding to your messages here. I was busy recently and I'm just now catching up on all of my Wikipedia messages and emails. :-) Great; it looks like this matter has been taken care of - that's definitely good to see. I agree that this IP user has been up to no good and the message he/she left on your user talk page was an attempt to be a troll - it's always best to ignore those attempts completely (even though it can be very hard to do sometimes - I completely understand). If you run into any more issues like this, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be happy to take care of it. Again, please forgive my delayed response here. I had some real-life matters to take care of, which is why I was offline for a little while. :-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:00, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Battle of Benadir and Battle of Barawa
Hello Oshwah, hope you're having a happy 2019 so far. Sorry to hassle you again with this specific issue, but since you're already aquainted with it, you might remeber that a few months backs I requested a lock in the pages Battle of Benadir and Battle of Barawa due to persistant vandalism. Since a semi-protection lock doesn't seem to be enough, I have filed a request for indefinite full protection. You will find my reasoning in the talk pages of the respective articles as well as my request over on Requests for page protection that I have made.

Best regards, Wareno (talk) 21:54, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Wareno! I apologize for the delay responding to your messages here. I was busy recently and I'm just now catching up on all of my Wikipedia messages and emails. :-) Great, thanks for filing those page protection requests in the proper noticeboard. That's the best place to leave your requests (you're obviously welcome to message me and point me to them as you did above); they'll receive faster attention and be viewable by any admin who views or regularly patrols that page. Feel free to file additional requests (and let me know as well) if the issues continue, and someone (if not myself) will be happy to take care of things.


 * I also noticed from your message above that you requested indefinite full edit protection to be applied to those articles. Applying indefinite full edit protection on an article is extremely rare; I've only applied it to an article maybe 2 or 3 times since I've been an admin, and it was in response to a situation where extremely contentious information and details were starting to be reported in the news involving a biography of a living person under a topic where discretionary sanctions were authorized, and where unreferenced content and speculation were being added to the article by users of every level (from anonymous to extended confirmed accounts) and at a rate of one or more edits per second. That should hopefully give you an idea of a situation where I'll consider applying indefinite full editing protection to an article. ;-)


 * I recommend that you take some time, go through the protection policy page (or at least this section of the page), and give yourself at least a quick refresher on the different protection levels and when they're typically justified, applied, and used. I review all page protection requests - regardless of what the user asks for (and I'll apply a protection level that's different than what someone asks for about 20% of the time), but some admins out there might not do so if the request seems too farfetched or excessive given the reason provided. Creating protection requests that ask for a justified and realistic protection level will help your requests stand out to admins in general, and will avoid being quickly brushed off, not taken seriously, and declined without being looked into fully. If you have a problem where this happens to you somewhat regularly, 1) that's bad on the admin's part and he/she should know better and at least look into your request, and 2) my advice will help to significantly resolve it. :-)


 * Please let me know if I can assist you with anything else, or if the issues return while I'm currently online - and I'll be happy to step in and make sure that things are handled. Thanks for the messages, please forgive my delayed response, and I wish you happy editing. :-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:38, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * It's no wonder then, that my request got denied. I presumed "indefinite full protection" was meant as an edit-breaker against vandalism, I just didn't know it was used that rarely. Alright then, if you think it's unnecessary, I will drop the idea right away. Though I will file more "reasonable" requests in the future should the vandalism persist. Thank you very much for taking the time to clear things up for me! Wareno (talk) 20:23, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Wareno - No problem! I just wanted to take time to explain the different levels of protection that can be applied and make sure that you understood each one and when they were typically used. Edit protection requests that ask for an appropriate protection level given the situation will generally be taken more seriously than those that don't (even if the difference is minute); they show that the requester has some experience and a proficient knowledge of Wikipedia's protection policy. Please don't hesitate to let me know if I can do anything else for you and I'll be happy to help. I hope you have a great rest of your day and I wish you happy editing. ;-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   20:59, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail

 * TheSandDoctor - Received and replied - thank you! I've executed your request; let me know if I can do anything else for you and I'll be happy to do so. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:40, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

New invention promoted here?
I'm not sure if this requires administrative intervention, but if you don't mind, please keep an eye at the topic.
 * Special:Contributions/Charles Checkley
 * Special:Contributions/Charles H. Checkley
 * Special:Contributions/2601:198:C17F:ECD0:B145:1D7A:A554:64DC
 * Special:Diff/878207345
 * Special:Search/DIAMO*MINO

--CiaPan (talk) 18:44, 13 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Deleted the Diff link from the listing above - apparently the page has already been removed.--CiaPan (talk) 19:22, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi CiaPan! Thanks for the message and for keeping a lookout for ongoing disruption and issues of sock puppetry. The edits by both accounts (as well as their similar usernames... lol) as well as the edit by the IP address are certainly enough for me to assert that they're all from the same person. Both of the accounts will be seen as stale if an SPI report is filed, since their last edits were made more than three months ago ('s last edit passed that threshold by just over a week - darn!). The IP address listed above could be checked for accounts that have been created or edited while behind it, but I doubt that anything will come back as a result... the IP has pretty much no activity going on and the network CIDR range is much too large for a CU to be bothered to run. However, we should file a case nonetheless so that this information is documented in case the user decides to return using more accounts and begins to cause a higher rate of disruption. Have you filed an SPI report for this person? Can you do so for me? If you have trouble with this or need help with filing it, please let me know and I'll be happy to walk you through the process. Thanks again for the message, and for your extreme level of diligence and dedication to this project and keeping it free of disruption. :-) Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:54, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Requesting page protections

 * Can you put page protections for the articles Isis-Khorasan Province[] and Open Defecation[]? A sockpuppeteer called Abhishek9779 keeps making disruptive edits through various IP addresses.

See[] []-Mountain157 (talk)
 * Hi Mountain157, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your requests. It looks like there's a discussion currently open at ANI here, as well as a report currently open at SPI here. Since the discussion and report are both currently open and awaiting investigation, input, actions (if applicable), and close - I'm going to hold off on applying page protection and let the admins involved with the matter apply it if they determine that it's a necessary action - it's possible that this IP user might not be hopping between addresses purposefully and that the issues reported all come down to being a content-related dispute for you to work out among yourselves... I obviously don't want to intervene and apply protection until I have a full sense of what's going on. If you have any questions or concerns while these reports and discussions receive input and comments by other users, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. Otherwise, I think I need more information and to look into the situation a bit more before I consider doing anything right now. I appreciate the message and your understanding, and I wish you happy editing. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   03:17, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Adding to the Toney page
Hello Oshwah. I added the court case again and on the cite,I pasted in the district court link with the case number CV number,but it doesn't stay up.Am I continually missing a step? Thanks for any information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daubje (talk • contribs) 01:45, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
 * See my response below for an explanation of why your edit continues to have issues. Best -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   05:05, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Toney additions
Hello oshwah,I've added to the Toney page with a Worcester district court case number,but nothing stays in.Am I continually missing a step?Thanks for any helpDaubje (talk) 01:48, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi again, Daubje! Thanks for leaving me a message with your questions. I'll be happy to help you understand why your edit to the Albert Toney III is still problematic. I left you a message on your user talk page with information and an explanation of the issues that are still ongoing (click here to read it). To explain further and more in-depth: The last edit you made to the article at the time of this writing (which you can view by clicking here) adds what you believe is a direct link that navigates users to the court case page. This is incorrect. What you added was a link to your search for the specific court case information, not a direct link to the actual case. If you were to click on that link, you'll most likely be navigated to the court document just fine since the browser cookies, cache, and session information may not yet be expired on your computer. However, if you use a different computer (or even just a different internet browser on the same computer) and you click on the link you added to the article, you'll see exactly what everyone else will also see: you'll be redirected to the search home page of the website; no court information is displayed. I took some time last week, located the court page using the website, and looked around for a direct URL or a link to generate one - unfortunately, I did not find a way to do this.


 * Aside from the issue with a direct link to the court document being provided within the article, this court document and website cannot be used as a reliable source to support the addition of this content. The content is contentious in nature and it is being added to a biography of a living person ("BLP" for short). We scrutinize articles of living people much more strictly than we do with other articles, and due to this policy section, we cannot accept the URL, website, or the type of document that you're trying to add as a source to support this content - it even mentions court records or documents specifically as something we do not accept as a source. Instead, the source must be secondary (meaning that it references primary sources such as that court document and discusses information using them), independent of the article subject (meaning that the source can't belong to or be controlled at all by Albert Toney III), and published where it can be peer-reviewed and scrutinized.


 * To summarize the information I've said to you above as well as on your user talk page: For you to be able to add any kind of potentially contentious content to a biography of a living person, it must be cited by a source that meets the requirements listed in this Wikipedia guideline and hence be considered as reliable. Any other kind or type of source (such as those mentioned in this policy section) cannot be accepted on BLP articles. What you need to do is locate another website and type of source (such as press or news coverage by a reputable news source), and use that to support the content being asserted. Until then, your edits to this article that fail to meet these requirements will be removed and considered a violation of Wikipedia's BLP policy (which is something we take seriously if done repeatedly). I know that you're not fully familiar with these policies and guidelines; you don't have anything to worry about - you're new and being new and making mistakes is a completely expected thing with new users. :-) We just can't have this issue going on forever; you need to do what's necessary to review and understand the policies and guidelines I've listed for you in this message and use the resources available to you on Wikipedia to locate a proper source and make sure that your next edit to the article complies with policy.


 * I hope this response helped to clarify any confusion and explained everything necessary for you to fully understand the issues with the edits you've been making to the Albert Toney III article. If you still have questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to let me know and I'll be more than happy to help you and to make sure that your questions are answered and concerns addressed. Thanks again for keeping me updated, for your patience and understanding, and for taking the time to discuss this issue and learn about the important policies we apply to articles and pages. I wish you a great day, happy editing, and good luck with locating a source that's proper. :-) Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   03:55, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Oversight?
Could you have quick look at this edit? If memory serves, this is quite similar to some edits to [REDACTED - Oshwah] that you suppressed a few months back. Thanks. Sir Sputnik (talk) 15:54, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Sir Sputnik - See your email inbox for my reply to this message. :-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:26, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!
Thegooduser  Life Begins With a Smile :)  🍁 00:51, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Received and replied - thanks!  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   00:53, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Bot
Hi I plan to make a bot designed to Welcome Students and Teachers participating in an educational assignment. What code should I write for the bot? I have very little experience in coding btw. -- Thegooduser  Life Begins With a Smile :)  🍁 01:20, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thegooduser - The creation and use of bots typically requires proficient knowledge of programming, script and code, automation, and HTTP/HTTPS before one begins to build one for Wikipedia; it's unfortunately not something that you can just pick up, learn in just a few steps and in a short period of time, and have done and out the door and doing everything you want perfectly. It doesn't work like that at all. These things take experience, patience, time, and must go through an approval and trial process before it can even be switched on. You're of course welcome to read into bot creation and use as much as you want - Wikipedia's bot policy page should cover most of the important things as well as provide you with a good list of links and references to check out. That would be the place I'd start reading through if you're interested in this area.


 * I obviously have to urge extreme caution - do not, under and circumstances, get ahead of yourself in this area; don't do anything before you ask and receive approval first. I run into unapproved bot use or bot misuse sometimes on Wikipedia, a percentage of which require me to allocate extensive amounts of time in order to fully clean up the damage (I'm talking 6+ hours of work). Misuse or overuse by approved bots is quite rare, but unfortunately something that the community has had to deal with before. They usually always led to heated discussions, blocks being placed on the bot accounts, and (sometimes) even blocks or bans applied to the bot's creator. In one particular case (that I will not mention names or provide a link to), a user was desysopped and had their administrator rights removed due to bot overuse, repeated overuse and incorrect use of automation and automated editing tools, and repeated disruption to discussions that involved automation. The same principles apply in this area as they do with the use of Twinkle, Huggle, and other tools - you're responsible for the mess that is made as a result of its use, and you'll be held accountable for any damage you cause.


 * I hope that my response didn't scare you away from reading into this area or discourage you from attempting to learn about bot creation at all - I'd never want to do that to anyone here. I just want to make sure that whatever you do, that you're careful and that you do things the proper way and get approval before you attempt to do anything - especially when it comes to automation. It only takes but a few moments for a bot to cause a lot of damage due to careless procedures and process, deploying untested or poorly-tested code to production, and/or taking shortcuts around best practices... Good luck, be careful, and make good choices. ;-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:47, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Please keep edit
The source is I am a current student, and I know that the school is not located in Baghdad, Iraq, the mascot is not Thanos from the movie Infinity War, and that the color is not magenta (again in reference to Thanos) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.160.94.120 (talk) 01:41, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi. Sorry, but you will need a Reliable Source. Thanks. -- Thegooduser  Life Begins With a Smile :)  🍁 03:56, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your explanation regarding the edit you made here to the Out-of-Door Academy article. Sorry, but what you described in regards to the "source" you used constitutes original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. In summary: You cannot add any content to Wikipedia articles that's based off your personal findings, experience, relationships, research, or published work. All content that's added to Wikipedia articles must be attributable to a reliable source, or (in cases where the content added isn't "common knowledge") it must be directly attributed (cited in-line) by a reliable source. Please take some time to review this policy (as well as Wikipedia's guidelines on conflict of interest), and let me know if you have any questions about them. I'll be happy to answer them and help you if you do. :-) Thanks again for the message, I appreciate your understanding, and I wish you happy editing. Best -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   05:11, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Out-of-Door Academy
Hello Oshwah,

Somebody vandalized this article to show the location of this school from Sarasota, Florida to Baghdad, adding a variety of hogwash. There has been a series of edits reverting the vandalism and adding it back. An IP cleaned up the mess, and you reverted, restoring the vandalism. Please take a closer look. There is no doubt that this school is in Sarasota. Thanks. <b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328  Let's discuss it  02:25, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I was going to semi-protect the article but that would be counterproductive because IP editors are now maintaining accuracy while established editors are not taking a close look, and are reverting to the vandalized version. <b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328  Let's discuss it  02:29, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Cullen328! Aww crap... I did accidentally restore vandalism, didn't I? Grr... good catch. lol... Thanks for leaving me a message here and for bringing that to my attention. I just now went back to that article and restored it to a previous revision here, which removed even more vandalism that was being added and restored by others. I also just applied pending changes protection to the article for two weeks so that edits like those will be reviewed before it has time to get out of control. Anyways, I thought I'd respond and let you know what I ended up doing to the article. I appreciate the message and for letting me know about my idiot mistake. ;-) My talk page is always open to you; don't hesitate to stop by again if you catch more bone-headed moves on my part. ;-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:17, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Please Help
Ive been trying to edit a page regarding a notable graduate of the University of Missouri. I'm not sure what i've been doing wrong and my editing ability is getting threatened to be halted. I would rather that not happen and love the product Wiki produces. Thank you so much for your time and have a great day! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Schuyler324 (talk • contribs) 02:33, 16 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Please adhere to A Neutral Point of View. Thank You. -- Thegooduser  Life Begins With a Smile :)  🍁 03:59, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Schuyler324, and thanks for leaving me a message here regarding your concerns. Your edits to University of Missouri have a number of issues and problems. They do not comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, were not cited in-line by a reliable source, and could even be interpreted as being purposefully disruptive. Since you're brand new to Wikipedia, I highly recommend that you go through and complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial before doing anything else here. It will provide you with many helpful walkthroughs, guides, interactive lessons, and other information that will be very helpful to you. If you have any more questions after completing the tutorial I've linked you to, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them and help you further. Thanks again for the message and I wish you happy editing! :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   05:23, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

If a user specifically invites people to discuss potential conflicts of interest on their talk page, that is presumably something they welcome.
"I will always disclose and freely discuss any potential conflict of interest." - User:Cullen328. You cannot threaten retirbution against someone for sincerely inquiring about a conflict of interest, when the person said they would be glad to discuss exactly that. Nor is that question (""Do you perhaps feel that you have a conflict of interest regarding this particular article, a conflict which might result in a need for you to recuse yourself from it? Do you perhaps have a deep-seated animosity toward Jewish traditions, values and beliefs, which is causing you to present those traditions, values and beliefs in a negative light in this encyclopedia, or to facilitate others' efforts to do so, in a way that makes it appear to the world as if Jewish civilization and history was and is a fraud?") a "personal attack" by any stretch of the imagination. However, if that is an accurate description of his behavior, and he did have a conflict of interest that was causing him to behave in that way, and he was facilitating a pattern of editing that did portray Jewish traditions and beliefs as if they were a fraud, then that would be a very serious issue that could not be allowed to persist.

Note also that the WP:INSULTING page specifically states: "Note that it is not a personal attack to question an editor at their talk page about their possible conflict of interest on a specific article or topic." 174.126.168.126 (talk) 02:39, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Your "inquiry" is not sincere by any reasonable definition. You are hectoring me, and engaging in endless ranting in protest about how Wikipedia works, and against its policies and guidelines. You are engaging in innuendo and personal attacks against me as a result of your imaginary interpretation of my religious beliefs. I am rigorously neutral regarding religious topics (and all other topics) here on Wikipedia, which is why I enjoy a measure of respect here. In my private life off Wikipedia, I am a proud Jew. <b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328  Let's discuss it  03:06, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Protection request for 2020 in American television
Hi there! I noticed you recently used protection powers on the Toy Story 4 page, and I was wondering if you could help protect 2020 in American television. This recently created page has been used as a sandbox of sorts by anonymous IP users who put blatantly false (and unsourced) information in the page only to quickly delete their contributions. It’d be one thing if it was once but this has been a repeated occurrence with the same shows being added. Them removing it on their own just isn’t a well-meaning enough gesture to say they won’t do it again. And that’s why I ask for some sort of protection to stop this from reoccurring--Fradio71 (talk) 02:46, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Fradio71! I've applied temporary edit protection to the article. Please let me know if problems continue and I'll be happy to take another look. Happy editing! ;-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   05:15, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much! I’m kind of nervous to create articles even for the redlinked TV shows so creating that article was a big step for me, even if it wasn’t that risky.--Fradio71 (talk) 05:52, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Fradio71 - No problem, and no worries - we were all new here once. ;-) We've all had to take that "big jump" and write that first article, nominate that first page for deletion, add that first template, revert that first vandalism edit left by someone else, write that first warning to someone whose causing disruption, report something or someone to a noticeboard, and many other "firsts".... you'll get more used to it as you make more of these "big leaps" and you'll find yourself feeling less nervous and less afraid of doing something wrong as you grow and become more experienced with Wikipedia, it's policies and guidelines, and how everything works. Just remember that we won't go after you for making good faith mistakes and errors. We expect them to happen (I've sure made my fair share of mistakes and still do so every now and then...); just be positive and open to any reverts and feedback left on your user talk page, learn from that feedback you're given, and take every bump or mistake as a positive learning opportunity. You're always welcome to message me if you run into any issues, need input or help with something, or if you have any questions - I'll be more than happy to lend a hand. ;-) Have a great rest of your day, I wish you happy editing, and I hope we speak again soon. :-D  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   05:59, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail

 * Abelmoschus Esculentus - Just replied. ;-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   05:46, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Replied. ― Abelmoschus Esculentus  ( talk •  contribs ) 05:58, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

No subject
Thanks a lot Oshwah, have a great day wherever you're based :) JenniferAVsg (talk) 09:21, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * JenniferAVsg - You're very welcome. Keep those policies and guidelines in mind as you edit Wikipedia - as a paid editor, this is very important to do at all times. I'd also consider going through and completing Wikipedia's new user tutorial before you start making any edits or changes. It will provide you with many helpful walkthroughs, guides, interactive lessons, and other information that will be very helpful to you. I'm available should you have questions or need help - don't hesitate to message me here and ask. :-) Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   09:27, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Lol indeed
It was too early! :( GiantSnowman 10:08, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * GiantSnowman - It gave me a good laugh. Thank you for that :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   10:09, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * The least I could do! GiantSnowman 10:10, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Chris Benoit
Do you know a lot about Chris Benoit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.2.41.158 (talk) 11:21, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there, and welcome to Wikipedia! Unfortunately, I am not an expert nor do I know much about Chris Benoit. However, I can try and help you if your question is Wikipedia-related. Do you have a question or do you need help with something? Let me know and I'll be happy to help you (or at least point you in the right direction so that you receive the help you need). :-) Best -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   11:30, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Arvin Appiah edit
I understand editing without a reliable source or from a ‘bias’/not neutral point of view is against the Wikipedia terms of service. However the info added from Blandle on the Arvin Appiah page was factual and arguebly true even is it is considered an opinion as opposed to fact. This knowledge of Arvin however comes from somebody relatively close with Arvin and the knowledge is a primary source. Blandle (talk) 12:00, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Blandle! Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for leaving me a message here regarding your edit to Arvin Appiah. So, there's a few things wrong with your edit and your statement here. You stated that your edit is considered an opinion; I agree, and this is exactly why I removed it. Wikipedia articles are not for adding personal commentary, opinion, or viewpoints - all content is required to be worded to represent a neutral point of view. Your statement that the content you added was "factual and arguebly true even is it is considered an opinion as opposed to fact" does not make sense. Opinions are not factual statements; they are opinions. Opinions can contain facts, but they are not considered facts.


 * You also stated above that this content "comes from somebody relatively close with Arvin and the knowledge is a primary source". This constitutes original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. To summarize this policy: You cannot add any content to Wikipedia articles that's based off your personal findings, experience, relationships, research, or published work. All content that's added to Wikipedia articles must be attributable to a reliable source, or (in cases where the content added isn't "common knowledge") it must be directly attributed (cited in-line) by a reliable source. Reliable sources also typically should be secondary, not primary.


 * Please take some time and review the policy pages I've linked you to here. Since you're brand new to Wikipedia, I also highly recommend that you go through and complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial before doing anything else. It will provide you with many helpful walkthroughs, guides, interactive lessons, and other information that will be very useful to you. Most users who take this advice and complete the tutorial tell me later that it was significantly helpful to them and it led to them being saved hours (if not over a day's worth) of time and frustration. If you have any more questions or concerns, please let me know and I'll be happy to discuss them with you and help you further. Thanks again for the message, I welcome you to Wikipedia and hope you enjoy your stay, and I wish you happy editing! :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   12:14, 16 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much, I am new to editing so as you can understand I am inexperienced to say the least. I hope you can bear with me as I learn and hopefully in the future can make useful edits on the page. I will now take the time to read and complete the tutorial like you mentioned, but thank you very much for the support you’ve given. Blandle (talk) 12:21, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Blandle - Yes, of course; you're very welcome. We understand that new users will make mistakes and won't be familiar or proficient with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines yet. We were all new users at one time here, and I can tell you that I've made more than my fair share of mistakes over the years that I've been an editor here. Mistakes are expected, they're a normal part of learning, and we won't hold them against you so long as you make them in good faith and with the intent of attempting to improve the project - so fear not. :-) Yes, definitely complete that tutorial - it'll be very helpful for you. If you run into any questions after completing it, or if you get stuck anywhere or need help - just let me know and I'll be happy to assist you. Welcome to the project, and I hope you stick around and become a long-term and experienced editor here. It's a lot of fun, and it's definitely worth the time you volunteer with us. :-D  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   12:33, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Geller
Thanks for locking the article to stop the edit warring. Can you review the recent article history? The first sentence of the current version includes (debatably) poorly-sourced, negative content about a living person that was not present in the long-standing rev of the lede. I think WP:WRONGVERSION should be viewed through the lens of BLP in this case. VQuakr (talk) 17:00, 16 January 2019 (UTC)


 * It's exceptionally debatable that the source is poor. It's the SPLC, a respected secondary source with expertise on the subject matter and the argument against inclusion is deeply tendentious. WP:IDONTLIKEIT applies here as the sour grapes are more that this particular Breitbart contributor is being called far-right for espousing far-right views. Simonm223 (talk) 17:06, 16 January 2019 (UTC)


 * The SPLC is a great source... that doesn't directly call Geller a right-wing extremist, eg the proposed edit is "poorly-sourced" along with the other issues I mentioned above. VQuakr (talk) 17:13, 16 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi VQuakr and Simonm223, and thanks for leaving me your messages with your concerns about the content in dispute on this article. I believe that the content being referred to is debatable in regards to whether or not the source can be considered reliable or if it cannot be used to support the information, as well as the particular use of words to describe this article subject is accurate and acceptable.


 * I always try and stay away from modifying the contents in an article that I've applied full protection to. It assures that my actions never give the impression to others that I'm taking a side, or that I'm using protection in order to favor certain users or edits over others, any of that stuff. ;-) However, per Wikipedia's BLP policy and regarding the content that's added, contentious in nature, and where its sources, legitimacy, or compliance with policy is questionable, debated, or being discussed - I can remove it pending the resolution and consensus from the relevant discussion at-hand. Given the questionable nature of the reference in regards to its reliability, and the use of words (specifically, "extremist") to describe this person - I do believe that removing this content pending the outcome of the discussion is the right thing to do in this situation. Hence, I have done so and without certifying its compliance, reliability, or whether or not the content is acceptable or belongs in the article.


 * Please let me know if I can assist with anything else and I'll be happy to do so. I wish you both a fair, peaceful, and civil discussion and that it comes to a close that best reflects the quality, legitimacy, and accuracy of the content, and with the project as the upmost priority. Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:24, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Mistake
Hello, Oshwah.

I did make a mistake, I was in the process of trying to find out how to state that the image was not fit for fair use, and I oviously had selected the wrong license template.

The problem has been corrected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.75.233.218 (talk) 17:04, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there! Thanks for leaving me this message and for letting me know. No worries; it happens and it's not a big deal. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:30, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello
Can you keep an eye on this user he is very close to a block and I can't block him (because I'm not an administrator), Thanks Forres Harriers (talk) 17:21, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * This user has made another vandalism edit, enough is enough He is getting blocked. Forres Harriers (talk) 17:27, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Forres Harriers - I've already taken care of the issue. Please let me know if I can help with anything else and I'll be happy to do so. Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:29, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Just very disruptive user I think you should block Indefinitely as they will do it again after blocked. Forres Harriers (talk) 17:31, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Forres Harriers - IP addresses don't receive indefinite blocks unless in circumstances that are extremely rare. Out of the number of blocks I've applied as an admin, I've only applied a justified indefinite IP address block maybe one or two times. IP addresses can change and be allocated from from user to user as often as only a few hours - this means that someone editing today from an IP address that was used to make edits a year ago may not be from that same user. Blocks that are much too long in duration or that are set improperly can result in an innocent user being impacted later, which is something we absolutely do not want to have happen. :-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:37, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Delete request
Hi Oshwah, Can you please delete following pages: my tp archives, corresponding ClueBot indices and master Indices. Due to various reasons I have moved to manual archives 1 and copied content of all these old archives. &#8208;&#8208;1997kB (talk) 17:45, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * 1997kB - ✅.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:51, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Carter Jones
I find it offensive that you even dare take it off the page. Carter Jones means different things to different people and I am just trying to reach out to those people. Where I come from he is a god and a friend. I can't believe you don't know that and am quite disgusted that you don't know the importance of Carter to me and my fellow peers. I believe I should be able to continue editing on this page because I know more about Carter than you ever will. And for God's sake put a picture of the actual Carter Jones on the page. Another thing about his photo. I can send you the way we see him, the way he is a god. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.91.206.60 (talk) 17:50, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Racist Melanoma Comment
White people is racist. Caucasian? Fine. White people? Would it be viewed differently if it said something else? I think so. Change it to reflect nutrality https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melanoma — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:29D3:6F00:D8D9:C692:F59B:E767 (talk) 21:57, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there! Adding content like you did here to Melanoma and calling it a "spelling correction" in your edit summary is not only disruptive, but achieves exactly the opposite result compared to what you appear to be concerned about here. If you feel that content and wording isn't written in the best way or that it implies a point of view that isn't neutral, then you're welcome to be bold - improve the article, fix the content, make positive contributions, or you can discuss your concerns on the article's talk page - but edits like these are not okay. They will be interpreted by other editors as being malicious or purposefully disruptive, and will be removed accordingly. If you need help and wish to make positive contributions, you're free to message me here with your questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:03, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

why are you the way that you are — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nichbarker (talk • contribs) 22:01, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Adding to the Toney page
Ok,I will give up,apparently nothing I do can add some truth to the page of this charlatan,al toney,Daubje (talk) 23:19, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Daubje - What are you stuck on exactly? Were you able to locate a source from another website? Let me know where you're at and I'll be happy to help you...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   23:26, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Yisroel Belsky
Hi, thanks for your comments at ARV. I just want to confirm that the edits from the IP,  are 100% vandalism. The edits in question, are about a controversial figure and he used buzzwords in Hebrew or Yiddish that you might not be familiar with, and he then hid many of the edits by then doing another edit and changing tenses from past to present.
 * For example, his first diff,
 * he changes several items, adds a negative epitaph to the name, (SR"Y) proclaims him non-orthodox, and a golem (in other words not a real nice person) and talks about his relationship with kissing Hillary Clinton and "Rabbi" Bernie Madoff.
 * The second diff was just as ludicrous, adding "purportedly" to him being a son of his parents.
 * His edits also talk about "Gestapo Nazi" like torture, etc.
 * This edit, added, "He was "widely acclaimed for his in-depth knowledge across the length and breadth" in Torah which he used to manipulate and pervert Halacha."
 * This edit, added that he received smicha (rabbincal ordination) from Bernie Madoff, and that he considers himself a student of Rabbi Al Sharpton.
 * All in all, this is just a sampling but it's clear that it's not just a sources needed but clear vandalism. Thanks, and sorry for the formatting.Sir Joseph (talk) 23:33, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I just wanted to add that I reported him to ARV before with all these diffs listed. Sir Joseph (talk) 23:35, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * And he just did it again anyway. Sir Joseph (talk) 23:46, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Sir Joseph - Stand by.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   23:48, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Sir Joseph - I appreciate the follow-up message and explanation; that helped me out a lot... thank you. :-) The user has been blocked. If it continues, please don't hesitate to let me know. Cheers ;-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   23:57, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, much appreciated. Hopefully there won't be a next time. :) Sir Joseph (talk) 00:36, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Sir Joseph! HA! Yeah right... we'll speak again soon (when the next vandal comes around in about a few minutes from now). lol  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   00:44, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

No subject
I understand. I will add the source soon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by XxSkippiexx (talk • contribs) 23:36, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi XxSkippiexx! No worries; thanks for letting me know. Please don't hesitate to message me if you run into any questions or get stuck anywhere - I'll be more than happy to help you. :-) Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   23:58, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

discrete logarithm base 10
dear, i need to compute 10^? mod N=M where N and M are known, so how many to raise 10 in some exponent to match the result. Thank you. 41.102.225.197 (talk) 01:12, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * So you're asking about how to solve 10^(x)(mod N) = M for x?  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:39, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

A beer for you!

 * Thegooduser - Thanks for the beer, man! No problem; hope it helps :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   03:59, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Did you rename from Beano, to Oshwah? -- Thegooduser  Life Begins With a Smile :)  🍁 04:00, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * ** Oswa ― Abelmoschus Esculentus  ( talk •  contribs ) 04:34, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * HA! That was a loooong time ago. It was a username I chose simply to annoy my friend in High School. He was registering an account and told me what he was going to choose as a username, so I quickly made my account faster than him in order to take it before he could. He was not amused. :-P  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:37, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

January 2019
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. <b style="background:#0000ff;font:Helvetica;padding:0.4em;font-size: 80%;border-radius: 2em;margin: 0.25em;"> Cards84664 </b> (talk) 05:07, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Cards84664 - I didn't do it! I'm innocent!!!  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   05:11, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

What did I do wrong?
I'm new to adding info to Wikipedia. Can you tell me what I did wrong so I know how to do it correctly next time? Thank you :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Halfire101 (talk • contribs) 07:57, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Halfire101, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your question and your request for help. I'll be happy to explain why your edit was reverted and point you to the right policies and guidelines to help you.


 * Your edit here to Marc Yaffee modified content and without citing a reliable source in order to support your changes and assert that they are accurate and true. When adding content to articles that are beyond "common knowledge", you need to cite a source in-line with those changes. This is especially true when making any kind of edits to articles that are biographies of living people. If you can locate and cite a source with your edit, you should be just fine and shouldn't run into any more problems there.


 * Since you're brand new to Wikipedia, I highly recommend that you go through and complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial before you make any additional edits. It will provide you with many helpful walkthroughs, guides, interactive lessons, and other information that will be very helpful to you. Most users who take this advice 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. Don't cause yourself hardship; this tutorial will make your time here much easier and better!


 * Please let me know if you have any more questions or if you need further assistance, and I'll be more than happy to help you. Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy your stay and that you decide to become a long-term member of the community. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   08:14, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Halfire101 - Please see the message I just left on your user talk page. I accidentally reverted more than what I originally intended, and this has since been resolved - please accept my apologies for letting that happen. Let me know if you have any questions - I'm here to help! :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   08:27, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

I need your help as you have blocked me to post in Wikipedia == A N T P L (talk) 11:24, 17 January 2019 (UTC) ==

Can you lift off the ban on me ?? Earth article? Example (talk) A N T P L (talk) 11:24, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

discrete logarithm base 10
yes...solve for x=? thanks.

//im sorry...i dont know how to add reply on your last comment so i sent as new message...sorry again. 41.102.225.197 (talk) 11:27, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * It's been awhile since I've solved discrete equations with modulus in them. Since this is a discrete equation, this isn't a matter of solving for x and arriving at an answer. You're being asked to come up with a proof or prove that a given proof is true or false. Looking through search engines for "discrete logarithm base 10" returns a good number of helpful tutorial pages for you. Find one that explains things in a manner that you understand, and use it to try and help you. Remember that your instructor is a great resource to go to for help as well; stop by during your instructor's office hours and ask them for some help - they should be happy to give you the extra help that you need. Good luck, and sorry that my response didn't arrive at an answer this time. Best -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   20:37, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Blocked spammer User:Vthebbar
Hello. I found another, obviously related, account that was used for adding spamlinks to the same site (way2know.com) a few days ago, having done nothing else:. So would you mind blocking that account too? - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 13:09, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thomas.W - ✅.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   13:13, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks. They'll probably show up again... - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 18:03, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thomas.W - Oh yeah, man - of course they will. That's a given... lol  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   21:01, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Richard Challoner article
Hi oshwah May i change this article as it says it an all girls secondary school and it says holy cross on it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cake11HD (talk • contribs) 15:46, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

User you blocked clearly using a sockpuppet to edit.
Per this and this, you recently blocked the user for the mentioned misuse of sources. Seems this is happening again, albeit with a sockpuppet. I've just realized the same editing pattern (changing sourced information to fit their POV) was used at Chapli kebab. The user before the block made this edit, misusing a source already from the article which does not support the addition. They made the edit again.

Now the user is blocked and they are very clearly making the same edit using a sockpuppet,.

As well as making the same edit to Pakol that has been reverted over 5 times, the same edit you blocked them for. This time the user hijacks a different source versus the one they were hijacking before.

(tagging, as they were a part of the AN discussion.)- R9tgokunks   ⭕  21:20, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Seems this sock has been used since Novemberm and there are numerous warnings on their talk page. I'm certain that User:51.39.124.130 &User:51.39.124.179 are connected as well. The edit summaries between the four are identical in word useage.("Afghanistan"; also see, , ) - R9tgokunks   ⭕  21:34, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Took it to SPI. Listed under Sockpuppet_investigations/.hodajan. - R9tgokunks   ⭕  02:40, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * R9tgokunks - Please accept my apologies for the delay responding to your messages here. Let me take care of a few high priority tasks and I'll take a look at this today and get back to you...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:03, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * R9tgokunks - Thanks for looking into this matter and for filing that SPI request report regarding this user and possible sock puppetry - you did what I wouldv'e recommended to you here. I'll take a look at the behavioral evidence and see what sure connections can be established between the two accounts. If you have any questions or additional concerns regarding this situation, let me know and I'll be happy to respond and help you. Thanks again for the message as well as your follow-up responses with your updates and links. I hope you have a great day and I wish you happy editing. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:07, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * . Thanks for your follow-up. Unfortunately, the user had their block expire and is back making the same exact edit that got them blocked, in fact the identical edit as the susptected sockpuppet. I'm dismayed that no action has been taken yet, even a CheckUser hasn't been completed... It has been 2 days since I filed the report. Not blaming you, as there are many other admins who could take the reins on this, but don't seem interested in it. - R9tgokunks   ⭕  21:19, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

User page protection
Hello! Could you please extend the protection time on my talk page? I'm being harassed by a user, or multiple users, both on and off Wikipedia. Bizarrely, he's telling me he'll continue to edit my user page using new accounts until I email him. I politely asked him to stop already, and he refused. Thanks! GhostOfNoMeme (talk) 21:57, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * GhostOfNoMeme - ✅.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:09, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

No way, I did not know how to use it.
No way, I did not know how to use it. Queen70 (talk) 15:58, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * @Oshwah, could you perhaps draw their attention to WP:NOTDATINGSERVICE (see current user page). I would do it myself, but I wouldn't want to be misconstrued... ——  SerialNumber  54129  16:11, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Serial Number 54129 - LOL - I don't think that it would be. ;-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   16:24, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Gotta be careful—one is complicated enough :D thanks for the U5 though  ——  SerialNumber  54129  16:26, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Serial Number 54129 - Indeed. ;-) No problem; always happy to help. Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   16:28, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

I changed the article and wrote it myself and someone deleted it
I changed the article because of copyright a few minutes ago and then RHaworth deleted the page. I already changed the page, so there a no copyright infringements anymore. I feel like RHaworth deleted the draft too soon without even noticing the changes.

RHaworth (talk | contribs) deleted page Draft:Jessica Clements (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of http://www.models1.co.uk/women/main/3889-jessica-clements/) (thank) 16:55, 18 January 2019 (UTC)NYC2019 (talk)
 * NYC2019 - I would take your concerns to RHaworth directly so that he can assist you with this and (if applicable) resolve the matter. It's necessary to do, since he is the deleting administrator and it's something that he should potentially be aware of. Let me know how this goes and if you run into any issues when attempting to resolve the matter with him; I'll be happy to help you further. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   16:59, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks but I where can I contact RHaworth?NYC2019 (talk) 17:02, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * NYC2019 - You can click here to visit his user talk page and leave a message there. Best -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:04, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Can you help me please? I think RHaworth doesn't want to help. I am still waiting, but I have a feeling he ignores my message. NYC2019 (talk) 20:37, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi NYC2019 - I'm sorry that RHaworth hasn't responded to the message you left on his user talk page. I took a look at each revision made to this draft page. The first two times that you created this draft, they did contain copyright violations as content text was copied directly from one or more sources - the application of G12 was justified for those creations of this page. However, it looks like you resolved the matter this last time by paraphrasing the words and writing them yourself, and the content appears to be okay. Hence, I've restored the draft page you last created. Please remember to take Wikipedia's copyright policies seriously and that you keep them in mind with each edit you make to Wikipedia. Don't copy text straight from sources or even make close paraphrases from that text (where you copy and paste the text, and then change a few words here and there to make it slightly different). You must paraphrase everything and by writing it in your own words. 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)   21:01, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much, I appreciate it. I will keep that in mind. Could you publish this draft please? NYC2019 (talk) 21:17, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi NYC2019 - I'm unfortunately not involved with the articles for creation project and hence I cannot review or approve drafts for publishing to the Wikipedia article space. Doing so otherwise would be disruptive on my part and improper use of my admin rights - I obviously don't want to break the rules. :-) You will need to submit your draft page to be reviewed by someone on the articles for creation review team by following the process outlined in the project. 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)   21:24, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

hi
yes I changed it because some of the information is incorrect I added some boxffice that was missing based on boxscore reported to pollstar which you can find on pollstar website and the tour final gross is incorrect only 4 show " sprint center, entreprise center and the 2 in Miami hasn't been reported. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dwayne158 (talk • contribs) 20:04, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Dwayne158 - Your edit here to Aubrey & the Three Migos Tour removed content that was referenced and replaced it with content that did not reference any sources at all. A description of the sources you found this information and data from here is not sufficient; the the burden of proof is on you to provide a reliable source as the user who is trying to add and modify the existing content. You need to take the source and cite it in-line with your changes. Failing to do so will result in your changes being reverted. Please let me know if you have any questions about these policies and I'll be happy to answer them and help you. Thanks for the message, and I wish you a great day and happy editing. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:12, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!
Oshwah, I'm having difficulty with the font sizes in certain lists and sections, such as references. They seem to have gotten even smaller this week, and I don't know if there is a work-around. I have old eyes, and small fonts are very difficult for me to use. I have the font size in my browser set fairly high already, yet something on Wikipedia keeps overriding it and making certain fonts even smaller. I'm emailing you my OS and browser information. You can reply here unless something is specific to the browser. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 22:31, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi BilCat! What skin do you use when editing Wikipedia? Is it the monobook skin? The Vector skin? or a differnt one? Let me know.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:56, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Monobook. - BilCat (talk) 22:57, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * BilCat - Okay. And do you just set a magnification using your browser settings, or do you force a specific font size by default on all webpages? Such an option is typically available to do on most browsers - just look up how to do this on Google. Let me know.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   23:04, 18 January 2019 (UTC)


 * It's a magnification setting, I think. - BilCat (talk) 00:00, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * BilCat - Does increasing the magnification solve the issue with all of the text on Wikipedia? Or is there specific text that isn't changing? You might just have to bump it up one more magnification level to increase the text to the size you're comfortable at.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:55, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Revdel
Hey Oshwah. You cross my watchlist a lot and normally I don't bother questioning admin actions that aren't totally beyond the bounds of reason because I'd rather spend the time doing something else. But you delete a lot of revisions and log entries, many of them unnecessarily in my opinion. The latest example I spotted was the removal of from the page history. Deletion of usernames in particular should be extraordinary. It's important to remember that openness is a fundamental part of Wikipedia, even the ugly stuff, and we should only remove things that are potentially harmful rather than silly or even unpleasant, both on general principle and because the community needs to be able to review things. As it is, it's now impossible for a non-admin to understand who made this edit, and your removal of it is completely unexplained. Can I suggest you ask yourself "does this need to be hidden" in future, or "would harm be done if this was visible", rather than just "does this meet the criteria for deletion"? Best, <b style="color: teal; font-family: Tahoma">HJ Mitchell</b> &#124; <span style="color: navy; font-family: Times New Roman" title="(Talk page)">Penny for your thoughts? 23:02, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi HJ Mitchell, and thank you for leaving me a message here with you concerns. I appreciate your honesty and I'm happy to talk about my use of revision deletion. In the example you gave where I redacted the username that made an edit to a relevant article because I felt that it was purely disruptive in nature and an attempt to troll the project. I do however completely agree with you when thinking in terms of "is it needed" (which is no) vs "is it purely disruptive" (which is yes). I try my best to apply an appropriate balance when making decisions to redact anything on Wikipedia. I also agree with you that public visibility of content to the public is an absolutely crucial principle that makes this project unique, and a reason why Wikipedia is the 5th most visited website in the world - I do my very best to keep to this principle, but I completely understand your opinion regarding some of my revision deletions when looking at it with a "need" vs "meets the criterion" point of view (as you described it). I try to balance publicity with keeping a positive editing environment, and (other than your message here) have not received any negative feedback from anyone else regarding them (apart from a few messages with simple questions). Regardless, I will take your feedback to heart and will keep this message and your thoughts in mind moving forward and when making future revision deletion changes. Please let me know if you have any further questions or concerns, and I'll be more than happy to discuss them with you and work things out. Again, I appreciate you for taking the time to leave me this message and for your honest thoughts and feedback. I will take them to heart and I hope you know that everything I do on Wikipedia is because I feel that it's what's best for the project and what I believe is the right thing to do. Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   23:17, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply. I'm not picking on you necessarily, I see lots of admins making overly liberal use of revdel, but I see a lot of your actions because you do so much. But I decided to drop you a note because I'd seen you delete three or four events in the space of a week that I thought were unwarranted. Here's another example, which I spotted while I was looking through the log for something else—you removed all trace of a username that had never edited. Yes, it's an unpleasant username and well worthy of a uhblock, but it's not directed at any named individual so it doesn't come close to meeting the criteria, and you even removed it from the block log (which used to be a big no-no) so even an admin would struggle to work out what was going on without a lot of clicking and it would be impossible for a non-admin to review. The summaries of the criteria are quite broad, but the extended criterion makes it clear that the scope of RD3 is much narrower than just anything that's disruptive and is not intended for run-of-the-mill vandalism and rude words, nor indeed satirical trolling usernames. All the best, <b style="color: teal; font-family: Tahoma">HJ Mitchell</b> &#124; <span style="color: navy; font-family: Times New Roman" title="(Talk page)">Penny for your thoughts? 17:58, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * HJ Mitchell - I think you're right. I've actually noticed that I've seen myself start to use it more liberally - I thought it was because I was simply becoming more proficient and comfortable with it, but I'm beginning to realize otherwise. I appreciate your message and your honest words. I'll take your feedback to heart moving forward and I will honor it. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:45, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!
New one on that question you asked me. BilCat (talk) 23:59, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * BilCat - Received; will respond soon - I'm currently mobile for a few hours so please excuse any delay in responses for a bit...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   00:07, 19 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks, and no problem. This one isn't urgent. - BilCat (talk) 00:21, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Brit Award for British Group
Hi there, I was wondering whether you could block a specific user who keeps spamming this page and protect it. I saw what you did for the 2019 Brit Awards page and thought you could do the same for Brit Award for British Group. Thank you Saxonvsjones (talk) 00:05, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Saxonvsjones! Thanks for leaving me a message here with your questions and concerns. I apologize for the delay responding to your message here. It looks like edits to the article have stopped since the 19th, so I'm going to hold off on any action right now. If things do continue, please don't hesitate to let me know, or file a report at Administrator intervention against vandalism or Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents and a request for protection at Requests for page protection. :-) Best -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   18:01, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Enquiry
I want to write about someone, is that possible on this platform? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iseeyousmirky (talk • contribs) 00:20, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi,Iseeyousmirky! I would first suggest you to read Our Conflict of Interest Guideline, and Your First Article. Thanks and Happy Editing!-- Thegooduser   Life Begins With a Smile :)  🍁 02:50, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Iseeyousmirky! Thanks for leaving me a message here with your question. Yes, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia where you can write about people. However, we have guidelines that must be met in order for the article to be kept. You should make sure that the person meets Wikipedia's guidelines on notability and that there exists a significant amount of secondary sources that are reliable and independent of the subject. Using the articles for creation process or the your first article wizard is highly recommended, since you're new at writing articles here.


 * Since you're new to Wikipedia, I also highly recommend that you go through and complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial before you make any additional edits. It will provide you with many helpful walkthroughs, guides, interactive lessons, and other information that will be very helpful to you. Most users who take this advice 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. Don't cause yourself hardship; this tutorial will make your time here much easier and better!


 * If you have any more questions or need anything else, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be happy to answer them and help you. Good luck to you and I wish you happy editing! :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   18:10, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Input request
Hey Oshwah, I was hoping I’d get more input about merging Extreme Makeover: Home Edition (Specials) into [[List of Extreme Makeover: Home Edition episodes on the Talk page. It started out as a move discussion before turning to merger but things have stalled--Fradio71 (talk) 02:13, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Fradio71! I don't see an issue with merging this list into the other one, since the later list is supposed to contain each episode of the show; the "specials" list could be merged into the other list easily. It looks like the original proposal was a simple rename and move; I'd start another discussion on the article's talk page that's separate from this one and also propose that the list be merged with the other. This way, if no consensus is reached to merge the list, a discussion can continue regarding the rename and move. It's also okay to leave a message on the user talk pages of editors who have recently edited both lists. Just be neutral in your writing, let them know about the proposal to merge, and point them to the location of the discussions so that they can participate. This should help put some traction behind the stall that you're seeing. If you have any more questions or need my assistance or input with anything else, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be more than happy to lend a hand. ;-) I wish you a great rest of your day, good luck, and happy editing. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   18:20, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Just seeking advices
Please notice Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Sænmōsà<font size="1.5" color="grey">I will find a way or make one. 02:03, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Sanmosa! I apologize for the delay responding to your message here. It looks like an admin has already responded to the ANI discussion you mentioned and the discussion has since been archived. If things continue and you need my input, please don't hesitate to message me and let me know. I'll be more than happy to help. :-) Best -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   18:24, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Actually I've noted that. Anyway thanks, as the article was somehow unstable then. Sænmōsà<font size="1.5" color="grey">I will find a way or make one. 22:50, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi again Sanmosa! No problem. If things continue and disruption picks back up, let me know and I'll be happy to take a look and step in where necessary. :-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:52, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!
BilCat (talk) 03:59, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
 * BilCat - Received.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   18:34, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Kerning
Not to mention that the kerning is poor is not neutral. The graphic should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.250.248.199 (talk) 07:50, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there! I left the notification on your user talk page because your edit here on Kerning appeared to inject your opinion. Please remember that Wikipedia articles and content must be written to reflect a neutral point of view. If you have any questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks for the message, and I wish you a great day. Best -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   18:37, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Girl’s State Swimming Champions
Add 2018 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:C000:82A0:40EA:93D3:AE57:C581 (talk) 13:34, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there! I'm not sure exactly what you're referring to? Can you elaborate a bit further so I can help you? Thanks :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   18:38, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Requesting page protections
Ever since the sockpuppet investigations into Abhishek9779 were closed by another admin, it appears the block evader has yet again started making disruptive edits on pages such as ISIL-Khorasan province. So can page protections be added for Al Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent[],ISIL-Khorasan Province[] and Taliban[] to prevent further disruptive editing by these sockpuppet IP's? Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mountain157 (talk • contribs) 22:35, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Mountain157, and thanks for keeping me updated on the issue. It looks like the disruptive editing has since stopped, so I'm going to hold off on protecting any of the articles unless disruption continues. If it does, let me know and I'll be happy to take a look, or you can file a request for protection at Requests for page protection. I hope you have a great day and I wish you happy editing. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   18:55, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

I am
Hi sir and Medam Pls help me my baby study perpouse Hi — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:6427:a380:80b9:2d5:b84a:58b3 (talk) 07:36, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there! I'm not sure exactly what you're talking about in your message here... can you elaborate further? Do you need help with anything Wikipedia-related? Let me know. Best -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   19:29, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail

 * Ashrafbabur9766 - Received and replied; thanks! Next time, you're welcome to ask me for help publicly on my user talk page here. This way, you'll receive a faster response and other editors who watch this page will be able to help weigh in as well. We want to have messages and discussions be done on Wikipedia unless circumstances call for them to be private. No worries though; it's not a big deal. I hope my response was helpful. Feel free to follow up here with any questions. :-) Best -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   19:50, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Too much
This is too much. You are reverting everyone's edits. These aren't Spammers. This is totalitarianism. An article on the Dominicans? What's your motive? I want to read the edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1:D739:3343:25A6:E212:F763:3DE5 (talk) 14:04, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there! I'm not sure exactly what you're talking about? Do you need help with something? If you could elaborate a bit further, I'll be more than happy to help you. I just want to make sure that I understand what you need help with so that I can assist. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   19:51, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

I need help
Hey Osh. I'm trying to add a residence section to the Infobox I'm writing on my user page, but it's not working, even though it works elsewhere (Jay-Z for example). Is there something I'm doing wrong? Could you have a look at the current edit mode and tell me what I need to do? Many thanks😊 GOLDIEM J (talk) 15:57, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi GOLDIEM J! No problem - I'll be happy to help you with your user page. You'll want to refer to this documentation page while attempting to add information to the infobox on your user page. For example: looking at the first two recent edits you've made while adding information to the userbox, you added "residence" which does not exist as a parameter for this particular infobox. You also tried adding "Name", but you capitalized it (which is why it didn't appear when you saved it); the parameters are case-sensitive, so you change "Name" to "name", it'll appear as it should. Also, I'm sending you a very important email here in a few minutes. Please read it before you modify that infobox any further. Trust me, it's important. :-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   19:59, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I have it all figured out right now and I don't need help anymore. But thanks anyway. Have a good day👋😀 GOLDIEM J (talk) 21:19, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * GOLDIEM J - Awesome! No problem; always happy to lend a hand. Please don't hesitate to message me again if you need help with anything else. ;-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   21:23, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thx mate😊 I actually have another question right now. How do you pick up an umbrella?😂GOLDIEM J (talk) 21:28, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * GOLDIEM J - LOL. This sounds like a riddle. You got me... how?  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   21:29, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Need help with Mis Global again
Hello. I sent an earlier message. Miss Global is having a hard time with a former employee by the name of Tea Mak who keeps putting herself as founder and adding hurtful message next to our current winners name. Barbara Vitorelli is doing amazing as our current queen. She has never been fired or dismissed. Can you help me by putting a stop to editing with the same info from your last post on our page? Thank you, Mgoleader — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgoleader (talk • contribs) 07:47, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Mgoleader! I received your email earlier about this as well. I'll be happy to take a look and make sure that disruptive edits are handled. Best -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   20:21, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

User:14.139.94.113
Same copyvio after third block. Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 15:23, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Muhandes! It looks like the IP address has since been blocked. If the issues continue from this IP, let me know and I'll be happy to look into this further and take appropriate action. Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   20:21, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Sure thing. --Muhandes (talk) 21:35, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

recent changes
what is or isn't constructive is subjective. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.29.185.89 (talk) 21:26, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

/* Gaddafi and international terrorism */ Corrected date Gaddafi threatened to utilize the 'revolutionary weapon' from 1971 to 1981.
The citation already included in the article contains the correct information. I simply attempted to adequately reflect the source material. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.62.48.185 (talk) 22:10, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there! Thanks for leaving me a message and for letting me know. You're the owner or have possession of the same source cited in the article? My apologies if you were attempting to correct an error in good faith; I just see a lot of edits like this where people change dates and without citing a source, and where a previous source that's accessible contradicts the change. If your modification to the year is correct, please feel free to change it back. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask me them here and I'll be happy to answer them. My very best -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:14, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Naturalistic fallacy
Veganism is not mentioned in "Q&A: Steven Pinker of 'Blank Slate'. Why does "meat eating" require a source when "veganism" does not? Meat eating actually makes sense in this context where veganism does not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.93.135.34 (talk) 22:14, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message regarding your edits (1, 2) to Naturalistic fallacy. After re-reading what you were changing on the article, I agree that this isn't a situation where a "source" is required (as I said to you originally); I've replaced the notices I left on your talk page with a copy of this response. However, compared to the revision text that was published previously, I feel that the article is better-worded as it was originally. "Veganism" is a much more encyclopedic term to use rather than "eating meat", hence I think that it was better as it was before. Nonetheless, I apologize for the confusion I started with the notices I left originally. Please let me know if you have any questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:20, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

:)
Yay Cheers -Combo Panda — Preceding unsigned comment added by Combo Panda (talk • contribs) 23:00, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Combo Panda! I'm happy to see that you read my message. I hope you have a great rest of your day and I wish you happy editing. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   23:08, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Change Dunkin' Donuts to Dunkin'
Hey Oshwah since Dunkin' Donuts is now Dunkin' can you move the page because of that. Thanks A.R.M. 00:40, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * ARMcgrath - ✅.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   00:52, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Say, you know, or maybe you don't know, there was a proposal to make this move a couple of weeks ago, and it was rejected by a broad consensus. Now one user, who didn't even contribute to that discussion, requests the move and it is done instantly. Maybe there is a good reason for this, despite the discussion, but, sheesh, you could have at least left an explanation on the talk page. --Alan W (talk) 05:05, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Alan W - Thanks for responding and for letting me know about this discussion; I was unaware of its existence. Let me take a look; if the reasons opposing the page move still apply, I'll undo the move. Stand by...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   05:07, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Alan W - I reviewed the discussion and I agree that WP:COMMONNAME is still a relevant argument in opposition after taking into account the article's content and references; whether or not this is a permanent company name change is still in the air and not adequately stated nor supported by reliable sources. Hence, I've rolled back the change to the article's title. Thanks again for the message and for letting me know about the discussion. I usually check talk pages first, but I do admit that I was sidetracked and a little distracted earlier and I must've overlooked doing this. Please let me know if you have any further questions or concerns and I'll be happy to discuss them with you and help. Thanks again! :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   05:42, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * No problem. I know all was done in good faith, and I mean by that to include your request, ARMcgrath. I'll add, Oshwah, that it's a pleasure to be in an environment where civility reigns, as you try hard to maintain on this talk page. :-) --Alan W (talk) 06:02, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Alan W - I appreciate your understanding and your kind words. It's unfortunate how civility tends to go completely out the window sometimes (if not many times) around here... I just had to block an IP user for making repeated uncivil and almost troll-like comments on this ANI discussion they were involved in. I understand that people become frustrated and perhaps upset and make mistakes in that area sometimes; nobody is perfect... but c'mon man! Haha :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   06:14, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Alan W - By the way, my user talk page is always open to you. You're welcome to come here any time you need or want to and I'll be more than happy to help if it's needed. :-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   06:15, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Oshwah. I might just ask for your administratorly opinion on something one of these days. I'll just mention that I just read your user page, and I love those quotes. (The nitpicking editor in me, though, can't resist pointing out that it's Edgar Allan Poe, not Edgar Allen Poe; I would have corrected it, but on principle I never edit other users' pages.) Getting late in this time zone, so I had best get some sleep. Good night! --Alan W (talk) 06:40, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Alan W - Please do; I'll be happy to help. Oh wow... good call on the spelling of Edgar Allan Poe; I'll go fix that right now. That would bother me too. ;-) Have a great night and I hope to speak to you again soon. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   06:43, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for notifing me I also had no idea as a while back. I redirected the page to Dunkin' but was warned cause it screws up the edit history or something. Thanks on that too Oshwah. Even though this will be notified to you without even pinning you, (it’s your talk page lol) anyways thanks have a good one the both of you. Until we meet again A.R.M. 06:16, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * OK, sure, you have a good one, too, A.R.M. --Alan W (talk) 06:40, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * ARMcgrath - Redirects are perfectly fine to add to non-existing article titles that are commonly navigated to so that editors are navigated to the article where the content exists. I think whoever told you this might have been referring to performing a "cut-and-paste move" by replacing the article with a redirect, and them creating or replacing the redirect on the intended "new page" with the article content. This will indeed cause edit histories to become confusing since they'll start to become scattered across multiple page histories. When a move is needed, having someone perform the actual page move is the right way to accomplish this. :-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   06:22, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * ARMcgrath - I'm pinging you to notify you of updated information that was presented to me after I completed your request. Due to a recent discussion that opposed moving the page and after reading through it and agreeing that the reasons for opposing the move are still relevant, I rolled back the page move I performed and the article is back to the title it was previously. See above for additional information.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   05:44, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Huggle
Hi Oshwah! 2 things... I have already asked this question at the huggle feedback page, but I thought I'd ask you, Huggle makes me enter my password right after I log in, and it logs me out! I never even clicked log out or anything like that! It just quit on me! Other question, how do you get the HG summary to say "Not Providing a reliable source, WP:CITE WP:RS (HG) ? Thegooduser   Life Begins With a Smile :)  🍁 03:32, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thegooduser - Are you using a bot password to log into Huggle? Or are you using the legacy tab to log into huggle? To perform actions for failing to provide a reliable source, you'll use the mouse and open up the drop-down menu (the little black down arrow) next to either the "revert and warn", "revert", or "warn" picture buttons located on the top of the Huggle and then select that from the list of options from the drop-down menu.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   03:35, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Legacy Log In, My regular Password, and Now I can't log back in because there are people around me.-- Thegooduser  Life Begins With a Smile :)  🍁 03:37, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd try following the directions here to create and generate a bot password for you to use instead of your regular username/password, and see if this resolves the issue. Since I'm an admin with two-factor authentication enabled, I must use a bot password to authenticate with Huggle; I don't have a choice. This is the preferred method to authenticate with Huggle anyways, so I'd recommend doing this regardless. Do know that bot passwords will stop working automatically if you forego using it for authentication for a period of time (it's for your protection), so if this happens, just remove the old one and generate a new one and you should be good to go. Let me know if this resolves your issue. Best -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   03:51, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I can't use bot password for reasons, I can't copy and paste it into the PC, since it is not "mine", hence when I use my normal password, it's stored in my head. Thegooduser   Life Begins With a Smile :)  🍁 03:54, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thegooduser - There might be an issue with Huggle. Have you tried uninstalling it and re-installing it back onto your computer to see if this resolves the problem?  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:05, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I re-installed it a while back.... Should I do it again? Thegooduser   Life Begins With a Smile :)  🍁 04:06, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * If you're having issues, it can't hurt. Worst case scenario, it doesn't resolve the problem and it continues to do what it did before. This way, you can eliminate it from the list of "possible causes"...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:09, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Reinstalled it, bug still there... Thegooduser   Life Begins With a Smile :)  🍁 03:14, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Does this issue happen only periodically (only during certain times of the day, only while on certain networks or computers, etc) or does it happen all the time and every time? Have you tried using a different network, ISP, or internet connection to see if this resolves the problem?  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   09:30, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

happens very often, almost everytime, I will change provider still will not work, I only leave it idle for 5 mins and this starts happening... Thegooduser  Life Begins With a Smile :)  🍁 01:36, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * So it happens after you leave it idle? What about at the beginning when you first start using it and after you just logged in? What do you notice that you do before-hand that you think might cause it to happen?  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   00:00, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh and it also crashes ever time I put down my laptop screen. It happens if it is left idle, it's fine at first, but after left idle will crash. -- Thegooduser  Life Begins With a Smile :)  🍁 01:00, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
 * If closing your laptop lid results in the system going into standby mode, then this would definitely likely be the cause of the crash. I'd take a look at your power settings and change them so that your system never goes into standby mode when idle or if you close the laptop lid, and see if this isn't the cause of your issues. I obviously wouldn't advise bumping or moving the laptop while it's on and running if you have a Hard Drive that isn't solid-state (due to the risk of damaging the hard disk), but standby mode does and will cause some programs to have issues if the system enters that state while it's running - especially if it relies on networking to perform most of its tasks (such as Huggle).  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:06, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Is 3.4.7 out yet? if yes I will try updating it to see if this fixes the bug, so annoying when I have to enter my damn password over and over again. Thegooduser   Life Begins With a Smile :)  🍁 02:36, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
 * The latest stable release is 3.4.6. Have you updated the discussion on Huggle/Feedback that you started regarding this? I'd update it with things that you've tried doing to no avail and pinging so that he can read it.  ~Oshwah~  (talk)  (contribs)   02:52, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
 * In fact, we should move this discussion there so that other Huggle users can see and read it, and respond with input. We're doing ourselves a disservice by discussing it here and not there...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:55, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!
Thegooduser  Life Begins With a Smile :)  🍁 03:58, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Received and responded.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:06, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Be Bold
I am not saying bad things or anything here... but I am running into A LOT of sandbox edits with different usernames, but they all say the same thing "Being bold is important on Wikipedia" Is there something happening? Thegooduser  Life Begins With a Smile :)  🍁 04:09, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * It's the sandbox tour, never mind. Resolved.-- Thegooduser  Life Begins With a Smile :)  🍁 04:10, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * What you're seeing is an automated edit as part of the new user tutorial that we encourage all new editors to go through and complete. Look on the account's user page next time you see this and you'll most likely see awards and badges from that tutorial on there. There's nothing to worry about... :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:12, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

The Official Huggler Award

 * HA! Thanks for the award... I almost forgot about that photo someone did of me... :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:41, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

About my (Sonicrs) recent edits to the article "the funniest joke in the world"
Hello Oshwah. You have recently reverted for the second time my edit on the page "the funniest joke in the world" for supposed vandalism, however I would like to inquire on why you considered said edit as vandalism. The whole reason I went to that page yesterday for the first time was to find out what the actual joke sentence is (to paste it into Google translate and see for myself the "[FATAL ERROR]" Easter egg]), so to help others who wanted the same thing, after finding said sentence I put it on the page. I went briefly over the Wikipedia definition of vandalism and think that even ignoring my original intentions, there is just no reason to think that an informative edit such as that is vandalism. Thank you for your time. Sonicrs (talk) 12:24, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Sonicrs, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your concerns regarding the edits you made (1, 2) to The Funniest Joke in the World. Let me apologize to you; I didn't mean to leave that particular message on your user talk page; I meant to leave you a personal message simply stating that your edit to the article with your translation isn't necessary. Wikipedia has projects and processes regarding translation of pages and text, and using an online translator such as Google translate isn't how we properly do this. Your edit certainly was not vandalism as the message said, and I know that you were simply trying to improve the article in good faith. Please disregard the message that was left (I removed it from your user talk page), and let me know if you have any further questions or concerns - I'll be more than happy to discuss them with you and help you in any way I can. Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   12:29, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hello again. Just a clarification, if you read the page you'll see the sentence has no actual meaning and Google added an Easter egg so if you try to translate the translation apears to be "[FATAL ERROR]" (literally fatal, as defined in said sketch). I of course didn't mean to just Google translate random sentences, I meant I wanted to see that Easter egg by myself. The page even mentions the Easter egg, but not the sentence itself so it's quite annoying to go look for it personally. Anyways, if all's well I shall get back to my finals, have a good day and bye. Sonicrs (talk) 12:50, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Sonicrs - Oh, interesting! I didn't realize that. I initially thought this was simply an attempt to translate text. Thanks for pointing this out to me. Please let me know if I can assist with anything else, or if you have any further questions or concerns. I'll be happy to discuss them and help. Please accept my apologies for the confusion and the warning that wasn't supposed to be left on your user talk page. Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   12:56, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

:O/ :D/ :?
I do not want to change my user name but thanks! Combo Panda (talk) 23:00, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Combo Panda - No problem! I just figured I'd let you know in case you weren't aware of this option. :-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   14:12, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Invitation

 * Path slopu - lol... what is this association exactly? What is it for? haha  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   14:11, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * This association is for those who believe that Wikipedia should be a place for "Dialogue Among Peoples" not a place for promote a race, religion, language, country, belief and/or an ethnicity. Also the Association may reject ungraceful ideologies and acts in our encyclopedia which may cause any kind of cultural, ideological and/or religious clashes having been classified under the category of Clash of Civilizations theory or another related. -- PATH SLOPU (Talk) 14:15, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Path slopu - Ah, I see. I appreciate the invite, and I'll admit that discussions and comments should be about content, not about the editors themselves. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   14:22, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Rangeblock of https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=User%3A175.176.0.0%2F17&type=block
Hi oshwah, I just now found that ip address is range-blocked. I found that from this database https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Database_reports/Range_blocks now you have again blocked it for vandalism, which I appreciate. Can you please link that lta for me I seem to have some trouble finding it and yes lta means long term abuse I know that correctly, as per the rules for range blocking goes it is correct placed. Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2401:4900:1725:9C0F:2:1:185D:FDEC (talk) 13:48, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there! It could be a number of LTA users... my best guess is that it's, - one of those people... DoRD and Ponyo are both  users that I think would be able to identify the LTA user behind these edits better than I could (I've pinged both users on this discussion). Let's see what one of them say... :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk)  (contribs)   13:54, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure it's not one of those two, who typically operate from another continent. Unfortunately, there are a number of miscreants in the Philippines that this could be, but the behavior isn't ringing a bell at the moment. —DoRD (talk)​ 15:59, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * DoRD - That's how I point out LTA users as well at times. I don't know exactly who it is, but I know their patterns of disruption and abuse and I know that it's someone... :-) Thanks for providing your input, DoRD.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   16:02, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I have a head cold to end all head colds at the moment, so everything is a little hazy. This one isn't ringing any bells at the moment.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 19:13, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Ponyo - 10-4; hope you feel better soon. Thanks for the input. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   19:15, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Discussion
Sorry about that. I don't want to be blocked. I promised that I won't do everything like that again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.210.239.23 (talk) 14:18, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Civil rights movement redaction
Oshwah- First, thank you for removing whatever vandalism you removed from the Civil rights movement page. I am an occasional editor of an eclectic collection of pages (if you like the Psychology section of the Mondegreen page, thank me :^)> ). I sometimes edit the Civil rights movement page. I've never seen, there or elsewhere, a redaction; I didn't even know one could do that. I am curious: was it the content or the vandals editing comment or both that were so vile that you didn't want other editors to be exposed to it? How do you decide that something violates RD2? Paulmlieberman (talk) 16:10, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Paulmlieberman, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your questions. I'll be happy to answer them and explain the basis in which edits can be redacted. This redaction you're seeing is performed using the revision deletion tool. It allows for administrators to redact the revision text, edit summary, and/or the username/IP of the editor who published the revision - from revisions located in the edit history. It also allows for administrators to redact the action/targeting user or page, the summary, and/or the username/IP of the user who triggered or performed the given action - from log entries that are located on the log page. Redacted information is viewable only by administrators. There's also another level set of users, called Oversighters, who have additional abilities with changing visibility settings on edits and logs, but you can read about that after I answer your questions. :-)


 * Obviously, redaction is only allowed to be used if the edit or log meets one of the critera for redaction; it's not something that administrators can use freely or liberally on any edit or log that they like. It's used within strict limits to redact text where needed while keeping a completely open and publicly accessible project. One of the criteria, RD2, allows administrators to redact "grossly insulting, degrading, or offensive material". What examples meet that level exactly? Edits or logs that contain derogatory racial slurs (like the 'N word'), or make deeply derogatory or offensive statements against skin color, history, race, gender, sex, etc. (such as edits that praise Hitler, make terrible jokes about the Jews and the Holocaust, or talk about how funny slavery is)... I think you get the idea now. It's not meant for childish remarks, name-calling, or ordinary vandalism that you typically see... it's for the kind of edits or content that have absolutely no place on Wikipedia in a public edit or log. I won't go in-depth with what was redacted, but... it was necessary. Not cool. If you have any more questions about revision deletion and redaction, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. I hope that my response was helpful, and I wish you a great day and happy editing! :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   16:42, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Rm Command is no longer essay-like
Hi! Recently, I've been editing the article for the rm command article, which has an essay-like template on it. I've been working on fixing the article a lot, and was wondering if it would now be a good time to remove the template. I read the WP:MTR article, but that confused me, as I don't exactly know what the essay-like content is. Would you please check the article and see if it's good to remove, and if not, explain what's wrong with it? Thanks. -- One Blue Hat  ❯❯❯ (talk)   17:27, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi One Blue Hat! I think you've done an excellent job with improving the article and its content. I would start a discussion on the article's talk page and ask what other involved users think regarding the removal of that template. This way, those involved will be able to give input and you won't risk having someone put it back in disagreement. :-) Personally, I think it looks good, but I think that more than just my input alone should weigh in before we remove that template... just in case. ;-) Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Let me know if you start that discussion and I'll be happy to participate. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   19:00, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Please be more careful
Several days ago, you blocked me with the template of vandalism and unacceptable name. There was clearly no vandalism. I merely inserted in the Prince Philip article that he was driving a Land Rover Freelander, not just a Land Rover. Since then other editors have inserted the same change. (FYI, it is here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Prince_Philip%2C_Duke_of_Edinburgh&type=revision&diff=879291471&oldid=879252894 . Nacentaeons is guilty of vandalism if the word Freelander is vandalism, which it is not)

When you wrongly put a vandalism tag, it makes it hard for other administrators to see beyond the accusation. I was blocked for many days until someone made sense of your wrong block.

I am patient but others are liable to become very angry at what they may view as very poor and unfair customer service at Wikipedia.

Summary: Please be more careful with use of your templates. Don't call things vandalism when they are not. Thank you in advance if you're more careful in the future. Squeaky Rubber Duck (talk) 18:01, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Squeaky Rubber Duck, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your thoughts, input, and concerns regarding your account. Looking at the edit itself, I agree that calling it 'vandalism' wasn't correct. The main concerns that I had were with your username. The username you chose appeared to be indicative of the same behavior as users who have a very long history of causing disruption and abuse with multiple accounts that I frequently handle. Seeing that you're not one of those users I thought that you initially were, I absolutely owe you my apologies for what happened. However, I hope that you would also meet me halfway and understand that the username you chose was concerning, and combined with the fact that you immediately went to edit the article in relation to your original username, it would cause concerns with most editors who see this. This obviously doesn't excuse the fact that I blocked you too quickly and jumped to conclusions when I shouldn't have; I'm in no ways trying to justify my actions. However, I simply ask for your understanding that your username, the fact that you immediately went to edit the related article, and the information presented during the unblock review process - would be concerning. I appreciate you for taking the time to leave me this message and express your honest opinion. I will take this situation to heart, and apply this moving forward. If you have any questions or concerns, please don't hesitate to let me know. Thank you and best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   18:54, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Content dispute editor returns to U.S. Route 101 in California
is now using. They need more than a 36 hour block this time. <b style="background:#0000ff;font:Helvetica;padding:0.4em;font-size: 80%;border-radius: 2em;margin: 0.25em;"> Cards84664 </b> (talk) 18:31, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Cards84664! I've applied a block to the IP users involved and applied semi-protection to the article for a few days. Please don't hesitate to let me know if disruption continues or starts to spill over into related articles sand I'll be happy to step in and help. :-) Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   18:57, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

invest/infect
Sorry, but invest (in, not into) isn't the right word. You were probably put off because "infect" sounds like a negative value judgment, but is simply the correct idiomatic English (consider "infectious laughter = enthusiastic laughter). 2601:8C2:4280:14C0:979:2F2A:1B3D:A0A5 (talk) 19:19, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there! Thanks for the message and the explanation. I remember the edit you're talking about, and this is exactly what I thought when I saw the change. If I'm incorrect, please feel free to restore the revision you made, and I apologize for any inconvenience I may have caused upon you. Thanks again for letting me know and I hope you have a great day. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   19:20, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Feedback
Wow, nice hair!

Just wondering why my edit didn't get approved. You probably get asked this a lot, so sorry to bother!

Roxy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:7DB7:500:C497:1832:48DC:74E (talk) 19:44, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there! Thanks for leaving me a message with your question, and I appreciate the complement. ;-) I had concerns with the external URL that you were adding with your edit here to 3D modeling. Typically, we don't add external links to websites outside of Wikipedia in the middle of article content. They're supposed to be added to the "External links" section of the article and only if they meet the guidelines. Please review this guideline and let me know if you have any questions. Thanks again for the message and I wish you a great day. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   19:50, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Weird thought
Hey Osh - we have an LTA who keeps pasting your photo on random templates/pages - is there a chance you could blacklist it with as exceptions? Might help nip this in the bud. Home Lander (talk) 22:01, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Home Lander - Oh fun... who are the users? Can you list them so I can take a look? There might be an easier way... ;-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:06, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * , it's an IP hopper. just caught him using Special:Contributions/78.81.162.202. Home Lander (talk) 22:22, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * 79.210.86.204, 95.191.14.248. RC in NS10 is where it's at right now, if you're interested. -- zzuuzz (talk) 22:25, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Home Lander, Zzuuzz - Tune in here if you want to keep instant watch for edits by this LTA (as well as other ones); they'll show up in this log and you can quickly take a look at the edit and report/block the user from there. Enjoy - it's a filter that I created and regularly update and maintain. ;-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:33, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * That's a great filter. I frequently spot vandals tripping it while I'm watching the abuselog. Home Lander (talk) 22:36, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Home Lander - I appreciate the feedback :-) It's there for you to use any time you wish. Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:37, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

User talk:DID YOU SPILL SOMETHING ON THE KITCHEN FLORR??
User:DID YOU SPILL SOMETHING ON THE KITCHEN FLORR?? is abusing her talkpage. CLCStudent (talk) 22:42, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * CLCStudent - Talk page access has been yanked. ;-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:44, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!
BilCat (talk) 22:44, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * BilCat - Received, responded, and handled. ;-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:47, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!
Home Lander (talk) 23:54, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Home Lander - ✅ - see my reply.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   00:12, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Revision
Hey Oshwah,

I am new, and I just made my first edit! I know this is kind of random, but could you look over it real quick? It's really cool! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equation_solving

Thanks, Blium

Mrblium (talk) 03:13, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!
Thegooduser  Life Begins With a Smile :)  🍁 03:22, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Received and replied.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   07:15, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Mass Revert of "Einladung ins und zum Münchner Wikipedia Stammtisch" in User Talk Pages
You reverted between on 24 January 2019 13:21 and 13:23 user talk page edits titled in German as "Einladung ins und zum Münchner Wikipedia Stammtisch" as you considered those as "mass spamming of messages on user talk pages".

Those were not really spam, they were just invitations to the Munich Wikipedia regulars' table. Only users indicating in their users page to be living in the area of Munich had gotten this invitation. I guess one can argue that there shouldn't be German invitations on English Wikipedia user talk pages. In case of my talk page this revert is fine, as I got this invitation also on my German WP talk page, where it is certainly more appropriate anyway.--Berny68 (talk) 06:27, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Berny68, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your input and your thoughts. Sigh... this unfortunately has been an issue before and multiple times - not with this particular user, but with other accounts who have messaged a mass number of users in order to spread the word about events, meetups, and other Wikipedia-related functions. There have even been times where users have "mass-spammed" user talk pages like this and while operating as part of an official Wikimedia event or project, and in coordination with WMF staff. The edits were treated like spam and reverted at first (by me, actually) until I was informed of what was going on. The real solution to this issue is to have some process where a user account is appointed as a "communicator" of the particular WMF event, meetup, etc; they should have a WMF user conduct these communications, and they should message users properly in order to spread the word. They don't need to be flooding the recent changes list, contribs, and other pages like this by leaving messages one-by-one... this is what we have the mass message sender user right for. In most instances, users who are patrolling recent changes and logs are going to take alarm when they see that a user is mass-messaging other editors like this. I agree that the messages themselves were not disruptive... but the method, manner, and the ad-hoc way in which users have been actually delivering them is disruptive (in my opinion). Please let me know if you have any questions or further concerns, and I'll be happy to discuss them with you and help you. Again, I appreciate your message and your thoughts, and I hope you have a great day. :-) Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   07:14, 25 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks Berny68 for bringing this up. As the usere who wrote this I want to comment as well. First I did not knew that this is unwanted in english wikipedia – if I violated a rule I am sorry for that. The invitation was however not for one event but for all the events the local community in Munich is dooing. We meat at least once a week, have our own flat and work together all the time. It's a invitation to people from Munich who are active in the engish Wikipedia to join. Therefore I wanted to send this to all users in the (quite limited size) category User from Munich. This is also nothing done by WMF or WMDE or any other organisation but completly organized by the community. Therefore there is no way any communicator of the WMF could send an "official" message. To the mass message system – yes that does exist, but only few people have the right to use it – obviously not including any Wikipedians from German Wikipedia. So I don't realy see how we can properly reach out to those users. -- MichaelSchoenitzer (talk) 12:54, 29 January 2019 (UTC) PS: In German Wikipedia our local groups do this regulary and we have the rule to only do it once every second year…
 * MichaelSchoenitzer - I apologize for the delay responding to your comment here. I just now saw that you did so while I was going through and double-checking that I didn't miss any replies; apparently I did...


 * No problem, and thanks for following up here and for discussing it. For announcements and invitations that need to be sent to many editors, there's a page to request this so that a mass message sender can do this for you and all in one action. Just follow the instructions listed here to create a request and someone will do it for you. If anything, it'll save you a lot of time by doing it this way and it'll keep you out of trouble. As stated above, users mass-sending messages like this will draw attention (as what happened in this case). If you have any questions, please let me know. Other than that, don't worry about it. You didn't know and mistakes happen; we're not perfect and I greatly appreciate your understanding and your participation in the discussion here. :-) Thanks again -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   09:13, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Flagellation
Hi Oshwah. After you reverted 95.187.111.170 on Flagellation he reverted, then reverted him, I dealt with him twice and then raised the matter at ANI. Again he reverted and Alarics restored things. He is now banned (by Materialscientist), but this morning appeared making the same changes. I'm suspicious this might be sock puppetry. I noticed that you were an admin, so would you mind dealing with the problem as you see fit? Thanks, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 09:41, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Martin of Sheffield! Sure; I'm always happy to help. :-) I've blocked the new IP user for block evasion. If you see any more edits like this from additional new IP users, please don't hesitate to let me know so that I can handle them as well. Thanks for the message, I hope you have an excellent day, and I wish you happy editing. :-D  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   09:44, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Looks like the ban on 95.187.111.170 has expired since he is back to his old tricks. :-( Martin of Sheffield (talk) 23:05, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Martin of Sheffield - I apologize for the delay responding to your follow-up message here. I didn't see it until just now. I just checked the contributions of this IP, and it looks like editing has stopped since the end of January. If it continues, please let me know and I'll be happy to look into it further. Thanks for the follow-up and please accept my apologies for the delay responding to you here; I did not mean to let it slip by like this...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   09:33, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
 * No problem. I fixed some issue or other a year or so ago on the page, so it's on my watchlist and I'll monitor it.  Regards, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 10:05, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Martin of Sheffield - Awesome! I appreciate your understanding and thank you for continuing to keep an eye on it. You know where to find me if things start heating up again... ;-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   10:24, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Rangeblocks
Per your discussion with on ANI, I'm also interested in what I should check before doing a rangeblock. I think I understand IP networking better than most (my current work is writing firmware for routers, so I'd better!) but I still hold off on rangeblocks for fear of overstepping and collateral damage; I usually leave rangeblock requests to others and hope a CU can confirm it's okay. Any guidance you can offer here would be really welcome. GoldenRing (talk) 10:18, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Dlohcierekim, GoldenRing! Thanks for following up here with your request for input regarding how to check and predict collateral damage when considering a range block! I'll be happy to go over it with you and explain how I check for this.


 * The first thing that I always do (and what will give you the best and most accurate information when looking into a range) is to check the range's contributions. Pay attention to how frequent and how many edits are being made from the range, how recent other edits have been made from the range in relation to the disruption at-hand, and look at the edits to determine if they appear to have anything to do with the disruption or not. Do they seem like they're being made by someone else and that they have no relation at all to the disruption? How many unrelated edits are being made? Use your judgment and the information here to determine how likely your range block is going to cause collateral damage. In most cases, it'll be obvious.


 * Taking an example from a recent case I looked into, lets take a look into the IPv6 range 2604:4080:1300:8031::/64. To begin, we simply navigate to Special:Contributions/2604:4080:1300:8031::/64. In this case, if you look at the contributions, we can clearly see that the number of edits are overall pretty low (compared to some monster examples that I'll show you). The disruption being made from this IP range is to the List of Interstate Highways in Washington article, and previous edits that were made before this disruption were made a week before. It's to the same article, same disruption - so it's most definitely that same person. ...Great! We now know that the edits before this span a longer time in the past. Here, we can determine that collateral damage is quite unlikely (but we're not done yet! Read on...).


 * Let's look at a different example: IPv6 range 2A02:C7F:6440::/42. In this case, someone was making disruptive edits to Tom Pope and we were called to investigate and block the range. Checking this range's contributions (link), and... ohhhh boy... we can see that edits appear to be coming from this range that probably don't involve the disruptive user at all. The range, a /42 - is quite wide as well. This is an example of a case where I decided to only block the individual IP instead of opting to block the range. As you check the contributions of IP ranges of major ISP networks, you'll immediately see that you can't block the range that you want to block. Edits from the same day and time within the hour will fill up the contribs page and it'll leave little guesswork at that point...


 * After (or before...) we check the contributions of the range, I always run a WHOIS using the individual IP address causing disruption. There's a WMF tool labs page that will do this for you - it's located here. Enter the IP (not the range) and it will return some very useful information that you should look at. Let's say that we believe that blocking a /18 range of an IPv4 address is what we think is a good idea initially - if we enter the IP address into the WHOIS, one piece of information that it returns is the CIDR range of the parent network. That's very important! If, say, we're considering that /18 range block and the WHOIS comes back and says that this IP belongs to a /18 range as well... that means that applying the block would apply to everyone who is on that network, ISP hub, or node! Is this a bad thing? It might be... is it a good thing? It might also be... it all depends on the issue, the disruption, and you want to look at it on a case-by-case basis.


 * Other information that's returned from the WHOIS is the name and description of the network. If you're considering applying a block to a range and find out that its description is T-MOBILE, you might want to reconsider.... that's a mobile range and hence you need to heed caution. On mobile ranges, people constantly move from tower to tower throughout their day, so their IP will change in a matter of moments as soon as their mobile device carrier or ISP performs what's called a handoff (where the device's signal stops pointing to a tower they're moving away from and towards another tower that they're moving toward). Depending on the location, carrier, network, etc - they'll be still within the same IP range or even keep the same IP address, but as you undoubtedly know - devices get powered off, lose their charge, and go in and out of coverage frequently - their IP addresses will change frequently, so blocks must be carefully considered first. On top of this, the IP address you block can also be reused again and given to someone else - usually the next person or whomever that passes by that tower. Mobile networks are situations that you need to handle very carefully and for multiple reasons.


 * There are other tools that I'll use to help gauge the probability of collateral damage, but these two methods above are what I always check and will usually give me a good idea from those results. I hope this response was helpful and that it wasn't overly complicated or dreadful... lol. If you have any questions, would like me to explain something further or more in-depth, or would like my input on an example that you might find - let me know and I'll be more than happy to help! :-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   10:56, 25 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Many thanks for a useful guide. I always forget that you can inspect contribs for a CIDR range.  One followup question: when you say "I decided to only block the individual IP," my understanding is that for IPv6 blocking a /64 range is essentially always collateral-free and so blocks should not be issued at a finer level of granularity than this.  Is this accurate?  Or does this only apply on dynamic IP networks and are there some instances where blocking a /64 might have significant collateral?  GoldenRing (talk) 11:05, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * GoldenRing - Not always. Many ISPs do allocate IPv6 addresses to their clients at the /64 range level, meaning that the IP address of the user can change from one to another and within that range.... essentially, it means that the /64 range belongs to that person. However, we can't make that assumption at all - not until we see evidence that this is indeed the case. If you were to just block the /64 range of IPv6 users by default, you're likely to block an entire network that allocated their IPs to users individually, or on a less wide of a range (meaning that you'll likely cause collateral damage). Always block the individual IPv6 user that's causing disruption first (as you would any other IP user). If you notice or see that other edits are coming from an IPv6 user and where the numbers and letters are the same for half of them on the left, that means that it's likely that this is one of those networks that allocate /64 ranges to each person - and you'll just follow up with a /64 range block to take care of the issue completely. Let me know if you need me to elaborate further or if you have any more questions about this. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   11:11, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Fantastic. Thanks. You might want to put this in the rangeblock instructions.-- <b style="color:black">Dloh cier ekim </b> (talk) 15:04, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Dlohcierekim - That's not a bad thought. Details on what to do before applying a range-block and how to determine collateral damage probability is quite lacking on those pages... I'll put this as a project on my to-do list. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   15:10, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Edit-Warring IP
Just an FYI that the IP who edit-warred to the point of being blocked due to their edits at Ocean's Twelve,, also appears to be editing as. I've requested page protection for the article, but a block on that IP may be advisable as well if they are going to continue to refuse to come to the table to discuss their edits. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 14:32, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi DonIago! Thanks for the message and for letting me know about this. The IP user is now blocked for block evasion. If you notice any more edits like this, let me know and I'll be happy to take care of it. :-) I hope you have a great day and I wish you happy editing. :-D  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   14:34, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Sure thing! I hope when they come back that they'll show more willingness to edit collaboratively, and I've attempted to encourage them to do so, but I think it's on them at this point. Happily their edits and the tone of their summaries have made it rather easy to identify them thus far. Thanks for the assist! DonIago (talk) 14:36, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * DonIago - You're very welcome, and I hope they come back and contribute positively as well... the ball is in their court; we'll just have to see what happens. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   14:44, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

do you
UTRS-- <b style="color:black">Dloh cier ekim </b> (talk) 15:09, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Dlohcierekim - I do! Though I don't check it nearly as often as I should be... :-) Why, what's up?  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   15:33, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Im a current Florida Polytechnic Student, and my edit is accurate
So do I need to upload pictures of the RAD space to show that its not there anymore? Or am I going to have to get my local paper to publish something regarding that? The page is Florida Polytechnic University. Floridapolystudent (talk) 15:30, 25 January 2019 (UTC)FloridaPolyStudent
 * Hi Floridapolystudent! Your edit did not cite a reliable source, which was the reason why I reverted your edit to Florida Polytechnic University. Your school's local newspaper (if it publishes articles online) is a source you can use. The information isn't independent of the subject - a criterion that's taken into account when the community determines the reliability of a source, but in this case it's better than nothing at all. If you can cite a source, it'll be very helpful. Please also make sure that you read and understand Wikipedia's guidelines on conflict of interest when editing articles as well. It's a discouraged behavior to edit or discuss article subjects or topics that you have a personal conflict of interest with. It leads users to write about the subject in a positive or a negative way, which violates Wikipedia's policy mandating that we write articles to reflect a neutral point of view. Please take a moment to read this guideline and reflect upon it. If you have any questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks again for the message and I hope you have a great day. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   18:25, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

fell off the silly tree, he did
Thanks-- <b style="color:black">Dloh cier ekim </b> (talk) 15:37, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Dlohcierekim - Acknowledged; just read it and I'm looking into it as we speak...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   15:40, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Dlohcierekim - Oh dear Christ, what have you gotten me into? LOL  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   15:47, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I figured you'd be the best to sort though this Pascal of problems.-- <b style="color:black">Dloh cier ekim </b> (talk) 16:06, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Dlohcierekim - HAHA! I appreciate that. I can definitely do it, but you're killin' me man! :-P  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   16:08, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Dlohcierekim - I believe that I emailed you regarding my findings. If I didn't or if you still have questions or concerns about this case, let me know. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   18:20, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

The Ritz-Carlton, Riyadh
Hello - The "Use as a prison" section under History doesn't need to be added as it only shows negatively about the hotel. Please remove it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.218.120.235 (talk) 15:46, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message here. Sorry... that's not how encyclopedias work. Content that is well referenced and written to reflect a neutral point of view is information that belongs in an encyclopedia. We don't remove legitimate, well-referenced and well-written content simply because it might hurt the article subject's reputation. That's censorship, and Wikipedia does not recognize such. Unless the content is violating a Wikipedia policy or a legitimate reason is presented to support the removal of the content, it's not going to be removed. Please let me know if you have any questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks and happy editing! :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   16:03, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * . Besides, it should had to the historic/romantic mystique.-- <b style="color:black">Dloh cier ekim </b> (talk) 16:08, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Change in the wikipedia profile of Vasant Sathe
I would like to add following information to the Vasant Sathe article after ‘where doctors declared him dead.’ It should be written as ‘where doctors declared him dead. His body was donated to the All-India Institute of Medical Sciences in New Delhi.’ Dinesh Kumar (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.31.84.120 (talk) 15:49, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there! I think you meant to sign this message as Dinesh Kumar? You accidentally edited while logged out and your IP address was signed automatically for you instead. If this is a concern for you, let me know and I can hide that information for you. The reason I reverted your edit was because you did not CITE a reliable source with the information you added. You just need to do this, and you'll be set to go. If you have any questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. I'd also highly recommend that you go through and complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial as well - it will be very helpful for you and it only takes a small amount of time to go through. Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a great day and happy editing. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   18:18, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Email
Sent you another email if you could take a quick look. Thanks. Home Lander (talk) 16:20, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Home Lander - Just handled the issue and responded to it. ;-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   16:25, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Quick question
Is it possible that I could have the user and talk page of my legit alt account User:Alucard 16 Public either semi or full protected? I have semi protection on my main userpage due to previous vandalism and if it could be extended to my alt account I plan on using on public wifi that would be awesome. I have the talk page of my alt account set to redirect to my main talk page. This way I don't have to worry about any vandalizing or accidental messages left on my alt account.   Alucard 16  ❯❯❯ chat?    21:55, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Alucard 16! You sure can! I've applied indefinite semi editing protection and indefinite full move protection on both the user and user talk pages of your alt account. Please let me know if I can do anything else for you and I'll be happy to so. Happy editing! :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:01, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Awesome thanks so much Oshwah!    Alucard 16  ❯❯❯ chat?    22:05, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Alucard 16 - You bet; always happy to help. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:06, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

It's fine.
Yeah, I was pretty pissed bjut now i'm fine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KoolBeansFart (talk • contribs) 21:58, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi KoolBeansFart! I can't say that I blame you one bit... I'm glad to hear that all is okay; I had simply meant to click on the user account listed underneath yours, didn't realize that the list updated and that a new entry was added to it and bumped your username down one right before clicking, and I accidentally sniped you down instead. Please forgive me for what happened, and please let me know if I can help answer and questions or address any concerns - I'll be more than happy to help with anything you need. Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:05, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

(ok here we go nicholas...) thank you for teaching me my lesson
here is a little story based on truth: Nicholas decided to make his independence article, showing off his company and allowing the whole world to know about his company. he tried the article wizard and saw he needed to create his user page and add content. he thought " well this is my user page, so i think no one will mind if i show off a little bit about me, this is Wikipedia anyway" he posted two links and got the percentages right. he was just dipping his feet in the water, seeing how hot he could make it before he had to get his feet out. he finished the first bit of his page and then decided to check his watch list and see whats it all about. he saw this person delete his page and clicked on his profile. from the message i could see i was misusing Wikipedia. he then decided to message him and saw how he had loads of awards. so i decided to message hima s a thank you for doing that. wich brings us to here.

i just wanted to say, thank you for teaching me a lesson. i should make sure i don't add my social media to my independence article.

thank you, nicholas from the uk — Preceding unsigned comment added by Score fresh 506 (talk • contribs) 22:44, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Score fresh 506! Welcome to Wikipedia! I deleted the user page you created for two reasons:


 * The first reason was because I was concerned about the information you were sharing, in that the information included links to your personal social networking pages and other personal information. I highly recommend that you do not post any information onto Wikipedia that would link or provide details of any kind to others regarding your personal identity like this. It opens the door and makes it much easier for users to engage in harassment toward you and do so more effectively. See this page for more information as well as a list of other information that I urge you to use extreme caution and consider carefully before adding it to your account's user page (or anywhere on Wikipedia).


 * The second reason for doing so was because I felt that your user page, given that your account was just created at the time, appeared to be created and worded with the intention of using it for purposes not related to Wikipedia. Unfortunately, it's a frequent occurrence to see people create a new Wikipedia account and then immediately go and create a new user page with the sole intent to advertise or promote themselves, use Wikipedia as if it were a forum, resume, social networking profile, or web host - and for purposes unrelated to Wikipedia's goals, and not use the account to edit or contribute to the project. Please see Wikipedia's policies on user pages for more information regarding what is and is not allowed, as well as what the purpose of user pages are and are not for.


 * Since you're brand new to Wikipedia, I highly recommend that you go through and complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial. It'll provide you with interactive walkthroughs, scenarios, and information that are very useful and important for you to learn and know about regarding Wikipedia and how to be an editor or contributor. If you have any questions, or if you would like the links and personal information that you added to your user page to be removed and hidden from the public, let me know and I'll be happy to help you further. Thanks again for the message and I wish you a great rest of your day :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:53, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

re AIV
The SPI for the LTA is NewAccountWikiPatrol.php. They are also known as Arturo and they like to create a bunch of accounts with various nonsensical usernames such as the ones from the archive, and sometimes mock other editors' usernames. -★- PlyrStar93  → Message me. ← 00:02, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I didn't spot the AIV comment until after I blocked, or I might have added something there. Generally, PlyrStar93 is fairly good at spotting this one. -- zzuuzz (talk) 00:05, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Zzuuzz - Ah, no worries man. I usually recognize and can see LTA patterns, behavior, and activity - I just didn't recognize this one... no big deal ;-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   00:08, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * You'd certainly recognise it if I span a few previous usernames your way. Incidentally, this is often called the oshw*nker troll. But mainly there's usually at least 5 or 6 accounts, sometimes including the name Arturo, and often a company name (in this case, this one). -- zzuuzz (talk) 00:13, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Zzuuzz - Do you happen to have a list handy so I could take a look at it? Those other usernames are definitely very familiar to me as LTA users; I'm just not seeing the connection between this particular username (加州的 阿图罗 古斯塔沃 - translated as Arturo Gus..... okayyyyyyy, I see the pattern now (LOL)....  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   00:19, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * A list or the LTA page link would still be useful and very much appreciated if you have one handy :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   00:20, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * It's a funny thing, by design that SPI is all there is. I'll see if I can rustle up an email in the foreseeable. -- zzuuzz (talk) 00:23, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Zzuuzz - No problem. Again, I appreciate your messages very much; thank you for your time here. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   00:25, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Zzuuzz - I just received your follow-up email. Thank you. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:35, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * PlyrStar93 - Ah perfect, thanks for following up here and for letting me know. I just didn't recognize the username as an LTA pattern that I typically recognize and bonk on the noggin with the blockhammer. :-) I appreciate the message; I'll know this for next time ;-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   00:07, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

BLP violation
Hi Oshwah, The IP had just restored BLP violations that I had removed. Requesting you to kindly remove the same from Jagdish Tytler

WP:BLP violation. There is no evidence or reliable source that Tytler said these things. these are unsubstantiated and unproven accusations from lawyers and not Tytlers own statement. as is being stated in the wiki article.

The wiki article currently states that "Tytler, then a member of the Indian Parliament, was complaining to his supporters about relatively "small" number of Sikhs killed in his parliamentary constituency Delhi Sadar, which in his opinion had undermined his position in the ruling Indian National Congress party of India." -- D Big X ray ᗙ  05:45, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi DBigXray! I'm obviously not trying to take a side, give any advantage to anyone or a revision over another one, or endorse a particular revision - I typically do not edit or touch articles that I close the gate and throw a gold lock on (because I need to appear and handle the issue in a purely neutral and administrative fashion). However, due to the circumstances regarding the content, I agree that it's necessary to remove it by default pending the outcome of the discussion on the article's talk page. Please let me know if I can do anything else for you and I'll be happy to help. :-) Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   05:52, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, I understand, I have started a discussion thread at Talk:Jagdish_Tytler to address this BLP violation. For now there is nothing else needed from admin side. Appreciate your kind help. -- D Big X ray ᗙ  05:55, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * DBigXray - You bet; always happy to lend a hand. ;-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   05:56, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Jessica McClure
What do you mean I didn't provide a source? It's right there! There's are reference attached to the stuff you reverted. -- 70.51.201.106 (talk) 08:51, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there! My apologies; you are correct - you referenced a source and I somehow failed to notice that. I have restored you changes and removed the notice I left on your user talk page. Please accept my apologies for the error on my part, and please feel free to follow up with any additional questions or concerns that you may have. I hope you have a great day and I wish you happy editing. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   08:53, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks for the rapid response -- 70.51.201.106 (talk) 08:54, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * You're welcome; I apologize again for the mistake and I hope you have a great day. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   08:55, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Ant to you. -- 70.51.201.106 (talk) 08:59, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

206.74.212.63
I don't know why you deleted my content. I'm trying to improve the article — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.74.212.63 (talk • contribs) 09:01, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Excerpting and citing de Zayas work correctly?
I cited the reference from a verifiably accurate source, and yet I was removed under the assumption that I did not cite an accurate source. Please advise to where the following is not an accurate excerpt of de Zayas work:

In February of 2018, de Zayas advocated for legal compliance within the territory of the Hawaiian Islands, by publishing a pertinent legal memorandum involving illegal American military occupation. The memorandum clearly states:

'I have come to understand that the lawful political status of the Hawaiian Islands is that of a sovereign nation-state in continuity; but a nation state that is under a strange form of occupation by the United States resulting from an illegal military occupation and fraudulent annexation. As such, international laws (The Hague and Geneva Conventions) require that governance and legal matters within the occupied territory of the Hawaiian Islands must be administered by the application of laws by the occupied state (in this case, the Hawaiian Kingdom) not the domestic laws of the occupier (the United States). ' (Read the entire memorandum at https://hawaiiankingdom.org/pdf/Dr_deZayas_Memo_2_25_2018.pdf) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SpeakingTruthToPower4Freedom (talk • contribs) 09:17, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi SpeakingTruthToPower4Freedom! Thanks for leaving me a message on my user talk page with your question. Are you just trying to quote this person? Is the person being quoted from this source or are you copying the exact writing from this .pdf source because it's what was written? Depending on the context, the author of the .pdf file, and the source itself - this may be a violation of policy due to the content being copyrighted. Copying things directly from a source (unless the source is also quoting what someone said) may constitute a violation of copyright - please check and make sure that this isn't the case. I also question the source and the website that you're getting this from. What is it about? It doesn't appear to be a government source nor from a location that Wikipedia considers reliable - please also check this too. If this isn't a direct quote from a person, you need to paraphrase what is being cited in your own words. If you have any questions about the policies I've linked you to here, let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. Good luck and happy editing! :-D  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:47, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Why did you deleted my editing
You had deleted my information .... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tharun Rathamsetty (talk • contribs) 09:35, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Tharun Rathamsetty - Your edit wasn't cited by a reliable source. On top of this, it didn't appear to be constructive. If you need help with citing a source, please see this page regarding how to do so. If you're using the visual editor, it includes a tool in the interface that will help you do this very easily. If you still need help, let me know and I'll be happy to do so. Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   19:18, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

expletive spray in article
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/58.167.84.201 might try again - who knows - I honestly think dropping text into articles laced with expletives is something needing a direct to admin reference - if it strikes again it may be close to requiring action... JarrahTree 13:27, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * JarrahTree - IP blocked. ;-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   13:28, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * thank you - appreciated - as always  :|    JarrahTree 13:30, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * You bet! :-D  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   09:15, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Deletion help
Hi, sorry to bother you but could you help me delete all the pages linked on my sandbox page? Or do I have to nominate all of them under g6 one by one? &sub; Emoteplump (<font color="color:#ED2939;">Contributions ) (<font color="color:#ED2939;">Talk )  13:25, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Emoteplump! Nope, that's fine - your request here is good enough; I'll just link it in the deletion reason so that others can navigate to it and verify that you requested this. Give me a few minutes to set some things up, and I'll be happy to get this done for you. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   13:52, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your help!! Since WikiProject Portals is undergoing a major upgrade, I will periodically update my sandbox page for redundant pages that are linked to an automated portal page. Will you be able to help me delete those too? It's ok if it isn't possible :-) &sub; Emoteplump (<font color="color:#ED2939;">Contributions ) (<font color="color:#ED2939;">Talk )  14:02, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Emoteplump - Just to confirm... I am deleting every page listed in your sandbox right now - all (about) 100 of them?  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   14:44, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * All except those mentioned in the header. Eg. Portal:Malaysia, Portal:Finland, etc. &sub; Emoteplump (<font color="color:#ED2939;">Contributions ) (<font color="color:#ED2939;">Talk )  14:46, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

How to add reference links to edits
Please I would like to know how to add reference links to the edits I make on a page. Pax in christos (talk) 15:57, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Pax in christos! Thanks for messaging me here with your question. Adding a reference to a citation is simple! If you're using the visual editor, there's a button in the interface that will help you by doing it for you. You'll just paste the link to the source and it'll help you fill in the rest. If you're using the traditional code editor, you can visit this section of the help page for how to do this manually. If you have any more questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:51, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

No subject
Hi, I'm the one who edited BPM 37093. I did not make a mistake but thanks for telling me. Do not remove any of my edits without my permission. - YoMyNameJoe — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.64.44.82 (talk) 16:05, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

I need to know what the message is and what I need to do. Thank you
I need to know what the message is and what I need to do. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vincedumond (talk • contribs) 19:18, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Vincedumond and thanks for leaving me a message here with your question. I apologize for the delay responding to it; I've been busy with real life and I'm just now getting caught up with all of my Wikipedia messages and emails. :-) If you're referring to the ArbCom 2018 election voter message you received, the voting period has since closed and the elections ended, but you'll be able to vote in the next election when it occurs at the end of 2019! :-) The message was simply to let you know that your account was eligible to vote in the Arbitration Committee elections that choose who will replace the users whose terms have expired (usually about half the committee). These users are elected as members of the committee in order to perform arbitration and make binding decisions regarding difficult and/or extreme incidents or issues that users and admins cannot come to a consensus regarding what must be done. If you wish to vote in the next election, simply wait for the next notification message that you'll undoubtedly receive and follow the instructions - you'll be directed to the page listing the candidates and their responses to questions. There you can get to know each candidate, ask questions, and participate in discussions with other voters. You'll also be given a link to cast your votes. Please let me know if you have any questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks again for the message and I wish you a great day and happy editing! :-D  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   18:14, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

User talk:Red Label MusicGroup
You may Wish to Remove Talk Page access. -- Thegooduser  Life Begins With a Smile :)  🍁 22:11, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:35, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism
Hi, Cube Entertainment wiki's page has been vandalised recently. I don't know how to filed vandalism to wikipedia. Fans from a Kpop soloist, Hyuna has been putting unreliable sources and hate to Cube's wiki page. Can you help inserting the vandalism code in the page?

Belbelllebell (talk) 08:22, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Belbelllebell and thanks for leaving me a message here with your request for help. I apologize for the delay responding to your message; I was busy with real life and I'm just now getting all caught up with the Wikipedia messages and emails I've been left while I was away. :-)


 * You can report users who are engaging in repeated vandalism or other blatant or malicious disruption by filing a report at Administrator intervention against vandalism. If a particular article or page needs to be protected due to a high rate of vandalism or disruption, you can file a report at Requests for page protection and an administrator will review and protect that page. I took a look at both articles that you provided, and it looks like the issues have since stopped, so there's no need for me to do anything at this time. However, if the disruption resumes please file a report at the locations above or let me know if you need help and I'll be happy to do so.


 * Thanks again for the message! We need diligent editors like you who care about the encyclopedia and want to make sure that article content is neutral, verified, fair, and accurate. :-) Best -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   19:26, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Refund.
Hi Oshwah! Can you refund me the following pages, since the result of the MFD was keep,

TheWikiWizard/September 2018 and.... Category:TheWikiWizard Talk Archives
 * TheWikiWizard/Workshop
 * TheWikiWizard/Issues/December 2018 (Special)
 * TheWikiWizard/October 2018
 * TheWikiWizard/Don't Bite The Newcomers
 * TheWikiWizard/Tips
 * TheWikiWizard/Workshop/Draft/January 2019
 * TheWikiWizard/Workshop/Notes and Ideas/November 2018
 * Wikipedia talk:TheWikiWizard/Archive 1
 * Wikipedia talk:TheWikiWizard

Thanks! It's a lot of pages right? I did not want to request them at WP:REFUND because it would take up a huge section. Thegooduser  Life Begins With a Smile :)  🍁 21:10, 27 January 2019 (UTC)


 * I've restored the above after a request at WP:REFUND, the remaining redlink is a page which has never existed.  Hut 8.5  21:23, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I fixed the link to it, Sorry to cause the confusion. Thegooduser   Life Begins With a Smile :)  🍁 21:24, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
 * OK, done that one as well.  Hut 8.5  21:26, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you Hut 8.5 for taking care of this while I was away. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:34, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

SCCY CPX-1
Hi Osh, Special:Contributions/107.145.39.11 is back again after its block expired. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 22:44, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi BilCat! I apologize for the delay responding to your message. Is this still an issue? Let me know.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:26, 6 February 2019 (UTC)


 * No worries, User:Dlohcierekim blocked them for a week, and they haven't showm up yet since the block expired. I hope all is well. - BilCat (talk) 18:19, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Perfect; I'm glad to hear that this was handled. Things are fine! Just been busy with real life things and making some important changes in that aspect... fun times... lol  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   09:17, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Chat
Mn I see u the best I got to talk to....I need to know to use these thang...computers or phone in a way of different from others but I dont how? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.186.83.67 (talk) 22:50, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there! Unfortunately, Wikipedia doesn't have a computer tutorial. However, we have a tutorial for new users if you're interested in learning about Wikipedia and how the site works and how you can use it to contribute. Give that tutorial a go and let me know if you need anything else. Good luck! :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:28, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Range block needed
Hi. Any chance you could have a look at this problem? Deb (talk) 11:21, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Deb! I apologize for the delay responding to your request for assistance here. I was busy with real life stuff and I'm just now getting caught up with all of my Wikipedia messages and emails. :-) Is this ANI still active or was it taken care of? I'll be happy to help with a range block if it's still needed... let me know. Best -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:32, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I think it was closed. Someone else did look at it and concluded that a range block was impracticable. But thanks anyway. Deb (talk) 18:19, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Deb - Yes, of course; you're very welcome. I'm sorry that I didn't respond in a timely manner. If another issue presents itself where a range investigation and possible block is needed and you need assistance, please don't hesitate to leave me a message as you did above, and I'll be more than happy to help. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   19:27, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

No subject
 ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  17:28, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Wikaviani - Received and just responded. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   20:04, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!
Thanks again :-) --  Doc James  along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 17:41, 28 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi again Doc James and thanks for the award. I typically edit these articles by cleaning up vandalism and blatant attempts to add invalid or incorrect facts, but I'm happy to be recognized nonetheless. :-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:33, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Around the World in Eighty Days
Dear Oshwah, I am sorry about that. While I was away from my computer, one of my fellow classmates added unnecessary words to the paragraph. I have informed him of the mistake he made. Hopefully, this shouldn't happen again.

Thank you for your concern. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shatcher514 (talk • contribs) 18:36, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Shatcher514 - This is a good lesson for you to always lock your workstation when you step away from it - even for just a moment. Later in life when you hold a job and a career, leaving your workstation unlocked can put you at risk for someone to use your workstation and (more importantly) your name to do things that are much much worse and could cost you your job or even more... Even if you claim that it wasn't you or that someone else did it, if no security footage, witnesses, or anything to collaborate your claim of innocence can be found, managers and supervisors will have no choice but to refer to the fact that your username caused the damage because it's your responsibility as part of your job to keep your accounts, information, workstation, and company information and data secure. This also applies here; you're responsible for all the editing that comes from your account and you will be held accountable for them. Please be more careful in the future.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   20:10, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Look...
I don't know how to talk to you GOLDIEM J (talk) 19:26, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
 * ...You just did...? --Biscuit-in-Chief (Talk – Contribs) 18:07, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi GOLDIEM J! What you did above be messaging me here is how to communicate directly with others on Wikipedia. Is there something you need? Do you need help with anything? Let me know.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   20:13, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't know how to all you of you're ok GOLDIEM J (talk) 20:15, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
 * GOLDIEM J - I apologize; I don't understand your response here. Can you try and elaborate so that I can help you? Thanks :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   09:39, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
 * My friends always feel the need to tell me thingsGOLDIEM J (talk) 19:36, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
 * ?  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   20:25, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Editing of Lee Rowley page
Hi again Oshwah,

Hope you are well. You helped a while back with the 'Lee Rowley' page after what appeared to be the same person repeatedly deleting anything that was not entirely positive about the subject matter. Same person appears to be back. First it was an unregistered user and then it was a user who only edits that page. As before, they are making exactly the same edits as last year (word for word), which suggests it is the same person again. After the last round of issues a couple of experienced Wiki editors stepped in and tidied things up and rejected the vandalism that was going on. They also critiqued some of the detail in my edits, which I accepted as they were sensible points. As again, suspect the page needs a extra control to stop their vandalism, as they keep just re-doing the edits.

I have recently started a new job, so my recent editing had gone down, which is why it took me weeks to notice the vandalism. Hope to start doing more again soon. Issues appear to be localised to this particular page.

Thanks, Impsfan (talk) 19:41, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Impsfan! Please accept my apologies for the delay responding to your message here. I've been busy with real life things as well, and I'm trying to keep caught up with all of the Wikipedia messages, pings, notifications, and emails I receive. It's not easy at times, but I do what I can. :-)


 * Okay, I'll take a look at the history of the page and see if it's currently ongoing. If so, I'll do what's needed to put a stop to it. If it's no longer happening, I'll still do some digging but may hold off on taking any action until it continues again (if it does, please let me know); otherwise, I'd be taking action regarding stale contributions, which would be inappropriate on my part. Thanks again and I hope you understand the delay; I'm sorry that it happened.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   09:37, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the edits by are stale now... the user also hasn't been warned for disruptive editing and they appear to have communicated with you on your user talk page as well regarding the BLP policy and his/her thoughts - what are your thoughts about the arguments that were presented? Let me know.  ~Oshwah~  (talk)  (contribs)   09:41, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Cali
tldr this dummy needs another sock block. <b style="background:#0000ff;font:Helvetica;padding:0.4em;font-size: 80%;border-radius: 2em;margin: 0.25em;"> Cards84664 </b> (talk) 22:09, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Cards84664, sorry for the delay responding to your message here. I was away to take care of real life things and I'm just now catching up with all of my Wikipedia messages and emails left while I was away. It looks like this IP user has been blocked - excellent! If you need help with another disruptive IP user, please don't hesitate to let me know or file a report at AIV or ANI. The later is recommended, since those noticeboards are regularly patrolled by many admins and will be taken care of much quicker should I be inactive or not around. Thanks for the message and I wish you a great day! :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   20:15, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

User:Henry helper
Hey Oshwah. Could you perhaps calm down? Apparently, he's a bit anxious. –Biscuit-in-Chief (Talk – Contribs) 14:22, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Biscuit-in-Chief and thanks for leaving me a message here with your request for assistance regarding this user. I apologize for the delay responding to it; I've been busy with real life and I'm just now getting caught up with all of the Wikipedia messages and emails I received while I was away. :-) It looks like this account has since been blocked, so that's good to see if that was the action that was needed. If you need my input or assistance with anything else in the future, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be happy to help. If I'm inactive or away, I recommend filing a report at AIV or ANI - it's patrolled by many admins and will result in much faster assistance during those times. :-) Thanks for the message! I hope you have a great day and I wish you happy editing. :-D Until we speak again -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   20:18, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
 * How DARE you apologize for taking some time off Wikipedia?! xD I mean, looking at your edit count, you don’t do anything but Wikipedia, so I think it was a very well-deserved break :-) —Biscuit-in-Chief (Talk – Contribs) 20:33, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Biscuit-in-Chief - I know, I'm sorry! I'll do better next time! XD - Yeah man, I say that to myself when someone tells me what my edit count is at... I need a hobby. :-P To be fair, many of them are semi-automated due to my involvement with patrolling recent changes which will add a lot to the overall count. Still doesn't help though :-P  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   20:38, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Air Georgian Edit
Yes I did, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by John7224 (talk • contribs) 01:39, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi John7224. I wouldn't consider the edit you made here to Air Georgian as compliant with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and I don't think that many other editors of the community would either. I highly recommend that you go through and complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial as it will provide you a lot of help and assistance with getting started, locating important pages, understanding Wikipedia's basic policies and founding principles, and provide you with an easy way to quickly understand how to navigate and communicate with other editors. Please let me know if I can assist you with anything and I'll be happy to help. Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy your stay and become a positive long-term contributor to the encyclopedia! :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   20:23, 6 February 2019 (UTC)