Jump to content

User talk:Oshwah

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has CheckUser privileges on the English Wikipedia.
This user is an edit filter manager on the English Wikipedia.
This user has oversight privileges on the English Wikipedia.
This user has interface administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Oshwah (talk | contribs) at 04:01, 13 July 2022 (→content deleted: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.



Let's chat


Click here to message me. I will reply as soon as I can. All replies will be made directly underneath your message on this page.

Please create your message with a subject/headline and sign your message using four tildes (~~~~) at the end.


Experienced editors have my permission to talk page stalk and respond to any message or contribute to any thread here.


NYC Subway IP

Need an extended block for 107.127.42.18 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and 107.127.42.112 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). Cards84664 16:30, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cards84664! Sorry for the delay responding to your request. It's been a busy last few months for me. :-) It looks like this range isn't active anymore, so I'm going to go ahead and hold off for now. If you do see any more shenanigans from the 107.127.42.0/24 range again, definitely let me know and I'll be happy to take a look. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:34, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Brashbandit (19:16, 12 June 2022)

Hey Oshwah! Just wanted to say it's pretty cool to have a Wikipedia mentor. Thanks and have a good day! --Brashbandit (talk) 19:16, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Brashbandit! It's awesome that the mentoring program was able to go live and into production here. I think it will absolutely help new users with becoming familiar with Wikipedia, how it works, and how they can contribute here. If you run into any questions or need anything, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them and help you. :-) Welcome to Wikipedia! I'm glad that you joined us! :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:36, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hey Oshwah! Blanchey here, I hope you are well. I wanted to ask what 'LTA Edit summary' stands for? An anonymous user edited my talk page last month and since the edit was abusive, it triggered the filter and that is what was said although I don't know what LTA stands for. Many thanks! Blanchey (talk) 12:28, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Blanchey It's WP-jargon for "Someone who has been doing crap like this for years", or Wikipedia:Long-term abuse. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:37, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Gråbergs Gråa Sång ahh, that makes perfect sense, especially in the case I had! Thank you for assisting me. Have a great day! Blanchey (talk) 12:39, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You too! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:50, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Blanchey! I apologize for the delay responding to your question here. Life has been keeping me extremely busy over the last few months, and I'm finally catching up with all of the messages, pings, emails, and requests for help that I've received. :-) Gråbergs Gråa Sång pretty much hit the nail on the head. "LTA" stands for long-term abuse, which has a Wikipedia page that documents and lists users who have pretty much dedicated their time toward Wikipedia, but in a bad-faith disruptive and destructive manner. The abuse filter you likely saw was this one that I created (#53). One thing about LTA users who frequently engage in disruption, vandalism, personal attacks and harassment, and the making of threats is that they typically have a pattern or Modus operandi that they use to cause this disruption. These patterns can be easily be identified, added to this filter, and used to flag future edits by these abusers so that administrators and users can quickly identify and put a stop to it as soon as possible.
Looking at the edit that triggered this filter, it's obvious as to why. The IP range has been blocked for sock puppetry, and this will (hopefully) put a stop to future disruption. If you have any more questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them and help you. :-) Until we meet again... ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:49, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, don’t worry about it! Thank you for clarifying with me, Happy editing! ;–) Blanchey 💬 • 📝 19:57, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You as well, Blanchey! You know where to find me if you need anything else; don't be a stranger! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:14, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Of course not! ;–) Blanchey 💬 • 📝 21:40, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to work together on Adiutor

Hi @Oshwah I've developed a gadget called Adiutor like Twinkle on Turkish Wikipedia, now I'm adapting it to English Wikipedia, can you help me with this? 𝗩𝗶𝗸𝗶𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗺𝗲𝗿 ℣ 02:46, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Vikipolimer! I apologize for the extreme delay with responding to your request here. Life has been keeping me extremely busy over the last few months, and I'm finally catching up with all of the messages, pings, emails, and requests for help that I've received. :-) Sure, I'll be more than happy to help! What do you need my assistance with, exactly? :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:56, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Oshwah I've started this process already, you can help me add some new features, give me some ideas for things that will make actions easier for users, and we can incorporate these ideas into this user script. check this User:Vikipolimer/Adiutor 𝗩𝗶𝗸𝗶𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗺𝗲𝗿 ℣ 20:03, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Vikipolimer - Awesome! I'd love to help! Do you know if this script works with the legacy vector (2010) skin, or any of the other ones? I know that some scripts don't tend to play nice with certain skins, depending on what functions and features that they use in order to make them function... ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 20:07, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It currently supports three skins (Vector 2022, Vector, Monobook), the script uses OOUI as the interface, and the UI differs according to the theme. 𝗩𝗶𝗸𝗶𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗺𝗲𝗿 ℣ 20:14, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Meanwhile, you may check this one too :) 𝗩𝗶𝗸𝗶𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗺𝗲𝗿 ℣ 20:17, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

From last IP Range

Since this other IP editor asked this question relating to this, would you take a look at this edit? Here it is:[[1]] Also, you should take at look at 205.155.237.189, 2600:1011:B00F:D1:4858:819E:FF80:90F2, 104.243.113.132, 24.234.55.138, and 172.85.211.18. Also, did you review edits of 204.129.232.191? They asked many unhelpful and disruptive questions and posts unrelated to the improvements of the talk page, such as What if 2020 was a person? and What if 2020 came to your house?. They cause disruption to the Wikipedia articles. What do you think of them? And did you blocked them all? Thanks for reviewing them. --2601:205:C001:EA0:8C8C:2AE3:19B5:861D (talk) 01:29, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! Oh jeez, not this user again... Okay, I'll take a look and take care of the disruption (assuming that these IP users haven't gone stale). Thanks for letting me know about this. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:57, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Update: The IP users listed are all  Stale now, so there's no point in blocking them. However, I've updated some abuse filters and scripts so that they will flag these kinds of edits made by this user, and assist admins and users with putting a stop to it as soon as possible. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 20:08, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Thank you for updating the filter. I also saw this kind of disruption that happened on talk pages. What type of abuse filter or script did you update? Maybe you might assist admins there. --76.20.110.116 (talk) 20:56, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The abuse filter that I updated was one of a handful of filters that I created and keep maintained and updated to this day - #53. For obvious reasons, the details, logs, and code for this abuse filter are marked as private and are not visible to the general public. Nonetheless, it has been updated and it will flag further and future about by this person. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:39, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Oshwah 76.20.110.116 is the "what if 2020 were a person" troll, the month long block on their IP has just expired, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/76.20.110.116. 192.76.8.85 (talk) 21:42, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
HAHAHAHA! Oh, wow, that's pretty good... Well played, sir... Well played... Oh well, it's not like I disclosed anything that wasn't obvious already... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I'm not worried about it; it's obiously not going to change anything. ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:47, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Noah nobh back again

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/JFK_BOMB_HEAD

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Daniel_case_is_asswipe

[2]

–Skywatcher68 (talk) 15:45, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, this list of sockpuppets at another Wiki should be of interest.   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 15:49, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Skywatcher68! Thanks for the message, and I apologize for the delay getting back to you here. Life has been keeping me extremely busy over the last few months, and I'm finally catching up with all of the messages, pings, emails, and requests for help that I've received. :-) I've gone and created an SPI report regarding this sock user, and a report was made the following day that included these accounts as well. The accounts were subsequently blocked as a result. If you see any more of these kinds of edits from this user, please don't hesitate to let me know, or file an SPI report. Thanks again for the message and for letting me know about this user's continued shenanigans. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:19, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

June 2022

Pikachu Barnstar
For being cool. Sahaib (talk) 17:21, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Sahaib! Thanks for the Pikachu gift and for the kind words. They mean a lot to me. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:20, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Revision deletions - one or two lines over dates

Is there some reason as to how in some cases I see only one line over certain edits and on others there is two lines (see this page for an example). Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 22:18, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Iggy the Swan: Good question! I had to look it up, it's explained at WP:OS. The single strikethroughs are RevisionDeletes, while the double strikethroughs are suppressions. ––FormalDude talk 22:43, 22 June 2022 (UTC) (talk page watcher)[reply]
@FormalDude thanks for that explanation. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 20:50, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Iggy the Swan! FormalDude is correct; a single strike-through means that the edit was revision-deleted and is visible to administrators, with the revision-deletion logs that are noting those changes being visible to everyone. A double strike-though means that the revision has been suppressed, with the logs and the revision only being visible to oversighters.
I was the user who initially proposed this change to the developers, and due to the fact that it was very difficult to see the difference between edits that were revision-deleted vs oversighted. However, it was implemented and deployed to production in a way that was different than I intended and desired. I only wanted the double strike-through vs single strike-though to be visible to oversighters; non-oversighters should only see a single strike-through - even if the revision is suppressed. Also, I don't know why this is, but after the double strike-through change was implemented and deployed, the color of the "double-strike" was subsequently changed from gray to black, which I also don't believe should be the case. The color and style between the two should be consistent, and making it black vs gray (as well as different for non-oversighters) just draws more attention to those edits than they should. I might go back and see why this color change was made, and propose that this style be only visible to oversighters and (if that is impossible) at least have the color changed back to being gray.
Please let me know if you have any more questions, and I'll be more than happy to answer them and help you. :-) It's good to talk to you, as always, and I hope you have a great weekend! :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:32, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's like when I once started a section "Faking signatures" where the second response I mistakenly used my own IP address which had to be removed and surpressed, I can see there are two lines on the date and time of the edits back on that day. I admitted I used the IP address as people would not think there are two registered users plus a random anonymous user participating where I knew it was me who used that address so you removed and surpressed that IP. Other people have done that accidentally as well (using an IP address) such as this case at the start of the Help with an edit section. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 21:21, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Vincentvangone (18:27, 24 June 2022)

Hello sire it’s good to see some helping people. Tell me something interesting about editing like suppose if I edit any article, then is it Mandatory to mention quotation of any famous source like encyclopaedia britanica ? Or is it fine with any public source?

Thanks for your help sire! --Vincentvangone (talk) 18:27, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Vincentvangone, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for leaving me a message here with your question. :-) If you take a look at this Wikipedia policy page (specifically, this section of that page), you are required to provide a reference and an in-line citation to a reliable source when you add content to an article that is any of the following:
  • a quotation (you're directly quoting something that someone said, wrote, etc),
  • material whose verifiability has been challenged,
  • material that is likely to be challenged, and
  • any kind of contentious matter about living and recently deceased persons.
In addition to this requirement, I generally require myself (as a general personal rule) to support any kind of specific data or similar information that I add to any article with an in-line citation to a reliable source. Examples would be specific dates and times, measurements, computerized or computed data, lengths or heights, or other geological or factual information that is of a set length or date range. This way, I assure myself (and others) that the information that I'm adding is accurate. That's of course up to you, but if you do this (as well as comply with the requirements I listed above), you'll find adding content to be much easier for yourself, and you'll avoid many conflicts and possible disputes with other editors over accuracy and factual information. Before you add any kind of content listed above to any articles on Wikipedia, you'll need to familiarize yourself and become proficient with Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and Wikipedia's in-line citation content guidelines.
Please let me know if you have any more questions, and I'll be more than happy to answer them and assist you further. Again, welcome to Wikipedia! I'm glad that you're here and that you decided to join the community and help us to improve the encyclopedia! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:46, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Teesta Setalvad grammatical mistake

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teesta_Setalvad#

Paragraph 1 Last sentence. Begins as " In 25 June 2022, Supreme Court of India finds her allegations over Narendra Modi was not proven."

Should it not be " On 25 June 2022, Supreme Court of India finds her allegations over Narendra Modi was not proven." — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZePepper (talk • contribs) 17:57, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ZePepper! Yes, that would make more sense to start the sentence with "on" instead of "in", since the date is specific to the day. Otherwise, "in" could be used if only the year or the year and month were specified (such as, "In 2015, the Supreme Court..." or "In March 2015, the Supreme Court..."). At least that's what I think. ;-) I performed a search for the specific sentence that you mentioned here, and it looks like that sentence has since been changed or removed. However, I wanted to respond and answer your question nonetheless. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:52, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Imamkhashiff on Security token (15:40, 27 June 2022)

Salutations of Peace and good Will.

I'd like to purchase to help me verify my identity --Imamkhashiff (talk) 15:40, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Hello Imamkhashiff, and welcome. Wikipedia is not a place to sell or purchase things; it only has articles. Thanks, Kpddg (talk) 16:24, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Imamkhashiff! Welcome to Wikipedia! As Kpddg stated above, this website only serves to create, expand, and improve the encyclopedia that has been built here. We're not in the business or market of assisting users with the purchase or acquirement of any goods, services, or items if they are not directly Wikipedia-related. Typically, these kind of security tokens (like the one you see in the article as a USB device) isn't something that one simply "purchases" and can just start using. Companies and institutions that enforce this kind of multi-factor authentication will usually give these devices out to all of the users that must use them in order to authenticate themselves. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:24, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Farley Lev (19:44, 28 June 2022)

I'm having trouble adding my photo to a template I'm editing, how does it work? --Farley Lev (talk) 19:45, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) By "my photo", do you mean a photograph that you've uploaded to WP:COMMONS that you believe is somehow helpful to a template? Or do you mean "my headshot" or "my profile pic"?

Many Wikipedia users don't want photographs in templates, because photos take bandwidth that not all Wikipedia users have. This is a global encyclopedia. Many users live in parts of the world where every image file sucks up their allotment of bandwidth and means they can't get access to necessary informative content.

If you are seriously asking how to put your own personal photograph in a template, STOP IT. Wikipedia isn't social media. This is an encyclopedia. No one is going to hire you. No one is going to date you. You are in the wrong place. If you love knowledge for its own sake, we do, too, and we will help you. But if you just want to have your picture on a user profile, STOP IT. This is the wrong website. Julietdeltalima (talk) 20:25, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Farley Lev! See above; Julietdeltalima is asking the same questions I would ask, and stating the same things that I would state above. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:26, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Walkerglo

Any objection to my indeffing the user and without tpa? Calling other editors facists? Saying "But go ahead I have multiple vpns, we will take our culture and countries back from you clowns 🤡 keep power tripping on Wikipedia lmao 🤣" on their Talk page?--Bbb23 (talk) 23:17, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bbb23 - Oh jeez... Yes, go for it! No objections from me at all. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:19, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks!  Done.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:22, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Bbb23 - Any time! Have a great weekend! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:23, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Interaction

You saw my page. Do you share any of my interests and/or want to discuss them? -Oversized Lego spoon 64 Oversized Lego spoon 64 (talk) 04:33, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Oversized Lego spoon 64, and welcome to Wikipedia! I of course share the same interest with my passion for reading Wikipedia, as well as contributing to the project, and performing the duties and tasks that I perform in order to protect the project from abuse and harm, and provide a positive editing environment for the community. :-)
Since you're brand new to Wikipedia, I highly recommend that you go through Wikipedia's getting started page and that you complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial before you make any edits or take on any major tasks around here. Those tutorial pages will provide you with many important walkthroughs, guides, interactive lessons, and other information that will familiarize you with our policies and guidelines, how Wikipedia works, how to navigate around the site, and how to find important locations and pages. Most users who take this advice, read through those pages, and complete the new user tutorial usually tell me later that they were significantly helpful to them, and saved them hours of time and frustration they would've experienced otherwise.
Please let me know if you have any questions, or if I can assist you with any editing or contributions that you make to Wikipedia. I'll be more than happy to help! Again, welcome to Wikipedia! I hope that you stay with us, become a regular editor and contributor to the project, and that you learn and grow with us! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 04:39, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Oshwah thanks for the tip! I was wondering how you got that fancy home page.
P.S. Sorry it's so late, but you're probably in a different time zone. \__(' '_)__/ Oversized Lego spoon 64 (talk) 04:43, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oversized Lego spoon 64 - No worries! Great question - I actually designed and created it myself! :-) Early 2023 will be my 16th year of being an active editor to Wikipedia; you tend to pick up some editing skill here and there after all of that time... ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:55, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Oshwah sorry to bother you, but I didn't see anything about putting pictures on your home page. (I mean that in the nicest way possible) Could you show me how? Oversized Lego spoon 64 (talk) 17:53, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Oversized Lego spoon 64! You're not bothering me at all! Helping new editors on Wikipedia is part of the regular duties that I perform here, and I'm more than happy to lend you a hand. ;-) Wikipedia's help page on pictures provide tutorials on how to add them to articles and pages. You can click here to visit that help page. Please let me know if you have any more questions, and I'll be more than happy to answer them and help you. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 18:45, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Oshwah Thanks! 🙂 Oversized Lego spoon 64 (talk) 20:49, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oversized Lego spoon 64 - You bet! I'll see you around the wiki; until we meet again... ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:41, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not enough recent activity for RfPP

Something to keep an eye on anyway. Lots of misinformation about Ectopic pregnancy and abortion are flying around now so we should be vigilant about misinformation creeping into the article.   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 15:27, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Skywatcher68! Thanks for the message and for letting me know about the ongoing issues with unreferenced content being added to the ectopic pregnancy article. The dusruption isn't super high in frequency, but I can see from the edit history that nearly all edits made by anonymous users lately either added unreferenced content to the article, or added content that was subsequently reverted due to issues. Hence, I've gone ahead and added pending changes protection to the article for the next month. This should keep any unreferenced content and other disruption at-bay, while allowing anonymous users to add legitimate good faith content without being restricted from doing so. :-) Thanks again for the heads up, and I hope you have a great rest of your day. Happy editing! :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 17:29, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Apologize and Request

Hi Oshwah, I’m contacting you after checking the profiles of more that 200 admins. But, I think only you can solve my problem. Let me start by apologizing for my mistakes. I edited 3 definitions and added a link to a website providing comprehensive explanations of these definitions. You can check by yourself those definition were wrong and unclear. Still, the definitions are incorrect since my edits have been reverted because admins consider that link a wrong act. Furthermore, the link I provided is purely relevant. I am a insurance expert and i never thought of adding wrong information on wikipedia. Personally, I am a writer. But sir unfortunately, linking to specific websites on Wikipedia is not allowed, no matter how relevant they are. With blocking my IPs and accounts, Wikipedia put the website on its spam list this time. When you put a website in your Spamlist, it adversely affects its ranking and reputation. For you, it's just a website, but someone has put years of work into making that website successful. As an admin, its your right to block any ip, any account but please don’t put that website in a spamlist. I’m requesting you to please remove the site from your spamlist. I truely apologize to all the admins for all my mistakes and i promise that i will never make any edit on wikipedia. But please remove that site from your spamlist. Looking forward to your reply and will answer any questions you may have! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.160.96.208 (talk) 09:08, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! Thanks for leaving me a message here, and I apologize for the delay responding to you. From your description of this website you mention, it's apparent that the website is yours, or that you have a personal connection to it somehow. Unfortunately, when external URLs are repeatedly used either for advertising or promotion, spamming, or the addition of original research to Wikipedia, and after repeated reasonable attempts have been made asking the user to stop, adding the external URL to the MediaWiki spam blacklist is the logical next step in order to stop the issue from allowing to continue. In the future, please make sure to include references to reliable sources that are secondary and independent of the article subject, as well as yourself (an editor of the article). Please review Wikipedia's verifiability policy and make sure that you understand it. If you have any questions after reading through this policy page, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 10:07, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

History merge mistake?

The history merge you just performed of Arvoreen to List of Dungeons & Dragons deities appears to have been erroneous; they are separate articles which were merged into each other through several intermediate steps and you resulted in several parallel history segments like Special:Diff/724261582. Ditto for Baervan Wildwanderer into Gnome (Dungeons & Dragons)

That said, I know it's a common thing on Wikipedia to only complain and never give thanks, so thank you for tackling this often-forgotten backlog, even if you make mistakes while doing it * Pppery * it has begun... 04:08, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pppery - ARGH! I literally just noticed this a few moments ago while reviewing those histories... It looked like the section was moved but then later incorporated into that article instead of having separate ones. Okay, I'll check this out deeper and remedy what I can. Thanks for letting me know about this. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 04:11, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Pppery - Update: I was able to locate the parallel history segments on List of Dungeons & Dragons deities, and I've moved them back to Arvoreen. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 04:58, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Pppery - Update: I've also located the parallel history segments on Gnome (Dungeons & Dragons), and I've moved them back to Baervan Wildwanderer. Thanks again for your diligence and for letting me know. One question. I'm curious to know, how did you catch this so quickly? What did you do in order to figure out that that I screwed up? :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 06:18, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I was looking through the deletion log out of curiosity (not intending to take any specific action), noticed your history merge, and thought "Huh, those don't look like two names for the same thing". * Pppery * it has begun... 13:31, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Pppery - Ah okay, fair enough. ;-) Thanks again! ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 13:32, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also, you seem to have missed a few revisions; the following were erroneously merged from Aroveen:
And the following from Baervan Wildwanderer:
List
The following revisions were moved back but shouldn't have been:
Special:PermaLink/243234301
Special:PermaLink/237403503
Special:PermaLink/105400964
The following revisions should have been moved back and weren't:
Special:PermaLink/929070489
Special:PermaLink/855160285
Special:PermaLink/719140166
Special:PermaLink/698985957
Special:PermaLink/689490943
Special:PermaLink/688221150
Special:PermaLink/640672884
Special:PermaLink/640407963
Special:PermaLink/640337098
Special:PermaLink/639427423
Special:PermaLink/639427232
Special:PermaLink/639427023
Special:PermaLink/577904933
Special:PermaLink/576497504
Special:PermaLink/544290372
Special:PermaLink/503691832
Special:PermaLink/463366380
Special:PermaLink/433951269
Special:PermaLink/426117812
Special:PermaLink/424068269
Special:PermaLink/424064937
Special:PermaLink/424063422
Special:PermaLink/424063051
Special:PermaLink/424062544
Special:PermaLink/424062318
Special:PermaLink/249447038
Special:PermaLink/208578343
Special:PermaLink/178174680
Special:PermaLink/175866401
Special:PermaLink/107992586
* Pppery * it has begun... 14:18, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bayside Trail to Bay Trail appears to be also erroneous; you merged an article on a trail with a disambiguation page. * Pppery * it has begun... 14:47, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(The correct target for that history merge was Bay Trail (Australia)) * Pppery * it has begun... 14:55, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Pppery! Weird... I was using WikiBlame to go through the revisions on both the List of Dungeons & Dragons deities and Gnome (Dungeons & Dragons) articles, and it came back without finding anything. I'm wondering if the binary search algorithm I chose has too wide of a threshold of cutting revisions into half before it stops, or if it allows the script to make assumptions based off of too wide of a threshold. Either way, I appreciate the second pair of eyes! I'll also look into the Bayside Trail and Bay Trail merge that you mentioned as well. These articles both had pretty small numbers of revisions if I recall correctly; that appeared to be a pretty straight-forward merge, but I (of course) could be wrong. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 15:43, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some more notes on your history merge project if you ever get back to it:

  1. Be careful not to restore unneeded redirects that are parallel with the merged history. For example, on Object Query Language, you should not have restored Special:PermaLink/47570019 (the redirect that was overwritten by the cut-and-paste move you repaired). It's probably not worth deleting and undeleting the page again to rebury the edit (and running into the second problem), but a note for the future.
  2. For reasons I can't understand, articles are getting added to the new pages feed as a result of your history merge process. Normally I would say bringing attention to old stagnant articles (as most of the articles you reviewed are) is a good thing, but given NPP's large backlog, would you mind marking pages as reviewed after history merging them?

Thanks. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:52, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pppery - Yeahhhh, I learned about the redirect move revisions both the easy and hard ways - especially knowing that an issue exists (T30819) that can cause permanent co-mingling of the two page move edits that are automatically added to both pages if a redirect is left. I'm surprised that the MediaWiki references deleted revisions by their timestamps as unique identifiers - almost any novice software engineer would see that as very terrible practice. Oh well, hopefully they'll fix that one of these days... ;-) Also, I... don't understand at all why my resulting moves, deletes, and deletes would cause any part of the page to show up in the new page feed. I have the autopatrolled flag - are they showing up as "needing review"? If so, they shouldn't be... ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:28, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to be phab:T311347//Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers#Article patrol status after refund/undelete, which deliberately ignores autopatrolled on the grounds that, for example, the autopatrolled status of an admin actioning a REFUND request for a contested PROD should be irrelevant since they are just acting mechanically. But, regardless of why, the fact is that it did definitely happen, and I marked ~50 articles you history merged as patrolled earlier today (Sticky Bun through Bay Trail in my patrol log). Feel free to bring this up at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:42, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Pppery - Wow, that proposal was merged just very recently! I don't agree, though... If an admin has the autopatrolled user right, they should be given the same level of trust with the content they undelete or restore - in addition to create, in that the content is presumed suitable and doesn't need human review. ...Admins are purposefully using this loophole as a way to get unsuitable content past the community-established radar? I'm... appalled... Any admins who have purposefully and willingly engaged in the use of this loophole basically spit in the direction of the community by doing that. Absolutely unacceptable... :-P ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:58, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to have misunderstood the motivation for this feature - it's not trying to combat willful admin abuse, as the discussion I linked to earlier explains. Anyway, there's no point in arguing with me over whether this feature is a good idea, because I'm just a new page reviewer and have no control over what the software does, so I won't discuss the merits of this issue any further. If you want to discuss the way the new page review software works, bring it up at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers * Pppery * it has begun... 04:07, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Pppery - Ohh, haha, I wasn't arguing at all! In fact, I forgot to add the ":-P" to the end of my last response. I was joking about the malicious admin part, though I don't see why having autopatrolled admins needing their undeletes reviewed as being necessary. But, hey, oh well.... ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 04:10, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions

Your edit of Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions includes a line with misnested tags:

| text = <big><div style="text-align:center;">'''Do not edit this page without the Arbitration Committee's authorisation.'''</big> This page documents the internal rules and procedures of the Arbitration Committee.</div>

which should be changed to

| text = <div style="text-align:center;"><big>'''Do not edit this page without the Arbitration Committee's authorisation.'''</big> This page documents the internal rules and procedures of the Arbitration Committee.</div>

Cheers, —Anomalocaris (talk) 09:40, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anomalocaris -  Done; the diff is here. Thanks for letting me know! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 09:43, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That was quick! Thank you for taking care of it. —Anomalocaris (talk) 09:45, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Anomalocaris - You bet! Thanks for leaving me a heads up about this! :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 09:54, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Busy?

I have filed an SPI. Something odd is going on at the Battle of Marj Ayyun article. Kansas Bear (talk) 21:39, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question from SenatorNato22 (21:46, 12 July 2022)

Hi, I noticed something that is factually incorrect on a page. It is semi-protected, so I cannot edit it. However, I would be happy to provide the edit and source if it can be changed by someone else. --SenatorNato22 (talk) 21:46, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

content deleted

Good Morning my boss. am new to wikipedia. trying to create my biography but my content has just been deleted and am here wondering why. Dj Redcardz (talk) 03:48, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Dj Redcardz and welcome to Wikipedia! Your user page was deleted because it consisted of content that was not allowed. Wikipedia is not a place to advertise or promote yourself or your discography, and it's clear that this is what you did. Hence, your user page was deleted for violating that policy. Please review Wikipedia's policies on what it is not designed to be; this is an encyclopedia - not a place for people to advertise themselves. If you have any questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 04:01, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Oshwah&oldid=1097882029"