User:Oshwah/TalkPageArchives/2018-02

You are currently viewing an archive of Oshwah's user talk page from February 2018. Please do not modify this page.

These discussions are no longer active and were moved here for historical and record-keeping purposes. If you need to respond to a discussion from here, please create a new discussion on my user talk page and with a link to the archived discussion here so I can easily follow, and we'll be able to pick up where we left off no problem.

Were you trying to send me a message? No worries. Just click here to go the correct page.

Applied psychology

Hlo sir !

Please tell me fields and careers in applied psychology  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.207.188.215 (talk) 09:18, 1 February 2018 (UTC) 

I think the Wikipedia helpdesk is a better place to ask for this assistance. I'm not much of a psychology expert, although I do occasionally read and study it in my spare time :-). ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:06, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

2600:1002:B100:0:0:0:0:0/42

• 2600:1002:B100:0:0:0:0:0/42 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial))

There's more vandalism and block evasion/socking after your recent 72 hour block expired. Would you mind blocking this range again? Thanks. 67.86.212.27 (talk) 17:21, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

It looks like the vandalism you're referring to is concentrated on the Special needs article. Looking at the level of vandalism there, the number of IP addresses and ranges involved, and the overall edits from that IP range - I'm going to hold off on blocking that range again, since there appears to be legitimate edits coming from that range now. 2600:1002:B100:0:0:0:0:0/42 is an IP range for Verizon Wireless, which means that IPs in this range are used by many people and frequently shared and changed between multiple users as mobile devices travel and are handed off to other towers and re-used. I try to block any IP ranges as a last resort, when singular IP blocks aren't effective, and when the potential for collateral damage is minimal. Collateral damage didn't seem to be occurring very frequently when I previously blocked the range; this appears to be a different case now. I'll need to keep eyes on things and take action accordingly as usage changes with IP ranges - especially public, shared, or mobile ranges. I also see that Courcelles has recently blocked an IPv6 address in that range for vandalism on that article (as well as others outside of it) and has applied semi-protection to the article, so things will hopefully remain under control there. Please don't hesitate to let me know if you see more disruption from this range and I'll be happy to take a look. As you can imagine, I can't keep track of every single IP I block and watch them all for continued disruption, so I appreciate your continued eyes and ears on this range and for giving me a heads up; it's very helpful to me :-). Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:20, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Heroeswithmetaphors

I see you edited this entry. She/he does not maintain a "talk" page. Do you have contact info? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.173.119.133 (talk) 1 February 2018

It looks like this user maintains a user talk page here - it just hasn't been edited frequently recently, but that doesn't matter. If you wish to leave a message for this person, just leave a new section as you did on my talk page here :-). Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:25, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar!

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Sorry it's a bit delayed, but thanks for cleaning up my user page two weeks ago. ∰Bellezzasolo✡ Discuss 22:05, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Bellezzasolo! No apologies are needed at all! In fact, I owe you one as well - I've been busy over the last two weeks and I'm just now catching up with all of my messages and emails here. I apologize for the delay responding to you here ;-). I appreciate the barnstar, and you're very welcome; I'm always happy to help :-). ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:27, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi!

You told me to message you if I had any questions! So, although it's not about the user rights, I thought it would be best if I personally asked you. How do you guys deal with users who write controversial (or just normal) articles in their personal pages? Aka articles in userpage name spaces?--◂ ‎épine _talk♬ 10:09, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Épine! Sorry for the delay getting back to you! I've been busy over the last two weeks and I'm just now catching up with all of my messages and emails here. Honestly, it depends on exactly what the content is, what it's about, what the purpose of it is, as well as some other factors such as what the account's username is, how old the account is, their editing history, and other things that I use to determine exactly who they claim to be or represent themselves as and what they appear to be on Wikipedia for and why. I do have some common examples, if that helps at all :-). If I see what appears to be promotional content on an account's userspace and it appears to be blatantly promotional toward a company, "themselves" as a person, or that they're using that page for reasons that aren't related to Wikipedia (see also this criterion for user page misuse) - I'll delete the page and handle the account accordingly. If the username of the account is also promotional (or is against Wikipedia's username policy for representing a company, group, band, etc), I'll obviously handle it accordingly. Another example: A new user account adds disruptive content to their user pages. Depending on that content and how... disruptive it is, one can easily tell if they're not here to contribute - and I'll handle it on that basis. The things you need to watch out for are mostly disruptive content or promotional content - that's what I most frequently see in situations where I have to take action (either on the page itself, the account, or both). If the user page appears to be used for drafting an article anywhere within their user space (even if it doesn't look any good), or if it's being used as a simple sandbox or test page, that's completely fine and it's okay for them to do that. If you want to offer some assistance to those users, just message them and point them to Wikipedia's new user tutorial and encourage them to go completely through that. I hope my response has at least somewhat helped to answer your questions. If you have any additional questions or specific examples that I didn't mention, let me know and I'll be happy to respond and go over it with you. Thanks again for the message! I hope you're doing well, and I'll await your response to let me know if I was of any help :-). ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:42, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

@Oshwah: thanks for the response! What if a user wrote an article that falls under the speedy deletion criteria in their userpage? The userpage policy says that users can do as they like with their user pages but never mentioned such thing.--◂ ‎épine _talk♬ 09:54, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Épine - You bet; always happy to help! Ehh... again, it would depend on the content (such as the examples above). In general, any speedy deletion criteria that starts with the letter 'A' only applies to pages in the article space (hence the 'A' - it stands for "Article"). That's why major things such as vandalism, attack pages, and copyright violations are under the letter 'G' (it stands for "General", or it can be applied anywhere except where it explicitly states it doesn't apply). If a user is trying to put together a page, and it falls under something like A7, A10, or even A11 - we're supposed to leave it alone (although A11... depending on the content and extent, one might be able to justify U5). Your questions are very easy to ask, but difficult to answer unfortunately... I wish I could provide you with straight-forward answers, but content on user pages really can (and often do) fall into that "grey area". There are times where even I'm not completely sure and have to re-read policy, look at past deletions, determine how others have handled the exact situations in the past, and do so on a case-by-case basis even in similar situations... I'm assuming that your underlying question is what you should do if you see such situations where you're not quite sure how it should be handled: If so, I'd say that the best thing for you to do is to message an admin, give them the link to the user page, and let them look into it and help answer the question. Please don't hesitate to respond if you have any more questions, and I'll be happy to answer them. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:27, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Note about Tony1

I'm sure you noticed, but this is a courtesy note that I've added a note to Tony1's block log saying that his block didn't follow the requirements in WP:NLT#Perceived legal threats. While I disagree with that block, I want to make sure you understand I am not one of those clamoring for your head on a pike. People are allowed to make mistakes, and even if you don't ultimately believe you needed to make that further comment in the block log, you apologized for the hurt caused. So as far as I'm concerned, listen to Bish's advice about not listening to Born2cycle's demands. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:16, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Floquenbeam! I apologize for the delay responding to your message here. I've been busy over the last two weeks and I'm just now catching up with all of my messages and emails here. Sure, that's totally fine for you (or anyone else) to do and I'm totally not against it at all. Thanks for the note and for the kind words - it's very much appreciated :-). ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:54, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

On Colemak

Hey Oshwah, I've arbitrarily come to you as you'd probably be able to help or give advice. Colemak was an article deleted several times due to be not notable in 2009, and got protected in the process to stop more recreation. Since then it's definitely garnered notability ([1] [2] [3][4][5], not to mention anything else you can find in a Google search!) and should probably have its own article given how bloated the current subsection of Keyboard layouts is getting. I'm wondering if Draft:Colemak should be moved to mainspace on the basis of notability and not on the basis of its current completeness. If it's notable enough for its own article then giving it one would automatically throw a 'this is what Wikipedia says' box on Google searches as well as encourage people to flesh out the article to much greater depth than the current subsection would allow. Do you have any thoughts on this? Y -NottNott|talk 03:38, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi NottNott! As I stated in my response on your user talk page: I apologize for the delay responding to your message here! I've been busy over the last two weeks and I'm just now catching up with all of my messages and emails here. I know that I stated that I'd respond to you "right now", but afterwards I noticed that I had other messages ahead of you that needed the same level of attention, so I apologize if you felt that my response stating that I'll get back to you immediately was an empty promise. Sure, if you feel that the Colemak keyboard layout is notable enough for its own article, I'll be happy to take the locks off the front gate so that the draft can be moved there if it meets the necessary requirements for AFC. Let me know if it does and if you wish it to be moved, and I'll be happy to help you with doing so :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:17, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

I hardly felt a thing, I have to sleep you know... It sure does meet notability criteria - a standalone article would definitely be a net benefit for the reasons given above, and have no chance of going down in an AfD. According to WP:AFCPURPOSE it would pass an AFC too - I've added a few more sources now too. The article isn't complete or thorough but meta:Eventualism means it will get better, and at the very least that subsection can be trimmed down (which i'll do now). I'd say it's ready -NottNott|talk 12:58, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

So yeah! Draft:Colemak is ready to be moved over Colemak when/if you are. Sorry if this comes off as pushy, I just don't want this to be buried under all of that admin stuff that'd make anyone forget things -NottNott|talk 10:06, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

NottNott - The deed has been done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:01, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Marvellous, thanks for your help! -NottNott|talk 13:05, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

NottNott - My pleasure. Always happy to lend a hand ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:19, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Icell network page

Hey the edits on the icell network page is* not* vandalism at all and is there a way I can dm you, I want this conversation to be private.2406:3003:2077:3A2:D9D0:87B6:D27E:652 (talk) 13:03, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

I protected the page due to it being modified multiple times by a user evading the block placed upon them. In order to message me privately, you can either create an account (which allows you to email me), or join #wikipedia-en on IRC and ask for me there. The IRC channel is public, but if I determine that the conversation should be moved to a private area, I can assist with that. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:21, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Topic

Hi, I received a message immediately after I tried to post a page about Nui Social and I don't know if that means it was directly rejected or not. Please let me know. Acrasband (talk) 22:23, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Acrasband - The content you're adding on your user page appears to be blatantly intended to advertise or be promotional. This is not allowed per Wikipedia's policies on it's purpose. I note that you since re-created the content on your userpage; I've deleted the page again under Wikipedia's speedy deletion criteria for blatant advertising. If you feel that I'm making a mistake, please let me know why and what the purpose of the page is for, and I'll be happy to assist you further. Thanks for leaving me a message, and I welcome you to Wikipedia! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:23, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Friend

Oshwah is a friend of DoRD. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.57.8.174 (talk) 11:57, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

William Foster Nye

There was a speedy deletion notice which I contested. I took the article from an 85.7% Earwig down to a 2% earwig. It was deleteed (can't recover who did it) anyway as a copyuright violation. SNAFU. Please help. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:00, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Discussions here and here 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:36, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi 7&6=thirteen! I took a look at the page logs, and it was Fram who deleted the article under G12. There's typically no issue with fixing the article so that it's no longer a copyright violation (in fact, we encourage it over deletion if it can be done), but it appears that Fram (from this discussion here) still saw issues with the article and felt that your changes weren't a sufficient paraphrase from the sources it was copied from, which is why he proceeded with the deletion. Fram's response here where he states, "Please don't try this kind of cleanup again. Hiding clear copyvios behind very superfluous changes and thuis (sic) avoiding speedy deletion is almost worse than the original copyvio" might have been a little bit brash (mostly open to misinterpretation that he's scolding you and that you were purposely trying to "fool" a tool against policy), but I don't believe that this was his intent at all. He was simply trying to say that your changes only modified certain key words in each paragraph and weren't proper paraphrasing (which is what needed to be done), and that the proper way of truly fixing the issues on the article isn't simply to change some words and get a "thumbs-up" from the Copyvio Tool when just enough has been changed, but to fully paraphrase the content in your own words and then reference the source (which is policy). If you have objections or further questions, I would message Fram as (s)he was the user who deleted the page. You're of course more than welcome to respond here instead (I've pinged Fram in this response so (s)he's aware) - that's completely fine :-). I just want to help give clarify from Fram's response to you and to help you see past any (possible) interpretations of the intent to be punitive or make accusations. My talk page is always open to you should you wish to respond here, or if you have any questions for me :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:42, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

To add a note to my previous response: It looks like Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) has an active ban imposed which restricts him from article creation (see this ArbCom case and motion from clarification). This is probably why Fram responded to you in such a manner - because it was not only a violation of his ban to create that article, but repeated copyright violations were stated as a reason for the ban. It wasn't your fault and you probably didn't know about this, 7&6=thirteen, but (assuming Fram's examples are accurate - I see no reason not to have any doubt) your edits were inadvertently taking content resulting from a disallowed action from an ArbCom remedy and making it harder to be found, removed, and any subsequent ArbCom enforcement actions carried out by doing this. Again, it's probably something you didn't see, notice, or realize, but I'm adding to my response to state that I have a greatly increased understanding of why Fram made the response to you that he made. The main point to take from this, 7&6=thirteen, is to make sure that if you're going to fix any newly created articles that are copyright violations, to fix them properly by fully removing that content and (if necessary) replacing it with content that's written completely in your own words :-). ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:51, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

I was in the process, and It was abruptly terminated. They were quick to disregard the contested deletion; and I was in the process of a complete rewrite that was abruptly cut off and would have cured the problem. Lesson learned. Article recreated, so there is nothing meaningful to argue at deletion review; won't go there just to try and prove a point. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:12, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

7&6=thirteen - Ah, okay I see; that makes sense - I noticed that the article was recreated as well. It just looks like you saved early or before you were fully done fixing the article and things quickly escalated over bigger matters before you knew what was going on and before you had a chance to explain. It happens - I'm glad you see it that way and are okay to move on. Like you said: lesson learned. Shit happens and it's not a big deal :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:33, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

I was collateral damage. Not worth fighting over any more. I was simply trying to fix the problem, and my editing got cut off before I was finished. I had taken it down from 86% earwig to 2% Earwig. I was not done, and this whole controversy would have been avoided if I had a few minutes more. Tried to save more edits and the article was just gone. Vaporized real fast. And the admins circle the wagons and lit the pyre in solidarity. Shit happens. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:45, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

7&6=thirteen - Regardless, I'm sure it was frustrating for you and I completely understand why. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:46, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

19 Kids & Counting

Hi Oshwah, I've recently noticed on the 19 Kids & Counting page had many false edits made every 1-3 minutes so I changed them back to normal and this actually happens almost every day so could you protect it if you can please.

HospitalHistory (talk) 17:03, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

HospitalHistory -  Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:55, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

User:QFloppy

Hi Oshwah. You placed a user warning at User talk:QFloppy about a week ago for disruptive editing. I'm wondering if you think that User:QFloppy is a possible draft that this editor might has mistakenly started developing on their user page or if it's a WP:FAKEARTICLE kind of thing and should be tagged for speedy per WP:G11 or WP:U5. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:54, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Marchjuly! That user page is.... pretty borderline, and in more than one way. I went ahead and deleted it per U5 since it's about himself and isn't focused on Wikipedia-related involvement. Thanks for the heads up; let me know if you need me for anything else and I'll be happy to take a look :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:01, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for checking on it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:30, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Marchjuly - You bet :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:38, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

My account

Thank you!!!!!!2607:FCC8:9008:7E00:6D05:EC36:DC81:4DE3 (talk) 02:32, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

You're quite welcome. Good luck! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:33, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

CJ Sapong

Not really useful — Preceding unsigned comment added by User990011 (talk • contribs) 04:24, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi User990011! Make sure that you read Wikipedia's help page on edit summaries, as it will lower any confusion from other editors when you save each edit with an edit summary. I'd also highly recommend that you go through and complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial - it'll provide you with a significant amount of guides, walkthroughs, and tutorials that you should know about. Let me know if you have any more questions. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:58, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Alt acc..

Hi, Oshwah, Can you kindly grant the confirmed flag to User:Winged Blades of Godric (AWB)? Entering Captchas while in AWB is impossible! Regards:)~ Winged Blades^Godric 10:29, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Winged Blades of Godric -  Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:32, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! ~ Winged Blades^Godric 10:45, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Winged Blades of Godric - Sure, no problem :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:47, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Edits to Chipata.

Hi Oshwah

I hope you are well. Yes I made a few additions to the Chipata article. Most notably on suburbs and economy. However it is difficult to cite my changes. I reside in Chipata and I have first hand knowledge. Thanks and good day. You can WhatsApp me on [REDACTED - Oshwah]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mfumuyathu (talk • contribs) 13:50, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Osmel Sousa's date of born

I worked for him as an assistant. He was born in 1940 and he started working for OPPA Publicidad, owners of Miss Venezuela in 1969. He was 29 then. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.239.111.90 (talk) 00:03, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message here! Sorry, but are a few issues with the changes you're trying to make. Editing an article where you have a personal conflict of interest is a behavior that's discouraged by the community. This is due to the inability for those users to maintain a neutral point of view with their edits. Referencing yourself as being an assistant to the person and knowing him personally constitutes original research, which isn't allowed on Wikipedia. Original research is content that's referenced off an editors personal experience, relationships, findings, and references (even if its published). You can also call it "citing yourself". This is not allowed because such content cannot be verified for authenticity or accuracy. Please review the policies and guidelines I've lined in this response as they are very important for you to know and understand. If you have questions about them, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks for understanding and I appreciate your message :-). ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:12, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Aight sorry dud — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.181.194.7 (talk) 00:37, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Ok, so I will publish his official ID copy for everyone to see his real birthdate — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.239.111.90 (talk) 01:43, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

re: Garland

Hello, I've changed what I wrote on the "Summer Stock" (film) page as per your instructions, however, it's common knowledge that the studio later regretted letting Garland go from her contract. Thanks and have a pleasant evening, Jacob — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.185.32.3 (talk) 02:00, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Emmy van Deurzen

hello! Re the above article, my edits were actually an improvement. Please take the time to read the AfD comments before reverting again. there are explicit suggestions to trim to verifiable.104.163.148.25 (talk) 02:04, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi there! I left a message on your talk page. I saw your explanation and I appreciate it very much - I'll take another look :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:05, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Maybe particpate in the AfD too? hard to say if the page should be kept or not.104.163.148.25 (talk) 02:11, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Sure, I can do that. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:12, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

IP Checkuser

Hey Oshwah,

There is this IP hopper, 64.228.129.136 (talk · contribs · 64.228.129.136 WHOIS) who has been putting checkuser/sockpuppet templates on users pages. I was wondering if you could block them since they are clearly not checkusers. Thanks, HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 03:37, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

HickoryOughtShirt?4 -  Done. Thanks for messaging me about this - let me know if you run into any more and I'll be happy to clunk em :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:26, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

FYI

This is a continuation of this, which would have otherwise resulted in a lvl 4 warning, which is why I left one. GMG^talk 09:12, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

GreenMeansGo - AHA! That makes more sense now. I'm an idiot :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:16, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

I work in mysterious ways. GMG^talk 09:33, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

GreenMeansGo - Me too! *Oshwah gives GreenMeansGo a high-five* ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:17, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

ANI

Just a heads up. See this thread.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:19, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Bbb23 - Interesting... Sure, I can help out with that. No big deal :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:22, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Bbb23 - Ahhhh... you meant to meant to link me to this discussion, not the one you actually linked me to above... LOL. Whelp, like I said above, I was happy to respond to that ANI discussion and help there - I was just a little confused as to why you pointed me to it... LOL. Oh well, no worries... that realization just made me laugh is all. Thanks for the heads up none-the-less :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:33, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Bad Bbb23. --Bbb23 (talk) 15:35, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Bbb23 - HA! It happens, man... no biggie ;-). In fact, I was able to resolve and close that ANI discussion below because you linked me to it accidentally... so something good came out of it! :-D ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:21, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Jay Larranaga Article

I work for Jay and he wants his new wife's name on his wikipedia page. There is no proof of it online, but feel free to call me at Kauffman Sports Management Group on Monday if you don't believe me. He is one of our clients. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.213.228.137 (talk) 17:00, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) See also contributions here. Eagleash (talk) 17:25, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message here! Sorry, but are a few issues with the changes you're trying to make. Editing an article where you have a personal conflict of interest is a behavior that's discouraged by the community. This is due to the inability for those users to maintain a neutral point of view with their edits. Referencing yourself as being an assistant to the person and knowing him personally constitutes original research, which isn't allowed on Wikipedia. Original research is content that's referenced off an editors personal experience, relationships, findings, and references (even if its published). You can also call it "citing yourself". This is not allowed because such content cannot be verified for authenticity or accuracy. All content added to articles that are biographies of living people must include a reference to a reliable source; content that fails to do this is to be removed immediately. Also, if you're being paid in any way to edit Wikipedia and these articles, you're also required to disclose this per Wikipedia's Terms of Use. More information on paid editing is available here. Please review the policies and guidelines I've lined in this response as they are very important for you to know and understand. If you have questions about them, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks for understanding and I appreciate your message :-). ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:41, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Incorrect close

While I agree with nearly everything you said here [6] the word "recently" is wildly inaccurate. The problem goes back years. My best guess is no Admin is willing to take the abuse a block would cause. Legacypac (talk) 17:45, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Legacypac! Thanks for leaving me a message and for talking to me about your thoughts and input here. I used the word "recent" not to refer to the user's civility issues as an entirely (which, yes, span over a long time), but to refer to the civility issues that I observed him making - which he obviously had made recently, or like just minutes prior... :-). Does that make sense? I'm completely aware that his civility issues spam over a very long period of time - that's why I made the in-depth close statement that I made. Please let me know if you still have any questions or concerns regarding my closing statement and I'll be happy to explain or clarify any confusion. I appreciate you for voicing your concerns and your disagreements here - my talk page is always open to you, and regardless of whether or not you agree with me :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:51, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Yes, indeed. Every time he comments on me it has been a blistering baseless attack. A good start would be to never sanction any editor that says anything bad about him. If someone started a page where various editors could post the personal attacks against them from that one source it would be very enlightening and lead to permanent highly justified blocking. I believe the uncivility outweighs any benefit gained by coverage added about Moldovian skeet shooters in the 1932 Olympics and other "autonotable" subjects whose mothers don't even think about them needing a wiki article. Legacypac (talk) 18:14, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

The civility issues I addressed on the ANI obviously appear to span from a period of time that's both long and consistent - from the responses expressing concerns in the ANI alone, I can definitely tell that there are long-term problems that have been allowed to build over time. If poor conduct by this user has really gotten to "that point", I think that the logical thing to do is start an ANI thread and express these concerns. Provide all the diffs you can find and present as evidence, and present a strong case to have it looked into. I know that ANI can have a reputation of being an "all bark and no bite" discussion pool sometimes, but it is the proper place to move forward with having this issue discussed and addressed. I'm sure that other editors, upon seeing the ANI, will be willing to add their input and evidence to it as well. The ANI I resolved that had nothing to do with his conduct had editors expressing concerns; I imagine that a discussion that does involve his conduct would have more users stepping forward. Give it some serious thought - I'm not trying to take any sides or encourage anything to flare-up obviously, but I'm absolutely not afraid to tell someone to start a hard discussion if there needs to be one... It's up to you to decide if there is a need or not. Let me know what your thoughts are and if you have any more questions, concerns, or anything you want to talk about... my talk page is an open book :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:26, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Looks like 'Pac still has an axe to grind, esp. as they have no idea too when it comes to BLPs. Scroll down a little further in that thread and you'll see another editor started a section called "Propose "topic ban" for Legacypac" all to do with WP:CIR issue around BLPs. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:50, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Again, like I said in the ANI closing statement here, I like you a lot and the response above isn't meant to encourage any action against you because of any "personal vendetta" that I have - I'm sure you know that. The advice I'm giving above is advice I'd give regardless of who it involves. I hope you understand. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:43, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

User talk:Gaurs International School

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 18:24, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Cahk -  Done. Thanks for the heads up :-) 18:27, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

hi

i dont care — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:583:8280:439F:317B:27C1:90D2:799B (talk) 21:51, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Rich Piana birthday

Hi Oshwah,

I recently made a change to the Rich Piana article regarding his birthday. I linked his social media as a reference, but here is his actual gravestone listing his birthday https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/182730833/rich-piana#view-photo=164416221 from site: https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/182730833/rich-piana. I am not sure how to fix the references, but that is his true birthday, not May 5th as the article claims. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.81.20.130 (talk) 22:23, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message here! These references you're talking about here don't appear to be reliable. Do you have other references that Wikipedia constitutes as reliable according to the guideline I cited in my response here? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:47, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks

... for rescuing my old school from vandalism! :) Cheers DBaK (talk) 00:09, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered - HA! No problem ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:30, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi yes I was the one who messed up the upchurch article I was trying to put in his nickname Upchurch The Redneck if you could do that pls do it thx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69fscott (talk • contribs) 01:18, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

• Hi yes, no. Drmies (talk) 01:19, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

My user page chris_kalan

Hi there. I removed the actual reference to the site so there is no more advertising, it simply said that I am Editor for an online magazine covering the worlds of gaming, television, and film. It is not advertising because I removed the name of the website. I appreciate if you put my page back to the way it was. Thank you, Christopher chris_kalan (talk) 01:19, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Chris kalan, and welcome to Wikipedia! I highly recommend that you review Wikipedia's policy on user pages, as it will explain exactly what is and is not allowed. Wikipedia is also not a means of promotion. I modified your user page and removed exactly what was not allowed, and you then undid my edit and put it back. Just because you removed the direct URL to your company page from your user page does not mean that the content on your user page is allowed or won't still be deemed as promotional. You're new to Wikipedia, and you're fine (and are of course expected) to make mistakes and mess things up until you learn the different rules and policies here. It took me at least six months before I felt that I generally knew most of the basic rules and knew my way around here... however, you need to be receptive and understanding, and follow the rules and the advice of other editors - they're who will help you to understand everything here. When you see that I removed problematic content stating such, and then you revert it and then try to explain to me that I'm wrong and that your user page isn't promotional (which was absolutely not correct) - that's definitely not the way you should be reacting to the feedback of others. That kind of reactive response will cause simple mistakes and learning opportunities to become seen as disruptive, and being resistant to the help of others will make things harder, not easier, for you. Please understand that I'm saying this because I want to help you, and I want you to be successful here. One thing you must do is be open to feedback and having other editors fix mistakes and tell you about them - you don't want to be combative or resistant to that advice. If you don't allow yourself to be helped, you won't be successful here. Please let me know if you have any more questions. I'm going to restore you user page, but I'm going to remove the content that you cannot have there. Thanks :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:32, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Okay, you're absolutely correct - you didn't put back everything that I removed. The edit summary you left as default indicated that you did. I apologize for the confusion - I'm striking out what I incorrectly stated to you above. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:35, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Easy Solutions

I would like to understand why you deleted my post. I'm not trying to promote this service I'm just trying to give everyone an idea of what a so-called "hitman site" looks like — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrWhistle (talk • contribs) 02:04, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi MrWhistle, and thanks for leaving me a message with your questions. Sorry, but your attempted creations of Easy solutions (now deleted) constituted blatant advertising, which was the reason it was deleted. I highly suggest that you go through and complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial, as it will help you significantly with the important areas and aspects of Wikipedia and give you a number of extremely important guides and walkthroughs to complete. Afterwards, you may consider creating this article by using the articles for creation guide, which will help you by having you create the article in the draft space. Doing this will give you the time you need to expand and improve the potential article. When you feel that it's ready to be published live, an editor will review and approve it or give you things that you need to fix first. It's greatly helpful when writing an article for the very first time. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to let me know. I'll be happy to answer them and help you further. Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy your stay and become a long-term editor with us! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:55, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Rich Brian

Hey! I'm not annoyed or anything so don't worry and I'm sorry if it comes across that way, but you reverted my edit to rich brian's article in which I added (formerly known as Rich Chigga). The reason provided was because I did not provide a citation, however it's extremely well known that his former stage name was Rich Chigga and people may even still refer to him as such. Searching "Rich Chigga" also redirects to his article so I also feel it would add cohesion if his former name was mentioned clearly.

2A02:C7D:7078:2D00:18D4:83E7:F55:99E2 (talk) 03:13, 11 February 2018 (UTC)Amez

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message with your thoughts and input here. If you didn't reference a reliable source with your changes, you need to do this. It's extremely important that verifiability exists with the content that is added to articles, so that others can review and fix any problems. Citing a source establishes this verifiability. If you have any questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks again for leaving me a message :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:57, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Red/Redmond Gerard

Hi. I wasn't quite sure where to go with this, and you happened to be the first admin I saw (sorry!). Redmond Gerard and Red Gerard are/were articles about the same person. The latter was actually created first (15 January) and has recently been redirected, but I was wondering if there needs to be some kind of history merge performed for attribution maybe? - JuneGloom07 Talk 03:32, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi JuneGloom07! No apologies are needed at all - I'm always happy to lend a hand :-). Yes, it looks like there is some history merging I need to perform. I'll get that done now. Thanks for the message, and please let me know if I can do anything else for you. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:39, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Alright, JuneGloom07 - you should be all set. I'm glad that you happened to run into me and asked me to do the HISTMERGE. I've done it multiple times and such requests usually result in me getting pinged to help perform it properly (it can be quite complicated depending on the situation). Please let me know if I can do anything else for you. Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:52, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you Oshwah for your help. I shall call on you again if I find any more articles that need a HISTMERGE (hopefully that won't be often)! - JuneGloom07 Talk 04:01, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

JuneGloom07 - Sounds good! Until we meet again ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:02, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

What is the ip doing, removing info from infoboxes?

I came across it before I saw your exchange [7] [8]. It seems to me that roles that actors are most notable for are what should be in an infobox... --Ronz (talk) 04:05, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Ronz! I still honestly don't know. I saw that the IP reverted my warning and revert, and upon looking on the user's talk page I see encouragement from other administrators and telling the IP that he/she is being constructive. From what I saw there, I believed that it was more likely that I was mistaken by reverting that edit than it was that the IP was being disruptive. Hence, I apologized and moved on. I see that you've reverted the page and have asked for an explanation - thank you for doing this. I'm actually quite curious and would like to know what this user is doing as well... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:10, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Oshwah. Thanks for the explanation. The ip is doing some good cleanup work, but the edits to the actors from Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory are something different. I'm awaiting a response from the ip. Thanks again. --Ronz (talk) 04:20, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Ronz - You bet; always happy to lend a hand ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:21, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the ip doesn't appear interested in discussing the matter... --Ronz (talk) 16:56, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Ronz - Well, the IP also hasn't edited since you left your message. I'm sure (s)he'll respond to you when (s)he does. We'll just have to wait and see... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:02, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

The ip reverted all relevant edits since my first message. Let's see what happens now I've left a second. --Ronz (talk) 17:06, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Remove content

Hi, Oshwah. I'm deeply sorry to remove your template, but i had to do it because there have been some mistake placement. I hope you understand. Sincerely, Gio. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.203.170.251 (talk) 04:35, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

If you think there are issues with information within the template, removing the template entirely isn't going to fix it. Instead, you need to explain what the issue is on the templates talk page, or (better yet) fix it yourself! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:58, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

how do I upload documents to wikisourceRickLoll (talk) 05:06, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

From what I can tell, I'm not really supposed to make an article on Wikipedia about the 7C Constitution for the whole world, that I made to be public domain, because of COI, but I can put it on Wikisource. But, I can't find how to get it uploaded. Also how do I make the 7C Constitution acceptable as an article for everyone to understand and see, as the whole document must be posted like The US Constitution? A lot of people want to see this. I'm a bit confused about how to go about this because there isn't really information about this type of material, as it has over 5 major contributors that want this information for everyone too. What is your opinion? The PDF file is https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aMAslTdfBPLRFdTHdm7p4c4umggDB-RL/view?usp=drivesdk

I need help

Hi Oshwah, I wanted to reach out because I think my page was flagged for incorrect reasons. My account is solely for individual use, yet the account name makes it appear as if I could pass off the purpose. Know that this is not my intention and am curious what steps I should take. Thanks. Umdtourguide (talk) 05:25, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Umdtourguide - I've already resolved the issue for you. See the message I left on your talk page; please let me know if you have any more questions or concerns and I'll be happy to help you further. I apologize for the confusion and I hope I didn't disrupt any of your work :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:27, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	One more Anti-Vandalism Barnstar! I seem to always edit-conflict with you on Huggle, and I usually fail to thank you. So, here you go, to make up for it. =) byteflush Talk 06:57, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Byteflush! Thank you, man! I really appreciate the barnstar and the kind words. I'm glad to see that I'm making at least some impact on this project ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:17, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Removing of My Edit

How did me editing the Step One U.S. Version seem less than neutral? I was just informing the reader that the Step One CD cover for the U.S. version is the cover of the Steptacular album. I am holding the CD in my hand right now. I suggested the edit so when people from the U.S. look at the site they are not confused as to why there is a different cover on theirs than there is on this site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.198.54.108 (talk • contribs) 08:13, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm a bone head.... I thought you were giving your opinion and calling the album spectacular. I now see that this is actually the album's name :-). I've reverted my changes and I apologize for the mistake on my part. Thanks for letting me know about this :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:20, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

email

I want to add the following ' email: [REDACTED - Oshwah] [REDACTED - Oshwah]' to the Defence services medical academy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.25.13.85 (talk) 08:27, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

to edit Defence services medical academy

I want to add the following 'email :[REDACTED - Oshwah] [REDACTED - Oshwah]' to the Defence Services Medical Academy.

User talk:Capture Moment

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 10:04, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Cahk -  Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:12, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

User talk:A amphibious with a dog bick

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 10:05, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Cahk -  Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:12, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

for Help

I am new in Wikipedia so please guide me for editing — Preceding unsigned comment added by Umesh Maurya (talk • contribs) 19:04, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Umesh Maurya! Welcome to Wikipedia! It's great that you're here and wish to volunteer as an editor to help improve and expand the encyclopedia! I highly recommend that you go through Wikipedia's entire new user tutorial and finish it completely. This tutorial will provide you with a significant amount of new user guides, walkthroughs, training, and help in many areas that you should know about and understand. When you completely finish the new user tutorial, let me know if you still have questions or need help with anything and I'll be glad to do so. Again, I sincerely welcome you to Wikipedia and I hope you enjoy your stay :-). ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:04, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

George Campbell Jr. Biography

The entire section on the controversy is not "neutral". The statements in the Attorney General Report were cited as false by the board of directors at the time it was released and reported as reported in the newspapers when the report was released. There is no mention of that in this section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.75.11.214 (talk) 19:13, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Fine by me. Just make you that you keep neutrality as well as due and undue weight as your priority when adding content :-). ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:05, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Darryn August update

Hallo Oshwah

Can I ask why you deleted my update on Darryn August.

He is not a hero - have a look at the Carte Blanche story on him tonight - he voluntarily jumped from the moving train to avoid paying for his ticket.

Le Roux — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.247.146.113 (talk) 19:39, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia and its content (especially on articles that are biographies of living people) is not about rumors or unreferenced speculation. This kind of content is not allowed and constitutes disruptive editing if repeatedly added. Please review Wikipedia's policies on biographies of living people and identifying reliable sources, and let me know if you have any questions. Thanks for understanding :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:10, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Mufffin!!!!

I will eat your blueberry muffins in your fridge. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1000:B113:E439:D8F6:26A5:AEE6:90E5 (talk) 19:39, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Give me any plain muffins you find!Lakeside Out!-LakesideMiners^{Click Here To Talk To Me!} 15:22, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

My edit

Why did you delete my edit on the article Sky bar? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vfz226342 (talk • contribs) 19:49, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Vfz226342 - I'm not sure what you're talking about at all. Can you please elaborate so that I can help you? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:11, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

I have a similar question about Daniel Quinn's page. I added his date of death because I know him personally and he died on Saturday 02/17/18. I spoke with his wife and you can see it on his FB page here: https://www.facebook.com/Daniel-Quinn-282199011813989/. I have not found any news publication with a story yet. GreenCPA (talk) 18:19, 19 February 2018 (UTC) GreenCPA

IP rangeblock

Hi Oshwah, thanks for blocking 2601:248:C301:5E97:5DDC:BE02:AAF4:466D (talk · contribs). However, as I said in my ANV report, they've been making random changes to categories, blanking and using ridiculous and irate edit summaries for at least two weeks. They've also been IP hopping: in the past two weeks, this is the same IP that has also used 2601:248:C400:CF0:48D6:E330:838D:86 (talk · contribs), 2601:248:C400:CF0:7933:A721:71C4:8308 (talk · contribs), 2601:248:C400:CF0:7D92:8E43:720F:1C1C (talk · contribs), 2601:248:C301:5E97:1D55:B670:A8B7:FB08 (talk · contribs), 2601:248:C400:CF0:BDA0:BEC4:D4E4:36C0 (talk · contribs), and 2601:248:C400:CF0:6D65:B70A:7A2B:1DA7 (talk · contribs) and been reverted with basically every edit. Aside from page protection for their numerous targets, I don't know what else will get them to stop other than a rangeblock. Ss112 20:54, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Ss112! Thanks for letting me know about these additional IPs; that user is definitely IP hopping to cause disruption. I went ahead and localized them to two /64 ranges and applied blocks to them both. Please let me know if I can do anything else for you and I'll be happy to do so. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:01, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Yamla (talk) 21:49, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

The link is WP:CBAN for ZestyLemonz. --Yamla (talk) 21:49, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Troy Blakely

Hi Oshwah,

Someone with username "nanabear2000" who is not related nor known to the family is continuing to try to mention ex-wives of Troy in his wikipedia page. These are not approved edits and should not be on his page.

Is there any way to prevent this person from editing Troy's wikipedia page?

Thank you.

Rockfacts101 (talk) 22:00, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi @Rockfacts101:, this issue has not gone unnoticed by other administrators. The article history shows that it has been temporarily protected by admin @NinjaRobotPirate: because of the edits that you mentioned. The Biography of Living People policy is taken very seriously by administrators. At this point, only editors who have at least some beginner's level of experience are permitted to edit the article. If further problems occur, the protection level can be increased so only more experienced editors can edit it. Failing that, it can be increased to the point that only administrators can edit it. Blackmane (talk) 22:36, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

@Oshwah:

The entire Personal Life section was removed- can it simply be returned to the correct information as it was yesterday, and as it has stood for the past 2-3 years?

I've extended the edit protection on the article to three months from today. Let's re-evaluate the edits made to it after it expires. If the vandalism continues, let me now and I'll extend it to six months. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:19, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Tagline

Hey, Oshwah. The tagline for Franz Anton von Harrach was improperly listed as "Spanish priest", when he is the Prince-Archbishop of Salzburg. - Conservatrix (talk) 22:00, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Dfdd — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:3637:E700:CD82:B6A6:AD95:1794 (talk) 22:12, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

With regards Ozark, Missouri

Does it really matter if I provide a source, like, who cares if the Ozark, Missouri wiki says it gets a small amount of revenue from gay porn, who's actually gonna care? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prussian-Wolf (talk • contribs) 22:28, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Prussian-Wolf - Many people care, and adding unreferenced content like that is going to be seen as disruptive editing if done so repeatedly. See Wikipedia's policies and guidelines on verifiability, identifying reliable sources, and citing sources in-line with content - those pages will answer your questions. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:12, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Larry Staverman

Even the Wikipedia page I tried to edit indicates that Larry Staverman was 6-7, not 6-9. Any basketball website will confirm that. So, I tried to make it 6-7 to make it correct and consistent. 2605:A601:805:400:A097:BC29:3158:1E4D (talk) 23:40, 11 February 2018 (UTC)) Phil Koppe

Then you need to locate one of those reliable sources you speak of and cite the reference in-line with your changes. These guideline pages will assist you if you have any questions about doing this. Thanks for understanding :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:13, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Gene Tormohlen

O.K., now I'm getting robo messages from you accusing me of "vandalizing" Wikipedia's pages. Why, I'm not sure. The first change I made was to the box correcting Larry Staverman's height from 6-9 to 6-7, even though the body of the article correctly listed his height as 6-7. So, the change I made made the article accurate and consistent. Yet, it was not made. Explain.

Then there's the Wikipedia article on "Bumper Tormohlen." It should be styled "Gene Tormohlen." "Bumper" was a little-known nickname bestowed on him by one of his teammates with the Kansas City Steers, Bill Bridges. But everywhere else in the world except Wikipedia he is consistently known as "Gene Tormohlen." He's listed in the phone book as "Gene Tormohlen. He's the all-time leading rebounder for the University of Tennessee and enshrined in their athletic hall of fame as "Gene Tormohlen." On every other basketball reference cite except one, he's listed as "Gene Tormohlen." There is really no such person as "Bumper Tormohlen." I suspect that only a few of his closest friends knew him as "Bumper." The Wikipedia error listening him as "Bumper" apparently stems from the Basketball Reference website. I wrote them about the error years ago, but it was never corrected.

The same is true with the Wikipedia article on Maurice King, who is incorrectly listed as "Maury King." I followed his basketball career when he played with the Wilt Chamberlain at the University of Kansas. I covered him when he played for the Kansas City Steers of the ABL as "Maurice King" -- never "Maury." Again, the error appears to have originated from Basketball Reference.com. For some reasons, it uses obscure nicknames as the actual names of the players.

So, to reiterate: The Wikipedia articles should consistently list Larry Staverman as 6-7, "Bumper Tormohlen" should be changed throughout to "Gene Tormohlen," the name he played under in high school, college and professional basketball. And "Maury King" should be changed to "Maurice King." Even his obituary in The Kansas City Star used the name "Maurice King." I never knew anyone who referred to him as "Maury King." ≈≈≈≈ Phil Koppe — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:A601:805:400:A097:BC29:3158:1E4D (talk) 00:01, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Please see the response I made to you in your previous message above, as the same issue still applies. You did not provide a reference to any reliable sources with the changes you were making. If you have any additional questions, please let me know. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:16, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is WP:CBAN for My Royal Young. Iggy (Swan) 00:05, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll take a look! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:16, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert

Hey man, just wanted to say thank you for cleaning up the mess on my page that the IP user left. Gotta love irate people, huh? —LRG5784 (talk · contribs · email) 00:53, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi LRG5784! No problem; always happy to help :-). Unfortunately, you will run into these kinds of people on Wikipedia... frequently if you're someone like me :-P. They'll mess up your user page and try their best to get an uncivil or negative reaction out of you. The important thing to do is to never ever give them one :-). I noticed that your user page wasn't protected at all, so I went ahead and applied indefinite extended confirmed edit protection and indefinite administrator move protection to it for you. This should put a stop to any attempts for vandals and trolls to trash your user page. Please let me know if I can do anything else for you, and I'll be happy to help. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:22, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

You are the man!!! —LRG5784 (talk · contribs · email) 17:03, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

That was the most interesting thing I have seen here in a whileLakeside Out!-LakesideMiners^{Click Here To Talk To Me!} 15:23, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Duluth kansas

Dear sir, You recently deleted my additions to the entry for Duluth, Kansas. Well my fine sir, I am the said bear who visited Duluth in June 2015 while I was on a student comedy tour. No, I’m not typing this with my paws, I’m a bear in the sense that I am a large hairy masculine gay man. In 2015 I was finishing my degree in theater performance, focusing on comedy for rural areas. I performed at a small church there to a crowd of 14 people who all seemed to enjoy the show. Before and after the show I stayed in Topeka as it is close and offers some semblance of civilization. And yes, Tang is their drink of choice. It is easy to keep a lot of it in the home as there isn’t a grocery option people can get to quickly. Please return my edits to their former glory. 72.230.103.39 (talk) 04:27, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi there. Ignoring the things you said to me here that have absolutely nothing to do with Wikipedia, I'll extend to you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you were just messing around and trying to be funny. The edits you made to the page were disruptive and not allowed on Wikipedia. Please understand that volunteers work hard to write articles and content and improve the encyclopedia - we don't tolerate purposeful attempts to degrade or destroy it. If you decide that you wish to make meaningful positive contributions, you're welcome to do so. If you have any questions, my talk page is always open. Thanks for understanding :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:25, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Dennis Bertrand vs. Wikipedia

FYI: For second consecutive day, Dennis Bertrand creating disruption at Elon Musk's Tesla Roadster‎. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 05:00, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi BatteryIncluded. It looks like the article was fully protected again by Dlohcierekim, who noticed a continuing trend of edit warring and content disputes on the article after I unprotected it. This will encourage all editors involved to discuss their various disputes and come to a consensus on the article's talk page. Please let me know how things go and if I need to look into things further regarding that article. Thanks for the message and I wish you happy editing :-). ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:29, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply and reassurance. In a nutshell, Dennis Bertrand is hell-bent on making the marketing aspect of the car the main focus of the article and the primary purpose of the launch. He went as far as demanding the article to be moved/renamed "Tesla ad (2018)". He is insulted that the marketing value of the car is dealt with in the "Reactions" section and not in the introduction and "Objective" sections as the primary purpose of the launch. His confronting attitude is beyond discussing content, but purely fanatical POV disturbance using all the Wiki-lawyering he can muster. BatteryIncluded (talk) 18:18, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

User:Chimerusso

Would you please give this editor a block template so that they can appeal? Thanks. Doug Weller talk 06:45, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Doug Weller -  Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:07, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

I want to create a personality page!

how i can create a Personality page in wikipedia...?? The name of personality is Zeeshan Shahid — Preceding unsigned comment added by StunnerZeeshan (talk • contribs) 07:09, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

StunnerZeeshan - You should completely go through Wikipedia's new user tutorial if you haven't already. Do that first before you consider creating any new articles or pages. Then, after you've completed the tutorial, you should consider using Wikipedia's articles for creation guide to help you crate your first article, as doing to gives you lots of advice and help. Please let me know if you have any other questions or need help with anything, and I'll be happy to do so. Welcome to Wikipedia! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:24, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

User: Verdy p

Good morning Oshwah, I regret to say that Verdy p is still arguing on the Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents page, with regard to his changes on the Rockall article. It does seem that they have taken no notice of the advice that you and another administrator has given them. Is further action required? Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 11:42, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi David J Johnson, and thanks for leaving me a message with your questions and concerns. It looks like the ANI discussion has since been archived. Are you still seeing problematic edits from Verdy p? As I stated in my response to the ANI discussion, his civility, temperament, and his edit warring behavior were not acceptable and were expected to stop. Let me know what's going on and I'll be happy to help if needed. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:27, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello Oshwah, It appears that the discussion has been closed without any conclusion, which is a pity. However, Verdy p does not appear to have "contributed" since 12 February. I really think that if they reappear with the same edit warring, WP:CIVIL, temperament and general behaviour then strong action should be taken. It is a pity this was not done before. With best regards and thanks, David, David J Johnson (talk) 17:53, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

David J Johnson - ANI discussions will automatically get moved into the archives if nobody adds to the discussion for three days. Just because it's been archived doesn't nullify what was reported or subsequently said in the discussion. Since Verdy p hasn't edited since the 12th of February, there isn't any need for action to be taken at this time due to there being no disruption occurring that's in progress. However, if this changes and disruption continues, don't hesitate to let me know or (better yet) create another SPI and mention the previous one that idled-out. Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:00, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Many thanks, David, David J Johnson (talk) 18:14, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

user:74.87.164.18

just came back from your block to do this.18abruce (talk) 20:44, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi 18abruce, and thanks for letting me know! The IP is now blocked for one year. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:28, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

No subject

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The specific link is here. Yamla (talk) 20:33, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Yamla - Another troll. Fun times :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:29, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Yeap. I probably need to stop caring about such things. It's not like there's a shortage of trolling on a regular basis around here. I need to recalibrate my troll-detection meter. :) --Yamla (talk) 16:57, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Yamla - No, not at all. You did the right thing and I appreciate the ANI notice :-). ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:58, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedholic

I can't stop going on Wikipedia when I should be doing my homework. Any advice? Thegooduser talk 03:34, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Looks like you're still finding Wikipedia a draw. Don't forget we did give you this range of answers (from humourous to very serious) at the Teahouse last month. Oshwah can certainly advise you of the merits of requesting a temporary block to ensure you do get your homework done, though we did give other less extreme answers at the TH too. Best wishes, Nick Moyes (talk) 09:09, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Thegooduser - See the expanded response I gave you on your user talk page here. Hope it helps :-). ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:03, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

LOLLakeside Out!-LakesideMiners^{Click Here To Talk To Me!} 16:11, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

LISTING IN GERMAN WIKIPEDIA

Hi, I'm a film publicist who'd like to contribute a page for J. Miles Dale who is the producer of the film The Shape of Water and is listed as so on the movie's page. When I searched him I found that he has a German Wikepdia page and I'm wondering if that makes a difference or how to initiate his English page. I'm a little lost with the Wikipedia rules.

I do have a full and updated bio approved by Mr. Dale.

Thank you.

Lisa — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shamatal (talk • contribs) 21:16, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Shamatal, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for leaving me a message with your questions. Yes, each Wikipedia language project has their own subset of rules in different aspects and areas, but so long as the content on the German Wikipedia isn't violating any content policies and guidelines on the English Wikipedia (here), the article that exists on the German Wikipedia already can simply be re-created and imported here via article translation. See these instructions regarding how this works and how to request someone to start this process and import it. Please let me know if you have any more questions. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:34, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Chief John Smith

Do you know what happened with his adopted son: Tom E. Smith? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.40.54.201 (talk) 07:11, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

No idea. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:30, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Pineapple cupcake

Why you don’t dance it the sun with the pineapple cupcake in your buns? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1000:B104:1DB7:D8BE:1E57:C8BE:10A5 (talk) 10:16, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

I'll handle the gate for that event, if I can take a cut! John from Idegon (talk) 19:53, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

...Lakeside Out!-LakesideMiners^{Click Here To Talk To Me!} 15:51, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Can you hanlde this for me?

Draft:Hixtape It is obvious that this won't ever be acceptedLakeside Out!-LakesideMiners^{Click Here To Talk To Me!} 16:11, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

LakesideMiners - I deleted the page as a G11. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:30, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank Lakeside Out!-LakesideMiners^{Click Here To Talk To Me!} 13:01, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

just a talk

why you 'enjoy' being at wikipedia, spending your ample time here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anandwikik (talk • contribs) 17:27, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Abusive word used

Hi

In the Nirav Modi page in the History section where it is written he has interest in art - the next word should be culture I guess - but is currently an abusive word: ch***a. You might want to change. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.209.254.196 (talk) 17:29, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) fixed. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:32, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Amendments to company page

Hi, a friendly Wikipedia reviewer. Thank you for your comment on my userpage. It seems I may have received some incorrect advice and was using my Talk page as a redirect for suggestions to a company page. Perhaps you can help me?

A page about a defunct company called Kit Digital has been renamed by a Wikipedian to Piksel. We believe this was a an error and would like to suggest some minor edits and undoing the name change.

As background, Kit Digital went bankrupt in 2013. The Piksel Group was formed out of the companies that previously made up parts of KIT Digital to create a standalone company under a new management team and board of directors. It is our view that the renaming of the page to Piksel is misleading as they are completely different businesses. The Kit Digital employee who previously contributed to the original article does not work for Piksel.

However, we recognise that the community may argue that the events leading up to Kit Digital's bankruptcy are in the public interest, so we are not in a position to objectively suggest changes to these elements.

In summary, we suggest:

• Reverting the page back to KIT digital
• Putting historical entries into past tense
• Removing overtly promotional material made up the Technology section (basically deleting this section)

I have written a revised version along the lines above, which I'm happy to share, but was just checking the right approach and didn't want to fall foul of Conflict of Interests or NPOV as I'm working for them. Pj520M (talk) 18:19, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Pj520M, and welcome to Wikipedia! You should express your concerns on the article's talk page in a discussion there. This way, other editors can respond and (if applicable) assist you with your concerns. Please let me know if you have any more questions or need anything else. Thanks for the message, and I wish you well! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:24, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks for the Rollback rights! Here's some Wiki-love back at you!

HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 20:15, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi HickoryOughtShirt?4! You bet! Thanks for volunteering your time for this project and for your awesome work! Let me know if you have any questions about rollback and I'll be happy to answer them (although I doubt you will; the tool is pretty straight-forward). Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:32, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

The Good Place - Edits

Hello,

My handle is tafkad, and I recently made some edits to the "The Good Place" page. I'm not sure how they're not neutral. There is a message block asking people to clean up the synopses of Seasons 1 and 2 because they're perceived by (someone?) editing the page as too detailed, and since I'm a professional writer and editor, I thought I'd give it a shot. I didn't make any opinions on my opinion of either season, and I certainly hope I didn't put anything offensive in against the previous writing.

What about my edits made you think I was less than neutral? I'm truly confused.

Thank you.Tafkad (talk) 21:33, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Tafkad and thanks for leaving me a message with your questions and concerns here. I saw that, with your edit here to The Good Place, you changed part of the content to remove the description of exactly how a character died to instead say that the person "dies in an embarrassing manner". I feel that this slips in an opinion of how her death was, instead of leaving it to explain exactly how and let the reader come to that opinion themselves. Does this make sense? If you wish to see the revision of your changes, they're not permanently gone but saved in the article's history. Simply click on the History tab to find your version. Please let me know if you have any questions and I'll be happy to help you. Thanks again for leaving me a message, and I wish you happy editing :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:40, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. I removed the original text because the page asked for less detail. It seemed like expendable detail. If it wasn't, no big deal, but I thought the whole point of the description of her death in the show was to evoke embarrassment for the character and the viewer, so . . . again, it seemed like expendable detail. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, I guess.Tafkad (talk) 21:45, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Tafkad, it's not about being right or wrong here :-). You were very much doing the right thing by trying to shorten the summaries like the article was asking for. There are just different words that can be used instead - you could simply just say "after she dies, ..." and it would be perfect and address both concerns :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:48, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for further clarification. I have submitted the change again, with removal of the description "in an embarrassing manner" and replaced it with "after her death" (or something similar--can't remember the exact wording). I have learned something. Thank you, and have a good evening.  :-)Tafkad (talk) 21:53, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Tafkad - I saw that you updated the article with your changes as well as the change I suggested! Looks good to me! And you bet; always happy to help! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:54, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Sebastian Janekowski released

I made an edit about Sebastian Janekowski of the Oakland Raiders he has been released check it out for yourself if you don't believe me — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.37.32.218 (talk) 21:46, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

why did you delete my page?

You ddlete d my page for no reason!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tronesto (talk • contribs) 22:21, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Parker middle school shooting

I just edited a page on parker middle school shooting and you immediately took it off the reference for what i edited about Justin fletcher is from the same boo you referenced about James strand almost same paragraph

PS nice hair — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.91.90.65 (talk) 22:54, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Can you not edit it please? I’m a relative of Gary Woods and I just want to have his kids on the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1010:B062:3931:2DA7:1CC3:63F8:5977 (talk) 23:15, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Starfucker?

So--Starwhore is not an OK username, I can live with that. You're too young for the Stones, but read the first paragraph of Star Star. Drmies (talk) 01:56, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Drmies - Oh, interesting... thanks for sharing this :-). And yeah, obviously I was just thrown off by the "whore" part and it being a username of a Wikipedia account. I would have also blocked "Starfucker" as well had I seen it... haha. It's obviously different now given the context you provided me here, but both usernames put a... umm... interesting picture of the literal in my mind. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:05, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Must be some happy timezone down under, with all the Australian school blocks I'm throwing out. Drmies (talk) 02:07, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Now I can't get this out of my mind. Thanks Oshwah. /s Lakeside Out!-LakesideMiners^{Click Here To Talk To Me!} 13:04, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Lee Fowler Wikipedia Page.

Hello, I have correctly edited the Lee Fowler Wikipedia page with new, true information that took me about 2 hours to complete. I was very annoyed that this has been taken down by yourself as this is confirmed information (you can check yourself). 89.243.224.230 (talk) 02:44, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for leaving me a message here! I do see that you put a lot of work put into this article, but your changes are missing references to sources so that your changes can be verified for authenticity. I went ahead and restored the changes you made so that you can modify the article and add references - can you please cite a few reliable sources in-line with your changes? Thanks :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:46, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Lee Fowler Wikipedia Page.

Thank you for returning my work :) please could you tell me how to cite on Wikipedia as I have the links here, but I don't know how to put them into my work89.243.224.230 (talk) 02:58, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi there! Sure, not a problem! You can refer to Wikipedia's guide on citing sources in-line for information and instructions for how to do this. Go through the guide, and let me know if you have any questions about it and I'll be more than happy to answer them and help you further. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:01, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello there!

Hi!

Hemingray (talk) 02:59, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Gulfport Biloxi international Airport

Hi Oshwah, I am confused how about the message you sent me saying my edit was a vandal edit. My edit corrected the post regarding airline info. I work for an airline so I’m constantly updating airport pages. I don’t see how adding Correct airline info is a bad thing. I changed united airlines to United Express because united airlines does not fly into Gulfport nor does American Airlines. Yes tickets are sold as American and United but the passengers don’t fly on those airlines. I am very educated in aviation and airlines as I have been in this industry since 2002. I’m just trying to understand how my edits are vandal edits when I’m trying to get the correct info out. John Johncevans84 (talk) 03:04, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Ohhh shit.... Johncevans84, you know what? It was my mistake - I am sorry. I didn't know that "American Eagle" was also the name of an aviation company. I only knew of American Eagle as the clothing brand here in the United States. I simply thought that an IP was trying to be silly by changing those links to be "American Eagle". I'm going to revert the warnings I left on your IP address. Thanks for leaving me a message here, and I again apologize for the mix-up on my part. Please let me know if I can do anything else for you, or if you have any more questions or concerns. I'll be happy to help you further if you do. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:07, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

No worries. Thank you for the quick response and for removing the warnings. John2600:100C:B029:9FBC:D403:9E84:3916:BD2 (talk) 03:15, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Of course. It's the least I could do given the fact that the reverts I made were mistakes on my part :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:16, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Lee Fowler Wikipedia Page.

Hi again! I have added in cites to verify the information like you told me to. Please could you check the page and see if it is ok. 89.243.224.230 (talk) 03:48, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Looks good! Thanks for adding those references! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:52, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

COI Tag

Hey,

So I've never tagged an article before and I just wanted to make sure I did it right. The creator of this article, Alpine Convent School, Gurgaon is named Alpines 56 (talk · contribs) and has a COI template on their page although their username is kind of obvious. They've been dead on the page since June 2017 and now a new user named Alpineschool (talk · contribs) is editing it. I dropped a COI template on their page and tagged the article. Is there anything else I should do? HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 06:05, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

HickoryOughtShirt?4 - Usernames like Alpineschool can be reported to WP:UAA as a username that's obviously against Wikipedia's username policy without question. The others you saw could be listed in a comment in your report to UAA for the Alpineschool account, since they're obviously usernames representing the school. I've applied soft blocks to the usernames I've found; many are old and probably didn't need one, but I've seen many "old and now-dead accounts" suddenly come back to the grave when it comes to COI and (what can turn into) meat puppetry editing. Your tag looked fine; if you're not using Twinkle, I highly recommend it :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:11, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

A quick peak at your contribs show that you're definitely using Twinkle. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:13, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! I hate to jump to a new topic but while you are online.... I just stumbled onto this editor Vailskijump (talk · contribs) and just simply look at their edit summaries [9] and this edit [10]. I think they might not be WP:NOTHEREHickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 06:14, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

HickoryOughtShirt?4 - Yup, definitely WP:NOTHERE. Blocked :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:20, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

I knew their edit summaries were not okay but they were reverting some vandalism, minus where they reverted the bot, so I wasn't sure if a warning would do. Thanks though for acting so quickly, you're awesome! HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 06:25, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) HickoryOughtShirt?4 - A new user reverting vandalism from the recent changes log in their very first edits tells me that this user is not new here. Add the uncivil edit summaries and take those into account, and not only is this user blockable from the get-go, but I suspect that this user might be a sock puppet account or LTA. Warnings never hurt; if anything, they put more confidence into any block made, since we can show a paper trail of warnings and reasonable attempts to ask the user to stop - so please warn users and talk to them when you see them doing things against policy like that! They're helpful in many different ways :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:29, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Annnddd you were right to block, based on their recent talk page edit [11] HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 06:27, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Well, I wasn't expecting a complete change of heart or anything... lol ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:30, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

User talk:Intinfotech

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 08:10, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Cahk -  Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:11, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for me

Thank you for reverting vandalism with me, if you're happy, get reply on my talk page. --Cyrus noto3at bulaga (Talk to me) 08:34, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Cyrus noto3at bulaga - No problem! Keep up the good work! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:41, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Re:No Game No Life

Looks like you will need to semi-protect the talk page as well because Kdchan is still editing there using an IP despite still being blocked. But given that they waited out the last semi-protection (which was for a year), I highly doubt that semi-protecting the page for 3 months is going to phase them. I have already opened up a SPI case cataloging this particular individual's behavior and their use of IPs in order to "right great wrongs". —Farix (t | c) 12:20, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Farix - I've blocked the IP for evasion. If more pop up on the talk page, let me know and I'll block em. If a lot start to keep coming, I'll throw a grey lock onto it. Thanks for the heads up, by the way :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:24, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

I have added a RFPP to the talk page given that Kdchan is still IP hoping to evade their block. —Farix (t | c) 21:35, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

New request for RFP

I just filed a new request at WP:RFP. Would you mind taking your time to deal with it? --INDICATOR2018 (talk) 13:09, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Note this. It may be related to Special:Contributions/UserDe or other IPs. Continue the same editing war --O1lI0 (talk) 13:30, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

This is an account that was recently created from an IP address that publicly disclosed their intent to do so, and in which and I have verified and manually confirmed. No information will be shared about this account due to this being personal information that is private. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:35, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Page protection for Björn Höcke

Hello! Could you please protect the article about Björn Höcke? There is someone (or maybe a group of people, since there have been tens of IPs doing the same edit) who absolutely wants the name Björn changed to Bernd, and every day me or someone else reverts it. It would be useful if you could protect that page. Thanks, L293D (✉) 13:36, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

L293D -  Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:39, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks L293D (✉) 13:40, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

L293D - No problem. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:51, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

refusal to accept my edits to article of the Darul Uloom, Birmingham

Dear Oshwah

I am the Headteacher of the Darul Uloom Islamic High School. I have made some edits to the article regarding my school, as some things that have been written have not been portrayed properly and also other importance evidence that shows the other side of things has been left out. However, you have prevented these edits being made. I am able to provide the evidence for what I have written.I am a first time Wikipedia 'editor' and therefore do not know how to use the edits functions competently and therefore was unable to upload the evidence for the changes I have made. Would it be easier for me to send a word version, where I can attach the evidence and you change the article?

Best regards

Abdul Jalil Shaikh Headteacher Darul Uloom Islamic High School 94.173.70.34 (talk) 14:51, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Mail notification

Hello. 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 15:19, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Eggishorn - Just received it; reading now... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:21, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for being so speedy with that. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 15:22, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Eggishorn - My pleasure ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:36, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	It feels weird to put "you know what this is for" as the reason, but that's the only thing I should probably say here. Thanks. :) Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:36, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Eggishorn! Thanks for the barnstar! And no problem; I'm glad I could help :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:39, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

The Tunnel (TV series)

The Tunnel (TV series) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tunnel_(TV_series)

You edited my edit of the cast list, and I can see why - but at the same time you are perpetuating the situation whereby a major cast member is missing from the article, as he is on imdb.

If my edit is left there at some his agent or somebody else who knows will correct it.

86.191.146.156 (talk) 17:27, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi there! Yes, I reverted your edit to The Tunnel (TV series) - why would you think that making an edit like that would be acceptable? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:29, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Chandini Sreedharan

Hello

The Wikipedia page under the name Chandini Sreedharan has been edited repeatedly to defame that said actress. There has to be a way in which this can be stopped. I would appreciate it if you could help me do that. I am speaking on behalf of the actual said person (Chandini Sreedharan). She can provide you with the actual details and would appreciate it if this page could be locked or monitored upon the editing of it.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChaaaS (talk • contribs) 17:40, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi ChaaaS! You should let this person know that they need to contact the volunteer response team with their specific concerns by clicking here and following the directions listed. They will be put in touch with the right people who are trained and have the ability to verify her identity and provide assistance to her directly. This is the best way for her to have these concerns addressed and in the most thorough manner possible. Please let me know if you have any more questions or if I can help you with anything else. Best regards -- ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:23, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your response Oshwah! I will email my concerns/requests to info-en-q@wikimedia.org as stated on the link you provided me with, but I would like to mention that specific people are targeting her and trying to defame her (which is why such content has been written about her on the page). Is there any way to edit the page and then lock it so that no further nonsense is written on her page? Could she become the sole editor of the page (along with other verified editors if required)? I appreciate your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChaaaS (talk • contribs) 20:35, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

URGENT

Dear OSHWA my recent edits have been maked as vandilism. I believe this to be a mistake, as my edits have been purely factual and constructive.

Thank you

everhdom000 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Everhdom000 (talk • contribs) 19:46, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Really? I think not. General Ization ^Talk 19:48, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

LOL. Sorry Oshwah, seeing that edit took me by surprise. DOn't take that the wrong way though. I fully support the LGBTQ+ communityLakeside Out!-LakesideMiners^{Click Here To Talk To Me!} 13:11, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Changes

At least show me what content you removed from my post, please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.180.219.134 (talk) 19:57, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi there! The edit that was reverted is located here. The reason it was removed was because it didn't cite a source. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:20, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Laura Ingraham edits

Hi Oshwah,

Thanks for your work making Wikipedia great. I am new to Wikipedia, so I would appreciate your advice on how to contribute.

I recently made edits to Laura Ingraham's wikipedia page. There is an ongoing situation surrounding her comments on Lebron James and Kevin Durant. If you google her name, you will see that there are literally hundreds of articles covering this incident. It is certainly worthy of being included on her page.

When I initially posted the edit, I said the views were "widely viewed" as racist and an editor stopped the edit because the citation I put did not defend that claim. I updated the citation to a news article that explicitly claimed that, and that also linked to several news commenters stating as such.

I am not sure why you rejected the next edit. You said it was because it expressed a "point of view" - but the edit explicitly said "viewed by some."

I believe its quite clear that the incident is worthy of being included on her page. How could I make an edit that you would not deem expressing a personal viewpoint?

Thanks! MontezumaSulcata (talk) 21:55, 16 February 2018 (UTC)Monte

Hi MontezumaSulcata, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for leaving me a message with your questions and request for advice - I'll be happy to help you to understand why the content you're adding has issues. When adding content, everything must be 100% worded and formed in order to represent a viewpoint that is neutral and unbiased. Adding content that surrounds the opinions given by others about something or someone (especially about an article that's a biography of a living person), extreme care must be taken. For example: I removed the section that you're referring to, because I felt that the motivation and the overall structure of the content paragraph represented a non-neutral stance, and a significant portion of the content contained in that paragraph described the event in an opinionated fashion. For example: the paragraph stated that she,

"derided the players for their poor grammar, suggested that James' political views were unintelligible because he failed to graduate high school, and said that the two should "shut up and dribble" instead of expressing their opinions".

Reading that aloud should send a huge alarm off in your head that this is an observation and interpretation of the events according to someone's viewpoint (and hence not in compliance with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy). We subject all biographies of living people to extra scrutiny compared to other articles when it comes to the compliance of Wikipedia's policies. It's also important to know that, because this article is within a topic ("post-1932 American politics") that are currently the subject of even more scrutiny to assure compliance. Ultimately, this means that you have to be extremely mindful of what you add, and that you absolutely make sure not to engage in edit warring or disruptive editing, and to discuss any disputes on the articles talk page if they come up.

I'd highly recommend that you go through and complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial if you haven't already done this, as it will help you to learn and understand very important concepts and areas that Wikipedia functions by. From there, you can then review and understand our various policies and guidelines as you go. The unfortunate thing is that you chose a very contentious and heated article subject to edit and expand; you may consider expanding other articles that are under less scrutiny so that you'll have an easier and frustration-free experience on Wikipedia as you grow, become proficient, and learn the various policies and guidelines that exist. If you have any questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. Again, welcome to Wikipedia! I hope that you take my advice here and that you enjoy your stay! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:35, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Edit War at Western world

Hello. There's a new (or maybe not) editor that keeps removing Judaism from the article (including removing sources) with no valid reason, although the sources clearly support the mentioning. I started a discussion on talk page but given the reasoning the editor supplied, i doubt it would help. Can you have a look? Thanks Infantom (talk) 22:30, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Infantom. Sure - I'll take a look and see what I can do to help :-). Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:36, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, there's definitely back-and-fourth reverting going on and with no attempts to discuss the matter on the article's talk page. I've fully protected the article for two days in order to encourage all parties involved to discuss the dispute on the article's talk page. This should hopefully resolve the dispute and the concerns expressed. I wish you well with your dispute and that the discussion ends in an agreeable and peaceful manner. Best of luck :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:43, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the reply. Is it possible in the meanwhile to restore to the original stable version prior to the change? Note that another editor restored back to the original version (but was reverted by the same user). Thanks. Infantom (talk) 22:47, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi again, Infantom. You're welcome; always happy to help :-). In order for me to be a completely neutral party in the dispute and to not give favorites to anybody on any side, I actually cannot do that. I've protected the article in the state that it's in and without looking at the revision in-depth or choosing which is the "right revision". Unless there is any content that's against policy and must be removed immediately that I missed, the proper way to have this content updated is to discuss the dispute properly, come to a consensus with the others involved, and either add an editing request on the article's talk page with the changes that are needed (and agreed upon by everyone) - or request the article be unprotected (again, assuming that a consensus is reached and everyone involved is okay with unprotecting as well). Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:54, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Ok, i'll try to solve it on talk page. However, given that the other editor simply rules out the sources based on personal opinion, i can't see how it's gonna be solved. Thanks Infantom (talk) 23:01, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Infantom - The protection will hopefully encourage the discussion to happen. Keep me updated and let me know how things go in a few days. Best of luck! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:04, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

No problem, i'll. Added additional source, hopefully it'll advance things forward. ThanksInfantom (talk) 23:24, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Carmel High School (Indiana)

Dear Oshwah,

MY username is User:Caleb The Wipper. I joined Wikipedia because I have been informed that Wikipedia claims that Carmel High School's primary sport is MMA fighting. When I Looked into the pages history, I found that the edit was made by 50.90.77.7, probably as a joke. I decided to delete the joke for vandalism, and list some of the events that happened at Carmel High school recently. My edit was as follows:

February 2018

While there usually is not a lot of chaos at the School, many unusual events happened during the month February 2018. those events include: A male student threatened a female student with a knife in a girl's bathroom on February 8th 2018. The female student disarmed the male student and the situation was dealt with shortly. [6] There were multiple altercations at Carmel High School shortly following. Although Principal Harmas claimed that there were only 2 fights and that they lasted a combined 3.5 seconds, many Carmel High School students disagree. [7] There were many rumors that a school shooting was going to take place. As a result, Principal Harmas released a video to debunk those rumors. Although the school shooting never happened, many students were still absent. [8]

All three references were to this following YouTube video [[12]]. After my Edits, I noticed that Carmel High School (Indiana) was semi-protected due to vandalism. I am aware that another user claimed that Carmel High School's rival was an entity known as the shooter, which is why I want to know whether my edit is considered vandalism by the Wikipedia Administration, or it was by bad luck that I attempted to edit Carmel High School (Indiana) at relatively the same time as those who wished to vandalize the page. I am aware that the semi-protection expires 01:02, 19 February 2018 (UTC). However, the version of the article that included the MMA claim has already been posted on Instagram, by an account dedicated to producing memes about the recent events at Carmel High School. I believe that someone needs to write truthfully about said events before the vandalized version of the article is known about by the majority of Carmel High School's student body. I attempted to volunteer for the task, but because the page was soon semi-protected and my edit was soon deleted, I need to know if my edit was considered vandalism, so I can continue to contribute to Wikipedia.

from a Wikipedia editor that attends Carmel High School (Indiana), Caleb The Wipper (talk) 17:04, 17 February 2018 (UTC)Caleb The Wipper

Hamill House

Hello Oshwah. I would like to dispute a claim made about a certain section on the Hamill House page, the David Parker Controversy. Stephen536 (talk) 02:34, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Stephen536, and thanks for leaving me a message here. There isn't really much to dispute - the content you're trying to add to Hamill House is completely unreferenced and not supported by any sources. This issue aside, I don't believe that this content is relevant nor necessary for a section on the article. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns, and I'll be happy to assist you further. Thank you :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:36, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

You say that I don't have any sources/references, but I myself actually live in Hamill. What kind of proof do I need to provide, so that way, future Hamilites know not to try and get this room, because it is unsuitable for human consumption? Stephen536 (talk) 03:11, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello

Thegooduser has given you a cupcake! Cupcakes promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cupcake, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. †

Thegooduser talk 02:57, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Thegooduser! Thanks for the cupcake! I really appreciate it :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:16, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Abou 107.178.32.0/20...

you might want to extend that block as well... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.95.160.180 (talk) 03:35, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

It's already set until January 2019... that should be plenty of time... lol ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:40, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

...

Experienced editors have my permission to talk page stalk and respond to any message or contribute to any thread here. [hide] On one condition... BE NICE!! Of course it would say that... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.95.160.180 (talk) 03:42, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Dustin Martin middle name

Hi there

I’ve edited Dustin Martin name to record his middle name (Lawrence) as well as his true nickname (Duzz) and the changes are reverted. Is there a reason why when he has also mentioned these things?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.164.9.253 (talk) 04:27, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Sir could you please unblock Western world, at l;east temporarily?

I would very much like to help settle the content dispute, so as to refine content, and reach an end for the dispute instead of just letting it hang out on air. Anu-Dingir (Please offer a sacrifice!!!!) 04:31, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Oh, I see I misunderstood how the block actually works, sorryAnu-Dingir (Please offer a sacrifice!!!!) 04:34, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hi.

I don't think we've had all that many dealings in the past, just quick peripheral ones about this and that, but I've been meaning for a while now to drop you a public note to thank you for your patrolling of AN and AN/I. I know that many admins steer clear of the "dramah boards", because they can be messy, and sometimes difficult to summarize and straighten out, but I firmly believe that they do a much better job then they're given credit for in airing problems that need to be solved, and even in solving them. That's only possible, though, if admins are willing to go there and put into effect the decisions made by the community. You're one of those who do dare to go where other admins dare not tread (along with Dennis Brown and NeilN and some others). Like much of adminning, it's a thankless job, but I thank you for it. Keep up your efforts, and know that it's appreciated.

Best,

Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:54, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Beyond My Ken. I wanted to respond and thank you for your very kind words and for taking to leave me a message here to express your gratitude. It mean's a lot. I don't blame any administrator for choosing not to participate in discussions at WP:ANI; it's certainly not a place for everyone. I think that a significant portion of what responders at ANI do is diffuse heated or angry situations that are being escalated there from other discussions - it certainly requires a 100% positive temperance and an above-average amount of patience to allocate to others. Or, to put is simply: "someone's gotta do it, right"? Anyways, I appreciate the message and I'm happy to hear that my time is noticed and appreciated. Cheers ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:10, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

"High visibility" of a template

Hi Oshwah. I'm following up on your replies in Special:Permalink/825957693#Template:Glossary infobox and Special:Permalink/825957693#Template:Addiction glossary. I'm fine with waiting as you suggested in those sections; but, I just wanted to comment on your rationale for rejecting indefinite protection for these templates.

Assume for a moment that you're considering whether or not to protect 2 different templates:

• One is transcluded on the main page, but nowhere else on Wikipedia (since the main page is transcluded to other pages, further assume that its transclusion to the main page is nested inside noinclude tags, like <noinclude>{{Template_pagename}}</noinclude>). That template would have a transclusion count of 1, but its visibility through transclusion pageviews would be roughly 0.5 billion pageviews/month.
• The other is transcluded to thousands of article talk pages on articles that have virtually no readership (i.e., 0–5 pageviews/month for both the article and its talk page).

Which one, if vandalized, would have the larger negative impact on Wikipedia? I'm guessing you'd say it's the template that's transcluded on the main page, but nowhere else. So, my point here is that, while it's obviously an important factor to consider, a template's transclusion count doesn't give you a good idea of how visible a template is; it only tells you how many pages would be affected by edits to that template.

In addition a template's transclusion count and the aggregate pageviews among all pages where a template is transcluded, I think a third factor to consider is the protection status of the pages where a template is transcluded. E.g., if a template is transcluded to 100 indefinitely semi-protected pages and nowhere else on WP, an IP editor could still vandalize all of those pages by vandalizing the unprotected template. In a nutshell, for unprotected templates that transclude to protected pages, template vandalism circumvents page protection.

Anyway, I'm not here to argue about whether or not those 2 glossary templates should be protected. What I've stated here is just food for thought on other relevant factors to consider in the future when determining if a template should be protected. Sorry about the wall of text. Seppi333 (Insert 2¢) 07:45, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Seppi333 - Acknowledging your message. I'm mobile right now but will read and respond to it as soon as I'm back home and on my computer. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:05, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Seppi333 - Thank for for leaving me a message here with your honest thoughts and your explanation of your disagreement. I really appreciate it and have no problem responding, discussing, and working with you about the protection of these templates. Yes, I absolutely agree that the number of transclusions is not the only thing that should be taken into account when deciding whether or not to protect a template. Templates that transclude content to highly accessed and/or highly important pages (like the Main Page) would obviously be protected regardless of the total number of pages it transcludes to - that's obviously a no-brainer and I understand your point completely. Are these templates currently transcluding content to highly accessed or important pages at this time? I don't believe they were when I last checked, but I've been quite busy on Wikipedia with lots of other things and I don't remember on the top of my head :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:48, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

I actually don't disagree with your decision regarding the protection status of {{Addiction glossary}}; while it is transcluded on 2 indefinitely semi-protected pages (amphetamine & methamphetamine) and viewed by readers – or, at least, is accessed in articles – via transclusions at an average rate of 0.34 times/second over the course of a day (based upon 28000 transclusion pageviews per day/86400 seconds per day), a minority of IP editors have contributed content to this template that wasn't reverted. So far, 10 different IPs have edited that template; 1 of those editors added a useful clause to a definition that is still present in the current template revision (see the last column in the table from this link). In a nutshell, if this page were indefinitely semi-protected, contributions like this from IP editors might not happen unless they were to propose their edits on the talk page. I'm not sure what fraction of IP editors who edit templates would actually do that; although, since template pages are non-mainspace pages, I suspect the proportion of IP editors who would propose edits to a template would be higher than the proportion who propose edits to an article (this is simply due to the fact that they're more likely to know how to navigate WP's backpages).

As for {{Glossary infobox}}, because this is a template that's transcluded into other templates that are then transcluded into articles, it would be very difficult for editors to find and revert a vandal edit in this template if they were to view the resulting vandalism in an article where it is transcluded via the transclusion of a different template which transcludes it (e.g., {{Addiction glossary}}, {{Transcription factor glossary}}, or any glossaries templates that are created in the future). After checking the article history and seeing no vandal edits, editors would probably check the transcluded glossary template and then see the vandalism, but not see the corresponding vandal edit in that template's page history. Unless they subsequently checked the template's source code for pages that transclude into that template,^{[see collapse tab below for a list of templates/modules that transclude into {{Addiction glossary}}]} they wouldn't be able to determine that the source of the vandalism is coming from {{Glossary infobox}}. Moreover, because I'm the only editor who has committed an edit to this template since it was created, I'm probably the only editor on Wikipedia who has watchlisted this page. So, if vandalism occurs while I'm not currently on Wikipedia, the amount of time it would take for vandalism to be reverted would be excessive due to this and the aforementioned reason.

List of back-end templates/modules that transclude into {{Addiction glossary}} that are not nested within noinclude tags + their protection status

This was copy/pasted from the edit preview page for the template after I deleted all the content inside noinclude tags and previewed the edit. Template:Box-shadow border (edit) (template protected) Template:Box-shadow border/css (edit) (template protected) Template:Cite book (view source) (protected) Template:Cite journal (view source) (protected) Template:Cite web (view source) (protected) Template:Glossary infobox (edit) <---------------------------- **This is the only unprotected page in this list** Template:Ifeq (edit) (template protected) Template:Infobox (edit) (template protected) Template:Navbar (view source) (protected) Template:P2 (edit) (template protected) Template:Yesno (view source) (protected) Module:Arguments (view source) (protected) Module:Citation/CS1 (view source) (protected) Module:Citation/CS1/COinS (view source) (protected) Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration (view source) (protected) Module:Citation/CS1/Date validation (edit) (template protected) Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers (view source) (protected) Module:Citation/CS1/Utilities (view source) (protected) Module:Citation/CS1/Whitelist (view source) (protected) Module:Infobox (edit) (template protected) Module:Navbar (view source) (protected) Module:String (view source) (protected)

Anyway, that was my motivation for requesting protection for those templates. I respect your decision regarding their protection status though, so I'm fine with waiting. I should probably mention that, while {{Addiction glossary}} might be a useful addition for around 10-15 additional articles on drug addiction/dependence-related topics, its transclusion count probably won't ever grow to more than 60 pages. The transclusion count of {{Glossary infobox}} on the other hand is likely to increase in jumps of 5-25 pages at a time. That's due to the fact that anytime a new glossary template is created, it's also going to be transcluded to a set of articles on terms that are linked in the glossary. Typically, a glossary should only be transcluded in articles pertaining to the terms that are linked in the template, so my upper limit estimate (25) is based upon the MOS's upper limit for the number of definitions included in embedded glossaries: "If the glossary would be 25 terms or more, it is probably better to create a stand-alone glossary article."

FWIW, the reason I'm inclined to have templates with high transclusion pageviews indefinitely semi- or template-protected is because of this edit, which wasn't reverted until 14 minutes later. That template, which is probably watchlisted by only 5–10 editors, is accessed/viewed in articles (including the article on Wikipedia) by readers at an average rate of about 1.6 times/second over the course of a day (based upon 140000 transclusion pageviews per day/86400 seconds per day). Seppi333 (Insert 2¢) 08:35, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

You're giving me a lot of reading homework this weekend... lol - give me some time to read this and get back to you ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:37, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Sorry about the second wall of text. Assuming you do go through it all, you'll end up making more well-reasoned decisions on the protection status of templates by considering the types of issues I've discussed here. Seppi333 (Insert 2¢) 08:53, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

No apologies are needed - I was just messing with you ;-). Fear not! I plan to read your entire message and respond back to you - I just need some time to read through it thoroughly :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:07, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Zelia

You just removed the authentic source from a person who posted in Zeila page but he didn't know how to edit so I kind of fixed for him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Poachlives (talk • contribs) 12:23, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Poachlives - Oh jeez, what the hell is the matter with me? Obviously a bad revert on my part. Thanks for fixing and for giving me a heads up - I sincerely appreciate it. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:40, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Re. unexplained HEU particle found at altitude

https://www.livescience.com/61766-enriched-uranium-particle-mystery-alaska.html

Interestingly it has been suggested that the source *might* be a nuclear powered aircraft. If so then it could be a variant of the ones tested in 1960 but with more modern HTSC shielding and part of a hypothetical missile shield system with solid state laser arrays. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.55.63.238 (talk) 13:45, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

175.158.216.200 and 175.158.218.56

I have recently noticed that there has been some 'purely disruptive material' edits from the two IP addresses (My Royal Young to be precise), I have also noticed that User:Drmies has recently been removing the revisions which contains the disruption - example. All these contributions to the two IP addresses are exactly the same behavior, I was wondering if you can remove them or shall the task go to Drmies since the user has experience in removing that disruptive editing. Iggy (Swan) 14:29, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Iggy the Swan - Are you talking about using rev del to redact the edit summaries per RD3? If so, then that's something I can definitely do ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:31, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

 Done. Let me know if I missed any edit summaries that need RD3 and I'll strike em. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:34, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Yes removing those revisions as well as the edit summaries that were deleted a few minutes ago. I have found one of them at the bottom of a revision on Fire_Emblem:_Shadow_Dragon. RD3, yes - Iggy (Swan) 14:36, 17 February 2018 (UTC) (p.s. edit conflict)

I'm going to leave the revisions themselves alone so that they can be reviewed by non-admins and used as evidence to report more users. The edit summaries used, however, are purely disruptive as they are extremely lengthy and make viewing the history / contribs page difficult where they exist. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:39, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Explanation

Why you delete my page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sadia Shakoor (talk • contribs) 14:52, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Sadia Shakoor, and welcome to Wikipedia! I removed your user page because you were using it for reasons that were not in compliance of Wikipedia's user page policy. Please review this page and let me know if you have any questions. I also highly urge you to go through and complete the new user tutorial, as it will provide you with a significant amount of how-to's and resources to help you get started here and get exposed to the different areas on Wikipedia and how to navigate. Thanks again for your message, and I welcome you to the project! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:56, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Goo Goo Dolls 'not constructive'

Hey, so I'm a new Wikipedia user and I recently added a bit on the Goo Goo Doll's wikipage, but you said that it 'wasn't constructive'. Could you elaborate a bit on that so I don't make the same mistake again (or direct me to a page that can). Also, if you're cool with it, could I try again (I didn't add a lot because of brevity)? Thanks Usernoot (talk) 14:58, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Usernoot - Because I don't believe that the content you added is true, and I don't believe the source you added was legitimate. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:00, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply, whilst I'm not 100 percent certain of the book's legitimacy, I'll give you that; what I added is true:

http://rockrevoltmagazine.com/interview-goo-goo-dolls/

http://googoofans.com/article/goo-goo-dolls-return-to-pittsburgh

https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackomalleygreenburg/2011/09/02/flashback-how-the-goo-goo-dolls-got-their-name/#22ed79334d8c Usernoot (talk) 15:14, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Usernoot - These references are definitely a step in the right direction :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:19, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Alright cool :) So are you cool with me adding it now or...?Usernoot (talk) 15:21, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Usernoot - Your changes may face objection by other editors, but I don't see any issues that would make me object at this time. So long as your changes are referenced... fine by me :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:23, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice :D Usernoot (talk) 15:27, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Usernoot - You bet! Again, welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you stick around and become a long-term editor with us! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:30, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Thankyou

Thanks oshwah for guiding me i am new on wikipedia and i dont know so much about it Sadia Shakoor (talk) 14:58, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Sadia Shakoor - Always happy to help ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:51, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Seeking for help

Friend please help me i dont understand how to use it Sadia Shakoor (talk) 15:02, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

See the response I made to your original message above. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:03, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

!

What's your deal bro? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cptn69 (talk • contribs) 15:09, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

!

https://kewauneecountyhistory.blogspot.com/2013/05/forbidden-to-court-wolf-river-romance.htmlhttps://kewauneecountyhistory.blogspot.com/2013/07/youngs-swaty-mc-donald-and-algomas.htmlhttps://kewauneecountyhistory.blogspot.com/2015/01/1887-cream-city-house-fire.html

Whatever dude I'm not going to go and type all that again. No wonder Wikipedia doesn't have shit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cptn69 (talk • contribs) 15:14, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Cptn69 - Please see Wikipedia's policies on biographies of living people and verifiability, and review Wikipedia's guidelines on identifying reliable sources. Your edits were not in compliance with our biographies of living people policy because the references you provided are to web blogs - not to locations or references that we identify as reliable. Please let me know if you have any questions about these guideline pages and I'll be happy to answer them. Thank you for understanding, and I wish you happy editing :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:17, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Why you have my changes , i have written the durood (Sal ALLAHua alyhi wasallam ) with prophet Muhammad's Sal ALLAHu alayhi wasallam, name

Why you have my changes , i have written the durood (Sal ALLAHua alyhi wasallam ) with prophet Muhammad's Sal ALLAHu alayhi wasallam, name in the article regarding arab tribe Banu Hanifa , Its obligatory to write durood with prophet's name every time , look into it ASAP 202.47.42.210 (talk) 17:18, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

I don't understand why you're changing "Muhammad" to "sSal ALLAHu alayhi wasallam" on this article at all... why are you doing this? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:52, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I don't find anything explanatory, but maybe it's the most respectful way of referring to Muhammad? E.g. [13]. 202.47.42.210, Wikipedia is not a religious text, we use only the most common names for things and people here, for instance Muhammad.

Ha, see also MOS:SAWW, Oshwah. Bishonen | talk 08:46, 19 February 2018 (UTC).

Bishonen - Thanks for citing that MOS section to me. That answers all of my questions as far as I'm concerned :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:52, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Reverted Blank Page Edit

Hi Oshwah!

Regarding https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Shoot_out&action=history

My edits were explained in the first of my edits. No reason to revert the first one, imo. I reverted my second edit myself. I see no reason to revert my first edit, thus reinstalled that.

Could actually help me, if you know how to delete the page.

Cheers, Joerg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.91.28.107 (talk) 18:45, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) This path to the 1971 Shoot Out western movie is entirely reasonable. Shoot out → Shootout → Shootout (disambiguation) → Shoot Out. Please stop changing the redirect. General Ization ^Talk 18:56, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

putting out fires

Hi, it seems that since this shooting in Florida, several SPAs (like this one "IMAParent") have popped up trying to add info about "mass murder" to multiple articles, such as sporting good manufacturers, various firearm articles, etc. I saw you had prosed limitations on one of them, have you considered going any further with that? (just curious)

Also, discussions (debates, really) with straw polls are popping up on several firearm-related article talk pages. I fear that we'll end up with conflicting local consensuses (consensi?) that will lead to further disputes and disruption. I have posted a proposal on WikiProject Firearms to amalgamate all these discussions into one place to hopefully achieve a singular, community-wide consensus. I'm not asking that you participate, rather that you observe and if consensus is in favor of the proposal, would you consider closing any and all discussions on the same issue, on all related article talk pages and directing them to the one location? I'd like to see it held as a proper RfC with a solid consensus that can be relied on to quickly resolve future debates and keep disruption to a minimum.
Thanks - ^theWOLFchild 19:41, 17 February 2018 (UTC) <oh, and one last, quick, unrelated question; do you do much mopping at 3RRNB?>

Thewolfchild - Interesting... okay, I'll take a look and see what I can't resolve ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:20, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	For blocking a persistant vandal before I even had a chance to report him. LittlePuppers (talk) 20:30, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi LittlePuppers! Thanks for leaving me this barnstar here! I'm glad that I was able to lend a hand and put an end to the issue :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:17, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Looks like you could use a cool one

I'd like to buy you a beer for all your help. - Samf4u (talk) 20:46, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Samf4u! Awesome!!! I never say no to a beer ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:19, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Jonathan Papelbon MLB pitcher bio

There was a paragraph stating that Papelbon is dead, that he died along with another MLB pitcher named Roy Halladay. Halladay's death is true, Papelbon is not, obviously some sick individual put that false information in his bio. It also needs to be changed in the side panel of his info and numbers area.

Thanks, Jen2001:5B0:2855:5340:FDB7:87FF:F53D:36D2 (talk) 21:45, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for letting me know. I'll take a look into this further and take care of any problems I find :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:47, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

My recent changes to Volume_table

Hello -

You thought my change to this page did not appear constructive. I included the relevant units for the equation and changed the displayed equation into TeX format. Without these changes, the equation could easily be misunderstood to have (2L) in its exponent, which it should not.

Thank you in advance for actually looking at the changes to see if they appear constructive.

50.39.203.210 (talk) 22:41, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi there! I'm not sure how I managed to do that, but the revert and warning I left was unintentional and done by mistake. I've removed the warning and restored your changes - I apologize for the confusion I caused you. Please let me know if I can do anything else for you. Thanks for leaving me a message and for letting me know about this. Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:43, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Who is Ivan Gogh?

Oshwa,

 I didn't make that revision and I have no idea who Ivan Gogh is. Sorry.

- Juan M Villar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmarvilla (talk • contribs) 03:48, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Michael Rapaport

Hi, could you please take a look at Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection#Michael_Rapaport, it's a real nuisance in the last hour or two, and I don't expect it would die soon - it's some twitter feud that caused this. Thanks! =) byteflush _Talk 04:28, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Byteflush - I just semi'd the page for two days. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:29, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! byteflush _Talk 04:32, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

19 Kids & Counting

Hi again Oshwah, the article 19 Kids & Counting is being vandalised again. take a look at the usernames/IP addresses I just had to revert two edits. Could you please protect the article please.

HospitalHistory (talk) 08:27, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

HospitalHistory - Oh how fun! I'll take a look and take care of it ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:28, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

IP: 86.8.33.92

Hello Oshwah, Could I draw your attention to the activities of 86.8.33.92 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) who was previously blocked for a month by another admin (Acroterion) for unsourced/unreferenced changes on various BBC articles. They have now returned from the block making exactly the same edits, without references and do not take notice of warnings on their Talk page. Can I leave this with you please? Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 11:00, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

David J Johnson - Oh yeah, no doubt... this user has clearly kept it up and went back to the same exact disruption as before. It is now blocked for three months. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:08, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Many thanks for your help. Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 11:10, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

David J Johnson - My pleasure ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:12, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Yo

AlexRover (talk) 11:21, 18 February 2018 (UTC)Could you give me any advice to improve this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Calderonista_Inavsion_Of_Costa_Rica_(1955)

AlexRover - It looks like you just need to expand the article and add content and references surrounding the event (if more such information is available). It looks like you're missing content on the event during the time that it was in conflict. This is an important part to expand upon - I'd start there ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:55, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, there really is nothing written about this war online, which is surprising, I'll have a look round though AlexRover (talk) 19:07, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Taboo TV series (2017)

Ha, ha! the "tiresome taboo" of the double-hit Wikipedia:Rollback is so elusive and yet so addictive. Cheers! ‑ ‑ Gareth Griffith‑Jones ^{The Welsh Buzzard} ‑ ‑ 14:31, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Gareth Griffith-Jones - One of life's many mysteries ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:56, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Anwar al Alaqqi

Hello, I am Keri Hassell, I was witness to Anwar's visits when I was married to Sheihk Alaa Afifi, MCA Pres. I was stating moments of history that had been missing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kerihassellhello (talk • contribs) 14:33, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Kerihassellhello - You can't use yourself or your experiences as a "reference" when adding content to Wikipedia. This constitutes original research, which isn't allowed on Wikipedia. You need to reference reliable sources with content that you're adding. Please let me know if you have any questions about these policies and I'll be happy to answer them. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:58, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Many thanks for getting in contact with me.

On February 17, 2018 Ronnie McDowell, singer and artist, unveiled "The Magic Moment" , his original painting of Elvis Presley getting his first guitar at the Tupelo Hardware Store in Tupelo MS, thus kicking off the pilot for his forthcomiong TV show, entitled “Ronnie McDowell Painting America". Here is the news item. http://www.wtva.com/content/news/Musician-unveils-Elvis-painting-before-TV-show-launch-474400873.html. On the basis of the latter, I added his work to the corresponding art section of the page entitled "Cultural depictions of Elvis Presley", and which as you ponted out, is now deleted. Can you repost it, please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.212.23.91 (talk) 14:42, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi there! I apologize for the confusion, and thank you for leaving me a message regarding your edit. You're going to want to fix this yourself, but also include any reliable sources you found as well. Wikipedia has instructions you can follow here regarding how to cite your references in-line with text. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:29, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

MBS Update Needed

There needs to be an update to the MBS process and MERS. I refinanced my mortgage in 2013, and I went from a traditional mortgage to a MBS mortgage. In the signing closing documents, MERS required a Waiver of Rights Statement wherein I was required to waive my rights for legal redress under my state foreclosure laws and waive 5th and 14th Constitutional Amendment foreclosure protections as a requirement for obtaining the MBS mortgage. My state, Georgia did NOT include this requirement in any legislation, though it was proposed. Nothing is mentioned about this Waiver of Rights Statement on the Wikipedia web pages. I cannot enclose a redacted copy of my Waiver of Rights Statement for your viewing, because there is no means established on this forum. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.76.204.114 (talk) 14:46, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message here. Nobody is asking for you to upload any personal documents or information to verify this information (in fact, please don't - that would be in violation of different policies and we take privacy very seriously here). You need to cite references from reliable sources so that readers and other editors can establish verifiability with the content you're modifying. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks for the message, and I wish you happy editing. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:33, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia Is Not A Vehicle For Advertising Or Promotion

February 2018

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:41, 18 February 2018 (UTC) 147.158.109.90 (talk) 14:59, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

CHUAN NI TE CIBAI AAAA!

Re-write

Hi, I’m Rachel Viollet. I’m not sure who wrote my biography but a lot of it was not acccurate. I have erased my biography and will re-write it. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manchester58 (talk • contribs) 15:12, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Submission

Hello Oshra, you asked as to the source, I am the source. I witnessed the visits,although because I was a woman I was not included in the details. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kerihassellhello (talk • contribs) 15:31, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Wrong weight

As you can see here, the Ngandong tiger is nowere near 470kg. https://i.imgur.com/9oyAvlr.png http://theworldofanimals.proboards.com/thread/936/ngandong-tiger-smilodon-populator — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.48.210.235 (talk) 16:51, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Problems with Darwen Ramblers Draft

AlexRover (talk) 17:03, 18 February 2018 (UTC) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Darwen_Ramblers_F.C. Hello this link takes you to a page suggesting the page doesn't exist when in fact it does, what is the issue here? Please help.

AlexRover - Ah, sorry about that! I though you had just created that page to test and see if you could do so (which is why I deleted it as a 'test page'). I'll restore the page for you right now. Thanks for the message and for letting me know :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:05, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

• Hi, Actually this is a duplicate as they had already created Draft:Darwen Ramblers F.C. and probably didn't notice the missing period on the second one Draft:Darwen Ramblers F.C. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 17:29, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

KylieTastic - Duplicate deleted. Thanks! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:11, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Liberal Fascism by Jonah Goldberg and I love your hair. Lend me some. btw, I am 67yoa and not too good with this machine. yet. I'm trying to add things to comply by the rules at the top, but my computer is too cluttered to want to join yet. anything

17:18, 18 February 2018 (UTC)17:18, 18 February 2018 (UTC)17:18, 18 February 2018 (UTC)~ I'm going to try to go back to wikipedia to see how to respond to,"anything." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.92.143.40 (talk) 17:24, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

I've left a note on the IP's talkpage. Acroterion (talk) 17:35, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Acroterion! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:12, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Benny Weger update

Hi, i see that you have reverted my edit on Benny Weger page. I'm searching in these days all the biathlete athletes that doesn't have results of their races, so i'm updating all the profiles, and the edit wasn't a test, but an update, so can you reverte my edit?5.88.51.116 (talk) 18:20, 18 February 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.88.51.116 (talk) 17:18, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi there! Sorry for the confusion! It looks like you've since restored the content I reverted - just make sure that you cite references with these changes and that you use reliable sources. If you have any further questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to help :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:05, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Email

Hello. 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeanambr (talk • contribs) 17:30, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Jeanambr - I didn't receive an email from you. Can you resend it to me? Did you still need help? Let me know. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:10, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

I had emailed you as follows: Hi Oshwah, apropos of your latest edits at the article "List of diminutives by language", I would like to point out to you that "gitarr" seems to be actually the Swedish word for "guitar". Cheers.--Jeanambr (talk) 23:55, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Ohhh! Thank you, Jeanambr. I thought it was just a user messing around... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:57, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

1991 CCL

Hi. I was looking at the 1991 CCL. I actually competed in that competition and have the format, results, etc. on CONCACAF letterhead and newspaper articles I took. Was making a few changes to accurately reflect names/results. I will type below for you.

Collapsing list

1991 Champion of Champions Tournament Draw Format Separate draws are staged in each of the three competitive zones (North, Central and Caribbean). The First Round draw for Central Zone teams was held January 26 in Guatemala. Caribbean First Round earrings will be drawn in Trinidad on Sunday, February 24. The First and Second Round draws for the North Zone are being held in New York City today, February 22. The initial round will match teams from Bermuda and the United States. Mexico has a bye in Round One; its teams will be drawn against the First Round winners to determine the Second Round pairings. Matches will be drawn without regard to any team's position as Champion or Sub-champion. Bowl One (USA) - A.A. Eagles, Brooklyn Italians Bowl Two (Bermuda) - Pembroke Hamilton Zebras, Dandy Town Hornets Bowl 3 (Mexico) - Puebla, Univ. de Guadalajara North Zone Championship First Round/1st leg April 13, 1991 at St. John's Field (Bermuda) Dandy Town Hornets - 3 - Brooklyn Italians - 1 16 - Khammes Essayed (Brooklyn) 70 - Burnell Richardson (Dandy Town) 78 - Troy Durham (Dandy Town) 88 - Ricky Mallory (Dandy Town) First Round/2nd leg April 27, 1991 at Brooklyn College (USA) Brooklyn Italians - 3- Dandy Town Hornets - 0 Second Round/1st leg November 10, 1991 at Memorial Mount Vernon Stadium (USA) Leones Universidad de Guadalajara - 3 - Brooklyn Italians - 0 11 - Hugo Aparecido (UdeG) 38 - Alberto Mariscal (UdeG) 86 - Leopoldo Castagneda (UdeG) Second Round/2nd leg November 20, 1991 at Estadio Jalisco (Mexico) Leones Universidad de Guadalajara - 3 - Brooklyn Italians - 1 14 - Chagas (UdeG) 25 - Manguinha (UdeG) 53 - Danny Mueller (BI) 73 - Octavio Mora (UdeG)

99.248.93.117 (talk) 17:59, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi there! Your changes seemed partially completed, in non-english text, and looked like a test, so I reverted it. If you're looking to update this page, you can certainly do so! Just make sure that you preview your changes before saving them, and make sure to cite references where needed. Thanks for the message and for explaining :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:14, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

My edited content is not appearing on Wikipedia page

Hey Oshwah!!

   Just read your message on my Wikipedia page Anupama Raag. This is actually my own page and I have been trying to edit it for the past two days but the page reloads as it were before editing. This has been quite baffling and my persistent efforts were marked as “disruptive editing “ by you while the fact is that I am trying to edit my own page. 
   Please guide. That why is it that my edited material is not getting saved on the main page.

Thanks Anupama (Anupamawiki (talk) 18:17, 18 February 2018 (UTC))

Hi Anupamawiki, and thank you for leaving me a message here. Your edits to Anupama Raag present many different issues and problems when it comes to Wikipedia's various policies and guidelines. First, we highly discourage and will typically revert any edits made by users that have a conflict of interest with the article subject or topic area. Your edits also seem to constitute advertising or promotion, which is not the purpose of Wikipedia. If your primary focus is to build an encyclopedia, you should contribute to other articles that you do not have a conflict of interest with. Please also take time to complete our new user tutorial before you edit anything, as it will provide you with walkthroughs and tutorials in many different areas that are important here. If you have any questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks again for the message and I wish you happy editing - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:20, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Dear Oshwah

I did not make a mistake there is a song called "Hello" by Adele, but the song has recently been bought by Lil Pump, and he renamed the song "Farts". Thank you for your concern, but i am sure i am correct.

               Sincerely,
                  Richard Hall  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:10E1:300:1041:2208:925C:532E (talk) 18:24, 18 February 2018 (UTC) 

You've got mail!

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 21:16, 18 February 2018 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Home Lander (talk) 21:16, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Home Lander - Received and responded ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:18, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Ditto that! Slight issue. :) Home Lander (talk) 21:20, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Home Lander - Got it ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:25, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

108.180.194.7

What in the world was this[14] about? --Guy Macon (talk) 23:40, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Guy Macon - Heh, you got me... I have no idea. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:47, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

United States Senate election in California, 2018

Hi Oshwah, can we get a lock on this and the talk page. A lot of block evasion just to get a little attention. Thanks, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 00:29, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Bob! I've already blocked the IP ranges involved here so far. I'm holding off from protecting the article on purpose so that the continued disruption will let me discover all of the ranges this person can abuse and block them. Once I get tired of watching it, I'll semi it ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:34, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Ah, I get it. Thank you very much and cheers. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 00:36, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Any time; always happy to lend a hand. If you need anything else, you know where to find me ;-). Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:38, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Recent Edit on Dalmatian

Hi! Was just editing because it looked like someone spammed the article with the number of native speakers = 101 (Cruella Deville et al.). I was under the impression that this was a mistake, but please advise if this is incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.244.18.168 (talk) 00:51, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Ah! I see what you were trying to do :-)! I've restored the article to a previous version before the disruption was made. Thanks for letting me know, and I apologize for the confusion I caused :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:55, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Controversies - No factual basis.

It seems very difficult, on Wikipedia, to "call out" opinions as opposed to facts. Anybody can file a lawsuit, Then it becomes a "controversy" when you withdraw your own lawsuit. On another suit the judge actually said, "But under Pennsylvania law, the relationship between a student and a private school is a contractual one." A mother states an opinion and it becomes part of "controversy." I'll wait for the court cases to finish and then come back to Wikipedia to correct the mistakes. ```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Farmerbrown123321 (talk • contribs) 01:20, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Farmerbrown123321! Thank you for taking the time to clarify what your edit summaries meant. Wikipedia has a policy regarding users and accounts who make legal threats on this site against another, so I wanted to make sure that your edit summaries were clarified. When talking about "legal action" on Wikipedia in any aspect (in general), it's best to avoid any kind of ambiguity and make these statements clear - else, someone may misinterpret what you mean and think that you're trying to make a legal threat toward someone where, which is not a thing nor is it a fun situation to have to resolve. Again, you did nothing wrong at all - I just wanted to let you know about this so that you're aware and understand that of ambiguous statements like that can be problematic, and that you also understand why. Thanks again for clearing this up. Please let me know if you have any questions, and I'll be happy to answer them. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:26, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Joseph Churchward

Hi Oshwah - did you mean to remove the entire sentence I added about Churchward Marianna? It was very similar to the sentence immediately preceding it, referring to his typeface in a film credit. Kirsten2406:E001:97A9:1:B8C7:CF83:E485:FBC2 (talk) 02:15, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

I restored the previous edit you made. Sorry about that! I only meant to revert the last one you made, not both of them :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:26, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

your tone seems very pointed right now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.35.35.195 (talk) 03:34, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Shyne

Hey Oshwah,

I'm dealing with a possible COI at Shyne and as it is getting late here I don't want to leave and find half the article deleted tomorrow. The IP stated in one edit summary [15] "Im Shyne, I Corrected historical inaccuracies". I reverted their edits and dropped a COI template on their page but they again removed content (mostly about his conversion to Judaism and negative content post release- all of which is sourced). Would you mind checking it out? HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 03:55, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @HickoryOughtShirt?4: It appears that, for now at least, the IP has left the article alone (roughly 20 hours and counting). Hopefully that will continue to be the case. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 17:00, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Just following-up on your message here, HickoryOughtShirt?4. It looks like no further edits have continued since the 19th (which is good), and others have left good warnings and in-depth messages on this user's IP talk page. I'm hoping that this is what was needed and the user has followed the information and moved on. Regardless, thanks for the message and for letting me know. I'm going to hold off on doing anything for the time being since the disruption has stopped, but do let me know if it picks up again and I'll be happy to look into it again :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:30, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

WP:CBAN for Krajoyn

On Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard, I have started a discussion of a potential CBAN of Krajoyn which you might have been involved in.

The discussion is linked at WP:CBAN for Krajoyn. Iggy (Swan) 19:21, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Iggy the Swan! Thanks for the heads up! Sorry I couldn't add to the discussion in time, but it looks like it closed and with the result I expected. Thanks again for the notice, and I hope you're doing well. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:32, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

It was already archived before I logged in after the reply. What I'm not sure about (with this or ZestyLemonz cases) is how much of this would be effective as IP addresses can belong to anyone. I think they are not allowed to create anymore accounts (not 100% sure). However, enough support was there to ban Krajoyn. Iggy (Swan) 18:12, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Iggy the Swan - Well, a site ban won't truly stop anybody from creating new accounts or from editing against their ban - just the accounts and IPs that we've blocked with account creation set to 'disabled'. A formal ban in this situation just gives editors the ability to report and block on sight any users or IPs they identify as the banned user and with less "red tape" that may cause delays otherwise (if any was even getting in the way in the first place). Formal discussions and votes on community site-banning LTA accounts and those who have a clear agenda to disrupt the project using any means necessary is becoming more and more discouraged by their participants in recent times - mostly because such discussions aren't really necessary once a user gets to that level of disruption and abuse. At that point, they're pretty much treated as if they were site-banned anyways. The only thing that's missing is a formal discussion and close stating that "[User X] is now formally site-banned from the project".

Now don't get me wrong: formal ban discussions are important and absolutely needed for users that are repeatedly being problematic or disruptive and don't fall into the situation I'm referring to above. However, when it comes to accounts that are being blatantly abusive long-term, are clearly intent on causing any and as much disruption as possible (such as those listed as LTA users), and whom repeatedly switch IPs or create sock puppet accounts to continue their abusive behavior ... it just becomes obvious at a certain point. Having an official discussion and "pounding the gavel" to rule these users as officially site-banned just feeds them more of what they want, which is something we obviously want to avoid doing. What's still up in the air for the most part regarding the situation of LTA accounts and considering them site-banned automatically are just formalities - mainly closing an official discussion on this and updating policy to reflect what the community feels should be done (and what we're basically doing already). Once this is done, the process regarding this very situation will be made very much more easier and clear: we'll be removing the red tape that says that we need a formal discussion in order to... remove red tape... haha :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:42, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Threat by anonymous IP

I doubt it's serious, but I saw a threat against you (and, oddly, Cluebot) here per the reporting process. I alerted the emergency email and they're looking at it, but wanted you to have a heads up.

--KNHaw ^(talk) 23:42, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

I have seen people threating users, but never against Cluebot. TBH we most likely all have beef against Cluebot,(For stealing our reverts) but this is just insane. Lakeside Out!-LakesideMiners^{Click Here To Talk To Me!} 13:38, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

@LakesideMiners: I have personally been requested to ban a vandal (by that vandal) and called a "stupid foo" saying they invented potato technology and I have seen others beg Cluebot to ban/block them, but outright threatening Cluebot? That is something I never thought I would see. I guess they didn't take the hint in the username that Cluebot might, you know, be a bot? LOL.

As for the threats against Oshwah, you acted appropriately KNHaw - good on you for reporting it. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 17:12, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

My God! That is one of the best things I have ever seen! Lakeside Out!-LakesideMiners^{Click Here To Talk To Me!} 17:22, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. The account got banned within minutes of me sending to the email. It's good to know they have a fast response.

FYI, I also just let the Cluebot crew know about it. I think they'll find it amusing.

--KNHaw ^(talk) 18:07, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

@KNHaw:@LakesideMiners: I agree, that is why I saved the URL to one of those diffs locally (and found others via it). While (To be clear,) I do not condone vandalism in any way nor do I find it "funny", that was definitely...unique... IMO. I was glad when the account finally stopped (was blocked) but demanding a non-administrator and a non-administrative bot block their account, thinking the bot an actual person, was somewhat amusing. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 19:32, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Hey just following-up here: A big "thanks" to everyone who discussed this and for doing the right thing by reporting the threat to the proper channels. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:34, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

page protection: Pocahontas

Hello. Could you please protect Pocahontas? the whole history is full of vandals. It was protected for some time, but now that the protection has expired, it's starting again. Thanks. L293D (✉) 02:30, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi L293D. I'm not sure Oshwah is on right now. Anyways, I took a look and you are right. There is a history of pervasive vandalism going back years despite multiple temporary protections. I have indefinitely protected the article. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:21, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. L293D (✉) 14:23, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Ad Orientem - Thanks for taking care of that request while I was offline - much appreciated! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:34, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

NP. Happy to help. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:27, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Log Redaction question

Hello Oshwah, in regard to the log redaction you made here, can you please review this deletion and provide an explanation for your redaction? (or reverse it). Thank you, — xaosflux ^Talk 15:01, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Xaosflux - This redaction was made because I stated only a few minutes prior to an IP that if they created themselves an account and let me know what it was, that I'd manually confirm it for them. To keep this new account's IP address hidden for this person's privacy, I had those previous edits redacted. Because someone could easily see the messages between myself and the IP address (which just created and confirmed an account) and then look through my logs and see the account I flagged as 'confirmed' within that immediate timeline, I redacted the log of the account I manually confirmed so that nobody could do this. Please let me know if you have any further messages or concerns about this log redaction, and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks for the message and for sharing your concerns about this log. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:39, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

It looks like the IP to USER conversation has since been oversighted, is there still a reason this needs to be hidden? — xaosflux ^Talk 18:18, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Xaosflux - Let me take another look. Depending on what was suppressed, if someone can't establish the account's IP based on what was removed, then sure - I can definitely undo that redaction. Stand by. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:37, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Xaosflux - Meh, someone would have to dig and try pretty hard to connect these dots... I'll go ahead and undo the redaction to that log. Since enough time has passed, I'm not particularly worried about it. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:12, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, happy editing. — xaosflux ^Talk 22:21, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Xaosflux - I appreciate you for messaging me and asking about it. I mean, it really is a weird log that isn't typically redacted... But there was good reason for it ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:23, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

108.180.194.7

Would it be possible to revoke his talk page access? He keeps doing things like this:[16][17] --Guy Macon (talk) 15:51, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Guy Macon -  Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:42, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Block evasion at article talk page

Hi Oshwah, it’s Bob, on the road. This [18] needs to be protected, since the vandal can’t disrupt the article. Thanks and cheers, 50.74.82.234 (talk) 02:57, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

 Done - L293D (☎ • ✎) 12:47, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Bob! The talk page has been protected by another admin. Let me know if you need anything else and I'll be happy to help. Safe travels! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:43, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

messed-up redirect

Hi, could you please delete Wikpedia:~? I wanted to create a redirect but I didn't notice I had put a typo in the page name. (Actually, the redirect already exists as Wikipedia:~) Thanks. L293D (☎ • ✎) 03:33, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

@L293D:  Done — xaosflux ^Talk 04:51, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Xaosflux - Thanks for taking care of that while I was away. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:44, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Glen Schofield

He has left sledgehammer games along with Michael Condrey to become executives in activision I hope you could update his page ASAP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.99.60.159 (talk) 12:41, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

If you're talking about changing or updating the article content of this person, you need to cite reliable sources with these changes per Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living people. If you have any more questions or need help, feel free to let me know. Thanks for the message - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:45, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

IP:119.14.62.94

Hello Oshwah, IP 119.14.62.94 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), whom you recently blocked, is again inserting unsourced information, this time on American Airlines. Not only have they started edit warring, but also left obscene comments - rather than any reason for their changes. Can I leave this with you please? Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 19:41, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Pinging @Primefac: as I do not believe Oshwah to be available based on recent activity --TheSandDoctor (talk) 20:11, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi TheSandDoctor! Thanks for the message and for the heads up. It looks like the user stopped disrupting this article, but now I'm seeing edits being made to Thai Airways that I'm going to need to look into..... wonderful. Thanks again for the heads up - I'll go check it out. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:49, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

You're welcome, but it was David J Johnson that made the report, I merely pinged Primefac as (based on your contribs) you were not active at the time (I hope that that is okay). --TheSandDoctor (talk) 20:22, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Bah! Sorry... Must've copied from the wrong field and didn't catch myself :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:23, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

No problem! It doesn't bother me or anything (seriously, being pinged is something I don't mind and appreciate in discussions that I have taken part in), I just didn't want to take the credit for the report when I was not the person who made it . All's good --TheSandDoctor (talk) 20:35, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Annie Kenney

I had an accurate statemant as an avid wikipediar and this is my life and I am a kaiserreich player who know true history — Preceding unsigned comment added by JackAnvil (talk • contribs) 16:21, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hello there JackAnvil, I assume that you are talking about the two (1, 2) edits that you made to Annie Kenney before adding this to Oshwah's talk page. In the case of the first edit made to Annie Kenney, the occupation was changed from " Political activism and trade unionism" to "Potential leader of Union of Britain", in the second you changed the "known for" field to read "Being a feminist and lame leader" (both of which Oshwah reverted). Considering that these two edits were the first that you have made with this account, if they were test edits, the best place to perform test edits without impacting current articles would be to do so in your sandbox (you can click the red link to create it). Otherwise, the edits you made could be considered non-constructive in nature. Regardless of which case it may be, they were rightly reverted as they were either test-edits on articles (which should be done in your sandbox) or were not constructive in nature.

I also took the liberty of looking into the other two contributions you have made, (1, 2) and they fall under the same category.

If you have any other questions (or if you would like to chime in Oshwah) please do feel free to do so. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 20:19, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Tutorial would also be a good place to start as it summarizes our project goals and may help to give a better picture of what is a constructive edit. (Wikipedia:Introduction or that might be a good place to start as well). --TheSandDoctor (talk) 20:38, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Can I get your input on an edit request

Hi, Oshwah. I'm asking you for some advice because I know you are more familiar with My Royal Young than I. This edit request seems innocuous and I was going to update it but then I saw that MRY had created his own LTA page and it occurred to me that this might be an attempt by that person to "put a notch in their belt", as it were. The CBAN doesn't change anything substantiative so it really does not need to be noted on the LTA page. It seems suspicious that a new anon user would both be interested in updating LTA pages and that they would be able to put together an edit request complete with diff. Any reaction you have to this is welcome. Thanks in advance. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 17:02, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Eggishorn, and thanks for leaving me a message with your concerns. Yeah, I'm suspicious as well - especially given that this IP made this edit request you linked, then immediately created a discussion on AN regarding that ban, followed by a new request at RFPP with a list of articles that MRY has apparently been editing... either this user is completely legitimate or this user is up to something. I'll assume good faith and simply decline the edit request. There's no need to update the LTA page with that information. Thanks again for the message - much appreciated... and quite... interesting... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:03, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I'm glad that my concerns weren't completely off the mark. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:03, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Eggishorn - You bet; always happy to lend a hand ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:22, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

question about edit to AirPods entry

Oshwah, You wrote me to tell me that you removed an entry I made on the AirPods page because you felt that it wasn't "neutral" enough. What exactly did you remove, and why did you think that it wasn't neutral? My intention was to simply be fact-based. If I wasn't, I would like to learn how and why so that I can correct the content I originally wanted to add. Thanks! Michael MrGernBlanston (talk) 20:40, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

@MrGernBlanston: While I cannot speak towards Oshwah's reasoning, I can clear up what was removed. If you click here you can see the edit where the content was reverted. Hope that helps! --TheSandDoctor (talk) 20:50, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

@TheSandDoctor: Thank you! MrGernBlanston (talk) 21:09, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi MrGernBlanston, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your questions. The edit I reverted was made by you back in May 2017 and is located here. The reason I reverted this edit was due to my concerns with the addition of this phrase, as well as how it was worded. It comes off as speaking favorably about the AirPods due to their price being lower compared to other models, as well as the fact that the words "true wireless" were put into quotations like that. While you certainly and most likely didn't mean to state or imply any point of view with your edit here, this phrase can be interpreted to be representing a point of view that isn't neutral. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them and assist you further. Thanks again for leaving me a message, and I wish you happy editing :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:17, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

trouble with photo sizing

Oshwah, I recently made an addition to a Wiki page called "List of People From Chicago" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_from_Chicago?wteswitched=1 ). I added an entry for a famous Chicago writer named Ring Lardner. Everything seemed to be going great, except when I added a photo. It seemed to be really big, and didn't match the size of all the other thumbnails. I used the Wikipedia "media browser" within the editing function, and selected an approved photo from the Ring Lardner Wikipedia page. I assumed that the photo would automatically be formatted for the small space within the table, but it didn't. Can you take a look at the entry I made and make a suggestion on what I can do to fix the photo so that it formats as a small thumbnail within that table view?

Any help you can give is appreciated, thanks.

MrGernBlanston (talk) 21:04, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @MrGernBlanston: All those images are set to be 80px. Help:Pictures will probably come in handy. Essentially, you add the image and then, in source add "|80px" to it (minus the quotes and inside the closing double brackets (]]). Hope that helps! If you need any assistance, please let us know. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 21:20, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi MrGernBlanston! Yeah, pictures and media can be tricky at times depending on exactly what you need to do with them or exactly where it needs to be added. It looks like your only issue, however, was that you didn't resize it to be the same as the other pictures in the same table. I saw that most of them were set manually to be 80px large, so I went and applied the same manual size to the image you added. Does that look better? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:22, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

If you have any other questions MrGernBlanston, please feel free to ask them here, on my talk page, at the Teahouse, or to another experienced editor/admin (but please try to leave individual discussions centralized to a single page). --TheSandDoctor (talk) 21:26, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

@TheSandDoctor: @Oshwah: Thank you guys very much! Is there a way to resize the images using the visual editing mode? Source editing kinda freaks me out.

Also, is there a simply way to hit "reply" to the comments you guys make to me here?

Thanks! MrGernBlanston (talk) 23:26, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Good questions, MrGernBlanston. I don't use the visual editor but last I knew, I don't believe it had that kind of functionality built-in. The change to an image size is more of a "code change" than it is a "content change". I'm sure there are tools to add an easy way to reply to messages in discussions like this one, but again - I don't use them. I do know that there's a project that's currently in progress with developing an overhaul to talk discussions like these and with one such feature being the ability to easily reply to a message and post it. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:30, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, ~Oshwah~!

@MrGernBlanston: It can be done. In the VisualEditor, click the image, click edit, go to advanced settings. In there you can change the size etc. Under "custom", don't worry about calculating the second column, it is automatically calculated when you change the first. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 23:38, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Oh! Well there you go! Shows how little I've used / tried it :-D ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:39, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I just thought that it might be, so went through the editor and saw. Personally, I have never changed image sizes via the VisualEditor (I am comfortable with code), but do use the visual editor for copyedits etc as it is easier. Glad I could help! --TheSandDoctor (talk) 23:43, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, TheSandDoctor! Your responses are so fast and so thorough. The visual editor makes it much easier for me to make quick changes. Feeling more comfortable already. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrGernBlanston (talk • contribs) 00:39, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Eric Branch

Hi sorry, I don't really know how to use the talk feature, so I thought I'd mention the edit I made here. I have redone my edit of Eric Branch_(murderer)'s page and left a source. Sorry for any mixup. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:341:8100:A808:B511:2179:9D8A:A7AD (talk) 00:50, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi there! No worries! Thanks for showing me a link to a reference. I went ahead and cited it in the article for you. Please let me know if I can do anything else for you. Thanks again and I wish you happy editing :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:56, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Hmmm...

I tried this and so far, it looks like this. Whaddya think? Progress? - ^theWOLFchild 01:28, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Thewolfchild - Nice. Any good faith attempts to help a new user are always cool with me! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:30, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Screw you

Don't worry i wont edit anymore things. I have a question. Are you in the wiki website exactly in this moment? Also, can you delete my account? I don't feel like doing it THANKS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bwickhead (talk • contribs) 01:52, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Accounts cannot be deleted, sorry. Just stop using it and you'll be fine. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:54, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

My article

Hey,

The article you reverted about Young Thug was not vandalised. He changed his name to SEX, so I edited the article accordingly. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bandittx (talk • contribs) 02:22, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi there Bandittx! Under normal circumstances, an edit such as this would indeed be considered non-constructive/vandalous (changing someone's name to "SEX"), but in this case, you are right, so I have gone ahead and reinstated the edit (with a citation added to dispel any doubt). In the future, with name changes it is a good idea to add a citation, especially if changing it to something that would normally be considered a disruptive edit. That said, thank you for bringing this up Bandittx! Happy editing! --TheSandDoctor (talk) 03:21, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Ah, I owe you my apologies then. Sorry for misinterpreting your edit as vandalism. I can see now that it clearly isn't the case. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:24, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello oshwa. how are you? Remember the red dots. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.45.44.235 (talk) 02:33, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

CU

Hi Oshwah, have you thought about requesting the CU bit for use in your antivandalism work? And you can have you Northeastern weather back!; rain, ice and slush. The highway was okay but the access road was hoon-nation. :( L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 02:56, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi L3X1! We just had some snow over here on the west coast, but it's mostly melted now :-). You're too kind; please, I insist - keep that weather all to yourself over there ;-). I have considered applying and will probably consider doing so on the next election, which is quite some time from now... who knows, we'll see :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:59, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Ok L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 03:01, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Hmm...

Howdy! Just note this. I need you to use some common sense. (No offense. Got that, Oshwah? OK. Here we go!👍) So, please listen up. If Jake Steinfeld was born on February 21^st, 1958, and it's February 22, tell me how he could still be 59. Do you need citations for THAT? (P.S. : Tell me on my talk page if you think I am being mean.)

-142.105.130.66 (talk) 03:00, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

<tps> You removed a template that automatically computes age based on birth date and left a manual edit that will never update. That's not common sense, is it? Acroterion (talk) 03:05, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Your edit here didn't just update the person's age to be from 59 to 60 - it also changed the year that the person was born from 1958 to 1959, as well as removed the template that we use (which automatically updates that information). This is why I reverted your edit. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks for the message :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:07, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 03:13, 23 February 2018 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

TheSandDoctor (talk) 03:13, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

TheSandDoctor - Just replied. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:16, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

oops, sorry

yes i was messing around and hit the publish button. didn't really mean to mess up kristie alley page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:5B0:4BD2:D4F8:5833:5CB5:B642:D389 (talk) 03:40, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @2001:5B0:4BD2:D4F8:5833:5CB5:B642:D389: Mistakes happen. If you wish to experiment with editing, I would suggest using a sandbox (click blue text to learn more). --TheSandDoctor (talk) 03:44, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Were you aware...

That only 61 editors have made more edits than you? Color me impressed. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 03:58, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

MjolnirPants - Oh damn... I have almost 300,000 edits? Good lord...... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:01, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Colour me double impressed. That is a LOT of edits (~281000 more than me! ). Keep up the good work! --TheSandDoctor (talk) 04:05, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Heh, well the edit count really isn't impressive knowing that (I'd estimate) about 90% of them are from recent changes patrolling... lol ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:10, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

I did the math, myself, and you have about 25 times as many edits as I do (counting both of my accounts), and I'm a recent changes patroller, too. Though I often forget that I am for weeks on end. Speaking of which... ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 04:17, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

I apparently need a hobby lol ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:33, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Seems to me like you have one already. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 04:38, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Same here MjolnirPants. Did the calculation myself. A little over 15 times my count haha. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 05:23, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

I am sorry I thought the foundation of the act they introduced was the foundation date — Preceding unsigned comment added by 43.243.174.11 (talk) 05:07, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Ahrar al-Sharkas

Somehow Ahrar al-Sharkas and my user page are interlinked and I would like them unlinked along with the artilce deleted, the material in the article isn't even about that group. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Takinginterest01 (talk • contribs) 05:38, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

I just fixed the page moving and redirect issues for you. Please stop blanking the article. If you have issues with it, please discuss those concerns on the article's talk page. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:40, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

This article for one is not relevant at all and two it leads to MY USER PAGE please delete it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Takinginterest01 (talk • contribs) 05:44, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Takinginterest01 - It's been moved back into the article space where it belongs. Your repeated attempts to move and blank it are disruptive - please stop. Why do you want this page deleted exactly? I don't understand... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:49, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

I was writing an article for a group in southern Syria active in 2014, but in my sandbox I was writing an article for a group called the Dzhokhar Dudayev Battalion which is active in Ukraine. I had to leave the Dudayev battalion page in my sandbox because when I tried to publish it, I got an error saying a page for it already exists but I didn't want my work to be deleted so I left it there and put in a request to an administrator to work it out.

Then I began writing about this other group in southern Syria in my sandbox but accidentally copied the Ukrainian group in instead then hit publish and some so I tried to move it back to my user page as I couldnt move it back to sandbox then from there I would just copy and paste the article's code into my sandbox and remove it from my USER PAGE and also to prevent it from being out on Wikipedia as it is all inaccurate, unfinished and an accident. Takinginterest01 (talk) 05:54, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Takinginterest01 - Okay, so it looks like we accidentally combined two articles into one then? Let me look at the history and see what I can do... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:55, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Takinginterest01 - By the way, you know you're able to create more than one sandbox, right? You can use User:Takinginterest01/sandbox for one article, and then just create something like User:Takinginterest01/sandbox2 for your other one... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:59, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

No I didnt know that but thank you for telling me, I think the best resolution to this situation would be to leave the page up but change it to "Dzhokhar Dudayev Battalion" I also dont want any articles leading to my user page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Takinginterest01 (talk • contribs) 06:01, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Takinginterest01 - Oh... well that's easy. Okay, I've moved the page to Dzhokhar Dudayev Battalion for you. All set! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:04, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you so much for all your help Takinginterest01 (talk) 06:05, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Takinginterest01 - Hey, that's what I'm here for. You're quite welcome :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:06, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Oshwah, Ahrar al-Sharkas is now a redirect to User:Takinginterest01/sandbox2. Was that intended? As current it is technically CSD R2 eligible. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 07:05, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. That wasn't supposed to leave a redirect :-). Fixed. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:08, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

No problem! (Unrelated) please check your email too when you get the chance. Thanks! --TheSandDoctor (talk) 07:10, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:12, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Shouldn't Mad Love (Sean Paul song) be at Mad Love (Sean Paul and David Guetta song)?

Hi Oshwah. I see you commented at WP:ANI under Giangkiefer's post and ended up doing a histmerge. However, shouldn't the article history be at Mad Love (Sean Paul and David Guetta song)? David Guetta receives equal credit on the song with Sean Paul. He's not a featured artist. This is why Hayman30 created their separate content at the title crediting both. Ss112 07:20, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Ss112! I just moved the article to the title that was the shortest - I'm sure there's a title that's more proper or better than that one. If there is, anyone is free to discuss it amongst themselves (since there seemed to be disagreement) and move the article to the right title ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:24, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Duong Van Minh

You need to check the falsification of sources that he engages in, and edits such as [19] and [20] to see what this person is like — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bumbubookworm (talk • contribs) 09:18, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Bumbubookworm - That's something you need to discuss with the other user and on the articles' talk pages. Edit warring is not allowed; you need to engage in proper dispute resolution protocol and discuss this content dispute with the user. If they continue to disrupt and fail to discuss things in return, report them to the proper noticeboard - but don't engage in the behavior yourself... :-). Please stop making edits to these articles and start new talk page discussions. Thank you :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:23, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Well I didn't expect any better response from someone who doesn't actually write anything to encyclopedia, nor am I surprised that putting up falsified material on WP is perfectly ok — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bumbubookworm (talk • contribs) 09:26, 23 February 2018 (UTC) Can't you see that I was just minding my own business on Huế and was just removing a trivia section when he decided to follow me around and reinsert it just to try and get a reaction??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bumbubookworm (talk • contribs) 09:35, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

If this is the case, then you're giving the user exactly what they want when you keep repeatedly reverting the article :-). Instead, you need to be discussing the issues with the user on the articles' talk pages or reporting the problem to the proper noticeboard if the issues can't be resolved. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:41, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Ah, very clever, Mr Administrator, so everyone is equal even though one person is deliberately stalking the other person around and reinstating trivia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bumbubookworm (talk • contribs) 09:42, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

I don't understand what you're trying to say. What I'm trying to tell you is that repeatedly reverting these articles and not discussing the issues with the user or reporting the user for disruption isn't going to resolve anything... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:47, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Given that you never actually do any real editing, I'm not surprised you can't tell a clearcut case of stalking to simply reinstate trivia on an article that is otherwise of no interest to the other user. Nor am I surprised that you just simply quote mantras to try and sound smart — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bumbubookworm (talk • contribs) 09:50, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

If you don't feel that my responses and actions are satisfactory and you wish to escalate your concerns about this other user and what's going on, please feel free to file a report at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents and discuss the issue there. This will give other administrators the ability to review the situation. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:08, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

hello — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.208.152.39 (talk) 12:02, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Thefanofwwe

Hi Oshwah. I noticed that you recently blocked User:Thefanofwwe for socking. The new user TheWrestlemaniaKing is making similar edits to my talk page as Thefanofwwe did. I don't know what other editor you determined Thefanofwwe to be a sock of, so could you have a look to see if TheWrestlemaniaKing is also? Thanks, -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:38, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Edgar181 - Can do. I'm taking a look now... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:42, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Edgar181 - There's absolutely no doubt that these accounts are the same person. Shortly after Thefanofwwe is blocked, TheWrestlemaniaKing's account creation is logged. The user made similar messages on your talk page, and even spelled "confirmed" incorrectly the same way and on the same talk page (1, 2). I've blocked the account :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:49, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Also, to answer your other question: the edit made here by Thefanofwwe connects these two accounts to Trevor800, whose blocked as a sock of The abominable Wiki troll - a well-known LTA. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:56, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response and cleanup. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:02, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Edgar181 - My pleasure ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:04, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Question about my link

I have researched and now understand why my link to the Ernest Shackleford play would be considered spam. I do think The existence of the play is relevant information, I just think I chose a bad link in my first editing attempt. Is there a better way to reference the play in an external link edit? Perhaps a link to a review? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobbyterrell (talk • contribs) 12:52, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Bobbyterrell - Do you own or operate this website at all? Are you personally involved with it (or what it represents or the information it gives) in any way? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:09, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

. Half a Wing, Three Engines and a Prayer

I changed the description from, "During WW2", to "Vietnam" describing Brian O'Neill's Military Service. The credible source is...I'm actually his son, Richard. He was born in 1949, so...he didn't serve in WW2. I was going to just write that as a reference but I didn't know if it would be considered serious. Should I just resubmit the change? What kind of language should I use to cite the source as myself?

I assure you he didn't serve in WW2, although whoever created the article had this misconception.

73.112.74.96 (talk) 14:03, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

• For what it's worth, Brian D. O'Neill does explicitly state that he was born in 1949. This would make it impossible for him to have served in WW2. Mr rnddude (talk) 14:09, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Mr rnddude - Good call. I reverted my change to the article - a big thanks to you both for messaging me and letting me know about this :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:12, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Regarding your warning & suggestion

I was about to add references to it but it was reverted before I could do it. Although I'm not sure on what grounds you considered my edits to a Cricket page as non constructive (unless that remark was regarding winter Olympic page). Winter Olympic page is the same. It was reverted before I could add the deleted passage. I did deleted that to see if changes were happening cause the small edit that I was actually trying wasn't happening so I wanted to see if those edits were visible or not. Apparently those edits became visible the next day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.48.58.226 (talk) 14:26, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi there! I reverted this edit, which I believe to have neutral point of view issues. When you add "although none of them have gotten any significant opportunity as of yet" to your edit, it appears to be an injection of opinion - you state that these players haven't gotten significant opportunities to play compared to the others. This is why I reverted this edit. Please let me know if you have any questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:33, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Laudo Hayes Firm Day

This article was deleted several years ago as a blatant hoax. Can you please tell me what the deleted article said? Did it include any sources? Thanks. FloridaArmy (talk) 14:51, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

FloridaArmy - All it says is that Laudo Hayes Firm Day (November 12) is a holiday in Paraguay - nothing else. There are no references. Hope that helps :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:55, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Cool. Thanks. FloridaArmy (talk) 15:07, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

No problem ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:08, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Regarding your warning & suggestion

I'm impressed you managed to judge that without actually knowing about Cricket or hk Cricket. Like I mentioned it was reverted before I could add links. Let see if I could explain what the text was about cause it's not easy to convey anything through text as much as sometimes different meanings can be drawn. I thought you were a troll but it seems you're not. Since 2017 5 teams took 5 Chinese players i.e. 1 each to play in the HK t20 Cricket tournament. That year was the 1st year for them to be included but they never set a foot on the pitch. This year all 5 got an opportunity to be part of the playing XI. It was 1 match for each of them out of the 4 matches their teams played. It wasn't significant as 1 player batted for 1 ball for his team & another was on the non striker's end when he came to bat so he faces 0 balls. The other 3 never made it to the pitch for batting. This usually happens with tail enders who come at the very lower order in batting cause their usual contribution is through bowling & not batting. They did however all fielded when the other teams batted & their teams were fielding but that also wasn't very significant as none of them bowled even a single ball. This was surprising since one of them was invited last year to Australia as a bowler to train with one of their teams. So they're indeed yet to be given any significant opportunity in the tournament while these same players do play in the annual East Asia Cup. Also I'm not aware on how to reply in the thread so I texted a separate message. I tried to find how to stay in the thread but I had better things to do than to keep looking. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.48.58.226 (talk) 15:20, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Regarding your warning & suggestion

I'm impressed you managed to judge that without actually knowing about Cricket or hk Cricket. Like I mentioned it was reverted before I could add links. Let see if I could explain what the text was about cause it's not easy to convey anything through text as much as sometimes different meanings can be drawn. I thought you were a troll but it seems you're not. Since 2017 5 teams took 5 Chinese players i.e. 1 each to play in the HK t20 Cricket tournament. That year was the 1st year for them to be included but they never set a foot on the pitch. This year all 5 got an opportunity to be part of the playing XI. It was 1 match for each of them out of the 4 matches their teams played. It wasn't significant as 1 player batted for 1 ball for his team & another was on the non striker's end when he came to bat so he faces 0 balls. The other 3 never made it to the pitch for batting. This usually happens with tail enders who come at the very lower order in batting cause their usual contribution is through bowling & not batting. They did however all fielded when the other teams batted & their teams were fielding but that also wasn't very significant as none of them bowled even a single ball. This was surprising since one of them was invited last year to Australia as a bowler to train with one of their teams. So they're indeed yet to be given any significant opportunity in the tournament while these same players do play in the annual East Asia Cup.

Berlin

Hi Oshwa, thanks for your attention to the Berlin article. I wonder if you have any advice about how best to resolve the situation there? It seems to me there's a consensus on the talk page, but one editor doesn't acknowledge that, and it doesn't look like further discussion is going to help. I've never had to deal with this before, so I'm not sure what to do next. --IamNotU (talk) 16:27, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi IamNotU! It's good to run into you again :-). If the editor has been notified of the discussion on their user talk page, and (if not an IP) pinged in the talk page discussion directly so they receive an alert (basically, they know about it and they're aware that it exists) - and they continue to revert and change the article and without acknowledging or contributing to the discussion, then the next place for me would be to warn the user, and (if that doesn't work) report them to the appropriate noticeboard (AN3 or WP:ANI) to have the disruption looked into. At that point, if you tried reaching out to them, pinging them in the discussion, and tried to help them understand - all to no avail, it sounds like you've done what you'd reasonably be expected to do and it's time to escalate it. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them and help you with anything you need. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:38, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

They've contributed at length to the talk page, but it's clear at this point that further discussion won't accomplish anything. Their changes consist of replacing most of the photos in the lead photomontage with pictures of war memorials and similar subjects. Four other editors, including me, have tried to explain that we feel it's unbalanced and creates POV problems. But they don't accept the explanations or acknowledge consensus, and continue to argue and revert. We've tried to restore it to previous stable versions, but they always change it again. This has been going on for almost two months now. I think we need to go to another level, but I'm not sure where... --IamNotU (talk) 17:23, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

IamNotU - Are they edit warring? You can report that issue at WP:AN3. If it's not vandalism or blatant disruption but repeated behavior that needs administrator attention, file a report at WP:ANI. Repeated vandalism, blatant trolling, or other clearly bad-faith disruption can be reported at WP:AIV. This sounds like something I'd file an ANI report about if it continues after the article protection expires... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:47, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Well, someone must be edit warring, since you protected the page for it :-) Maybe it's me, I'm not really sure... No one has broken the 3RR. It's not vandalism etc. Ok, I guess I'll try waiting until the protection expires, though I'm pretty sure what will happen. Thanks! --IamNotU (talk) 18:28, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

IamNotU - Oh yeah, there were disputes and edit warring by a few users - not just one ;-). What user are you referring to exactly? (Use {{noping|USERNAME}} if you want to avoid pinging the user in your response). ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:32, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

It's Kharon. There haven't been any disputes or edit warring lately except concerning them. In addition to the photos, there were some edits in the Recreation section that they kept reverting at the same time as the photos, with no explanation, but that eventually stopped. --IamNotU (talk) 19:30, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

IamNotU - Okay, that's good to know. Let's just keep eyes on things after the protection expires and take things from there. If things continue and warnings are left to no avail, file an AN3 or ANI or message me if you're not sure and I can take another look and help you from there. This way, we'll be giving the user a fair chance to correct these concerns while the article is fully protected and we can objectively look at their edits made afterwards to see if anything has improved or changed. If anything, it helps show that we've tried being reasonable, we've given the user fair warnings and notifications of discussions on talk pages, and given the user enough chances to participate and apply consensus. Keep me posted, and don't hesitate to message me if you need help or input with anything else. I'll be happy to lend a hand. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:44, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I expect I'll be back here on Sunday. Have a good weekend! --IamNotU (talk) 21:07, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

IamNotU - You as well! We'll talk soon. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:10, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Account Create and block request

Hey Oshwah, could you make an account with the username LakesideMiner and then block it so I can't be impersonated? I would do it, but I am at school and the school is blocked from account creation. Thanks! Lakeside Out!-LakesideMiners^{Click Here To Talk To Me!} 17:51, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

LakesideMiners - Just create the account yourself :-). Go to Special:CreateAccount, fill everything out and create the new account, then when that's done let me know and I'll soft block it as a doppelgänger for you. Let me know if you have any trouble creating that account and I'll be happy to help. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:54, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

I created the account when I got home. The account I am writing this from is the account I need banned. Thanks. LakesideMiner (talk) 00:12, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

 Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:14, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

What does it mean for an admin to review a User page

Dear User:Oshwah, It has been brought to my attention that you reviewed my User page. I know why you reviewed it, but I still wonder: what was the review, and what were the conclusion and results of said review? Caleb The Wipper (talk) 00:00, 24 February 2018 (UTC)Caleb The Wipper

Hi Caleb The Wipper! Welcome to Wikipedia! Having a page you created marked as "reviewed" simply means that an editor has verified that what you created wasn't vandalism, an attack page, or something that needs to be deleted. You can read more about this by visiting Wikipedia's guidelines on new page reviewing. Please let me know if you have any more questions, and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks for the message, and I hope you have a great weekend :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:02, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your explanation and your review. Caleb The Wipper (talk) 00:43, 24 February 2018 (UTC)Caleb the Wipper

Caleb The Wipper - You bet! Come back any time you have questions or need help, and I'll be happy to led you a hand :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:44, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

James Laxer

Take a minute and think about just how pedantic and officious you're being. Nixon Now (talk) 00:29, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

A URL to a blogspot is not a reliable source, and definitely not a reliable source to show that this BLP is dead. I'm sorry to have to go this far, but protecting this article from BLP violations is the top priority right now. Edits can be requested on the article's talk page. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:31, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

You're making Wikipedia look ridiculous. Personal blogs are rs when it comes to noncontraversial facts about the individuals involved, in this case a son reporting a father's death. Nixon Now (talk) 00:36, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

The source provided is: 1. Not secondary, 2. Not peer reviewed, 3. Not independent from the subject, 4. Not verifiable and could have been made by anyone with access to that blog, the list goes on... Also, that email you pasted here contains someone's personal contact information - I've removed and redacted what you added. Do not add transcripts of private messages like that again, please. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:42, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Obituaries are not academic articles and are not peer reviewed. You're not protecting Wikipedia's reputation, you're undermining it. Nixon Now (talk) 00:45, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Please refer to WP:BLPSOURCE and WP:BLPSPS if you have any questions about what's expected when adding controversial content to biographies of living people. This is a policy that Wikipedia takes very seriously and I have the responsibility to do what's necessary to protect the integrity of the article content and to enforce this policy when it's repeatedly violated. I'm not doing this because it's fun or because I get a kick out of it; I'm doing it because it's policy. I'm doing it because it's the right thing to do. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:56, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Now you're just being self-righteous. You're not doing the right thing, you're being officious, pedantic, and ridiculous and perpetuating something you know is factually incorrect (and no, a broadcast email sent to an entire university population is not private or confidential) Nixon Now (talk) 01:02, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Look, I'm sorry that you're frustrated and that this situation had to occur. Taking action that leads to the frustration of other editors is not something I enjoy doing - I'm sure you know that. I'm not here to butt heads or to "be victorious" over anything - I'm here to enforce policy and with the project's best interest as my top priority. I've provided you with all of the relevant pages that clearly outline the expectations of adding content to BLP articles and how to verify that your edits and references are in compliance with these policies. My talk page is always open to you, and you're welcome to message me here at any time and regardless of the situation or the issue at-hand - I honestly and truly mean that. Additionally, I will always treat you with respect and be willing to assist you regardless of any frustration or disagreements. I'm happy to answer any questions that you have regarding Wikipedia's BLP policy and what references are acceptable to establish verifiability with the content being added. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:17, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Will I be Blocked?

On my talk page, User:John from Idegon edited a section that someone else started. Because I wanted to address him alone, I copy-pasted his message onto a new section. He was so furious, he threatened to block me. Is what I did a valid reason to block me. please note that this is the third time he has threatened to block me. Caleb The Wipper (talk) 03:03, 24 February 2018 (UTC)Caleb The Wipper

Caleb The Wipper - No, I don't see a reason to block you...... but why are you asking John from Idegon not to revert any more edits you make to Wikipedia? And why are you promising to comply with Wikipedia's policies (things you must always do here) in exchange for him not to revert you? Are you saying that if he doesn't comply that you're not going to do these things? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:08, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Dear Oshwah, if User: John from Idegon does not promise that, then I would have only kept the promises that are required by Wikipedia's guidelines. However, I did change my promises from being conditional to being guaranteed after reading his response that claimed that I might be trying to promote CHS. Just because B would be true if A is true does not mean that B will be false if A is false. What do you think I should do about User:John from Idegon's threats and reversions?Caleb The Wipper (talk) 03:18, 24 February 2018 (UTC)Caleb The Wipper

Caleb The Wipper - You're making absolutely no sense... Usually when I offer to make a deal with someone, I promise to to uphold my end of the bargain if they promise to do the same. Depending on how to word your "proposition" and what you "propose", it can be fairly interpreted that if the other person refuses, they you refuse do the same. You admittedly messed around with John from Idegon's talk page by copying his message into a new thread, then you message him to try and negotiate a deal where you say you'll (in a nutshell) obey Wikipedia's policies if they never revert you again... yeah I honestly don't blame him for being a little bit frustrated with you at the moment... Instead of going on about John from Idegon and what-not, why not just leave the guy alone, man? What's the deal? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:38, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Oshwah, part of my frustration with this the 14 notifications I've gotten over it. Literally, I went to pick up my son and by the time I got home, I've got pings up the yingyang. The article in question is a pile of steamy crap. It's been on my list for 6 years, and every effort I've ever made to improve it has been slowly eroded away by SPA student editors. I decided yesterday I needed a break from the other extremely frustrating kerfuffle I've been embroiled in since the 1st of the year (I'm sure you know what I'm speaking of), only to arrive home to yet another problem revolving around an editor refusing to understand one of our most basic policies, V. I'm done but I'm gonna tell you, if he keeps pinging me, I'm going postal. (Figuratively) John from Idegon (talk) 04:29, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

I assume we're talking about Carmel High School (Indiana). In that case, yes - Caleb The Wipper you're adding unreferenced content repeatedly to this article. Please don't make any further edits it until you discussed your changes on the article's talk page here first. These edits need an explanation. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:06, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

John from Idegon - I've protected the article, and Caleb The Wipper - I understand and believe that you're a new user and that you'd do well here after some correction, assistance, and mentoring - but I need to tell you... it looks you're starting to wear the patience of other editors here (one example being John from Idegon obviously) - I urge you to slow down, to listen to others and let them help you, and ask for help if you're unsure of what to do. If someone objects to edits you're making to an article, stop and discuss it. Don't keep adding it back. And for God's sake, retract that "deal" you're offering to John from Idegon on his talk page. That's just gotta stop... I'm available any time if either of you have any questions for me. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:21, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Protection or not, I won't edit Carmel High School (Indiana) until the 23rd of march of 2018. this is meant to prioritize other users' edits over mine. Also, does deleting a deal count as retracting it? because if so then I just retracted the deal. Caleb The Wipper (talk) 02:13, 25 February 2018 (UTC)Caleb The Wipper

(talk page watcher)@Caleb The Wipper: Please see User talk:Caleb The Wipper#Removing posts from other editors' user talk pages and do anything like this anymore, OK? Moreover, there shouldn't be any need for you to make "personal deals" with other editors; just do your best to try and edit in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines. If you do that and make mistakes, then other editors will be more than happy to WP:AGF and likely try and help you sort things out. If you have a disagreement over content for other editors, then follow WP:DR. It's not going to make any difference as to how many personal deals you make with other editors if your edits are considered by the community as a whole to be inappropriate. The only deal you need to really make is to be WP:HERE and edit according to relevant policies and guidelines. If, however, you decide to choose a path that leads others to feel that you're WP:NOTHERE, then you're going to find yourself constantly having problems and most likely are going to end up being blocked by some administrator for one reason or another. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:50, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

A page protection request I made...

Hi. I made a request for a small bit of protection for the Covington KY page, due to constant vandalism which involves to exact same issue each time from IP users. I really can not understand how, looking how many times this issue has taken place, and how often I have personally fixed it, does not constitute there being enough activity. The problem is that someone keeps changing the name of the actual, current mayor of Covington to that of a local bartender and musician. It has been happening for at least two years. And it has been changed for as long as well. Another admin called it vandalism. Is it really acceptable for this sort of obnoxious vandalism to keep occurring?

The people doing this have completely erased all citation links from the page while changing the name of the mayor from the real mayor to that of the bartender. I honestly thought Wikipedia had higher standards than this. I won't lie- I'm pretty vexed by this. I live in the city that this page is about. I try to help keep its image as nice as possible. And I have even met Kyle Knapp (who is seriously not the mayor) and I have a lot of mutual friends with the guy. I assure you that he is not mayor, and I assure you that the IP vandalism will continue. So I once again implore you to please think rethink this. All I am asking for is low level protection to keep the IP alterations from taking place. I counted six times on one page that this has happened. Why is that not enough activity to warrant such simple protection? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Digitalcomplex (talk • contribs) 08:52, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Digitalcomplex - We're talking about Covington, Kentucky, correct? If so, I've added pending changes protection to it for two months. Please let me know if I can do anything else for you. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:23, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

How did you find the vandalism so quickly?

Hi Oshwah, just wondering how you noticed the dodgy edits so quickly on the Hanging Rock article yesterday. You reverted the changes within a minute or so of them happening. I guess there's software somewhere alerting you to possible cases, but in that case I'm curious to know where I can just a little about what it is and how it works. My best, A.

Aingotno (talk) 13:31, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Ah, this is what I was looking for.

Thanks by the way for the ongoing work, comrade. Aingotno (talk) 14:12, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Aingotno - Yup, that's the place! Let me know if you have any more questions or need anything else. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:48, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Proof

It will be interesting to see your prooof that she did not run away. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.170.187.17 (talk) 13:41, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

No answer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.170.187.17 (talk) 14:28, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) How arrogant! Your first message was less than an hour before this. Do you imagine that you have a Service Level Agreement with Oshwah or something? 15-minute response time perhaps? Good grief. DBaK (talk) 14:33, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Not only that, the burden of proof lies with the OP to provide a reliable source for the statement made at the article. Also, Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~). Eagleash (talk) 14:44, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Bhuvneshwar Kumar

The change have done was correct so please dnt revert it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hitesh singh poshwal (talk • contribs) 15:26, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) Note: This seems to relate to Bhuvneshwar Kumar and the editor has been blocked. Eagleash (talk) 16:20, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

No revert warring

Dear Oshwah,

There was some back and forth concerning the proper name for this queen (Blanche vs Blanca). The other person, however, seems to have understood that the correct common name for this queen is Blanca, as evidenced by the English-language publications listed as references. Since this other person conceded that full publications constitute reliable resources, I waited a few days, informed the person that if I did not hear from her/him, I would move the title to "Blanca". I have not heard, and so I moved the page. Please see the discussion under Talk. Poplar838 (talk) 15:56, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Poplar838, and thanks for leaving me a message here. Okay, give me a few minutes to finish a few things up and I'll take a look at the discussion. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:02, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

List of the Dominicans President

Good afternoon:

The main reason I did edit was that the list included historical figures who were not presidents of the Dominican Republic. The list included Nuñez de Cáceres who was a temporary president of short-lived Republic, El Haiti Español. And then, it added Boyer and Pierre who were the presidents of Haiti and during the occupation of the eastern part of the island. The Dominican Republic was born as a political state in 1844 so to include historical figures who played an essential role in the politics of the island before 1844 is completely wrong from the historical perspective. Again, the Dominican Republic constituted a political state in 1844. If Wikipedia wants to highlight the critical roles these figures played, it is essential, but to name the as the presidents of the Dominican Republic before 1844 is misleading information. That was the reason for my editing. I research the politics of the Dominican Republic and Haiti. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Virgiliooaran24 (talk • contribs) 17:06, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

James Laxer's death

Hello, I see there has been a dispute regarding listing James Laxer as dead on his Wikipedia article.

I am James Laxer's grandson, Nathaniel Laxer, and I can most definitely assure you that James Laxer is unfortunately not with us anymore.

Now I understand that Wikipedia has intense rules regarding this, and with good reason, but I fail to see how a family announcement from his eldest son, a very reliable primary source on this matter, is insufficient to say that he is dead on Wikipedia. My father, Michael, who made the announcement, is a well known political activist and writer in his own right.

There has not been an official obituary yet, as there has not been a funeral planned yet, due to the fact that James died overseas and very suddenly, complicating and prolonging matters.

This message is not meant as a direct "call out" or anything of you or your moderating decisions, I am simply confused as to why the information is not being allowed to be updated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Papa Meme (talk • contribs) 20:55, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Papa Meme, and thank you for leaving me a message with your questions and concerns. Wikipedia has very strict policies and guidelines regarding articles that are biographies of living people and how to identify references are acceptable to cite as verifiable proof. To explain briefly: Wikipedia content (especially if contentious, controversial, or likely to be challenged) requires the inclusion and citation of a reliable source. We hold these standards very high and enforce these requirements very strictly in order to avoid having untrue, hoax, or unverified content being published as true content. Wikipedia is about verifiability, not about truth. It's better for the content on an article to be slightly (or even significantly) "out of date" but completely referenced, verified, and true - than to have content that is believe to be completely "up-to-date" with the latest information and be unreferenced, poorly referenced, unverifiable, and untrue. Once a reliable source is publish and found, the article can be unprotected and the information added. However, we must have an acceptable and reliable source first before this happens. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:37, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi again, thank you for your quick response and willingness to respond to my concerns.

However, I am still at a loss as to how a statement by the son of James Laxer, Michael Laxer (who himself has a Wikipedia page in which he is identified as James's son: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Laxer ), whether on his blog or his Facebook post is an unreliable source in this context. I can definitely see how these sources could be obviously troublesome or unverified in other contexts, but within this context, this just seems like too strict of an interpretation of the rules.

Unfortunately in this context, at least to me, right now, Wikipedia's article on James Laxer has information that is, frankly, incorrect and could cause misinformation and confusion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Papa Meme (talk • contribs) 22:05, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Papa Meme - You mentioned something important in your response - the fact that these sources are potentially problematic are one (of many) reasons why we cannot accept facebook posts, twitter links, blog posts, and other social sites to assert verifiability and that the content on the biography of a living person should be changed to state that the person is dead. These sources are not secondary nor are they independent of the subject, they're not peer reviewed for accuracy and verification, and while these accounts may be from close relatives or sources that know this person, we obviously cannot verify that these blog posts or social media updates were actually made by the owner of the account. Wikipedia has been in the unfortunate situation of having deaths be added to BLP articles as apart of large-scale hoaxes and trolling a number of times (and some of which that caused controversy and other major issues as a consequence). Because of this, we have strict requirements for what sources can be used to support content like this on BLPs and we scrutinize and enforce these requirements to protect the article from such possible events. Even if it means that the content isn't "up-to-date" for a few days or even a week, we'd rather be late with updating such content if it means that we've waited for reliable sources to be published and found and that the changes are credible. Remember: Wikipedia's content should always reflect verfiability, not truth :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:21, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello, The news of James's death is now reaching established media.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/james-laxer-ndp-dead-1.4551337

I am sure this source is sufficiently, verifiable to allow the Wikipedia article to be properly updated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Papa Meme (talk • contribs) 21:44, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Shields & Yarnell External link deletion

S&Y's "Robots Eating Breakfast" skit is classic, and difficult to find. Wikipedia's S&Y External link seemed a good place to provide it. Removal of the link seems a disservice to wikipedia readers. Please check the (non-commercial) link before you are so quick to act. https://superradnow.wordpress.com/2011/08/03/shields-and-yarnell/

I will not pursue this matter further.

RW - ((I am not logged in) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.183.125.142 (talk) 23:09, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

What is your job?

I wonder what your job is (on Wikipedia) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:387:1:817:0:0:0:73 (talk) 00:11, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm a volunteer just like everybody else here - that's it :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:23, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

And to show the community what a great head of hair looks like. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:29, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

I'll accept that as part of my role here, sure ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:31, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

RevDel

Could you delete [[REDACTED - Oshwah] this edit]? The IP user added porn images. L293D (☎ • ✎) 00:41, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

L293D -  Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:46, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Edit to my talk page

Hey Oshwah! I saw that you reverted an edit to my talk page. What was it? I can’t see any difference in the two versions. Also, it appears that my page is not archiving properly. Did you or your crazy hair have anything to do with this?Lakeside Out!-LakesideMiners^{Click Here To Talk To Me!} 00:56, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

LakesideMiners - I reverted edits made by a troll who was making changes to your page text. The diff is here. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:01, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Alex Ko

Hi Oshwah, I could use some help here. See the edit summaries, twin accounts removing templates, and the links to Harper Collins offered as a source. Thanks, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:09, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

I've blocked the user and semi-protected the page. Let me know if you need me to look at anything else, and I'll be happy to help. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:12, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks--looks related to 66.65.42.40 (talk · contribs). The templates are pertinent--very little there is substantiated by those links. Thanks, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:14, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Any time; always happy to lend a hand ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:15, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

I think you forgot to put back the citation templates...I didn't want to re-add them in case there was a reason. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 03:16, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

HickoryOughtShirt?4 - Just fixed it ;-). ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:19, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Cool, and that IP is now blocked too ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:20, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Much thanks. I've left a note at my page for talk voyeurs, that the links to a publisher's website are insufficient, and the article needs to be refreshed with real sources. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:21, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

You bet ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:37, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Alina_Zagitova

I have added the Olympic Athletes from Russia flag to the following page Alina_Zagitova There was previously the Russian flag in the info box section of repr but I remove that due to the Olympic committees ruling that Russia will not be recognised can you please take a look So that any edit warring can be prevented as I believe that the Russian flag should not be there Since she is officially not representing Russia. Thanks TucsonDavidU.S.A. 04:52, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

TucsonDavid - Seems fine to me so far. If people change or revert it, discuss it with them and try and come to an agreement. Just keep eyes on things and take any issues as they go if that situation arises - nothing else needs to be done in the meantime ;-). If things get out of control or if things become disruptive, let me know and I'll be happy to take another look. Let me know if you have any questions or if you need anything else - I'll be happy to help. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:04, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Hey Oshwah,

I do not have a source because I not find any sites that said anything notorious about his temper. I wrote about his fiery temper on 'Alexander Zverev Jr' wikipedia page, due to my observation on his matches, where he loses his cool and smashes his racquets in a lot of his matches. I hope that you can understand my side of view here.

Cameron — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.216.201.182 (talk) 05:48, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

VJ-Yugo

Hi Oshwah, I saw you blocked a sock of Vj-Yugo. I suspect there is another sock of them around [21]. Same kind of edit with this [22]. Ktrimi991 (talk) 07:46, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Oshwah, since there is some suspicious activity by certain new accounts, I asked for a CU to look for other possible socks apart from Honk-honk-honk [23]. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 19:48, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Ktrimi991 - If there are suspicions with this new account, lets create a new SPI here - follow the instructions, create a new SPI with the master account name as "VJ-Yugo", and add the evidence to the SPI so that it can be looked into. Let me know if you have any questions. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:48, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Yep, I opened a SPI and the account was confirmed [24]. Too bad VJ-Yugo insists on that kind of behaviour. Thanks Oshwah. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 20:01, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

itold the truth..M more even..M

whether you believe is UR choice..<M Now..M Now Goodbye..MM — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.123.150.84 (talk) 14:47, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Revert for "Blanca of Navarre" follow-up

Greetings, Have you had the time to check Talk at the entry for Blanca/Blanche of Navarre? I can see that you were very busy yesterday. You will see in Talk that the person who was reverting my change came to agree that "Blanca" is correct. Thank you.Poplar838 (talk) 16:02, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Poplar838 - Hi there! I haven't yet. Are we referring to the Blanche of Navarre, Queen of Castile article? I remember resolving a dispute / issue on this article regarding this person's name ("Blanca" vs "Blance") and other things... what's going on now? What do I need to look at? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:55, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Good to hear from you. You did revert "Blanca of Navarre, Queen of Castile" to "Blanche of Navarre, . . .", but if you look at the discussion under Talk, you will see that the person who was reverting the entry to "Blanche" finally understood that "Blanca" is her common name in English. The only two studies of this figure in English (cited in References), call her "Blanca", so it is logical that the Wikipedia entry also use "Blanca" in the title. Please revert to "Blanca". Thank you.Poplar838 (talk) 23:20, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Poplar838 - I do see the talk page discussion here and I see that Adamgarrigus agrees with you, but the person you were having that page move war with (Surtsicna) - has not participated in the discussion and I do not see any agreement from this user about moving the page to this title. Can you include him in this discussion and work things out with him as well? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:26, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi again. What is the mechanism to do that? Since I asked Surtsicna to respond, and wrote that non-response would indicate agreement, I thought this was over with. But am happy to include this person if I knew how.Poplar838 (talk) 23:40, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Poplar838 - I've already pinged Surtsicna on this discussion herein my last response above this one, but you can ping the user in the actual talk page discussion (which is something you should do) by entering {{ping|Surtsicna}} in a response and it will notify the user of your mention of him. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:43, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Done. I read instructions for altering articles, but I apparently missed the part about communicating with other editors. Where do I find that? I appreciate your help.Poplar838 (talk) 23:59, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Poplar838 - Have you gone through and completed Wikipedia's new user tutorial? Because if you haven't, you're missing out on a lot of things that you should know about, and this tutorial guides you through all of it (and is where you're taught how to ping, communicate, and collaborate with others). Go through and complete it - seriously. You're cutting yourself short if you don't, and the tutorial does actually show you important places and things to know. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:04, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

I saw your note on the Talk page. I hope this can be resolved soon.Poplar838 (talk) 00:03, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm sure it will be. I'm here should anyone need help, so fear not ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:06, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Well, I thought I had done that, but clearly, I did not expect to get embroiled in this discussion, and then I have to say, I got flustered. Will read again. BTW, where do you see that Adamgarrigus agrees with me?

It looks like his response here does this? I could be wrong though... in fact, I'd respond to that discussion and verify that this is what he's saying. I don't want to assume anything - especially if others don't see that clearly. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:23, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello again. Two things: Surtsicna seems to have withdrawn from the conversation on this topic; and I thought the suggestion about contacting Adamgarrigus is a good one. But according to messaging that pops up, if I respond to his 2012 comment, all subsequent changes will be reverted. That would be a mess. So why don't we ping him instead? I would ping him myself, but now I am afraid to move without advice. I do not know what his idea might be, as the discussion you cite is about whether or not to call this person Queen of Castile, not about Blanca/Blanche. At the point that he commented, the name Blanche was being used. But my guess is that he would go with the usage in the two English-language publications about this personnage, which is to call her Blanca.Poplar838 (talk) 15:34, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Monotreme edit

Sorry about the edit. Just some honest confusion about why marsupials (warm-blooded creatures, therefore being an exothermic reaction) are endotherms. The last section on this page explains my confusion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.116.0.229 (talk • contribs) 25 February 2018 (UTC)

References

Newchic

I think this could become a page of relevance if it is about Newchic/Alphabetrade. What do You think? --Manorainjan 19:33, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Manorainjan! If you're talking about starting the article about this company, make sure that you read through Wikipedia's notability guidelines on organizations and companies, make sure that you fully understand it, and check that this company meets these guidelines before you decide to proceed and begin writing the article. Otherwise, the article (in one process or another) may get deleted and you'll be left disappointed and after spending numerous hours of time on it - all for nothing. Save yourself that disappointment - make sure the article subject is notable before you begin putting any time into creating or expanding it. Let me know if you have any questions or need any help with understanding Wikipedia's notability guidelines and I'll be happy to help. Good luck to you and happy editing ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:33, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

A user who shouldn't have rollback

Bless you, Oshwah, but I started a thread here [25], and realized after the fact that you bestowed rollback on this user. Please feel free to chime in. Cheers, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 01:24, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

• Just letting you know that I revoked rollback and Swarm revoked PCR. I know you are normally less active on weekends, so I didn't want the thread to go on forever for that user (and I hope you know I would normally never undo an action of yours without consulting you first ). Anyway, all the best! TonyBallioni (talk) 01:58, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

This was a good call - the user was clearly having issues associated with the role. Thank you Bob for filing the ANI, and thank you TonyBallioni for taking action :-). ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:19, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

BBC IP vandal

Hello Oshwah, The BBC IP vandal 86.8.33.92 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is now block evading by using IP 86.9.95.201 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) from exactly the same area of the UK and inserting the usual unsourced changes to BBC articles. With thanks for your help, David, David J Johnson (talk) 12:44, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

David J Johnson - Blocked the IP for 36 hours for block evasion. Let me know if you see any more and I'll be happy to take a look. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:35, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

• Many thanks, but they have now emerged as 62.172.166.201 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) with exactly the same edits as previous - all of which have been reverted by several editors. Regards, David J Johnson (talk) 19:54, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

19 kids and counting

I just happened to see on-line that Joy-anna and Austin had a son, his name was in the article. I edited "19 kids and counting" page to show that they had a son, his name and DOB. I'm not techno-geeky enough to change the color in the "grandchildren" chart or how to cite sources, but I would not have made the changes if I hadn't seen them on-line.

rachRach0581 (talk) 15:39, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

hello

Am new here need help to edit my page and stuff thank you can in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rawle 55 (talk • contribs) 23:58, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Try the Teahouse for help. Regards, User:TheDragonFire300. (Contact me | Contributions). This message was left at 00:05, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

That was not me - I have never been to that page you reference below

Hello, I'm Oshwah. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Guajome Park Academy— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 16:21, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Guajome Park Academy. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Snowolf How can I help? 18:57, 26 January 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jerryldixon (talk • contribs)

Jerryldixon - These warnings don't appear to be on your account's talk page - are you sure you didn't see those on the IP's talk page that you are logging in through? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:58, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Hi Jerryldixon. Perhaps you've been editing while not logged in to your current account. If that's the case, then any edits made will be credited to the IP address being used. The warning you've referenced above seems to have been added by Oshwah to User talk:99.203.11.32. Maybe that was you. You don't have to say (and probably shouldn't say either way) for sure; I'm just offering you a possible explanation. If by chance it was you, then you should try to edit while logged in whenever possible. An IP address may be shared by multiple people, but your registstered account is supposed only be used by you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:06, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

No subject

I think I might have accidentally deleted all of the article 98.109.25.211 (talk) 02:40, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Unblock request

I sincerely apologise in regards to the block, I believe I have some good to offer the community and I would like to continue to partake in that. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.223.90 (talk) 04:33, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

C'mon

C'mon Oshwa. You know as well as I do... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.13.229.105 (talk) 04:41, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Baaghi real edit has been done

Hello. I am djherosamar and you have wdit its real budget 37 crore but not box office so please do not change ok. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djherosamar (talk • contribs) 05:16, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Talk comments by IP at Tabarnia

Hello Oshwah, How are you? I noticed that you removed comments by an IP at the talk page of Tabarnia (diff) I am also involved in that discussion, I have asked for WP:NOFORUM to be observed. is there another reason for the revert of the IP? Regards. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 10:10, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Crystallizedcarbon - It was in error. My apologies. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:56, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Not a problem, the long edit summary due to the poorly chosen title for the section makes the mistake easy to make. Regards. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 11:25, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

User:Sport and politics

User:Sport and Politics came back and responded to our only warning. The response she gave was not in keeping with the warning and I was left with no choice but to block her. Canterbury Tail talk 14:03, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Canterbury Tail - Sigh... Well, we tried. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:07, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Now asking for an unblock as she doesn't get why she was blocked. Canterbury Tail talk 14:08, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Fun! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:15, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Levi Sanders

I see this is redirected to Bernie Sanders#Personal life. Is there a deleted article hidden underneath the redirect? Thanks. FloridaArmy (talk) 15:14, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi there FloridaArmy, there does not appear to be an article "hidden underneath" nor does any page with that title appear to have ever existed prior. (You can see the log for your self here). I also checked for an undeleted (just overwritten) article underneath and did not come up with anything (see here). Might I ask what made you wonder if there was? I hope that this was of assistance. If you have any more questions, please feel free to let us know. --All the best, TheSandDoctor (talk) (talk page stalker)

Thanks very much. Levi is the son of Bernie Sanders. Levi's step-sister is running for mayor of Burlington, Vermont. They're in the news and I was considering creating an article or perhaps redirecting to the congressional seat.. Probably a redirect to the race would be better but I doubt one exists. I though a previous article might have existed. I know "not-inherited" is a concern. If an article had existed I would rather use that then start fresh. I said hidden because if an article is deleted and then redirected I don't think an indication that there is deleted content is left behind. This is unfortunate. FloridaArmy (talk) 16:12, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

@FloridaArmy: Each article has a "View logs for this page" link under the title. Clicking it will indicate if any deletions have taken place. Example --NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:21, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

NeilN, what do you mean by "under the title"? I'm not seeing a link for view logs. You mean there is a tool to search by title name? That's the above link? Thanks. FloridaArmy (talk) 16:34, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

@FloridaArmy: Sorry, it's on the history tab like here and here. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:54, 27 February 2018 (UTC)