User:Oshwah/TalkPageArchives/2021-06

One person using two accounts and disrupting Wikipedia (now three)
Hi User:Oshwah I wanted to tell you that there is one person who is using two accounts at the same time doing the same to same similar edits User:Cactinites and User:Zekewoks look at these first as they are only editing mainl Bigg Boss 13 & 14 contestants and adding this and Zake here  also in Bigg boss look   also adding blue links to India in many actors   also they are doing a lot of disruption on Wikipedia so please block them as it’s not allowed. Please do something — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.120.138.152 (talk) 21:37, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi there! Have you created a report at SPI?  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:06, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I did but they declined it. User:Oshwah. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.34.127 (talk) 19:29, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Please could you block both accounts. Also they are unnecessarily making images big look in Devoleena Bhattacharjee's and Jasmin Bhasin's history and in Hina Khan as well. Please i request please block them.


 * User:Oshwah now this is gone too far the person has now made a third account User:Penacurt look at the history as it’s similar edits to the other please block them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.34.127 (talk) 19:31, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * User:Zekewoks isn't an account that exists. Did you spell it correctly?  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   20:31, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
 * User:Oshwah yes I did the user does exist look in the history of Naina Singh and click on contributions of the user. Please do something about this. Oh yes I did made a spelling mistake sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.34.127 (talk) 09:27, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * User:Oshwah please look at this as well the user is saying I haven’t got three accounts when they are lying. Saying friends have also edited on the other accounts how could that be possible. Please block both of them please. Also how could the user friends be doing the same to same edits that Cactinites have done. It’s very fishy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.34.127 (talk) 08:30, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Have you filed a report at SPI regarding these users yet? If not, you really need to do so. Once you've filed a report, let me know and I'll be happy to take a look at it. If you have questions about filing a report, let me know and I'll be happy to answer them and help you. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:37, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Invitation for Functionary consultation 2021
Greetings,

I'm letting you know in advance about a meeting I'd like to invite you to regarding the Universal Code of Conduct and the community's ownership of its future enforcement. I'm still in the process of putting together the details, but I wanted to share the date with you: 27 June, 2021. I do not have a time on this date yet, but I will let you soon. We have created a meta page with basic information. Please take a look at the meta page and sign up your name under the appropriate section.

Thank you for your time.--BAnand (WMF) 15:06, 2 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi BAnand (WMF)! Thanks for letting me know about this. I'll check it out! :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:43, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Some discussions
Hi Oshwah. I'm feeling harassed by two users who I feel have been bullying me for about 2 weeks and have been thanking each other on one of their talk pages. I've been losing sleep and having trouble eating and digesting food, for the last 2 weeks. It's affecting other members of my family. Unfortunately these two users are very regular, experienced users, so know how to "get to me" in a way that circumvents looking like policy violations to most people (I unfortunately don't know much about how Wikipedia works because I've been a "casual" user since 2008, having only made a few edits per year: even though I now have 1000+ edits, 500 of them were in the last two weeks). I don't want to use the noticeboards, because I am finding them extremely overwhelming. These 2 users have both "hounded" me on some noticeboards, and I am finding that process extremely bad for my mental health. I have repeatedly told both users: "please be more gentle with me", "go easy on me please", "I don't want to get into another 1-on-1 lengthy debate with you", "Can we please call a truce?" (x2), and they keep on replying again and again and again. I can't "disengage" because these users have made accusations against me publicly. I feel that if these accusations were true, then other Wikipedians would be able to make them (these 2 users don't have to keep initiating everything against me). In 13 years of being on Wikipedia, I'm new to all this drama and it's extremely disturbing to me. These users seem like they're on here full-time, and I can't compete with that because I have other work and other interests and family. My edit history will make it look like I'm on here full-time too, but that's only been in the last 2 weeks because of these users badgering me and sealioning me and digging up edits from years ago (some of them were even commented out using and still they're digging these up from years ago). Are you able to help me please? Dr. Universe (talk) 19:43, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Dr. Universe! I'm sorry that recent drama has been affecting you this way. I would do my best to not let the comments of others on here affect you to the point where it's bothering you outside of Wikipedia. After all, it's a website and this is the internet - you can't let other people on the internet get to you like that. :-) Who are these other two users? What are they accusing you of exactly? What's the situation and what's going on? I'll be happy to help in any way that I can; I just need more information and details. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk)  (contribs)   17:55, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Appreciation
Hey,

Big fan of your contributions. Keep it up. Modernedits01 (talk) 13:01, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Modernedits01! Thanks for the kind message! I appreciate it a lot. If you have questions or need help with anything, please let me know and I'll be happy to do so. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:56, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Newark NJ Fire Dept Wikipedia Page
It was the Newark NJ Fire Dept Wikipedia page, but the roaming ip address from St Petersburg Florida seems to have calmed down the last 8 days. You put temporarily page protection on it, and as soon as it expired he pounced on it like a lion. But there hasn't been any activity for the last eight days. Thanks Doriden Doriden (talk) 00:59, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Doriden! Have you been to Requests for page protection before? This is the proper page to make protection requests. I'll check out the article and see what's going on...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   18:44, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Disruptive User
Is there a way we can have this user's IP address 119.18.2.245 blocked from editing. I have warned them twice now not to vandalise Wikipedia pages and they keep doing it as they have done with Gerard Beale.Sully198787 (talk) 15:01, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Sully198787! I took a look at the article, and it looks like the IP user was just making changes to some wiki links. The edits don't seem like blatant vandalism to me...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   18:46, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Again the user is adding untrue content in pages
Hi User:Oshwah this user i reported few weeks ago to you is still adding untrue information in pages like Comedy Nights Bachao. For proof look in the users history. User:115.97.203.57 please look and block. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.34.127 (talk • contribs) 19:34, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi there! Please see the response I left for you in your message above. If the user is adding unsourced and inaccurate information into articles, please be sure to warn them. If the issues continue after multiple warnings, report the user to AIV. If you have questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them and help you. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:39, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Newark NJ Fire Dept Wikipedia Page
The page is fine right now and for the last nine days, I am on a mobile device and it's difficult to navigate through all of these potholes to request page protection. I appreciate your advice and interest. Thank you, Doriden Doriden (talk) 23:03, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Doriden - No problem! :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   20:24, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

CU request

 * Aeschylus - Let me know if I can be of any assistance. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   20:24, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Strange edits
When looking at recent changes I found User:Tuabee111/sandbox which appears to be a magnet for IPs to edit. It claims to be a television show that lasted one season but the amount of information far surpasses that and I can't find any existence of it via google. The lede says it is a Chinese television program from 2020 but the infobox claims it is Thai from 2019. I'm wondering if some people are using it for a personal project under the guise of a television program? Notfrompedro (talk) 17:11, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I U5 CSD'd it (After a LONG history of seeing such pages at MFD). — xaosflux  Talk 17:42, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Xaosflux - Thanks for taking care of that while I was away. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:40, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Newark NJ Fire Department Wikipedia Page
Hi Oshwah, that non static ip addresses from St.Petersburg Florida is currently blocked? If so for how long? Another editor put temporary page protection on the Newark Fire Department page last month and about an hour after it expired he pounced on it like a tiger. How can he have so many ip addresses? I personally would like to see him blocked indefinitely. Continuous disruptive editing, and on other cities fire dept Wikipedia pages too. Thank you, Doriden Doriden (talk) 09:53, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Doriden! You're talking about the Newark Fire Department article, correct? As of right now, the IPv6 range is blocked for one month. IPv6 addresses can change very frequently depending on the Internet Service Provider that the user is subscribed to. They can change every week, every day, or every hour - and without the user purposefully doing anything or even having any knowledge that it's happening. This is why we will often block IPv6 ranges (typically the /64 range) instead of individual IPv6 addresses. It's so that the user remains blocked even if their IPv6 address changes. :-) Please let me know if you have any more questions, and I'll be happy to answer them and help you. :-) Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:51, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Vibrio anguillarum
I don't know if this needs oversite but Vibrio anguillarum has been a copyvio of https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311668982_A_comprehensive_review_of_Vibrio_Listonella_anguillarum_ecology_pathology_and_prevention since December 2020 when DrPoPoPo added it without any kind of attribution. I removed it and warned DrPoPoPo but they haven't edited since that day. Notfrompedro (talk) 18:27, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Notfrompedro! Thanks for letting me know about the copyright issues on the Vibrio anguillarum article. I've rev del'd the revisions that I saw that needed to be hidden under RD1. If there are any revisions that I missed, let me know and I'll make sure to handle them. :-) Thanks again !  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:59, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I think you missed the initial edits adding the content in by DrPoPoPo. Notfrompedro (talk) 12:54, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Notfrompedro - Thanks for letting me know. . :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   12:58, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Edit of Eight-circuit model of consciousness
Hi Oshwah,

Thanks for your message. When I removed the content I was indeed doubting whether to explain or not, but it seemed so obvious to me that the content did not belong on wikipedia that I did not. The content I removed states that "contemporary neuroscience has found no evidence to support these hypotheses" and that "[other models are more accurate]". The content suggests one such model, linking to a book by Newberg and Waldman. It then states that the 8-circuit model would be considered pseudoscience.

- Most importantly, wikipedia articles have a descriptive function, but the content that I removed seemed rather to criticize the model in order to promote another model, which instead should itself be described in a different wikipedia article. Given the large number of existing models, another separate wikipedia article could describe the comparison of different models within psychology and neuroscience, although it would have to describe how different models have been compared by psychologists and neuroscientists, in order to uphold objectivity.

In addition, from my experience in cognitive neuroscience (PhD) and psychology, the criticism does not hold:

- The 8-circuit model is a psychological model, which integrates theory and results from many fields into a coherent structure which can be used and verified psychologically, even experientially. As such, it does not require neuroscientific evidence, and neuroscientific evidence alone cannot contradict it. Wherever it does include neurological information, one could criticize oversimplification, such as the integration of the triune brain theory, but that theory is actually correct, it's just that contemporary neuroscience seeks more specificity. - The content I removed mentions brain scans. There are many problems with the use of neuroimaging methods, which methods are widely popularized yet their reliability is overestimated (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0010945215000155). On a deeper level, the physico-physiological mechanisms of neuroimaging methods such as MRI, fNIRS, EEG are unclear, and where they could potentially be clarified, the number of mechanisms contributing to the eventual neuroimaging signal is so large, and their interactions so myriad, that the eventual result will (and generally does) prevent their connection to the activation patterns found in neuroimaging methods, such that the reported activation patterns come to lack meaning. - The experiential applicability of contemporary neuroscientific models is very narrow, such that one would have to be a neuroscientist, and often even to specialize in a specific model itself in order to find experiential value. The 8-circuit model, as it integrates sources from many fields, can be used by many to categorize and order their experiences. This applicability is often overlooked and the content that I removed unfairly diverts novel readers interested in experiential applicability.

Of course, the above three points are not as important as the first; wikipedia has a descriptive role, and the content I removed seemed rather to criticize the model, divert the reader to a specific alternative model by mentioning brain scans, including the referral to a book possibly in order simply to promote it. The fan of Newberg and Waldman could write a separate article on their model.

Could you help me decide which part of the above justification for the removal of the content I could add to the edit summary when I remove the content again?

Kind regards, Wouter — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.214.89.69 (talk) 07:20, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi there! If you don't feel that the content is encyclopedic or justifiable, feel free to remove it. You just want to make sure that you add an edit summary with the changes that you're making and explain what you're changing and why. Edit summaries help by explaining your changes to other editors that review and scrutinize them, and they help avoid confusion with other editors, since they know what you're doing. If you have any questions or need help with anything else, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be happy to assist you. I hope you have a great day and I wish you happy editing. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:26, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Newark NJ Fire Dept Wikipedia Page
Thank you very much Oshwah, I appreciate your help and advice. I'll keep you informed if anymore disruptive editing occurs. Thanks again, Doriden Doriden (talk) 03:47, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Doriden - You bet; always happy to help. :-) Happy editing!  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   03:48, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

RfA debriefs
Hey, I don't suppose you've got a minute to add your thoughts to a new RfA debriefs page? I recall you writing something elsewhere on this, but can't remember whereabouts. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  09:33, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Ritchie333 - I always have time to help you out. I'll check it out and add my thoughts. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   10:10, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Ritchie333 - I've added my debrief and my reflection to the RfA debriefs page. Thanks for letting me know about it, and sorry it took so long for me to get around to doing. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   11:12, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
 * That's okay, it's not a major high priority thing. I just went back and checked what I'd written at the RfA, and noticed although I opposed, it was very much a "not quite yet", with a (at least intended) implication that I would support a future RfA. And although some of the opposition was unpleasant, I really don't think you could hold that accusation to my central point : "I'm sure Oshwah does everything in good faith, but I think he's not quite hit the right temperament for the tools just yet." Over time, my objections have diminished and I'd probably now support you at RfA if you weren't an admin already. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  11:21, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Ritchie333 - I appreciate your honest thoughts - thank you for sharing them. :-) I don't hold any of the opposition I received on my RFA against anyone, and I certainly don't hold your opposition against you. You voted based on how you truly felt at the time, and with the project's best interest as your first and foremost priority. That's the best mindset to have when participating in a discussion, and I hold absolutely no grudges against you at all for doing what you felt was the right thing to do.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   11:29, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

== Highly biased airtcles(2409:4060:E87:CE6D:18D8:BB1:9CE9:C342 (talk) 11:20, 16 June 2021 (UTC)) ==

Hey administer you all say neutrality blah blah but one of your airtcles about Hinduism and other religions in the christianity section is a pure agenda block me if you want to but your website is a propaganda toll and your so called mods Admins and users are toxic gatekeepers there's a boomer admin that goes around harassing people — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4060:e87:ce6d:18d8:bb1:9ce9:c342 (talk) 11:20, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi there! I'm not sure why you would think that I'd block you... Have you considered trying to edit and improve these articles that you believe are not wording content neutrally? Wikipedia encourages everyone to be bold and fix issues when you see them. If the article is protected, you can make an edit request and ask that content be changed. I'm sorry if you feel that an administrator is harassing people - I'm sure that there's a reasonable explanation. If you could provide more information, I'll be happy to help you... :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   11:27, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Recently closed SPI
Hi Oshwah, really happy to see you clearing loads of these SPIs. In one of the SPIs you closed today, you mentioned that they are not in violation of policy as they might have lost access to their account. I think they did lose access to their account in one sense or another: The one account was blocked, and then just 1 hour later the other one began editing.. (see the timeline I had added there) Would you mind having a quick look at it again? – NJD-DE (talk) 12:09, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Njd-de! I've actually spent the last few hours in SPI and managed to clear the entire CU backlog! The checkuser requests are all caught up now! Woo hoo! :-) Anyways, that's not why you're here... :-) I went and took another look at the SPI report you mentioned, and I see that the listed accused sock account was blocked for 60 hours, but with no reason given in the block log. I'd be curious if Anthony Bradbury might possibly remember the reason behind the block. Nonetheless, this does mean that there is a potential violation of policy in terms of block evasion. For this reason, I have redacted my original decision to decline the SPI and I will be running a CU check shortly. Thanks for messaging me and for pointing this out. :-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   12:24, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah, huge thank you for clearing them!! And thanks for looking at the SPI again. I believe Anthony blocked them for vandalism, as the user kept removing sourced content from Shafiqul Islam Shimul. Actually something another IP had been blocked for as well. It appears someone really doesn't like the current version of the article .. So the confirmed CU didn't surprise me. – NJD-DE (talk) 12:42, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Njd-de - You're welcome; always happy to help! :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   12:48, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Please accept my apologies; my omission of block reason here is a gross error, and also a very rare one which I cannot explain satisfactorily. I do recall the event; the editor had vandalised very significantly, which is why the length of block was a little longer than usual. Anthony Bradbury "talk" 14:25, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Anthony Bradbury - No apologies needed; it happens and nobody is perfect. ;-) Thanks for responding and for explaining the reason for the block. I ended up running a CU on the accounts in the SPI report and confirmed them. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   14:34, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Please look at Special:Contributions/Trap133
This is a sub 48 hour editor with a lot of interesting contributions which have my antennae twitching. I have purposely not linked Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 12:15, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Timtrent! What exactly is making you suspicious? Who do you suspect this user of being a sock puppet of? Have you filed a report at SPI? :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   12:28, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * It is the pattern of many, many edits in a short period to gain an editing rights threshold, but by a new editor who would be unlikely to  know  that. I have not opened a report because I cannot work out which other editor I think this might be. I could  easily be mistaken.  Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 12:31, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Timtrent - No worries. Thanks for letting me know. Keep an eye out, and let me know if you find any evidence pointing this account to another. I'll be happy to help once I have evidence and an SPI report is filed. ;-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   12:33, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * At present their edits are oddly distributed, including a D !vote at AfD (again unusual). I'll keep an eye out, but their pattern does not yet suggest an obvious answer.  Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 12:36, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Timtrent - No worries; just keep me updated and let me know if you find anything. Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   12:48, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * They just declared on their talk page that they are a prior IP only editor. I am content. Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 15:32, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Sock puppet
Hello Oshwah you were the CheckUser, on this case []. I think I may have found him I opened up a new case if you have the time could you review case do to you closing the last one?.Mr.Jakub from prague (talk) 02:13, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Mr.Jakub from prague! I responded to your SPI report. I need more information before I can proceed. Can you help me out, respond to the SPI report, and provide detailed evidence? Thanks. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   03:17, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I just did hope it helps.Mr.Jakub from prague (talk) 04:27, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Mr.Jakub from prague - Perfect! Thanks for doing that. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   18:48, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Long-term abuse/Louisville LTA
Can you find the original user to this LTA? I can't find it myself and I asked about this.  NASCARfan0548  ↗  03:52, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi NASCARfan0548! I'm not sure who the original master is. I'm hoping that maybe LuK3 might know... :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   18:48, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , I have a question: why does he keep undoing the same edits over and over again on adding bad phrases toward politics, actors, actresses, and hurricanes?  NASCARfan0548  ↗  18:52, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
 * NASCARfan0548 - I have no idea why long-term abusers of this project do the things that they do. Many times, it's because they have some "morale" agenda to make content the way that they feel that it should be, or based off of their beliefs or ideals. Other times, it's simply because they want to troll and abuse the project. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   19:17, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Newark NJ fire dept Wikipedia page
Oshwah, he's back again this time from a Miami Florida ip address. Please revert his edit Doriden (talk) 18:23, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Doriden! It looks like you've reverted the edit already, so I'll leave things be. If the user continues to disrupt the article, let me know and I'll be happy to take a look. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   19:16, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks again Oshwah Doriden (talk) 19:20, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Sunshine
Happy first day of summer, Oshwah!! Interstellarity (talk) 14:21, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Interstellarity! Thanks for the message and for the summer wishes! It doesn't feel completely like summer where I'm at right now... right now it's a thunderstorm outside. :-) Thanks again for the wishes, and I hope you have a great day! :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:51, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Newark NJ fire dept Wikipedia page and others
Hi, Oshwah it seems that the roaming ip that has been doing the persistent disruptive editing behavior goes back a while, at least 2 yrs,  not only to Newark NJ fire dept Wikipedia page but to other various Wikipedia pages as well. Someone thinks that this is the work of Zackman08, if you go to the disruptive editing he did to Kansas City Fire Department. Please review his long history of disruptive editing behavior. And then the other day on that 172 ip address from Florida, which is the same state as the one who is blocked until June 27. I ask that he be blocked from Wikipedia for continuous disruptive persistent editing. Please help us out Oshwah. I would greatly appreciate it. Review all of his other edits. Scorpio has warned him repeatedly also. Thank you, Doriden Doriden (talk) 15:46, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Please don't spam admins with this kind of request. If you think the IP is disruptive, and it is urgent, go to AIV. If it is non urgent, go to ANI. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 18:57, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Doriden! As RandomCanadian stated above, we want to take any reports to either AIV or ANI if you believe that administrative action is required or necessary. I'm doing my best to keep an eye on the article for you, but I'm quite busy (both in real life and on Wikipedia), and it'll be faster if you file reports in the proper places. This way, other administrators who are available can review them and take action sooner than I probably could. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:05, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, Oshwah thank you, I am on a mobile device and not very computer savvy.  I am unable to contact these other people that you want me to.  Thank you very much anyway.   Doriden Doriden (talk) 02:20, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Doriden - Filing a report at AIV is very easy, and you're going to want to learn how to do this. :-) To report a repeat vandal who has been warned multiple times, just follow the directions listed on the top of the AIV page. If you have any questions, please let me know. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:24, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Question
Is edit filter helper a useful tool to track LTA activity (by examining the logs of private filters)? Or is it only useful for editing filters? aeschylus (talk) 23:40, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Aeschylus! The edit filter helper user right would give you the ability to view all edit filters and their logs - including edit filters that are marked as 'private'. The only thing that it doesn't give you is the ability to edit them (edit filter managers can do so). There are edit filters that are private (including the ones that I maintain) that track LTA activity, and having the edit filter helper user right would give you the ability to view those filters and their logs. The short answer to your question is "yes". However, do know that the edit filter helper user right is primarily given to users who show a need for the user right, and those who contribute regularly to edit filters or show an interest with helping with them. You can view the edit filter helper procedural policy page for more information. Please let me know if you have any more questions, and I'll be happy to answer them and help you. :-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:59, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * @Oshwah, based on my current level of participation with edit filters, am I likely to pass a request for edit filter helper? aeschylus (talk) 01:41, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Sockpuppet
Hello, Oshwah,

I just blocked User:Mehedi.Hasan9798 as a sockpuppet of User:MehediH42404406 because they both focused on editing an article about themselves. I wasn't sure it was worth it to file an SPI as I've now protected the article. But I wanted to give a CU a head's up. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 03:07, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Liz! I hope you're doing well and that you're having a great day! Awesome - good catch on those accounts. These kinds of usernames ring a bell, as if I've handled an SPI report with a bunch of accounts with similar usernames before... I'll keep my eyes open and see what I can find. If you find any more, let me know and I'll be happy to take a look. :-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:01, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't like to ever block an editor based on suspicions of sockpuppetry without CU confirmation but this was so blatant, with similar usernames and a focus on creating and recreating the same autobiographical article that even I found it a persuasive case.
 * I hope you get time to relax this summer. We're in a bit of a heatwave here in the Northwest. We could really use more of those rainy days that used to be so common here. Liz Read! Talk! 05:31, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Liz - Sure, I understand that completely. Just remember that checkuser evidence doesn't supersede behavioral evidence or obvious sockpuppetry. As the checkuser policy page states: "An editing pattern match is the important thing; the IP match is really just extra evidence (or not)." Two editors engaging in the exact same behavior or editing patterns might not always be declared as confirmed sockpuppets by a CU. In this case, the behavioral evidence would take precedence and the accounts would be blocked. ;-) Anyways, I'm glad that you took care of the matter. Like I said: If you see any more disruption by accounts with usernames like the ones that you blocked, let me know. I live in the Pacific Northwest, so I feel ya. :-) We had really hot weather today, followed by rain and thunderstorms in the evening. I just hope that we don't have any major fires this year like we did last year. Last year was crazy with forest fires and evacuations... I hope that I get to relax this summer, too. Life has been keeping me busy, so all I can say is "we'll see..." :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   05:54, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Image
User:Oshwah, hi I needed some advice on something. This is an image I uploaded from YouTube with the commons license on the bottom. please check the source of it is it allowed even if its a picture in a video. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Preetykaur761 (talk • contribs) 17:17, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Preetykaur761! It looks like the file that you uploaded has been nominated for speedy deletion due to being a copyright violation. I would take some time to review Wikipedia's policy on copyrights and make sure that you understand them before you upload any more images, files, or media. This will keep you out of trouble and assure that what you're uploading is in compliance with policy. For an introduction on licensing and copyright from the Wikimedia Commons project, see this page. It'll provide you with a lot of good information and help. :-) 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)   02:08, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Mate why did you make my boi account block set expire 2022
WHY — Preceding unsigned comment added by GibbySpenof (talk • contribs) 01:36, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi GibbySpenof! I'm not sure what you're talking about? Can you provide me with some more information so that I can answer your question and help you?  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:09, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Something new with the Socking
Hello Oshwah one of the Ip address that  uses that was Cu blocked 2 times. Was used again by them just wanted to let you know some of the new things I found.Mr.Jakub from prague (talk) 01:47, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Mr.Jakub from prague! Thanks for the message and for letting me know. I'll keep an eye on things. If you locate any accounts that you believe are sock puppets of, please file an SPI report and include as much evidence and details as you can. :-) Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:11, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Extra info at Sockpuppet investigations/Befoxy2008
Almost certainly not relevant to your close, I was posting this at the same time, broadly, as you closedit, despite the difference in timestamp Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 08:43, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Timtrent! No worries; thanks for adding that information to the SPI report. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   09:21, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Newark NJ Fire Department Wikipedia Page And Other Ones
Hi Oshwah, I remember a couple of years ago I made a edit to some page without citations and everyone crawled out of the woodwork to chastise me. Yet no one will help me with this persistent disruptive long term abuser. Hank Scorpio thinks it's Zacman08. If you go back in Wikipedia history to 2018. Thanks, Doriden Doriden (talk) 12:13, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Go enable WP:Twinkle - that should make AIV reporting easier. Otherwise, you seem plenty capable to start a new thread on a talk page, so you can just go to WP:ANI and start a new thread there. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 13:29, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * This is good advice. Do you have Twinkle enabled?  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   23:15, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

You've got mail

 * Doug Weller - Received and replied. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   16:43, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Socks?
Isn't User:Suhaibqadri121, whom you just indeffed for sockpuppetry, himself a sock of User:Inovannnn? Both promoted a Parvaiz Qadri (Deputy Mayor of Srinagar), the latter's sock created and Suhaibqadri121 later edited Draft:Deputy Mayor of Srinagar, the latter's other sock also added Qadri's name to Mayor of Srinagar... — kashmīrī  TALK  18:44, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Oshwah
Hi User:Oshwah I need your help on something I am very upset as there is a user Fizconiz who keeps reverting edits in Shrenu Parikh's page. First I made this edit as I think dates of the show should not go in the introduction of the actress and the career should only be in the filmography. After this he started attacking me and threatening me that he will report me for what reason. Yes I said he might own the page as I that was my thought that because he is always reverting edits of many other users on Parikh and Sachdevs page I thought that and If I was wrong in saying that then I’m sorry but he shouldn’t be reverting all edits people are doing because if they are not vandalism it should stay please make him understand this. Thank you please tell him to not revert every edit on the page. As not only he is allowed to edit it. He wasn’t willing to understand anything either. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.158.70.41 (talk) 22:23, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm going to link the talk page discussion. Fizconiz (talk) 22:41, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Started off here, where I reverted a change meant to keep the presentation of how StarPlus actually is wrriten. Next, they added it again and I reverted the edit asking them to see the talk page where I opened the discussion. I explained my reasoning and they then proceed with saying "why are you behaving as if you own the page". I then gave a response back explaining that it isn't ownership. The next day, I reverted this edit because I found no grammar issue or any problem with the dates. They used an accusatory tone in the edit summaries and on the talk page, I gave them a response (no attacks at all) and explained to them what disruption is, what edit-warring is, and what consensus is if editors have a disagreement. I also asked them not to use editors they may know because that's like pushing an agenda. They did not address the dispute nor did they even attempt to reach a consensus. Instead, they asked questions about why I am reverting edits. No ownership practice, no attacking present, and none of what I do on those pages gives the impression that I don't let anyone edit the page. Fizconiz (talk) 22:59, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Fizconiz Then if you don’t own it then let people edit the page without reverting. And also the dates are not needed in the introduction and career section I think it should only go in the filmography table. And you do attack me and threaten me by saying I will report you. It just gives an impression to the other person to think that you don’t want any one to edit the page. If you don’t have bad intentions then understand what others are saying and stop reverting every edit.


 * And now look at how you are begs of nicely in front of the admin when you was very rude to me on Parikhs talk page Fizconiz — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.158.70.41 (talk • contribs) 23:26, 22 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Not a threaten. I said that based on your actions such as disruptive editing, accusatory tone, siding with a known editor. Look back at the discussion and realize what I actually said. Quit with your false claims. And, this isn't a place to talk about article content, use the article's talk page to talk about content related to any changes. And stop mentioning me. I also am not changing how "nice" I am. The same type of response I gave you there as I am telling you here. If you continue to do engage in edit-wars and change content without consensus, I will report you. Fizconiz (talk) 23:51, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Fizconiz I came here for help and complain against you why are you not understanding or listening to others. All I am saying is stop reverting every edit in Parikh and Sachdev's page. If you don’t own the page then stop reverting all edits for no reason. Let other users edit, if it is vandalism then an experienced admin will revert it not you. Also my ip has changed over night when I was a sleep I really don’t know how so before you start complaining Fizconiz just telling you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.175.217.223 (talk) 07:57, 23 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Also my edits were not vandalism or descriptive. Let other users edit the page Fizconiz and stop reverting every edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.175.217.223 (talk) 08:00, 23 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Fizconiz with you quiet makes me think you really don’t want users to edit on Parikh and Sachdev's page. Fizconizthis is wrong stop reverting every edit for no reason and understand this please. If there is vandalism let an experienced admin revert it. Please understand that I think dates don’t go in introduction and career section it should only go in the television section table. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.175.217.223 (talk) 08:32, 23 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Also Fizconiz I want to say this as well not all edits in the page is disruption or vandalism. Some are good edits like mine was. I am making the page a bit better and you are stopping me and other users from doing so for no reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.175.217.223 (talk) 08:36, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Newuserpatrol bug
So I saw that the newuserpatrol script has a breaking. Basically, it got stuck on the name "Niels is een cummer". After some investigation, I noticed the name was globally suppressed. Is there a way to make the script not get stuck on hidden usernames? aeschylus (talk) 13:03, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Aeschylus - Are you talking about the script I wrote and use? If so, then yes, it is a problem that I couldn't fix. Basically, when it reads the list of new accounts, when a username is redacted, a record of its existence exists - you just can't see the name. The script basically hangs until that record is not one of the newest created. It was annoying as hell, but then I became an oversighter and that didn't affect me anymore, so I never put effort into fixing it. lol  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   20:48, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
 * @Oshwah, any idea why that username got globally suppressed? I don't see anything oversightable in this name. And is there any other way this script can be fixed? aeschylus (talk) 20:56, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , off the top of my head (and bearing in mind I'm not an admin, let alone an oversighter, so can't see for myself) I'm guessing it has something to do with a long-term abuser vandal? There was one vandal in particular that used to take usernames and add inappropriate strings to them, thinking this may be linked? Patient Zerotalk 04:42, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Patient Zero - Oh, probably... There are a couple of LTA users that tend to create abusive usernames with the sole intention of trolling and causing as much havoc as they can before they're discovered and blocked. When usernames get revision-deleted or oversighted from the new user log (where this script pulls the information from), it will still see that a log record exists if you don't have access to the redacted information; the script will hang and not function properly when it runs into this. It will function again when that redacted record is no longer on the list of 25 newest-created usernames that it pulls from. Again, I meant to come out with a fix for this, but just haven't done so since I became an Administrator and Oversighter. I'll put this on my "to-do list" - a fix for this shouldn't be too hard to come up with. If the record won't return the information, I can make the script insert "[REDACTED]" as the username instead of having the value just be null.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   23:24, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I must admit, it was my first guess based on my encounters with those LTAs in the past; I can recall a few of those usernames off the top of my head from a few years ago! Ah, that’s a pain. I can see how such a bug might occur, in that case. I’m thinking redacting usernames within the script wouldn’t be such a bad idea (even though I’m assuming it would be a contingency plan, I actually quite like it as an idea if all else fails). Congratulations on OS, by the way! :-) Patient Zerotalk 23:37, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Patient Zero - I'll need to do some debugging on a test or beta project and come up with a solution that works. Thanks! I've been an OS for a few years now. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   23:51, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Awesome - here’s hoping this works! No worries - it has just occurred to me that I was still very much active here when you were granted the OS user right! I blame my brain temporarily malfunctioning, lol - and perhaps the fact that it’s quite late here. 😆 Patient Zerotalk 00:03, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Patient Zero - HA! No worries. Keep in touch and don't be a stranger if I can be of assistance with anything... :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   00:31, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
 * If there’s one thing I’ll never forget, it’s that you were of great assistance to me when I first started out here! Thank you, I shall do - always a pleasure catching up with you. I’m back using Huggle again here, and have recently started using the IRC and Discord, so I imagine I’ll see you around there, also :-) Patient Zerotalk 01:28, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Patient Zero - Indeed! It's always a pleasure to see you online and to catch up with you. I'm glad that you're on IRC and Discord - I'm on both! Oshwah#9999 is my Discord. If you're not in the Wikimedia Community Discord, let me know and I can email you an invite link. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   03:20, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much! :-) I'm patientzero#8254 on Discord - have already joined it! All the very best, Patient Zerotalk 03:05, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
 * @Oshwah, I found another bug, where usernames with question marks in them do not render properly. The question does not show in the link. aeschylus (talk) 17:41, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Aeschylus - Yeah, I see that happen quite a bit. It's because the HTML address in the address bar thinks that you're sending it a variable, so it cuts off the rest of the address and doesn't load the user. I think there's a phab ticket filed about that...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   23:40, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * @Oshwah, is there a way to make the script edit the link to insert the %3F to replace the question mark? aeschylus (talk) 02:44, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Aeschylus - Not that I'm aware of.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:18, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Faking signatures etc.
I should think an edit filter should be made to disallow edits which add a user's user page link and talk page from anonymous/new users - from our administrators noticeboard made by sock puppets whose usernames are in the form of a first name, surname and a random number (like "Ronald3Carlsen12"), the edit made had " Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) " after the request to have another innocent user blocked. I hope these page watchers think I did not do any of that. Iggy ( Swan ) (Contribs) 20:41, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Any filter would have to account for bots and alt accounts that use formats like .  -- Tamzin  (she/they) &#124; o toki tawa mi. 00:49, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Or it could just apply to unconfirmed accounts. Elli (talk &#124; contribs) 02:41, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Iggy the Swan - I would agree in general due to the potential for abuse, but the problem is that this would likely cause signatures from unconfirmed accounts to be blocked or not display properly, and we try to encourage and have users leave signatures when they add comments or leave messages on talk pages... Even if you were to somehow be able to write a script that could tell if an account is using a signature that isn't the same as their account username, I'd imagine that there would be a lot of false positives. :-/  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   23:29, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
 * That is a good point Oshwah. We should not have any new/IP users not having the signatures to be disallowed. [REDACTED - Oshwah] 08:31, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
 * (That IP address used above is Iggy  ( Swan ) (Contribs), I failed to check if I was logged in first before replying to you).  Iggy  ( Swan ) (Contribs) 08:34, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Iggy the Swan - No worries; we've all done it (including myself). :-) I've suppressed your IP address and information for you so that it's not public.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   09:38, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
 * In that case, I should think the talk page of that IP should be deleted as I'd admitted it was used by me. In my list of contributions, the user talk page was created at 8:36 (UTC) today. Iggy  ( Swan ) (Contribs) 10:01, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Iggy the Swan - ✅. The page has been deleted and suppressed.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   10:05, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Flag request
Hello Oshwah, long time no type. Could you please remove my ACC flag from, I doubt I`ll be needing it anytime soon (if ever). I edit very little anymore, mainly due to having to use my smartphone, it`s a real pain to do anything, miss my laptop.

Cheers and happy editing.

- FlightTime Phone  ( open channel ) 01:47, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * FlightTime Phone - ✅.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   23:32, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

about mr jackub from prague
well, where do i start, looking at his contributions page, he always says everyone that reverts his edits (almost all of them got reverted at least once) are doing vandalism, a thing past marquinhos socks usually did, he also is obssesed with this marquinhos dude claiming that random people are his socks, a thing marquinhos socks usually did, and, due to all of this, i wouldnt really take much seriously what he does, im not accusing that hes a sock, its just that, he looks quite more like a troll than a sock, also, hes not new here, he obviously edited as a ip or had another account beforehand. Private Hans&#39; Flammenwerfer (talk) 17:24, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

2603.9000.9907
Hello, that roaming up based in Florida just got off his 30 day block several hours ago and is on the loose, his edits have already been reverted by other editors already, this guy must be stopped. Can you please be of assistance? Thank you, Doriden (talk) 02:58, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Doriden! Sorry for the late response to your message and request for assistance. Looking at the IP range's contributions, it looks like no further editing has come from it since June 28. Because of this, I'm going to hold off on taking any action. If things do continue and if they're engaging in repeated vandalism or disruption, please report the user to AIV or ANI so that an administrator can review your report and take action. It'll be faster than contacting me. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   23:41, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

2603.9000.9907
Did my message register?Doriden (talk) 03:04, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Doriden - Yes it did. See above. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   23:41, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

note to say hello
this is my first time visiting your page. just wanted to say hello. your efforts are very impressive. keep it up!! ---Sm8900 (talk) 🌍 20:33, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Sm8900! Thank you for the message and for the very kind words. :-) Don't be a stranger if you run into any questions or if you need help with anything. I'll be more than happy to help you. :-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   23:42, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
 * sounds good! thanks for your reply. see you! ---Sm8900 (talk) 🌍 13:46, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Sm8900 - You bet. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   19:27, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

User:Claederis17
Oshwah, could you please take a look at this editor, and take whatever action you deem appropriate. So far we have a pattern of Disruptive editing, especially ignoring the details of WP:FILMOGRAPHY, esp. MOS:DATERANGE, even after I've warned them about it. Thanks. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:33, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Editor is still at it, and has now received a second Level 4 warning from another editor. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:39, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi IJBall! I apologize for the delay getting back to you here. I've been very busy lately with real-life things, and I'm just now getting caught up with all of the Wikipedia messages, emails, pings, and requests for assistance that I received while I was away. Is this user still being disruptive? I see from their contributions that this user hasn't edited since June 30th. I just wanted to check in and see if there's anything that I still need to look into. :-) Thanks -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   23:45, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Oshwah, I think nothing since they indicated that they wanted to "learn from their mistakes". I'll let you know if anything changes... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:09, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
 * IJBall - Sounds good. Keep in touch! :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   00:30, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Oshwah, unfortunately they came back with the same type of WP:DE, but just at Maya Hawke. Hopefully one final warning from an Admin will get them to stop with these types of edits. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:50, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
 * IJBall - I've left the user a message here on their user talk page. Hopefully the user will take my advice and do what I recommended that they do. This is kind of a rough spot; I think they're trying to edit in good faith (unless you have diffs that show otherwise that I didn't see?), but there seems to be numerous warnings on their user talk page in regards to Wikipedia's manual of style. I don't want to block a new editor who's likely trying to edit in good faith, but I know that the disruptions can't continue either. Hopefully they'll respond and ask for some input and for some help. Keep me updated. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   15:17, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Oshwah, this editor is still at it – same pattern of ignoring warning on Filmography MOS. At this point, I feel like there's no choice but to seek a block here, as they've been warned plenty to stop this. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:02, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi IJBall. Thanks for keeping me updated on this user, and I apologize for the delay responding to your message here. I was busy in real life and I'm just now getting myself caught up with all of the Wikipedia messages, pings, emails, etc that I received. This user hasn't edited for the last few days, so I'm going to hold off on blocking until the user becomes active again. Please let me know if disruption continues from this user, and I'll be happy to take another look. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:02, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Oshwah, I'm now a little concerned that this editor may also be editing while logged out to avoid scrutiny – the interaction report only shows 4 articles in common between Claederis17 and 112.210.35.170, but the kinds of edits performed by both are very similar IMO... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:40, 17 July 2021 (UTC)