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 70.158.100.81 (talk) at 02:23, 11 December 2021 (→Hair: new section). 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.


Promotional articles in mainspace

Hi, I remember you helped me a few months back (I believe August), and you mentioned I can reach out in case I have any questions, so I hope you don't mind if I take you up on your offer. I flagged these two articles Symbol (blockchain) and NEM (cryptocurrency) but an editor keeps on removing the tags. Based on the edits, it makes me wonder whether the accounts could be related hence I initiated this [[1]]. I understand it takes awhile for the review and that's fine. I was wondering whether what's the best course of action with the articles? I don't want to engage in edit war with this editor, so I would appreciate your advice. Thanks in advance. --WomenProj (talk) 15:55, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Hi, WomenProj. I hope Oshwah replies to you, but since he hasn't edited in four days, I'll just mention that anybody is allowed to remove a PROD template, and it must not then be restored, as you did here and here. See WP:PROD. Please leave the articles the way the way they are now that サンドマン has reverted your restorations of the PRODs. Or else you can take the articles to WP:AfD, if you like. If you do that, the principle is the opposite: nobody's allowed to remove an AFD template from an article. Bishonen | tålk 17:15, 1 November 2021 (UTC).[reply]
@Bishonen: Thank you for your insight. Good to know about the difference. --WomenProj (talk) 17:24, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi WomenProj! I apologize for the delay responding to your message and your questions here. Bishonen did an excellent job with her response to you above; if you have any more questions or need help with anything else, please don't hesitate to let me know. I'll be more than happy to lend you a hand. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 14:30, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DeWitte court drama

Apparently I (we?) missed some court drama that RWP posted back in Aug. Bond hearing excerpt:

Prosecutor: You understand that obviously there's a lot of charges and if convicted you could spend the rest of your natural life in prison... you understand that, right?
Jeremy DeWitte: Yes sir.
Prosecutor: Is it your intention to come to court?
Jeremy DeWitte: Yes sir.

YouTube snip. Holy shit! El_C 15:26, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

El_C - That guy is a psychopath! I'm clicking on this now! ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:28, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I really think he might be looking at doing some very serious time, many years if not decades. Though I only got through less than half of that ~3-hour recoding, the reactions of the judge to some of the videos the prosecutor played to the court were very telling, I thought. She seemed genuinely shocked at his gross disregard to safety and his many other abuses. As she should be. That is the expected normal human reaction. I believe the trial judge will be someone else, though my sense is that that is of no moment. El_C 08:24, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
El C - That guy has been overdue for jail-time for years. Let's just play the "what-if game" and say, okay, somehow he manages to be acquitted of all counts involving the impersonation of law enforcement officers. All of those videos contain an absolute treasure cove of evidence that clearly show him violating numerous traffic and safety laws, on top of a pile of other laws - for years. If things go the way that I hope that they'll go, he's looking at 5+ years in jail at a minimum, on top of having his business shut down, a lifetime ban from any kind of commercial or business driving, and at least 10+ years of supervised probation after his release. Someone like him absolutely cannot be allowed to be given any kind of power or privileges that can be used to assert authority over other individuals. The years that he has used his funeral procession business as an excuse to do the things that he did clearly shows that, if he were given any kind of that power or privilege, he would absolutely abuse it. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 11:09, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And remember that he's already a registered sex offender (convicted of sexual battery of a minor), I think for life. One disturbing angle that I wonder to what extent will be explored in the trial, is the years in which police officers were instructed by higher ups not to engage him unless it involved "capital crimes" (!). All while he was committing multiple multiple felonies. Like, what the...? If there is even a trial, that is. He may just cop a plea on advice of counsel, though knowing Jeremy's ego, he may well choose the gauntlet. Which I sincerely hope he does. El_C 11:34, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Either way, I think his freedom of abuse is likely going to be shut down - one way or another. One can only get away with what he's gotten away with for so long... ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:00, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Been a Minute

Oshwah! It's been awhile, I'm trying to get back into things. Saw your name pop up following up with the mop on some of my point-outs. Hope you're well! RegistryKey(RegEdit) 04:43, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi RegistryKey! Welcome back! I hope you're doing well! :-) I've been busy lately with a lot of work and life stuff, but I'm definitely still around. Let me know if I can answer any questions or help you with anything, and I'll be more than happy to do so. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 05:24, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

LTA

see MrTesticle's edits. Lopbunny69 (talk) 14:29, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lopbunny69! I think you were referring to McTesticle instead of MrTesticle. ;-) Thanks for letting me know about this; I've changed the block to a more appropriate level. If you see any more shenanigans from this LTA and from other accounts, please let me know and I'll be happy to squash them with the mop. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 14:34, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No subject

so how do I learn how to edit — Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.112.176.209 (talk) 09:16, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! Welcome to Wikipedia! There are plenty of resources that you should definitely refer to in order to understand how things work around here, and how to edit, contribute, and become a key member of the project. :-) To start with basics... there's really no secret. If you see something on an article that you can fix and improve, be bold! Don't hesitate! Click the edit button, make the changes that you feel will fix the issue or improve the article, add an edit summary, and click on Publish changes - it's that easy! As you become more comfortable and familiar with the basic tools and how to do things, you'll want to grow from there. I highly suggest reading through Wikipedia's introduction page. There's also this tutorial that I really like. It will walk you through all the basics - how to navigate around the website, how to find important pages, documentation, help, and other great resources, as well as how to get involved and start contributing with us. Give those pages a read-though, and please let me know if you run into any questions. I'll be more than happy to answer them and help you. :-) Again, welcome to Wikipedia! I'm glad that you've decided to join us! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 09:25, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No subject

Hi Oshwah my name is ezinne I just log in to Wikipedia, so I will like to know more about editing I feel like it is a hard process 🧐🧐🤯 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agha ezinne (talk • contribs) 10:47, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Agha ezinne! Welcome to Wikipedia! I'll respond by stating the same thing that I said to someone who said the same thing just a bit ago... :-) There are plenty of resources that you should definitely refer to in order to understand how things work around here, and how to edit, contribute, and become a key member of the project. :-) To start with basics... there's really no secret. If you see something on an article that you can fix and improve, be bold! Don't hesitate! Click the edit button, make the changes that you feel will fix the issue or improve the article, add an edit summary, and click on Publish changes - it's that easy! As you become more comfortable and familiar with the basic tools and how to do things, you'll want to grow from there. I highly suggest reading through Wikipedia's introduction page. There's also this tutorial that I really like. It will walk you through all the basics - how to navigate around the website, how to find important pages, documentation, help, and other great resources, as well as how to get involved and start contributing with us. Give those pages a read-though, and please let me know if you run into any questions. I'll be more than happy to answer them and help you. :-) Again, welcome to Wikipedia! I'm glad that you've decided to join us! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 11:58, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail

Hello, Oshwah. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Doug Weller talk 13:34, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Doug Weller - Acknowledged. Stand by; I'm checking my email now... ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 15:02, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

IP with disruptive editing

Greetings Oswah, hope everything is well due to continuous disruptive editing recently the Vuk Karadžić page was protected but it did not stopped with it. This "new" IP Special:Contributions/93.138.19.195 started their edit warring on that page with the same behaviour on Mate Parlov page posting unsourced material. Can something be done. Thank you. User:Theonewithreason (talk) 13. November 2021 (UTC)

I just wrote the truth, that someone doesn’t like it, it’s his thing. I didn't put anything on the Mate Parlov page without the source, I just restored the previous state.and stop inventing that I am adding material without a source The editor of Vanjagenije added something that is not written in the source, you won't say that.93.138.19.195 (talk) 14:09, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Theonewithreason! Whelp, it looks like you weren't the only one who had issues with this user's disruption. The IP is already blocked by someone else, so we should be all set and good to go. ;-) Please let me know if I can lend a hand with anything else, and I'll be more than happy to do so. :-) Happy Saturday! ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 15:03, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Oswah and I really appreciate your kind words. Have a nice weekend. User:Theonewithreason (talk) 13. November 2021 (UTC)
You bet, Theonewithreason; always happy to help! Happy editing! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 15:49, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

unblocking Webby-Master-SD

I don't think continuing this discussion on WMS's talk page is helping them. Hope you don't mind me bringing it here instead. I'd just like to spell out where I'm at.

  • I blocked for a promotional username.
  • I stated my discomfort with the requested username as it appears to me to cling to the WP:SPA & WP:COI connotations of their previous username, and requested they choose another name. I neither accepted nor declined the unblock request.
  • You renamed them, and, I can't emphasize this enough, I'm 100% OK with that.
  • You didn't unblock them. I don't understand why, if you're content with the new username, you would not do so.
  • The conversation since seems to imply that I should unblock because you're content with the new username. In good conscience I don't feel I should use the tools based on your judgement. I'm 100% OK with you seeing it differently and unblocking, but that's your decision, not mine. I hope you can empathise with that position.

Thanks for the reminder about roofing. I've been waiting 6 weeks for a guy to come and fix some slipped slates on my roof. Time to give him a call. Be well, Cabayi (talk) 14:11, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cabayi - Ohhhh, shit.... I'm such a moron! I totally forgot to unblock the damn account. Thank you, thank you, thank you for letting me know! It probably doesn't mean much now (*Oshwah rolls his eyes at himself*...), but I just went ahead and unblocked them. Damn it! Wow... my stupidity still manages to amaze me sometimes... *sigh*...
Anyways, I'm glad that you responded and that you detailed your discomfort with the account's requested username. I guess I didn't feel that the account's previous username was relevant with what the user requested his/her new username to be, just because it was different enough and appeared generic enough to me. However, I completely 100% understand that you would feel differently. If I created an account with the username "I will kill Billy Bob", then requested my username to be changed to "Billy Bob lives at 123 Easy Street", any somewhat-kind-of-decent-sometimes-but-meh administrator would of course take a slight issue with that one... lol ;-) I guess there's just that line between "what was" and "what will be" that I'll need to think about and maybe define a bit better with my future judgments and decisions when it comes to this situation.
I greatly appreciate you for bringing your thoughts and concerns to me. You (as well any other editor on Wikipedia) are always welcome to come to me with any issues and concerns that you may have regarding my decisions and use of admin tools. Be honest and be frank; it won't hurt my feelings and I'm not going to go postal at you because you're willing to hold others accountable. If anything, we'll have a great discussion and we'll learn a few things and apply them moving forward. There's nothing ever wrong with doing that! ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 14:57, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Doh! That is of course the simpler explanation. Take it as an indication of my esteem that "Oshwah forgot" wasn't on my list of possible scenarios. Cabayi (talk) 15:16, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Cabayi - Hey, I'll take that as a compliment! It didn't cross your mind that Oshwah was actually a bumbling idiot and just didn't... you know... do the one thing that he was actually supposed to do! Heh, well, as you now know... those cards need to be on the table when it comes to me. Leave no stone unturned! ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 15:44, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail

Hello, Oshwah. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Doug Weller talk 14:30, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Doug Weller - Received and replied. It's good to talk to you, as always... :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 15:01, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps another sock

Hi Oshwah, thanks for all your work in tracking down socks related to EWAdams. I have met him at conferences and know him via social media, but at this point I honestly don't know which of the accounts are his, and which might be from people responding to his off-wiki canvassing (which is how I heard about things, myself). In any case, SPA Bmaryott (talk · contribs) just popped up and made a suspicious edit, so I wanted to let you know.[2] No other edits, no userpage, but very specific edit summary. I'm an admin but have never done much with SPI, so if I should be reporting this in some other way, please let me know, thanks. --Elonka 22:45, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Elonka! I hope you're having a good weekend! Thanks for the message and for reporting your concerns regarding this user account to me. I took a quick search through your contributions, and I noticed that you haven't edited an SPI page in quite some time. It doesn't look like you've created an SPI report before (but I could very well be incorrect). Nonetheless, can you file an SPI report regarding your concerns with this user account? All you need to do is click here, go to the collapsed box labeled "How to open an investigation", click on [show], enter the username of the sockmaster into the text field, and click on "submit". From there, you'll fill in the parameters, detail all of your evidence (be as in-depth as you can), and then save the page. Filing an SPI report will help me to facilitate this, as well as have an official case and request on record. Are you able to do that for me? Let me know when you've done so; in the meantime, I'll take a look at the account's contributions and see what I can't uncover. ;-) Thanks again for the message - I'm more than happy to lend a hand! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:09, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, User:Elonka (talk · contribs) I work at Digipen Institute of Technology, where we teach people to make games so this is actually relevant to my professional interests. If you feel like actually verifying I'm not him (and that I'm not an article of clothing), feel free to contact the school and ask for me in the I.T. department. The edit was a link from his name there, to this article here so I'm curious why that's considered "suspicious" as that IS what links are supposed to be for. As for "sock", I'm assuming you're referring to it being a "first edit" and not "having an account that's over a decade old but hadn't been used." I'm also very curious where the animosity to him is coming from. --User:bmaryott 23:42, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Bmaryott - I think you meant to ping Elonka in your response here - you acidentally pinged User:User:Elonka (the account with the username "User:Elonka"), which doesn't exist. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:02, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User recent edits query

Hi Oshwah. I have an odd feeling about this editor's content deletion of recent. WellCare article, Micheal Neidorff, etc. You blocked some sock puppet incidents. Might you have a look? I don't want to delete/revert the seemingly unwarranted edits -- really removal of material -- without another opinion. User is SrunzeecTheGOBLIN.

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

Best Wishes. -- (Bob) Wikiklrsc (talk) 04:26, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wikiklrsc! Thanks for leaving me a message here with your concerns regarding this user and their edits and behavior. It looks like Blablubbs beat me to investigating this user, as he has already blocked this account for sock puppetry. Looking at the user's contributions, I can definitely see why you messaged me with your concerns. If you see any more users that you believe to be the same person as this account (or if you see any others), please let me know and I'll be happy to look into the matter. Thanks again for the message, and I hope you have a great rest of your day. :-) Happy editing! ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:43, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your kind attention, Oshwah. Bests. (Bob) Wikiklrsc (talk) 18:55, 18 November 2021 (UTC)~[reply]
Wikiklrsc - You bet! Always happy to help! If you need anything else, don't be a stranger - hit me up and I'll be happy to lend a hand. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 05:40, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Article for deletion help

Hi Oshwah! I hope your day is going well! I wanted to reach out for some guidance in an article for deletion page I created for 2016 Shepherd Rams football team. It's my first time nominating a page for deletion, and I want to make sure I handled it correctly. A page was created for this football team (a school I graduated from ten years ago,) but the page itself doesn't seem worthy of a standalone article, due to references being from only one publication, and the team didn't get to their National Championship game. (The team DID make it to that particular Nat'l Champ game the year prior, with no article for that season.) Given that it's a division II team, I figured the page could be redirected to Shepherd Rams. I'm sorry to burden you, but you've been very helpful to me in the past and I just want to make sure I followed instructions correctly. Thank you so much! Spf121188 (talk) 16:05, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Spf121188! I hope you're doing well! Thanks for leaving me a message here with your questions and your request for some input and advice regarding the article that you nominated for deletion - the 2016 Shepherd Rams football team article. In this specific situation and if I were to be asked to participate in the deletion discussion for this article, I would refer to WP:NSPORTS (specifically, this section on teams and clubs). In this section, the guideline correctly points out that, while there are no general guidelines regarding the presumed notability of sports teams and clubs, the article (as with any article on Wikipedia) needs to meet Wikipedia's general notability guidelines.
If you navigate to Wikipedia's guidelines on notability, you'll see a blue table of links on the right-side of the page. It contains a list of subject-specific notability guidelines that should be referenced if an article falls into one of those. That little table, right there, is an excellent "pocket-book" to have on your belt. It's small, convenient, lists all of the subject-specific notability guidelines that may apply to various articles that are nominated (including the one that I just referenced above), and is exactly what I reference and look to frequently when I need to assess the notability of an article subject. In summary, when assessing the notability of an article subject, if the subject falls into one of those subject-specific guidelines listed in that table, refer to that guideline page for how to make a determination. Otherwise, in cases where the article subject doesn't fall into a subject-specific notability guideline, refer to the general notability guidelines instead.
While we're on the subject of AFD and notability, I think that it's also important to point out a common misconception that many users will often find themselves gravitating towards in one way or another. It's extremely important for not just the editors who create, write, and expand articles and content, but also the editors who nominate articles for deletion and participate in AFD discussions, to understand: Discussions at AFD, as well as the guidelines regarding the notability of an article subject, do not take the quality of the article itself into account when asserting the notability of the article subject and ultimately deciding whether it should be kept or deleted (whether it be the article's content, its references, how well things are written, how long it is, etc). The notability of an article subject is determined by evaluating the availability of secondary reliable sources that provide primary coverage on the article subject that can be researched and found (either on the internet, in print media, or other forms of publishing).
Think of it like this: If, for example, the Barrack Obama or Abraham Lincoln articles were only a few paragraphs long and didn't provide many or very good references or sources, these articles would be kept if I were to nominate them for a discussion at AFD. That's because, well, they're notable people... :-) It's quite easy to go onto Google and type those names in - you're going to find numerous sources that are reliable and show that these people are notable. We don't delete articles under the AFD process just because they're not long enough, don't have great content, or don't have enough sources cited. The articles just need to be expanded and improved is all. :-) On the other hand: I could have an extensively-written article about some random Joe person, but if they're not notable, the article subject won't be determined to be notable in an AFD discussion. Why? Because there obviously won't be any secondary reliable sources online or elsewhere that would establish Mr. Random Joe Person as a notable article subject, per Wikipedia's notability guidelines. The quality of the article I wrote about Random Joe could be significantly above-average when it comes to content, but in the end, it won't matter. :-)
Whatever ends up happening at the AFD discussion, I hope that it goes well, that it reaches a well-argued consensus, and comes to a good conclusion and close. Please let me know if you have any more questions, or if I can provide you with any more guidance, input, or information that you need. I'll be more than happy to help you. :-) Good luck, man! I hope that my response has provided you with a lot of good information, and that you received the help and guidance that you were looking for. Best wishes - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:27, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for your input and advice! I'm still making my way through all of the resources available, of which there are MANY, which is great! Looking back, I may have jumped the gun on the AfD article in this particular case, but everyone who has provided insight on the topic has also been helping me understand the process and what to look for. I hope you don't mind my inquiring for help now and then, as you have been incredibly helpful in pointing me in the right direction and providing the proper resources for a particular matter. Just trying to find my niche in contributing to the project, and I can't thank you enough for all of your help! Spf121188 (talk) 13:49, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Spf121188 - You're very welcome! Don't beat yourself up for feeling like you may have jumped the gun nominating the article for AFD. This was the first time that you've nominated an article for a deletion discussion at AFD. Nobody should expect someone who's brand new to that process to be perfect with their relevant guidelines. We all make mistakes, and we learn best when we have the ability to make them - if you're not making mistakes, then you're doing something wrong! ;-) Sure, no problem! Don't be a stranger; I'm absolutely available and happy to help you if you run into any more questions or need input and guidance on anything else. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 17:45, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starcraft_Marine

You reverted my link http://www.fiberglassics.com/library/index.php?title=Starcraft

This link provides a tremendous amount of information regarding the specifications of the older Starcraft boats. Frankly, I have yet to find a link that provides as much information regarding the older boat specifications as http://www.fiberglassics.com/library/index.php?title=Starcraft The information is not available on the Starcraft website.

The link should be left as an external link for those who know and understand the significance of the information.

To incorporate the information into the Wikipedia article would make the article 10x larger and be subject to possible transposition errors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohawk82 (talk • contribs) 18:02, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mohawk82 - I didn't feel like the link was necessary for the article. Why is it needed? ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:10, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Block of User:Ruthaylett

Hi Oshwah, in regarding your block of Ruthaylett (talk · contribs), as you may recall, this was done because she had run afoul of meatpuppetry at an AfD. She had responded to a social media request by the now blocked user EWAdams (talk · contribs), who had been canvassing off-wiki.

I'd like to confirm that Ruth is indeed a separate person who I have communicated with, and counseled on Wikipedia's policies. She understands what happened now, and has promised not to engage in this type of behavior again. Would you be willing to consider an unblock? Thanks, --Elonka 21:49, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Oshwah, it looks like you've been gone for a few days, so I've gone ahead and also posted an unblock request at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Requesting unblock of Ruthaylett, FYI --Elonka 05:07, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Elonka! I left a message on your user talk page (diff) to thank you for doing the right thing. :-) I appreciate it very much and I hope you have a great weekend. :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:57, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Oshwah! No need to apologize, I think the block was exactly the right thing to do at the time, as Ruthaylett was definitely acting as a meatpuppet, participating within a half-hour of the other account, and especially after such a long period of inactivity. The block was justified. In any case, all is sorted now. Have a great holiday season! --Elonka 13:56, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Elonka! Thanks for responding! I hope you also have a great and safe holiday season. Be well. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:20, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:14, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MaxMind

Trying to propose an article to be deleted here, but I can't edit the page because I'm not autoconfirmed. What do I do? 209.52.88.151 (talk) 02:17, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also wondering how illegal usernames are dealt with. As in, usernames that are specifically created to leak another person's real-life privacy. 209.52.88.151 (talk) 02:37, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As Wikipedia is not a government, usernames are not "illegal", but are against policy. You may report usernames that are against the username policy to WP:UAA. You may post a request at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion that someone else complete the AFD nomination process for you. 331dot (talk) 08:10, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot: Doesn't Wikipedia keep an Akashic record? So even if such username gets changed, the old username will be logged? Even oversight doesn't deletion information from the database, right? Have there ever been cases of such problematic usernames violating WP:PRIVACY? If so, how are they dealt with? 209.52.88.228 (talk) 16:43, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Usernames that violate privacy are oversighted and should be reported to an oversighter directly(this is described at WP:UAA). Oversighting it conceals it from view by everyone except other oversighters(even admins cannot see them) but it is not technically removed from the database. Username changes are logged; if a user wants to avoid this, they should just create a new account and abandon the old one. 331dot (talk) 16:56, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
331dot - Thank you for responding and for helping this user while I was offline. Much appreciated! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:11, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Conundrum

I am dealing with an editor Jannizzero1 on battle of Fornovo and an IP[3] decided to vandalize multiple articles that I just happen to edit. However, Materialscientist blocked them. That IP geolocates to Italy, just like the other IPs that have posted on Talk:Battle of Fornovo.

Granted they(SPI) will not connect an IP to a name account, should I even file an SPI? User:Jannizzero1's comments do have striking similarities to the comments made by IPs that have posted PAs on Talk:Battle of Fornovo. Your thoughts? --Kansas Bear (talk) 12:57, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kansas Bear! Sorry for the delay responding to your message. You can file an SPI, just don't request a checkuser. We can still investigate and take action based off of behavioral evidence - remember to keep that in mind. ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:04, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The issue has been addressed, somewhat. The SPI vs IPs and not requesting a checkuser is good to know. Thanks for that information, I will keep it in mind for the future. --Kansas Bear (talk) 02:30, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merger discussion for Centralised generation

An article that you have been involved in editing—Centralised generation—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:32, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chidgk1! Thanks for the notice - I'll go check it out. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:06, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Page protection

Hi Oshwah, can you protect this page "Upin & Ipin" for 2 weeks, to prevent excessive disruptive editing.

Thank you! --180.244.164.139 (talk) 02:13, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your request! I took a look at the article's edit history, and it looks like any disruption that may have been ongoing has stopped. Because of this, I'm going to hold off on adding any page protection to the article. If you find that disruption picks back up and continues, feel free to file a page protection request by clicking here. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:15, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

YGM

Hi Oshwah - hope all is well! Just letting you know I've sent you an email. Take care, Patient Zerotalk 04:21, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Patient Zero! No problem - I'll give it a read tonight and get back to you. Sorry for the delay responding. Work has picked up for the holiday season, so I'm swamped... ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:16, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! Not a problem whatsoever - things sound rather busy, there’s no rush! :-) Patient Zerotalk 03:33, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Problematic editor

Hi Oshwah, I have been watching a few articles and reverting most edits by 46.252.45.7 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) The anon said it is inappropriate to call women by their first name or by "she". The anon is changing names in articles of women who are known mononymously to their surname. Often removes "mononymously known as ...". The anon has been at it on and off for awhile, their IP hasn't changed since at least March. Focus seems primarily on three articles. Diff of their edits:

I have been reverting per wp:COMMONNAME and WP:SURNAME. Is that OK? Any suggestions?

Is the username "Skllavic Agent" available? Maybe I should request a username change? Cheers Adakiko (talk) 11:06, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Adakiko! That's an.... interesting... agenda that this user is going off on, editing articles like that and removing important information. My suggestion? Ignore their spats made toward you, revert their edits, and report the user for blocking if it continues. You've informed the user about WP:COMMONNAME; they know that further edits like that are disruptive. They obviously have read your messages and warnings due to the... very polite response (lol) they left on your user talk page. You seem like you're doing the right thing. You reached out to them about WP:COMMONNAME and tried to talk to them, they gave you the middle finger and kept at it - that's disruptive and I would've blocked them had I seen this currently happening. Let me know if you have any more questions or need anything else - I'll be more than happy to lend a hand. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:24, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your time, Oshwah! I'll use your suggestions. Cheers Adakiko (talk) 05:53, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Adakiko - You're welcome! Happy to help! :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 05:57, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
He's back. AIV report added! Cheers Adakiko (talk) 08:59, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Three months! Adakiko (talk) 10:35, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Adakiko - Hey, there you go! BOOM, handled! ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:41, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:IMPERSONATOR

Hi, hope you're having a good start of December, because I haven't on Wikipedia for the following reason:-

An LTA had created an account named "Iggy the Swan II" which is obviously similar to my name but with the "II" at the end. The same LTA had also created accounts similar to usernames of users they harass including me. Is there a way to stop further attempts for people to create accounts similar to my username as a couple of accounts beginning with my exact user name were created within the last 90 days? Thanks, Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 17:01, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Iggy the Swan! I'm sorry to hear that someone is creating usernames similar to yours in order to troll and impersonate you. If you know me as well as I'm sure you do, you'll know that this happens to me all the time. :-) First, don't let that crap intimidate you or scare you away from Wikipedia. This is the internet, and trolls will be trolls... that's just how it is. They're trolls - they want an adverse reaction out of you, and being scared or threatened away will only give them exactly what they want, and at a very cheap "price". The second thing I'd recommend doing is to check out this page. It lists all of the other accounts that I've registered and taken over to have as doppelgänger accounts, which is allowed under Wikipedia's sock puppetry policy. Basically, you'll create accounts with usernames that are very similar to yours (check out the list of mine for ideas, and make sure that you're logged in so that the new user log states that you created the accounts), redirect their user and user talk pages to your main account, and call it good. If there are impersonator accounts that were created that are very similar to yours, list them for me and I'll rename them so that you can create the accounts and take their usernames. If you want to go further, just create a subpage in your user space like I did, and list your legit alternate accounts (if you have any), and state there that if any accounts that look like yours pop up in the new user log that were not created by you, that they can be blocked. Shoot, copy mine if you want to - I don't care. ;-) If you have any more questions or concerns, please let me know. I'll be more than happy to help you with anything that you need. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:21, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That is a lot of accounts which starts off with the first few letters of your user name, more than I thought but some are listed on "this page".
In the case of accounts beginning with "Iggy the", I see eight of these accounts, three of which have been used to impersonate me with the rest being different as things stand. But the impersonator accounts have been taken care of already thankfully. The users who know my user name well would have realised something was not right with the edits made and were probably thinking that was certainly not me who did that. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 07:01, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, the LTAs and trolls like to target me like that. I don't know why... their efforts are a waste of time and don't affect me what-so-ever. Oh well... trolls will be trolls, and they'll keep doing what they think is working; there's nothing I can do about it, so I don't even care nor worry about it at all. Don't worry about impersonators making bad edits with similar usernames as yours. Any established editor will know to check the user page of the account and realize that it's not you. If they try to transclude or substitute your userpage onto theirs, I have a neat little trick to combat that. Just go into the Wikipedia sandbox, edit the page, then add {{User:Oshwah}} or {{subst:User:Oshwah}} to the page body, and click "Show preview". You'll see. ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:30, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Brilliant way to do that. I have seen you'd created "User:Iggy the Swan II" with the note of impersonating. Joseph2302 was also impersonated on the same day which I think you've noticed already per block log. By checking the edit filter, Iggy the Swan II tried to do something which a random filter disallowed the edit (here) but I can't prove what happened there for private reasons. Regarding me, if I ever forget my password I have an email address to recover it. I bet most others have an email address as well by seeing the listed tools. Cheers, Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 09:44, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A question

Hey Oshwah, hope you and yours are all doing well. I have a question about the lead of an article like Persian Gulf. Should the lead contain the name "Persian Gulf" in both Persian and Arabic or "Persian Gulf" in Persian and "Arabian Gulf" in Arabic ? Thanks in advance, wish you a great rest of your day. Cheers.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 09:48, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikaviani - Good question. Let me take a peek at the manual of style and guidelines and get back to you. If I recall correctly, like famous people who were born or originated in these areas, we supplement the person's native spelling of their name as what was recorded in that language if they're not using Arabic lettering. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 15:26, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot for your answer. Yeah, for the famous people, it's easier, but the problem with the Persian Gulf is that Iran says "Persian Gulf" (which is the international name of that body of water) and Arab countries say "Arabian Gulf" While both Arabs and Iranians call, for example, Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi by his Arabic name. ---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 17:37, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,sorry for interruption, but I also want to mention that there is no unique Arabic name. some Arab countries use "Gulf" or "Persian Gulf". for example Wikipedia Egypt uses "Persian Gulf". 85.185.56.9 (talk) 21:52, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bodiadub

Glad to see you're back on the front lines! -- RoySmith (talk) 15:02, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi RoySmith! Thanks for the message! It meas a lot, and I appreciate it very much. I've been mostly working behind the scenes these last few months to combat LTA activity when I see events in progress. I'll definitely be slowly going back and forth and keeping an eye on SPI.
Fun fact: I had compiled everything and had my CU findings all laid out and typed into the edit window on the SPI report. I hit "Publish changes", close all of my CU tabs and notes, go back to the SPI report, and....... my edit isn't there. Hmm, okay, that's weird... I refreshed the page - nothing. Checked the edit history. Nothing! Checked my contributions thinking I saved it somewhere else on accident? Nothing!!! My global contributions?!! Am I going crazy? Zippo, ziltch, nada. The edit somehow didn't get saved and I had just closed all of my tabs and notes. I had to go back, list the users that I remembered being 'likely' and 'meh', re-run the users I didn't have in memory, and type my CU findings in again. I made sure to have it copied into notepad++ in case it didn't save again. ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 15:23, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
BTDT, thought it was just creeping senility :-) -- RoySmith (talk) 15:27, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
RoySmith - You obviously know me well; I'm not an "angry or upset" kind of person, but that did frustrate me a little. Really?!! I spent two hours and my CU results didn't save?!! I need to start evil and become the best LTA ever!!!! ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 09:18, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I hear you. Pretty much the first rule of good U/I design is "never lose the user's data". -- RoySmith (talk) 13:45, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was unable to edit this page in October due to your ECP. After unprotection, vandalism continued. I made the request at RFPP a few days ago but the request was rejected. I made another request again. Last time administrator rejected the protection request, by saying few edits since August, but that was due to your ECP.--Knight Skywalker (talk) 07:10, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Knight Skywalker - Investigating... ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:38, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ujjwal 201

It looks Ujjwal 201 is upset with you. Just look at his/her user page per this. 2402:3A80:6E0:2848:49A1:2A62:94:90CE (talk) 14:36, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Starcraft Marine

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starcraft_Marine

My last message had the offered valid advice: "The link should be left as an external link for those who know and understand the significance of the information. "

Unfortunately, you fail to see the value of a link that provides a tremendous amount of information regarding Starcraft boats. Boat owners, on the other hand, would find the information of great value, especially if they were looking at buying a very old used boat, trying to replace a deteriorated USCG vessel information placard, or simply had an interest in finding out more information about that line of watercraft. The information is not publicly available on the Starcraft website.

You clearly have not looked at the contents of the link - or if you had- did not comprehend its significance.

Boat owners, on the other hand, would have the appreciation of finding a link to information that, for one reason or another, seems difficult or impossible to find elsewhere - including on the publicly accessible section of the boat manufacturer's website..

It seems that you are quite intent on blocking the content - there isn't much more I can do about it unless Wikipedia has some sort of appeals process involving more informed individuals regarding such matters. Mohawk82 (talk) 22:09, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Advice?

Hello Oshwah! I'm sorry to bother you on your talk page yet again, but you've been helpful to me in the past and I think I need some advice... There's a user who has made several reverts on different pages and characterizing them as "vandalism," when they really appear to just be bold. He left me a message on my talk page after I re-reverted one of his edits (and corrected a portion of it,) and I have the interaction here [4]. I wanted to come to you because WP:NOTVAND has been brought to his attention in the past, [5] and I wanted to turn to an experienced user/admin for some help, just making sure I didn't say/type anything through the interaction in poor faith. The other user seems to have a COI as it relates to University of Louisiana at Lafayette, but notwithstanding, I just want to make sure he doesn't continue marking bold edits as vandalism, and when he left me the message on my talk page, I tried to help him out by understanding what is/isn't vandalism, but he seems to take it personally (I did insinuate that he was a WP:SPA, which I did apologize for as I shouldn't have mentioned that.) I would appreciate any help or guidance to make sure I'm not overstepping or not being civil with him otherwise, as that wasn't my intention whatsoever. Thank you again for your help!! Spf121188 (talk) 20:02, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Hair

Dude, nice hair!

(Note to overzealous talk page stalkers: This is NOT vandalism. I am merely spreading the WP:WikiLove.) 70.158.100.81 (talk) 02:23, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Oshwah&oldid=1059706522"