User:Oshwah/TalkPageArchives/2023-11

Greetings Oshwah, how can a mentor help me in my use of Wikipedia? Regards, P. Jannetta
Greetings Oshwah, how can a mentor help me in my use of Wikipedia? Regards, P. Jannetta MarioJannetta (talk) 08:48, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi MarioJannetta! Welcome to Wikipedia! Mentors are assigned to all new users who chose to have one, and they can generally answer and assist you with all of "the basics". If this is what you're looking for help with, I would start by reviewing Wikipedia's Getting Started page. It will provide you with an extensive amount of guides, help pages, and tutorial pages. Another great guide to help new Wikipedia users to get started and familiar with basic concepts is "The Wikipedia Adventure". It's an interactive step-by-step tutorial that guides you through important pages and shows you how to do basic important tasks. It's a great resource for people who prefer to learn this way vs reading through text. Please let me know if I can help you with anything else, and I'll be happy to do so! :-D Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   00:22, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Please help me understand this DRV
I nom'd List of roles in the British Army for AfD because it fails WP:NLIST. The AfD argued that NLIST does not matter or some ILIKEIT rationale. The AfD closed NC, since only one other editor agreed with me. I took it to DRV which concluded that indeed ILIKEIT carries the day. I understand that a guideline is not a policy. What I don't understand is that the community consensus creates rules for various things but then community members decide that the prior consensus doesn't matter: it's anarchy all the way down. Why are our editors doing this? I'm just a guy working the NPP backlog. I have no dog in this fight. Chris Troutman ( talk ) 02:29, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi Chris troutman! I can provide you with any dog you wish - from cute little snugly ones (my favorite) to vicious beasts that would make the most evil and wicked of people cower in terror and fear. But anyways, on to your questions... consensus can be a very tricky and sneaky process. My experience on this project has, over time, helped me to "define" consensus given certain situations, but it's never going to be on-the-spot or perfect in any sense. For example: An AFD is created. Five people say to keep the article but without making a decent or in-depth explanation behind their thoughts or with any guidelines cited. One user (not counting the nominator) responds in opposition with delete, but with an in-depth analysis and with relevant guidelines cited that support the argument. This question is nearly always asked by someone in most RFA discussions in recent years - "What would you do?" Obviously, we would close the discussion as delete, since consensus here weighed much more toward the argument explanation rather than simply the number of users who agreed otherwise.
 * Now take the same situation. This time, instead of five users saying that the article should be kept, let's now make it one hundred users. It's very easy for users to state that the discussion should end with the same result as the first example (me being one of those users much of the time). However, like it or not, the number of users behind the one argument will begin to gain more "decision weight" than the one user (in this example) who believes otherwise and with a well written explanation and reason. Let's go even further: What about the same AFD, but where two hundred users side with keeping the article? Three hundred users? One thousand users? You can see where the number of users who stand behind a certain outcome can begin to outweigh the one user in opposition, and despite that user's correct, in-depth, compelling argument. Unfortunately, there's no "hard line" here... Users with a strong argument for one outcome should of course outweigh those who don't agree and who fail to sufficiently explain why. One thing to understand as well: WP:ILIKEIT and WP:IDONTLIKEIT is something that's much harder and extremely difficult for many users to recognize than others. In my humble opinion, it takes years of experience, skill, personality, and a lot of internal reflection and self-thought (to name just a few things) for someone to begin to possess enough emotional intelligence to notice the signs that they're factoring WP:ILIKEIT or WP:IDONTLIKEIT into their decision, and to consciously set those thoughts aside as "irrelevant" and weigh-in the discussion with only the relevant guidelines in mind. I personally believe that it's very easy for me to see tell-tale signs that irrelevant biases are beginning to intrude my rationale with a decision that I'm building, and to not allow those thoughts to influence or become a factor with that decision - much like yourself. :-)
 * Consensus building is not perfect, nor will it ever be. I'd even go as far as saying that any kind of decision-making strategy involving a group of people that we (as people) create, test, and implement - past, present, or future - will never be perfect. In the end, we just need to remember to do our best to make decisions with the project's mission, integrity, accuracy, and global impact in mind. We can't control everything that happens in life... Just follow the post-decision processes to have them reviewed. Be patient, positive, kind, respectful, and present a detailed and satisfactory argument behind your thoughts, and I'll say that you can confidently tell yourself that you genuinely tried your best to influence the right decision. ;-)
 * I hope my response here was at least a tiny bit helpful to you. If I missed something or if there's anything else that I can expand upon and provide you with input, insight, or guidance with - please let me know! I'll be happy to help in any way that I can. :-) Best -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:12, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I’d add some additional considerations as someone who relisted the discussion and all-but-called-for a no consensus close: NLIST is possibly the most unwieldy of the subject-specific notability guidelines, because RS rarely discuss lists of subjects as-such, despite potentially providing abundant relevant verifiable information. In this case, we had an article that is verifiable, non-promotional information regarding a potentially informative aspect (the list) of a definitely notable topic (the British Army). I think that rather than just being ILIKEIT, the stronger keep arguments made a case to the effect that the article’s content was encyclopedic. Is that an ironclad argument? No, and it more editors had !voted delete it would likely have been closed as delete even if the !vote count was close. But situations like this, where an overwhelming majority of editors makes reasonable arguments in keeping with Wikipedia’s broader goals, if not specific guidelines, are exactly why we have WP:IAR. signed,Rosguill talk 21:46, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Question from KeanCrod (18:50, 3 November 2023)
...How do I delete empty parts of an article? --KeanCrod (talk) 18:50, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi KeanCrod! Welcome to Wikipedia! Are you able to provide me with a specific example, like an article where you're seeing this issue? I'll be able to assist you properly once I have this... :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:03, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Question from Emendationum (15:05, 9 November 2023)
Hi Oshwah, thank you for offering to mentor. I am going to rewrite the Wiki entry for a brewery I am involved with. I have edited financial investor letters for years so I hope I am familiar with the required tone, but I haven't done anything on Wikipedia. May I ask if I can keep the changes offline in a live document for many days as I add more info? I want to keep working on it but not risk publishing a half finished article. Thank you! --Emendationum (talk) 15:05, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi Emendationum! Welcome to Wikipedia! In general, anyone is welcome to keep their changes "offline" and then publish them at once when they feel that the changes are ready for deployment into production (being added to Wikipedia). However, I have concerns in regards to some of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines regarding your desire to edit this article - specifically, Wikipedia's policy prohibiting original research, and Wikipedia's guidelines on conflict of interest. Please take some time to review these pages and understand them before you make any changes to the article. Following their directions and advice will prevent you from spending hours, if not days of time - toward building up a modification just for those changes to be removed by someone referencing one or both of these pages. Also, if you're being paid or compensated in any way, shape, or form to make these edits, you are required to disclose this publicly. Just follow the directions here in order to do this properly. In the end, I highly recommend that you focus your time and effort toward editing articles that interest you, but where you do not have these issues I listed. Please let me know if you have any questions, and I'll be happy to answer them. :-) Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk)  (contribs)   04:10, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi Oshwah, thank you. I am not paid by this corporate group but I am personally involved (I am Chairman). How should that be disclosed or should I open it to peer review before publishing? How do I set up a page for review BEFORE publishing please? Emendationum (talk) 11:25, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Question / Request from Coastie43
Hi Oswah,

I've noted in my watchlist you've recently blocked an account that I've reported a while ago at sockpuppet investigations with the diffs provided plus reasoning (as that blocked account has similar contributions to the Master of the blocked sock). Would you be able to assist with either getting the relevant administrators or if you are one of the admins at Checkuser to close that case, Thanks. Coastie43 (talk) 01:55, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Coastie43 - ✅. Thanks for letting me know about the SPI report. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:16, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Question from Queen Raducanu on Jordan Sangha (Big Brother) (01:49, 16 November 2023)
How to add picture --Queen Raducanu (talk) 01:49, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi Queen Raducanu! Welcome to Wikipedia! this page will guide you through how to do this. Just make sure that you are not violating Wikipedia's policies on copyrights; doing so is a serious violation and will get you into hot water. I'd avoid that if I were you. ;-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:17, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Noobiemaster299 at
has requested unblocking at. This is one of your range blocks, a /20 range blocked so as to prevent signed-in users. Do you mind if I convert that to an anon-only block? I've run checkuser and it looks to me like this would be appropriate. Sorry for not linking directly to the IP range block here, I'm being mindful of privacy. The range block was for one month and expires in ten days. Happy to link directly via email if you wish. --Yamla (talk) 19:35, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Yamla - I trust your judgment; go for it! :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:18, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Going live for my Amanda Spann article
Hi! I have finished my Amanda Spann article but it's not letting me go live for it? Is there any reason why that is? Thank you. Zremu18 (talk) 05:54, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi Zremu18! Welcome to Wikipedia! I found the content you wrote on User:Zremu18/Amanda spann. I advise that you merge your page's content into the content on the Draft:Amanda Spann page (if Draft:Amanda Spann didn't already exist, I would just move your page there for you). After everything is merged together, if you believe that the page is ready for someone to review it to be a live article, simply submit it for review. To submit the page for review, simply edit the Draft:Amanda Spann page and remove the "t" from the middle of the AFC submission template on the top line (so that it's now ), and save your changes. Removing that "t" parameter from that Template adds the draft to the list of pages waiting for a review, and marks the article as submitted. You're of course welcome to edit the page, add more content, or make changes while a review is pending. Submitting the draft will officially put it in line to be reviewed. Please let me know if you have any more questions or need assistance with submitting the draft, and I'll be happy to help. Good luck to you! :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk)  (contribs)   23:06, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Question from Boardy1 (02:23, 18 November 2023)
hello I am here to add information to Paul Stepanek Boardman including articles authored published in Newsweek --Boardy1 (talk) 02:23, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi Boardy1! Welcome to Wikipedia! Of course, if you need help, you're welcome to ask. I'll be happy to lend a hand. ;-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk)  (contribs)   23:16, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Question from Dev3999 (13:18, 19 November 2023)
Thank you so much! I really want to learn. I have read a lot of Wikipedia and this is the first time that I am encouraged to want to collaborate with this project. I am available for any suggestion. A priori, I would really like to be able to collaborate with translations from Spanish and Portuguese to English. or be able to create pages that already exist in Spanish, and recreate them in English. I don't know if this is possible here. I also really like the summary information templates. I have observed that some articles do not have them. So I'll start little by little. but these are my goals. Thank you very much once again for the possibility of growing in knowledge just by dedicating a little of my time to collaborate. I have learned a lot through this medium. --Dev3999 (talk) 13:18, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi Dev3999! Thanks for the message! I've also learned a significant amount of knowledge from Wikipedia by reading and contributing to various articles and topics. Take some time and review Wikipedia's translation guide page. It will provide you with information and details that will help you with properly performing these tasks. Of course, if you run into questions or need anything else, you know where to find me. ;-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:54, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
 * thank you so much. :D Dev3999 (talk) 00:27, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Question from ED3202 (18:01, 19 November 2023)
Hello. An alleged bot keeps removing my contribution in a talk page. I cannot directly edit the related Wikipedia page, but I included reasons and sources. Nobody replied nor fixed the page, and my contribution was removed. Why is this happening?

This is the change, my contribution was near line 145:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2023_Hamas_attack_on_Israel&oldid=prev&diff=1185830670 --ED3202 (talk) 18:01, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * probably because of the talk page settings. As it says at top: "You must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days". You don't qualify. Articles about contentious matters bring out too much commentary and this is a control we have to prevent the talk page being overrun. While I understand you concern, please let our longterm editors write the encyclopedia without interrupting that work. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 18:14, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I'd gladly save my time if your "longterm editors" didn't write misinformation. Could you please submit my reasoned and supported statement to an unbiased longterm editor? ED3202 (talk) 07:11, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, I won't finance Wikipedia anymore if it knowingly publishes fake news. Farewell. ED3202 (talk) 18:57, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi ED3202! This article (including its talk page) is under extended confirmed protection due to the fact that the article's topic has been designated as contentious (see this page for more information). This designation means that certain restrictions are placed upon all articles in this topic area. One such restriction is that the article receives extended confirmed protection, meaning that users without an account that's at least 30 days old and with at least 500 edits made will be unable to edit them. This can apply to talk pages in cases where they become a frequent target of disruptive editing or battleground conduct. I see that you've unfortunately decided to retire your account after this message, and it appears that contributing to Wikipedia isn't for you. That's totally fine and I understand; the time, effort, skills, and work that Wikipedia needs from its contributors isn't a fit for everybody. I would encourage you to make sure that your talk page discussion is reasonable, and any content in dispute is referenced by a reliable source and is free of bias or commentary. Our mission is to present information that references state are facts and nothing more. Add commentary, bias, or any non-neutral points of view is inappropriate on an encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not a blog, nor is it a publisher of original thought. Nonetheless I wish you well and good luck with your future endeavors. Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:28, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Question from Dev3999 (19:18, 19 November 2023)
i have i problem. i did a bigger error i think... i did see some page in spanish to traslater and before this i did add some categories and after i dont know if is by my action. some person deleat there article. i think this editor did bad action becouse that article was so much good. understand ? --Dev3999 (talk) 19:18, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi Dev3999! Welcome to Wikipedia! I looked at your deleted contributions, and it has no edits as of right now. You might not have saved your edit to the page when you added the categories to it. If you still want to add categories to the page, simple locate it and try again. Please let me know if you have more questions or need assistance with anything else. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:00, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

You've got mail!
- 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 01:46, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Illusion Flame - Received!  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:00, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia Library
Apparently administrators are allowed to grant users the right to access the Wikipedia Library before their account is six months old. Is there any way you can do that? Thank you for your time. Scorpions1325 (talk) 05:27, 20 November 2023 (UTC)


 * I'm not aware of any such right for admins, but my understanding is that one-off requests can be made at User talk:Samwalton9 (WMF); Sam is quite understanding in straightforward cases like this. (Or maybe I'm wrong and there's some button I've been missing all this time.) -- Tamzin  &#91;cetacean needed&#93; (they&#124;xe&#124;she) 05:38, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * What do you know about this? Scorpions1325 (talk) 05:44, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I'm not aware of that rule - where did you read about it? Could be wrong though. Largely in agreement with Tamzin. BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:17, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I wasn't aware of such a rule either. It's likely a basic eligibility requirement so that access is given to those who will actually use it. Again, like Tamzin said above, Samwalton9 (WMF) is a very reasonable user who cares about compliance with the spirit of such rules and guidelines, not just the black-and-white wording of such. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   21:45, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks all - I've responded elsewhere, we can provide access if given some proof of previous account ownership :) Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 12:50, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
 * has WP:CHECKUSER evidence confirming that I own both accounts. Scorpions1325 (talk) 13:12, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Question from NearSoldier (03:24, 24 November 2023)
Hi, Oshawott! (if that's what i can call you) I kinda need help with making my own topic for eon. I know my knowlegde. also why am i named NearSoldier? Named after the insect holding the longest scientific name. also why is it so long? (PLZ I BEG U DONT ADD THE INSECTS IMAGE ITS SCARYYYY!!!) bye bye! --NearSoldier (talk) 03:24, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Uhh..... Hi there, NearSoldier! Thanks for leaving me a message here! I would start by reading through Wikipedia's getting started page, as well as completing the new user tutorial before you start editing. By the time you finish both documents, you should have a good idea with how to add content or create a new page. Your username is NearSoldier because... you chose it when you created the account? If you don't like your username and wish to change it, the getting started page I linked you to will show you where to go. Cheers!  ~Oshwah~  (talk)  (contribs)   03:57, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh, it's okay, I chose that name because i like the idea of the Near Soldier Wasp Fly, not the appearance of it. it looks creepy weird. NearSoldier (talk) 16:23, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I, uhhh... I'm... I'm.... glad... Hap... Happy to help where I can! :-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   05:35, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Question from Thesnowprincess (19:31, 25 November 2023)
Hello Oshwah, thanks so much! I would love to occasionally contribute on AI/technology/mathematics topics on Wikipedia. I just submitted my first draft. May I ask if there are some "best practice" articles that are perfect for getting some inspiration for good quality content? Also, are preferences for different new articles measured? I would like to contribute with topics that are important and people search for them a lot.

Thanks a lot! --Thesnowprincess (talk) 19:31, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi Thesnowprincess! Thanks for the message, and welcome to Wikipedia! There are great guideline pages that will help you, such as my first article. If you click the link and take a look at the purple list of links on the right side ("Article Creation"), those links are all to great guides that will help you. If all you'd like to have is a good example of an article that's within the area of the one you're creating, I would just search for a well-known article that's within that area. For example: If I'm trying to create an article about a computer company, I'd perhaps search and pull up the Wikipedia article on Microsoft. Please let me know if I can help you with anything else, and I'll be happy to help! :-) Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:01, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Question from Pikkikhan (19:45, 27 November 2023)
Can I update Celebrities photo which is copyright free? --Pikkikhan (talk) 19:45, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi Pikkikhan, and thanks for the message. I highly recommend that you verify for 100% sure that the image you are hoping to replace the current image on a biography of a living person does not have any copyright issues. If you've done so and you're sure that it doesn't, I recommend that you start a discussion on the article's talk page. Provide a wikilink to the image, and ask for input and thoughts from others. I know that biographies tend to vary differently with what image of them is shown on the article. One example is with non-living humans. We tend to show a picture of them in their younger adult years, not just the newest image we have of what they looked like at age 87. :-) Please let me know if I can help you with anything else. :-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   21:48, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Question from Nanditadinesh (21:14, 27 November 2023)
Hi there,

I submitted edits to this page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Nandita_Dinesh) yesterday but am realizing that the chances of it getting approved are quite minimal (given that I am the subject of the article).

Would you recommend deleting it? And if so, would you be able to guide me on how to do that?

Thanks in advance! --Nanditadinesh (talk) 21:14, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi Nanditadinesh! Thanks for the message. I can delete the draft page for you if you wish; just let me know by responding here and confirming you would like me to do so. Do note that if you just want it to be deleted at some point in time instead of right now, all you need to do is no longer make edits to it. When a draft or AFC submission is abandoned (no edits in six months), it becomes eligible for speedy deletion under G13 - so it would eventually just disappear anyway at some point. :-) Let me know what you'd like me to do. Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   21:08, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks, @Oshwah! In that case I'll just let it be and allow it to disappear at some point :) Appreciate the response! Nanditadinesh (talk) 21:19, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Nanditadinesh - No problem, always happy to help. ;-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   21:43, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Acknowledged, thank you.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   21:19, 28 November 2023 (UTC)