User talk:Oshwah

Let's chat

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

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

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

Archives
Older Year 2007 Year 2008 Year 2009 Year 2010 Year 2011 Year 2012 Year 2013 Year 2014 Year 2015 Year 2015 (Jan - Jun) July 2015 August 2015 September 2015 October 2015 November 2015 December 2015 Year 2016 January 2016 February 2016 March 2016 April 2016 May 2016 June 2016 July 2016 August 2016 September 2016 October 2016 November 2016 December 2016 Year 2017 January 2017 February 2017 March 2017 April 2017 May 2017 June 2017 July 2017 August 2017 September 2017 October 2017 November 2017 December 2017 Year 2018 January 2018 February 2018 March 2018 April 2018 May 2018 June 2018 July 2018 August 2018 September 2018 October 2018 November 2018 December 2018 Year 2019 January 2019 February 2019 March 2019 April 2019 May 2019 June 2019 July 2019 August 2019 September 2019 October 2019 November 2019 December 2019 Year 2020 January 2020 February 2020 March 2020 April 2020 May 2020 June 2020 July 2020 August 2020 September 2020 October 2020 November 2020 December 2020 Year 2021 January 2021 February 2021 March 2021 April 2021 May 2021 June 2021 July 2021 August 2021 September 2021 October 2021 November 2021 December 2021 Year 2022 January 2022 February 2022 March 2022 April 2022 May 2022 June 2022 July 2022 August 2022 September 2022 October 2022 November 2022 December 2022 Year 2023 January 2023 February 2023 March 2023 April 2023 May 2023 June 2023 July 2023 August 2023 September 2023 October 2023 November 2023 December 2023 Year 2024 January 2024 February 2024 March 2024 April 2024 May 2024 June 2024 July 2024 August 2024 September 2024 October 2024 November 2024 December 2024

Table of contents

Overflow at your admintools page

Dear User:Oshwah. Your page User:Oshwah/Dashboard has appeared at Category:Pages_where_template_include_size_is_exceeded. You could help us to empty this maintenance category by replacing the former templates with {{admin dashboard/light}}. This template provides the same functionality, but is far less prone to overflow. Thanks in advance. Pldx1 (talk) 08:27, 1 April 2016 (UTC) By the way, fixing a wrong end of section some messages above. Pldx1 (talk) 08:31, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Pldx1. Cool, I'll give it a shot. Thanks :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:38, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

im adria72 sorry for the octopus  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adria72 (talk • contribs) 09:37, 9 April 2016 (UTC) 

Enquire about your movie article

""Hi I have seen your article on the Argentinian film Inercia. Can you please help me find out where I can get this movie from?" Soorajkr (talk) 15:40, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Soorajkr! I wasn't a major contributor to that article, and locating a copy of the film isn't something I can provide you help with, unfortunately. Sorry, and good luck! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:33, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

je suis Charlie

Being a Muslim and a human i have been taught to never ridicule any one or their religion. it is immoral and cheap to do so. the cartoon image disrespect or Prophet Muhammad Sallal la hu Alaihe Wasalam. thats why i have removed the picture. i hope you will respect my religion as we respect yours! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jiajiajiajia123 (talk • contribs)

Jiajiajiajia123 - You're pushing a viewpoint that is not neutral. This is why I (as well as other users, such as Yamaguchi先生 and C.Fred) reverted your changes and removal of content. Wikipedia is not censored, and your removal of content is disruptive. Please let me know if you have any more questions. I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks for understanding :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:06, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

je suis Charlie

awaiting a reply — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jiajiajiajia123 (talk • contribs)

Jiajiajiajia123 - See my above response. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:07, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for wasting too much time on #wikipedia-en ^connect and drinking too much beer. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

—k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 20:06, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

K6ka - NOOO!!!! SAY IT ISN'T SO!!! :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:30, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

No subject

Hi how are you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.30.38.145 (talk • contribs)

What did my kids do this time?

Hello Oshwah

I'm attempting to figure out exactly what my students at 75.144.241.185 are up to. We're a middle school and this type of thing might happen from time to time but I can't exactly tell what it was that happened and I'm hoping for some details from you if you are able to provide them.

Thanks in advance! Iamblakeh (talk) 22:46, 1 April 2016 (UTC)iamBlakeH

Iamblakeh - You can visit Special:Contributions/75.144.241.185 to see the contributions made from the IP. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:27, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Bemrose School

removed unsourced material, most of it PR puffery, as per the tag at the top of the article, which was placed there in August last year (not by me)88.144.49.107 (talk) 01:04, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Ah, got'cha. Sorry, I didn't notice your edit summary. Just make sure that your removal also doesn't accidentally remove good content, such as section headers or formatting (your edit here did just that). Other than that, you're good to go. Thanks for leaving me a message, and I apologize for the confusion. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:31, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Hypogonadism Edit

Hi Oshwah,

I deleted 2 lines of the page that had been added today, but were completely incoreect and talked of a made up disease, clearly using somebodies name. I put "deletion of vandalism" in the reason for deleting, so I am not sure why you coulndt see this. I will go ahead and delete it again, as it is very wrong thank you 77.100.71.193 (talk) 01:23, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Indeed! You're totally right. I apologize for the mistake. Thanks for letting me know :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:41, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Colin Smith wikepedia page

Hi yes, as I noted on the edit note, I am Colin Smith's daughter, Peta Smith born 1962. My brother Stuart was born in 1965 and my sister Kerry was born in 1972. Colin and Brenda (and us) emigrated to Australia in June 1972. I changed the word "daughter" to "three children" as we all emigrated.

Not sure what source to put, but wondering what the source was that said there was only me who emigrated with my parents and not my brother and sister.

Also need to let you know that my father, Colin Smith, died on 21st December 2014, so that needs to be updated.

I googled my father as I was looking for a "NUTS" article which had some coaching information I wanted. There are a number of "Vale Colin Smith" links on wiki so perhaps one of them can be used as a source to prove the authenticity of Colin's death?

I am not an editor. I just saw the information was incorrect.

Thanking you

Peta Smith

(and just to let you know I do donate to support Wiki when I get the annual pop up message!!) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.148.24.179 (talk • contribs)

Hi, and thanks for leaving me a message with your concerns. Indeed, content on Wikipedia (especially content that involves biographies of living people) must be cited with a reliable source if changes are made like the edit you made here. I am not able to verify your claims regarding your personal relation to the article subject, and such claims can constitute original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. If you have further concerns, you can contact the volunteer response team. They have the tools and training to verify your identity and assist you with your concerns. Thanks again for your message :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:04, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Fast reverts

Any trick to those lightning fast reverts? I got the MultiLink (right-click-drag = open links) plug in, but even that is slower than you were. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 03:56, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi EvergreenFir! There actually isn't; I just noticed that the user was making mass changes with the same edit summary (which was pushing a point of view and causing disruption). From there, I literally just opened the user's contributions page and quickly clicked each rollback link next to every edit until all of the user's mass changes were reverted. I find that doing that is much faster and more efficient than using any tools or scripts. Plus, it assures that I roll back only what's needed and leave any good contributions alone (in this case, there was none... haha). Anyways, that's what I do when I perform mass rollbacks like that. Hope this answers your question :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:09, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Geez! Quick clicker! Well thank you for getting those rollbacks! EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 04:13, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks EvergreenFir! And you bet! :-D ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:15, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

No subject

If you are for real, and not part of the "charade," then go to http://www.neilraymondbradford.com/#!oxley-gatton-murders/c1ofd and remove any reference to the "forged" and "falsified" documents. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neilbrad (talk • contribs)

Talkback

Hello, Oshwah. You have new messages at Senergyoni's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

05:28, 2 April 2016 (UTC)Senergyoni

No subject

Hi Oshwah, I didn't mean to remove any content from Sarah-Louise PlattHiptoyourjive (talk) 06:29, 2 April 2016 (UTC), only to fix a few typos and grammatical inconsistencies. I'm sorry if something got removed by mistake; I was using my phone to do it and the interface was jumpy. I've gone back and fixed 2 of the typos with a detailed explanation. I hope this is correct. Please let me know if not. Thanks, hiptoyourjive — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiptoyourjive (talk • contribs)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Well down, Oshwah. You have receive a Anti-Vandalism Barnstar for doing a good editor! I'm proud of you. Keep it up and do it again in the next future. Senergyoni 06:59, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Senergyoni! Thank you for taking the time to leave me this barnstar, and for your kind words. I've been busy lately, but I definitely find time to vandal patrol and keep Wikipedia squeaky clean! I hope to run into you again soon. It was a pleasure to meet you, and I wish you happy editing! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:16, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Oshwah. You have new messages at Senergyoni's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

07:17, 2 April 2016 (UTC)Senergyoni

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank for reverting the biographicies of people and thanks for reverting all those violated stuffs. Proud of you! Senergyoni 07:25, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Senergyoni! Again, I thank you for the wikilove and the recognition! Much appreciated :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:26, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

You're welcome man. But can you help by deleting the block section. I try to remove because ot offensive but it says unconstructive.07:28, 2 April 2016 (UTC)Senergyoni

Senergyoni - Where exactly are you referring to? Can you provide me a link to the location, or the page you're talking about? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:31, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Your user talk page, Blocked section, please remove it, because is offensive remark08:46, 2 April 2016 (UTC)Senergyoni

Senergyoni - There is nothing offensive about that section on my talk page. It was a simple April Fools joke made by K6ka, someone I talk to and edit with frequently. He's perfectly fine to leave me messages like this (it's actually nice to have some humor left on my talk page for a change), and I trust him. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:51, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

No one checks the datestamp or have a sense of humour, do they? :( —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 12:57, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

K6ka - He was a confirmed sock puppet of Profile101, so it's moot now :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:00, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Unconstructive?

If you can understand the Filipino language, you'll find that the one that is considered as unconstructive is the previous post that appeared on the site before mine. Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.34.246.2 (talk • contribs)

Hi, and thanks for leaving me a message! I went ahead and deleted the content from the article completely. Thanks again for the message, and I apologize for any confusion. Happy editing! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:03, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Psychology of art

There are people who think that the Mona Lisa is Leonardo's mother Caterina in a distant memory[1]. This theory is based also on Sigmund Freud's theory and on psychology of art. Psarto (talk) 11:37, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	I'm proud of you Oshwah for helping me. Keep it up in the future in the matured and good behaviour. And good luck to you and well done in your editing! Senergyoni 12:27, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks again! :-D ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:47, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Barnstars for you!

		The Multiple Barnstar
		Three barnstars for everyone who fought the vandalism at Paint River. The Teamwork Barnstar for working together as a team to fight the vandal. The Minor Barnstar since rollbacks are, (for some reason) marked as minor edits. The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar for fighting the vandal overall. (I'd give myself a Special Barnstar, an Original Barnstar, and an All-around Amazing Barnstar for reporting the vandal to AIV the second time, but I don't know if that's allowed. :P) Good work, team. Peter Sam Fan 12:48, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Peter SamFan! Thanks for taking the time to leave me this awesome barnstar with multiple amounts of wikilove! Well, the page is now protected. Hopefully that will temporarily help curb the vandalism using floating characters (I forget what the name of those characters are called). I'm sure we'll run into one another again very soon. See you out on the battlefield! :-D ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:58, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

No subject

hello Oshwah, My page bhalchandra_kulkarni is getting redirected to draft:bhalchandra_kulkarni. I am unable to publish this page. Bhalchandra Kulkarni is one of the famos personalities in Marathi Film industry. Could you please help me publish this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shyamrajpatil (talk • contribs)

Hi, Shyamrajpatil! It's actually very easy. When the draft article is complete and ready for publishing, you can file a request for the article to be reviewed by visiting Wikipedia:Articles for creation. Once approved, it will be moved and published to the main space. You'll want to visit the articles for creation page, as it will answer all of your questions. Hope my response helped. Cheers, and good luck to you! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:06, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Quantization

On what basis you reverted my changes? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.156.37.239 (talk) 13:03, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

I reverted your edit here because it appeared to be an edit test, or an addition of gibberish or random text. If I made a mistake, please let me know what the edit was attempting to accomplish so that I can fix it for you. Thanks :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:12, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

No subject

I did not remove text, just updated it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Walidbadeer (talk • contribs)

Walidbadeer, see your edit here. You removed two references that were used to cite the content and support the information stated. This is why I reverted your changes and messaged you about it. You didn't explain why you removed these two references using the edit summary. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:22, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Collaboration

Please have a look at the edits before you revert things - We're attempting a collaboration to write an article at User:Worm That Turned/Teresa Helena Higginson. It's quite clear from the edits that they are in good faith. Please do not make any further reverts there. Worm^TT(talk) 13:30, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Worm That Turned! Please accept my most sincere apologies. I saw this edit, and this edit. I thought it might have been vandalism, but wasn't sure. I saw that the user was new, so I went with a good faith reversion. I messaged you on your talk page and then realized that you messaged me here. Again, thanks for letting me know and I apologize for the mistake. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:42, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

No subject

Hy I am Atif.The iraqi causlaties mentioned in article related to Anbar offensive are very slow as compare to actuall ground situation.U can read "Offensive" heading in Anbar offensive article to know about real caulaties.Kindly reply me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atif000 (talk • contribs)

Hi, Atif000. I reverted your edit here because you removed references to sources and replaced it with text stating "see offensive heading". In the future, I highly recommend that you use the edit summary to describe your changes. This will help other editors to understand what you're doing and why. If the references were simply moved and not removed, then feel free to restore your changes. That was my main concern :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:50, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

HMS

How is that more of an opinion than say this sentence; "King Leopold II demanded that Stanley take the longer route via the Congo River, hoping to acquire more territory and perhaps even Equatoria"? The question about the route the expedition would take is fairly controversial and so if the above statement (and many others) can be left in place, then why remove mine? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:192:8200:1920:4D79:FB16:E72A:2193 (talk • contribs)

I'm not sure what you're referring to with the sentence you quoted here, but I reverted your edit here because I originally felt that the statement implied an opinion with words such as "degree of negativity". It also isn't referenced when you state that he only did this to African Americans and not Caucasians as well. So, there were multiple reasons. If you see content that doesn't adhere to a neutral point of view, please be bold and remove it! It will help improve Wikipedia if you remove content that you see as written with a bias or opinion. Please let me know if you have any more questions. I'll be happy to answer them. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:10, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

No subject

Your site does a great disservice to teachers of literature. Vast numbers of students no longer bother to read texts because they just read the plot summaries on Wikipedia. You should have whatever content about literature you want, but you should not include plot summaries. What purpose do they serve other than making it possible for someone not to read the book? This open invitation to cheating and plagiarism should be stopped. Teachers of literature the world over are waiting for you to do the right thing and allow this generation to re-discover the pleasure and wisdom of reading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.237.65.213 (talk • contribs)

(talk page stalker) The limited plot summaries on Wikipedia are hardly a substitute for reading the actual book (there's an essay on the purpose of plot summaries at WP:PLOTSUM). Even CliffsNotes have more information. clpo13_(talk) 16:27, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Removing plot summaries, such as what you did here and here - is not going to make a difference nor support your viewpoint. It's disruptive, not compatible with your views and Wikipedia's mission to be a completely free and content-rich encyclopedia, and will result in you being blocked from editing Wikipedia. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:36, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

What I did is correct

These people harassed me and tried to make me act like the way they wanted me to but I refused. They only care about their opinions. I've got to warn everybody about them so they are not able to repeat such behaviour or at the least others will be cautious when dealing with them. I'm only helping those who actually care about contributing to this site. 59.89.103.139 (talk) 16:37, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

No, what you're doing is disruptive, won't accomplish anything, and is only going to result in you being blocked from editing. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:44, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

I don't understand why you people are same everywhere. All of the mods are same like you. Only you people are correct, everybody else is wrong. Even real criticism is personal attack or disruptive or uncivil for you. You people can't even tolerate critisicm. This just shows your true nature. In case I am wromg about you, prove me wrong. Have them blocked. If you side with them, then there's no difference between them and you. 59.89.103.139 (talk) 16:52, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Your edit here was not "criticism" - it was a personal attack aimed at another editor. Especially when you say "you are nothing more than a childish person driven mad by power who thinks only he is the one are correct". This behavior will result in you being blocked; it's not constructive and is only harmful to the project. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:01, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Meaghan Oppenheimer

Hi there!

Got your message about the providing a source about Meaghan Oppenheimer's relationship with Tom Ellis. Would just like to say that there aren't any articles about the two but they are very public about their relationship on various social media platforms such as instagram and twitter. Because of this, I don't think I ca provide a sufficient source for my edit but if you do take a look at their instagram accounts, it can be seen that they definitely are in a relationship. Hope this clears things up. Thanks for the notice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.71.115.158 (talk • contribs)

Hi, and thanks for leaving me a message! Articles that are biographies of living people undergo much more strict scrutiny compared to other articles. The source that needs to be provided must meet the guidelines on identifying reliable sources; unreferenced content in biographies of living people (especially if it's contentious or controversial, or could be read or translated as such) must be removed per Wikipedia's policy on these articles. So, when looking for a source to support your edit, make sure to read those Wikipedia guidelines that I linked to you. It's very important that you do this. If you have any more questions, please do not hesitate to ask me them. I'll be happy to answer them and lend a hand! Happy editing! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:45, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

page deletion

hey i just wanted to ask u that my page has been deleted by u so please can i get a reason for that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jsa.99 (talk • contribs)

Hi, Jsa.99. Sure. What is the page that was deleted? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:16, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Bro my page name is ja'am(title). And sorry for taking any information from your site as j was just gathering all information from the Internet to one page about Jams. Thankyou looking forward Jsa.99 (talk) 18:31, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

According to the page logs in Ja'am and Jam (title), the Ja'am article was moved to Jam (title), then deleted due to a proposed deletion that expired. The concern that was listed in the proposed deletion was, "No references or credible assertion to [assert] notability. Potential WP:OR" (WP:OR refers to the Wikipedia shortcut for Wikipedia's no original research policy. This is why the article was deleted. I hope this answers your question. Cheers! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:42, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Content Deletion and Restoration

Hello, Oshwah, today, I received a message from you stating that my changes have been restored on Carroll Shelby's page. Here's what I did that you probably didn't know. Instead of having his death under his personal life, I placed death as a separate category, as is with many articles on other people. Here's what I suggest. When you look at an article, please do not go right in and undo other people's changes. I was on Carroll Shelby's page, and I know what I'm doing when I'm editing a page.

(talk page stalker) This is why it's encouraged to use edit summaries so as to let other editors know your intentions. clpo13_(talk) 18:31, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Seconding clpo13's response above: What would be better for you to do is to add an edit summary to your changes so that other editors can understand what you're doing and why. If you look at your edit again, as well as the article's history page, I don't have any context as to what you're trying to do if you don't add any edit summaries to your changes. Nobody is pointing any fingers at you or saying that you're in trouble; your edit just confused me and I reverted the change and left you a message in order to ask you what the reason was for the removal. So long as you include an edit summary with your edits, you'll be perfectly fine and you'll be less likely to run into frustration and confusion with other editors (like right now :-)). Please let me know if you have any more questions. I'll be happy to answer them. Cheers! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:33, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Very fine response, Oshwah. I will take your advice into consideration. Cheers! 174.55.184.91 (talk) 18:37, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Awesome! Thanks for leaving me a message and for peacefully discussing your frustration and concerns. I'm glad that we were able to discuss the matter and help each other out :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:43, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I removed an incorrect image of Whiting. Someone had photo-shopped it to appear as if the refinery was behind the beach, making it appear very ugly and incorrect. I plan to insert a few REAL images so our town is not viewed incorrectly and poorly.

Mike Turco Article up for deletion

Why did you tag the page for deletion all the info there is legitimate? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tribecasix (talk • contribs)

Tribecasix - I was not the original person who nominated the article you created for deletion. I simply reverted your removal of the articles for deletion tag (which must stay on the article until the discussion ends). To gain a better understand as to why the article is being discussed for deletion, visit the article's deletion discussion page. It will list the original reason explained by the editor who started the discussion. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:01, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

whiting indiana whihala beach

Please accept my apologies if I am not doing things quite right. I am trying to learn! I have removed an incorrect image for the Whiting profile because it was photoshopped to look as if the neighboring refineries were right behind our beautiful beach. This alteration was unflattering and unfair to our city. I will attempt to load some REAL images.

THANKS

Monica (EamusM3 (talk) 19:49, 2 April 2016 (UTC))

Hi EamusM3! Welcome to Wikipedia! No worries; we were all new at one time. Don't be afraid to make mistakes. If you want to replace images on articles with improved ones, go for it! What you'll want to do is leave the original image alone for now (unless it's a blatant violation of Wikipedia policy and must be removed), and replace the images with your improved ones once you have them. Then, you'll be all set! Please let me know if you have any more questions. Happy editing! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:13, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank You

Thank you fMetso96 (talk) 20:09, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Neutrality should not be achieved at the expense of factual accuracy, because then it will not be neutral but biased.

"." Hi Oshwah, my Wikipedia names is Stanley savant. Please will you advise me. (Where will I find your reply when I log in?) At 13.01 on 31 March I made a significant edit to the Henry M. Stanley Wikipedia page with full citations. The entire edit was removed next day by users of an IP address 70.124.133.228 (associated with Ugandan schools and the Ugandan Pentecostal church). Their reason "rv a series of too detailed, non-neutral edits". I'd put several hours work into this but did nothing about it till 9.31 on 2 April when I tried again but on a smaller scale. Shortly after this at 9.39 IP 172.56.17.137 (I think that's right but can't check on Edit History while writing to you) in a series of edits removed everything I had changed on the grounds that there had been too much detail. So although I know a great deal about Stanley, it's hard to see the point of my ever contributing again, unless you can somehow reassure me

I will describe the four issues that concern me most. All are in Charges of Cruelty.

1) At present there is a quotation from John Rose Troup's book about The Emin Pasha Expedition (note 48 at present). In it Troup claims that accusations made against him by Stanley, which couldn't be mentioned by him publicly, were grossly unfair. After this quote I inserted a passage to the effect that Troup had been an officer in Major Barttelot's Rear Column and had been accused by Stanley along with other Rear Column officers of not having had the courage to prevent the deranged Barttelot from shooting three men for trivial offences and for starving over 100 others. Stanley had then been 700 miles away. (Stanley's Diary October 1890 Royal Museum of Central Africa quoted by Tim Jeal p 358 Stanley: The Impossible Life of Africa's Greatest Explorer (2007). Back on 31 March I had also mentioned that Troup was a brutal man who had made a young Congolese girl his sex slave. (This is in William Bonny's Diary RMCA quoted by Jeal also on p 358. So the context shows that Stanley had had good reason to make accusations. Yet twice my efforts to show that Troup's criticism should not be taken at face value have been removed from the Stanley Wikipedia page. So Troup's criticism still stands as if Stanley had never had any grounds for discontent with him

2) There is a seriously inaccurate quote from a book called "The Congo: Plunder and Resistance" a book primarily about the Congo (at present placed before notes (38) 18 in which it is claimed that Stanley had "a pathological fear of women, an inability to work with talented co-workers and an obsequious love of the aristocratic rich". Every single statement is untrue. (a) Women. In the Stanley Archive (Royal Museum of Central Africa RMCA) in Tervuren, Brussels, there is a large body of correspondence between Stanley's first and second fiancées, also with an American journalist May L. Sheldon, and to his wife Dorothy Tennant. Some of these letters have been quoted by Professor James Newman in "Imperial Footprints" (2004) pp 26, 30-31 96-7, 216-17, 306, and more were quoted by Tim Jeal in his Stanley: The Impossible Life of Africa's Greatest Explorer (2007) pp 74-75, 78-89, 157-9, 267-269, 300-12, 388-90, 392-95, 404. Stanley's letters to his wife, Dorothy Tennant also show a close and loving relationship. The Stanley Archive was closed from the 1980s to the early 2000s and Jeal and Newman were the first to gain access. see acknowledgements in both their books. (b) Colleagues. Stanley's relations with A. J. Mountney Jephson (the most talented officer on the Emin Pasha Expedition) were always excellent. See Newman p 341. Stanley also got on well with Captain Nelson and Dr Parke who both visited him while he was on his honeymoon! On his first Trans-Africa journey he got on well with all his white colleagues and was devastated by Frank Pocock's death.Richard Stanley and Alan Neame The Exploration Diaries of H. M. Stanley (1961) pp 187-92. (c) Obsequious love of the rich. Stanley's grandest and richest friends were Sir William Mackinnon, a self-made shipping magnate and A.l. Bruce who described himself as "naught but a common brewer" (Bruce to Stanley 3.06.1885 RMCA) His closest male friends, Edward Glave and Edward King were a journalist and an ex-warehouseman. Jeal 83, 273. Major Pond, Stanley's lecture agent wrote about Stanley's hatred of high society and grand occasions "he cannot bear being on exhibition ... He appreciates friends, and those who know him intimately". Newman 341. The correspondence with Leopold in the RMCA show that Stanley at first was in awe of him, but his later relations were more adversarial than fawning.The Stanley Archive Inventory gives a good idea of this. All this I have tried to insert this into the Wikipedia page in a shorter form but twice it has been eliminated and the original thrice inaccurate quote left in place without qualification.

3) Immediately after the quotation from The Congo: Plunder and Resistance, there appears this sentence: "It is also notable that the degree of negativity Stanley sometimes employed while describing Africans was never used against the many white people he disagreed with." This sentence has moved about and been altered. But it is the third negative passage about Stanley in a row. How can this be said to exhibit neutrality or balance? Nor is it really true. Stanley described the activity of the white traders of Boma as constituting "two centuries of pitiless persecution of black men by sordid whites." H. M. Stanley The Congo and the Founding of Its Free State (1885) vol i 80,96. "You damned sons of a sea-cook, God damn you," he yelled at Stairs and Jephson after they had criticised his beloved Wangwana carriers and guards. Jeal 331. He wrote of finding white people ugly after spending years with Africans. He wrote that "their weird pallor... after gazing so long on rich black and richer bronze, had something of an unaccountable ghastliness." H. M. Stanley Through the Dark Continent (1878) Vol ii 462

4) I have tried twice to prevent the reference in the passage concerning John Speke punching the African caravan leader, Mbarak Bombay notes 12/28 and especially note 42 from appearing with a misquotation that changes the original meaning to Stanley's detriment. It is claimed that Stanley later punched Bombay in the same way that Speke had punched him i.e. in the mouth (breaking his teeth). But what Stanley actually wrote is "... months afterwards, I was called upon to administer punishment to him myself." H. M. Stanley "How I Found Livingstone in Central Africa" (1872) p 28. It may seem a small matter but it mirrors a general effort by many contributors to write negatively about Stanley.

PLEASE TELL ME WHETHER IT IS POSSIBLE OR IMPOSSIBLE TO STOP THE STANLEY PAGE BECOMING EVER MORE HOSTILE TO HIM BY USE OF SELECTIVE QUOTATION OR MISQUOTATION, AS SEEMS TO BE HAPPENING ALMOST DAILY? If FACTS CAN BE REJECTED IN FAVOUR OF SURMISE WHAT CAN BE THE POINT OF CONTRIBUTING? MY EXPERIENCE HAS BEEN PRETTY CRUSHING. CAN CONTRIBUTIONS EVER BE PROTECTED? I SUPPOSE RIGHT NOW EXPLORERS ARE UNDER PARTICULAR PRESSURE. BUT UNLESS THEY CAN BE SEEN AS NINETEENTH CENTURY PEOPLE, THEY ARE SURE TO BE DIMINISHED AND MALIGNED. PLEASE ADVISE ME. Stanley savant (talk) 20:17, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Stanley savant. Holy cow, that's a lot of text for me to go through. So, in a nutshell: you added content to Henry Morton Stanley, which was later modified and some of it removed by 70.124.133.228, and you have concerns about this. First and foremost, your edits are never gone; every change made to an article can be found on the article's history page. The edit you originally made and added content to the article is here - you can visit this page, click on "edit", and all of your content will be there as you added and saved it before. What you need to do is communicate with the user that modified your changes (on his user talk page), and seek consensus regarding what should be kept and not kept (do this on the article's talk page if possible after you've reached out to him). This is proper dispute resolution, and will be the best way to voice and resolve both of your concerns. Just make sure that you do not edit war, as it is not allowed and will only make resolving your concerns harder. Please let me know if you have any more questions. Cheers -- ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:53, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

No subject

Hi Oshwah! I'm an inexperienced editor, and I couldn't figure out how to remove the gray box around the information I added to the article. I was actually trying to expand the article, so I added my edits back in. If you know how to remove the formatting of the gray box, I would appreciate it. detroit.import — Preceding unsigned comment added by Detroit.import (talk • contribs)

Hi, Detroit.import! Sure, easy peasy... and it's fixed. Just so you know, the "grey box" formatting that you saw was caused by adding spaces at the beginning of the new line. To remove the formatting, just make sure that there are no spaces in front of the paragraph that's being formatted. You're all set to go! Cheers, and happy editing :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:38, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

No subject

Hi, I received a message about copyright infringement regarding the blog -https://plaskettfamilytree.wordpress.com/

I own that blog, and I was setting up a Wikipedia page for a notable ancestor, a clockmaker. Stephenrobertkuta (talk) 20:22, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Stephenrobertkuta! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for leaving me a message with your concerns. There are a couple of issues with your claims, as well as the article you created. First and foremost, we can't verify that you are, in fact, the owner of the blog that you created the article using the text from. Second, you're supposed to paraphrase and reference sources (not copy text straight from them), and lastly... even if we were able to verify your claim of ownership of the blog, you're adding original research which is not allowed on Wikipedia. To avoid issues and frustration with creating articles during the time that you're learning Wikipedia and becoming familiar with all of it's guidelines and policies, I highly recommend that you use the articles for creation process to create articles. The process and policies will go much more smoother for you, and you'll get to learn and understand them as you use the wizard and create content. Please let me know if you have any more questions. Again, welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy your stay and become a long-term contributor here! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:32, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

No subject

Hi Oshwah, I was in the middle of editing and had to go out suddenly.I was hoping to replace the section I deleted with another version that was more factual. I will do it if I get time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.26.230.43 (talk • contribs)

No subject

Hi Oshwah, Many thanks for your comments concerning the Royal Variety Performance page. The sections that we deleted were very in-accurate so we replaced them with accurate wording and correct information. For your information, we work officially for the Royal Variety Performance and the Royal Variety Charity in an official capacity, so the information that we substituted is 100% accurate. We are however, new to Wikipedia, so we now understand the importance of doing many references, so we have started again and included loads of references. We have deleted, for now, everything that we have added without references, so we hope this is now ok? Please let us know if not, as we want to make the page as informative and as accurate as possible. Looking forward to your advice. Many thanks --Rodeocowboy36 (talk) 21:09, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Just letting you know...

Hi. In most cases removing speedy deletions is bad, but in this case the author unintentionally blanked the page so someone tagged it as G7. The author then removed the G7 tag since he wasn't requesting deletion, and in that case it's fine for the author to remove the speedy deletion tag. Simply a reminder since that was probably just an accident when patrolling. Thanks for your work on Wikipedia! Appable (talk) 21:31, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Appable! Oh yeah, good call. I must not have realized that the CSD was for G7 or I mistakenly misread and thought that it was a different criterion. Thanks for the message and for letting me know. Cheers! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:38, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

gm page

Why? Telling the truth.

Sorry

I will add a summary next time. I was adding missing titles.

Rq-18070.186.96.188 (talk) 23:49, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Sources I watched and read said that the rq-180 was introduced in 201570.186.96.188 (talk) 23:49, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Look out

Just saw this. Watch that one. Fudgepack (talk) 00:06, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Fudgepack! He's already been reported to AIV; he'll get taken care of soon ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:08, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Everything happened fast, I messaged you (and now see you were onto it from the history), but the account has been blocked indefinitely. On with the journey! Fudgepack (talk) 00:09, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Craig Benzine

I made an edit to Craig Benzine's page twice and you reverted it back twice, even though the information was accurate and relevant. 23.240.144.214 (talk) 00:27, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes, but they were not supported with a reliable source, which is why I reverted your edits to the article. Articles that are biographies of living people undergo much more scrutiny than other articles. I highly recommend that you read the Wikipedia guidelines that I linked to you in this response; they will provide you with all of the information and relevant guidelines that you're looking for. Cheers! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:44, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

You Keep Undoing My Contributions to Craig Benzine, Please Stop

":"I've tried to add information to Craig Benzine's page about his personal life, including his dog and announcement about moving to Austin, Texas. This is both accurate and relevant information, and you've undone my additions three times. It's getting frustrating to have to keep redoing my work, and it's discouraging me from contributing. I hate you for that, please stop undoing my work. 23.240.144.214 (talk) 00:53, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Your edits are not cited or supported with a reliable source. All you need to do is include one, and you'll be fine. Otherwise, the content will get removed (by someone else, if not by me). If you have questions, please let me know. I'll be happy to assist you, but continuously restoring the content after being told multiple times about the issues with your contributions will only make things worse, not better. I appreciate your message and I appreciate your understanding. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:55, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Paul Ryan

Why would you undue my edit as not constructive? Did you actually read my edit summary? I was trying to -Be Bold- and people like you are like the Wikipedia Nazis who revert first and then ask people to explain themselves second. Go read my edit and if you think I was just vandalizing an article, go report me. Otherwise, maybe you should consider what I said and offer a constructive critique of the position. Lipsquid (talk) 01:27, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Lipsquid. Calm down. I'll be happy to explain why I reverted your change to the section header on Paul Ryan; there's no need to message me with guns blazing. I felt that the previous section header was more appropriate than the change that you made here. While, I agree that much of the section does mention Ayn Rand, I don't think it's a controversy. And the section reflects Paul Ryan's viewpoints and stances on many policies and beliefs. Not to mention, you also had a typo with the word "Controversy" ;-). But to answer your question: No, I didn't feel like the edit was vandalism at all. I just didn't feel like it was a constructive improvement. You're always welcome to be WP:BOLD; however, so are other editors as well. Disagreements are inevitable as you can imagine. Lets just be a bit more civil next time? I'm more than welcome to explain the reason behind my edits, but help me out a little here! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:39, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello, it is nice to talk to you. These kinds of comments should have been put on my talk page first asking for a deeper explanation or additional feedback. There are 4 paragraphs in the section. The first 2 are about him being a supporter or possibly a devotee of Ayn Rand and the third seems to have comments regarding him backing away from Ayn Rand due to atheism and possibly other reasons. The fourth paragraph talks about his identification with the Tea Party and *might* be construed as a political philosophy by focusing on the last sentence: -According to the article, Ryan supports the Tea Party's belief in "individual rights, distrust of big government and an allegorical embrace of the Founding Fathers"- which I was going to leave in the article and move to a different section, but you reverted me in less than 2 minutes.

So this section has 3 of 4 paragraphs about Ayn Rand and they are definitely contradictory and a single sentence about "political philosophy". This is somehow reflective of Paul Ryan's political philosophy and my edit is unconstructive? In this case, your revert makes your opportunity to be bold, higher than my opportunity to be bold regardless of whether we both had good faith as the article is protected and I can't make another edit. Lipsquid (talk) 02:22, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi again, Lipsquid! First off, I'll both apologize and acknowledge that using the word "unconstructive" was too harsh; it does imply that your edit was vandalism when it was clearly not. I'm sorry about that; I didn't mean for it to anger you. I think you also make a fair analysis and good points with your previous explanation here as well. I just didn't see it that way. If you still feel that the section header is better with the change that you made, by all means... feel free to change it back. I think your arguments in support are fair. Again, I'm sorry that we got off on the wrong foot. I appreciate you for messaging me with your concerns, and I'm happy that we were able to talk it out peacefully. Please let me know if you have other questions or concerns. My talk page is always open for you, Lipsquid. Happy editing :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:32, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for being a sane person and for the positive discussion. I was wrong and it is only semi-protected, not 1RR, so I can make another edit. I apologize for the aggressive tone and found it humorous to see you are a a fan of Godwin's Law, which I quickly showed is still valid. There are far too many revert bullies on Wikipedia, though you certainly don't seem to be one of them. That is my bad.

So on to something productive. Was it the word "controversy" that concerned you in the section title? Maybe "Ayn Rand Contoversy" is too controversial as a section header, even though by definition the conflicting paragraphs leave one with a controversy over whether Paul Ryan is, or is not, a follower of Ayn Rand. I am open to suggestions for improvement, I have no political view on Paul Ryan so I have no motive to support or discredit him. I thought of other possibilities like "Ayn Rand Influence", but influence tends to make the claim that he is influenced by Ayn Rand and he clearly stepped away from Ayn Rand in his own words in the third paragraph which is also his latest quote on the topic so I feel that would be a very big undue weighting and put him in a box that does not reflect the sum of all available reliable sources, so I used controversy instead. If I were Paul Ryan, I would want people to focus on my last quote on the subject, which was quoted as saying that I am not a follower of Ayn Ryan and the previously mentioned stories are an "Urban Legend". I would actually probably want it all deleted. To leave it as is says that there is some controversy as to why his latest statements should not be the termination of the Ayn Rand follower discussion. This is very messy and needs to be fixed or leave it and call it a controversy, which is what I did. Wide open to feedback, people will yell at my edit no matter what I do even though my logic is sound and I have remained neutral on the actual content. Thoughts? Lipsquid (talk) 03:30, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Lipsquid! I haven't forgotten about you. I've just been busy and got distracted. Once some time clears up, I'm going to get back to you. Just responding so that you know that I haven't forgotten about you! :-D ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:59, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Lipsquid - I'm back! Sorry about that. I got busy for a bit and just now have allowed myself to be able to backtrack. I'm torn to be honest; I feel like you're right in that "Ayn Rand something" would be a more fitting section header than the current, given the specific content that's in this article section. I can't think of a noun that appropriately describes the section header to complete it that doesn't imply a point of view that is neutral (maybe that's why it's currently the text as it is now). I'm going to check Wikipedia's section header manual of style guidelines again (as well as some others) and see if they don't have a consensus there already in this situation; please do the same so that we'll both be able to make a decision wisely :-). Right now, I'm stuck on what the change should be. In the meantime, I think that the section header should be kept as-is until we figure this out. Is that cool with you? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:03, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Oswah- How long does one wait? It seems you spend much more time rolling back edits than in contributing to the encyclopedic content of Wikipedia. My interest are sort of the opposite and I want to improve content. We agree the section description is not very logical. Why can it not be fixed? I don't mind waiting for you if you want to make an honest attempt to fix, you are on WP a lot. I want to say this as nicely as possible, but others can rollback vandalism without your input, this is waiting on you. How important is this to you? If this is not your priority, please rollback your own edit where you marked my edit as unconstructive and I will work through the issue with editors interested in the content of the article. Lipsquid (talk) 15:39, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

See my response in the talk page section that you've responded to. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:41, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Sam hinkie

Incompetent, in a culture of huge salaries for winning Sam hinkie is presiding over one of the worst win loss records in the history of the NBA.. What part of incompetent is unclear to you? The truth is helpful, what part of that is unclear to you? Alansgems (talk) 01:44, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Alansgems - Adding "incompetent" to describe an article subject that is a biography of a living person (as you did here) violates both Wikipedia's policies regarding the need to edit in a neutral point of view, as well as editing biographies of living people. This is why I reverted your edit - it implies a point of view that isn't neutral, which is not allowed on Wikipedia (and especially not allowed on articles of living people). ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:49, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Page Help!

Hi Oshwah!

I have a request for you, if you could help me out. I'm new to Wikipedia and need something done. There is a page that is being continuously vandalized

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

People from the Arrow SubReddit are coming in, making accounts, then bypassing the semi-lock (which was put into place cause they were abusing the page) and now are changing things to bully Marc Guggenheim, the writer on Arrow the TV show. Can you revert back to a legit version of the page and help lock it so even new users cant change it? These people are ruthless and are using this as a joke to be mean to the writers of the show just cause things aren't going their way.

If you can do something about it, please do!

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.229.228.106 (talk • contribs)

It looks like the matter has been resolved on the article. If future issues arrive, please feel free to let me know. I'll be happy to help you look into it and resolve the matter. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:19, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

No subject

Hello Oshwah.I notice that you have removed something I put into the page about Swami Premananda. Can you tell me on what grounds you deleted the passage taken from the Share International magazine? It is very frustrating generally, the whole Swami Premananda page.It is full of references to articles written in the Indian/Sri Lankan gutter press, which in themselves are not based on anything substantive but are merely sensationalist reporting of the worst kind. Why are references to such articles allowed to remain on the page,and other, more truthful references speedily deleted? It's a bit of a farce really.I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on the matter.Doughnutgirl (talk) 10:05, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Doughnutgirl! Thanks for leaving me a message with your questions. I'll be more than happy to explain the reason behind my reversion. I saw this edit that you made; it removed content but didn't have an explanation as to why in the edit summary. I reverted it in case it was a mistake. I noticed that you added content before this removal; I went ahead and restored the article back to that revision for you. If the content you want to remove still needs to go, by all means please feel free to do it. You will just want to make sure that you explain your changes using the edit summary. This allows other editors to know and understand what you're doing and why. It'll also avoid confusion such as this :-). If you need anything else, please do not hesitate to let me know. I'll be happy to lend a hand. Cheers! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:16, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

But why did you remove the content that I added, Oshwah? Doughnutgirl (talk) 10:37, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Forgive me, Doughnutgirl. I'm having trouble understanding your question. The content you added to the article should now be there; the article is currently at the revision in the state that it was after you added content. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:40, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

IKF

Hi Oswah, if I removed something then this was by mistake. What I did do is expand the article. But I see that is now all lost. How can I bring it back in deliberation with you? I think I only deleted some potential member information that was not correct anymore. As well as a link from South Africa which was not working anymore. What I added was all the compettiions under IKF Funafuti1978 (talk) 10:49, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Funafuti1978! Oops! It looks like the software reverted all of your changes instead of only your last one. Fixed. Sorry about that! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:52, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks mate - the last one that was added and deleted again it needed to be. Since by accident I added a football tab from another wiki. So it needed deletion. But now all looks good again! Funafuti1978 (talk) 10:53, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Ack! Funafuti1978, no worries. You'll want to use the edit summary to describe what you're doing in future edits. You removed content again and didn't explain why using the edit summary. No worries; all taken care of. Edit summaries just help other editors see and understand what you're doing and why. It also avoids confusion, such as this :-) Cheers, mate! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:57, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Will do next time. My last step is that I want to put all the member associations on a separate page like in FIFA. Since now they distort the whole page. Is that possible? I will use the edit summaries from now. Funafuti1978 (talk) 10:59, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Funafuti1978! Indeed it is! If you have a large list, simply create an article and title it "List of members in FIFA" (or something like that) and move the list there. Then you can link the main article to it. Check out Wikipedia's Lists help page; it will provide you with everything you need so that you can do it. Have fun, and happy editing man! :-D ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:03, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

For you

		The Userpage Shield
		You know why. Great work today. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:14, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

You're a rockstar, Anna Frodesiak. It was a pleasure to work as a team with you today. Feel free to recruit me on IRC any time you need to team up again. It was a lot of fun :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:36, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Civility Barnstar
	I know that one isn't meant to engage in barnstar swapping, but the one you gave me prompted me to look at your talk pages, and it's clear from your prompt and measured responses to all sorts of questions and complaints that this barnstar is well deserved. By the way, don't forget to keep up a broad range of activities to ensure that you pass your next RFA :)  —SMALLJIM  12:30, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Smalljim! Good to talk to again, man! Thank you for taking the time to leave me this barnstar. It's very well written and thoughtful of you to do. Sigh... I know. I really do need to. I've created some good content, but I can always do more. Vandal patrolling is just so much fun for me! I probably enjoy it much more than I should... haha. But you are right. I plan to spend some more time in different collaboration and creation areas, and maybe run again in August or September. It'll be a good amount of time since my first RfA, and... who knows, we'll see :-). Again, it's great to chat with you again, and I hope we keep in touch. Until we meet again. Cheers -- ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:02, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Reverting

hey man, you revert alot of vandalism. Here is an unofficial barnstar! Winterysteppe (talk) 13:31, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Winterysteppe! I don't need barnstars; a good fist bump or a pat on the back works just fine! Hope you're doing well; it's great to chat with you again :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:33, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi User:Oshwah I like chatting with you <3! You are spot on with catching vandals!! Winterysteppe (talk) 16:37, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Removal of My wikipedia page Abaya Hastha Swayambu Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Temple ,Agaram Village Hosur

Dear Mr.Oshwah ,

I have created a page on wikipedia about out temple Abaya Hastha Swayambu Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Temple ,Agaram Village Hosur for days together .But today i am shocked to see my new page has been reversed in no time .

you may not know how much time i took to create this . I respect every religion and at the same time i expect the same from others .I dont know why you do this ?

Is it a part of racism ? i hope you are not Please revert the same at the earliest.

Mr.Oshwah

Greetings from India

look i am a non computer gratuate and i am working hard to create a page on the request of the temple people on a service motive when ever i am free . If there is any mistake please kindly help me to correct the issue as i am learner and not a expert like you.

Regards, J.P.Krishna Prasad

Hi, Krrish1971. Thanks for leaving me a message with your request for assistance and with your concerns. So, I took some time and I went through the entire Abaya Hastha Swayambu Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Temple, Agaram Village, Hosur article and made a large amount of improvements and changes for you. There is still much, much more work that needs to be done. My primary concern is your almost complete lack of reliable sources to support the content that you're adding. Unreferenced content can be challenged and removed; I highly recommend that you spend time locating sources and citing them within the article. I believe I've gotten you off to a good start. Good luck, happy editing, and please let me know if I can assist you with anything. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:28, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Edits to World War III

Sorry, you're right that I shouldn't just delete them. I think that section is too long and should be turned into a list page, but I'm not sure what to do with the sections without a main article to link to.

Vluczkow (talk) 17:15, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Vluczkow! I apologize for the delay getting back to you. Yes, improving the article is absolutely 100% the right choice over deleting content simply because it isn't linked to a main article of it's own. If the content is quite long, but not in-depth enough to warrant it's own article, it's perfectly fine to leave it be. If the content is legitimate, referenced properly, and good, it would be absolutely crazy (and highly discouraged by the community) to remove it. Remember that we're here to grow and improve Wikipedia; deletion should always be a last resort (and this situation is definitely not one of them :-)). You could also try asking at the reference desk if anyone has any suggestions on how to address your concerns; my thought is to leave it be, but I'm sure that other editors will have some creative and good ideas. Plus, you'll get to have people go through and help fix any potential issues that they happen to notice... win/win! Give that a shot, and please do not hesitate to let me know if you have any more questions. Cheers, and happy editing my friend! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:05, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

My edit deletion revision

Oshowa I know my edit on dicks sporting goods was bad and inappropriate but why was the revision history deleted can you please pretty please with candy rainbow sprinkles and chocolate vanilla sugar on top please let me at least just me see the revision of my edit. Herpetology (talk) 21:59, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Herpetology! Thanks for leaving me a message with your request. Unfortunately, edits that have undergone revision deletion are usually never undeleted and re-enabled for public view. This is due to the regulations and guidelines behind performing revision deletion; edits that undergo revision deletion are better-off hidden from the community than visible and would only cause bad things to happen if it were to be public (so basically if it's grossly libelous, blatant and highly controversial copyright infringement, or something really really bad). If the edit was, by your own words, "bad and inappropriate", why would you want to view it? That doesn't make sense to me at all. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:15, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, the reason I want to see it is because well I have somewhat of a dirty mind and I love stuff that's inappropriate and sexual in nature and when I see a article with a rather suggestive looking title I get the craving to make it live up to that title (like articles with the name "dick" in it, I get the feeling that somebody has to make a penis joke in that article. But since it won't get reveled aw well. Thanks however for the response. P.S I am a snake lover and I am crazy for reptiles which is evident by my username snake dude and I am living in central Florida and had 10 encounters with snakes. Hell I was almost bit by a diamondback rattlesnake in Everglades national park. Thanks have a happy lovely sweet enjoyable day Oshwah.Snake dude (talk) 01:56, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Snake dude - Haha, hey whatever floats your boat man. I'm not here to judge. And thanks for changing your signature. I wanted to make sure that you didn't get reported or blocked for that; it can and does happen when people do that. And keep your nose clean and stay out of trouble dude!!!! I think you have great potential to become a long-term and trusted editor. Don't let silly stuff like that get in your way! I'm counting on you... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:09, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For tirelessly reverting all that vandalism to my talk page. Thank you for sticking up for me and God bless. Kailey 2001 (talk) 00:00, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Kailey 2001 - You bet; I'm always happy to do it. You're awesome, Kailey 2001! Sorry you had it happen. If it makes you feel better, my talk page gets trashed, vandalized, and trolled all the time! Oh well, it comes with the job of performing vandal patrolling. I enjoy doing it, so I don't care what they do to it :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:04, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

As I saw someone else say here, you must be doing something right if you have haters. Kailey 2001 (talk) 00:06, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Kailey 2001 - HA! You have no idea! Just ask anyone. My talk page is protected for the moment; else, it would be torn up at least twice an hour. It actually feels really weird when it gets semi-protected. I'm used to it being vandalized that much. Oh well, I'll enjoy the mini break while it lasts XD ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:10, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)I can echo Kailey's sentiment—you're a great vandal-fighter. Do you have any idea how many reverts you've beaten me to the past two days? (No? I don't either. Several dozen at the least, though. Used to be Cluebot I kept being beaten by, now it's Oshwah...) AddWittyNameHere (talk) 00:18, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

AddWittyNameHere - It's good to chat with you again! Thank you very much for the kind words. As I say frequently to those that ask me, I can't explain it... I just really enjoy vandal patrolling (shoot, maybe a little too much at times :-P), and it's a very fun area on Wikipedia to be involved in. I do plan on taking some of that time and allocating towards other areas (content creation, interaction in help pages, etc). It's something I really need to do to. But fear not, I'll still be patrolling! Again, thanks for the message. You're awesome man! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:53, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, you guys keep beating me to the punch tonight with the reverts. :-) Kailey 2001 (talk) 01:05, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Kailey 2001 - LOL, it's probably because everyone is on alert tonight because of all the fun that happened yesterday. Shoot, I know I'm on alert :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:07, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict)x2: You're welcome! Yeah, can be hard to explain, but I agree, vandal patrolling can be enjoyable. I also tend to over-focus on that area, y'know. Well, that and gnomish stuff. I mean, I have created 834 pages, which would sound awesome, right?

Except...751 of them are user talk pages (around 700 or so of those are to warn vandals, the remnant welcomes to users who've reverted vandalism or similar) and of the 32 mainspace pages, 24 are redirects (and another handful are from cleaning up pagemove-vandalism).
If I'd have to venture a guess, around ~65-70% of my edits are vandalism/spam-fighting, ~20% is gnomish work, ~5-10% is me blabbering on usertalk and the remaining ~5% is content work, at most. If you ever need an equally-repetitive but non-vandal-fighting activity, I'll gladly point out a few dozen different highly tedious and repetitive jobs that still need to be done just within the Lepidoptera wikiproject. Like fixing thousands-upon-thousands occurrences of names-without-diacritics-that-should-actually-have-them. (Fixing diacritics thankfully isn't contentious within Wikiproject Lepidoptera, just tedious—there seems to be local consensus somewhere between "-shrug- don't care" and "sure, fix is welcome". Not hard, when said Wikiproject currently consists of a bunch of retired users, a bunch of mostly-inactive users, a bunch of users spending their time doing other stuff, Notafly (currently not very active, plus splitting time between Lepidoptera, Diptera, Hymenoptera and entomology in general), Wilhelmina Will, Ruigeroeland, and me. XD) AddWittyNameHere (talk) 01:18, 4 April 2016 (UTC) P.S. Yegods, how do I manage to turn every darn conversation into a WittyRamblesOnAndOn-Fest? Sorry.

No subject

Thank you, Oshwah. 2.26.230.43 (talk) 10:02, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Changes to Samir Geagea page

Hello, I received 3 messages about an edit I am supposed to have made on the Samir Geagea wiki page (the last message being from you). I have not made these edits to that page. Please advise on how to proceed in such cases. Thank you Tony Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:37.209.254.4&oldid=686191367&diff=cur 37.209.254.4 (talk) 14:26, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

ccc

Your wikpedia is a very bad one 👎 👎 👎

Chandigarh International Airport

Oswah, The reason I deleted the sentence is that the claims made in the news report that airport hours will be extended did never go through. The news reporter made a claim that was not valid. So the airport still closes at 8 pm. Can you please put my material back from yesterday and today.

xkd2626 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xkd2626 (talk • contribs)

Xkd2626 - Is there a reliable source that states that the extended hours never went through, or that is up-to-date that states what their current hours are? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:16, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Xkd2626 - No worries about the missing tildes; I fixed it for you here :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:21, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Oswah,

First of all you can verify on flightstat IXC and it will show the flights operate between 7 am to 8 pm. see http://www.flightstats.com/go/FlightStatus/flightStatusByAirport.do;jsessionid=84BCEAC7AF6ADFDCC79483AA5C86E44D.web2:8009?airportCode=IXC&airportQueryType=0

Secondly there is a report even today from Jet Airways - see last para of http://www.hindustantimes.com/business/india-in-desperate-need-for-bigger-better-airports/story-ukkIrhDz9HccnuyzFvSBXP.html

The main issue with news on Chandigarh Airport is that there have been several claims but most never mature to reality. For example there are many claims and news reports that international flights will start but so far nothing. That is why there is now a lawsuit in the court that I added yesterday see http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/chandigarh/shut-airport-if-you-can-t-make-it-operational-hc/216246.html

xkd2626

Xkd2626 (talk) 22:31, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Xkd2626 - Oh! Interesting! Well, as long as the changes are cited with a reliable source, that's completely fine by me! Your original change simply removed content that was sourced, and replaced it with content that didn't have one. That was my only concerns. Cheers! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:36, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

No subject

Hello Iam Dimitar Andonovski I have made some updates on my CV, so I strongly recommanded to be procesed the new one, because the old one was with wrong information about my carrier.. It must be changed. All the best, Dimitar.

Emelianenko

What's "controversial" about him stating he's of Russian ethnicity? And what's wrong with the source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.29.102.252 (talk • contribs)

I've explained this here on ScrapIronIV's talk page. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:17, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Magic Exposure on the article "Book Test"

The paragraph that describes the Flashback principle in detail (under Dictionary) especially the part about using antonyms is not necessary for those that don't plan on purchasing a book that incorporates it. These are commercially available and the respective authors don't make the exact method publicly available. In the magic world, IP is respected and as the inventor of the concept did not wish to expose it here, it's not keeping in the spirit of free use.

CHandigarh Airport

updated with info on PIL court case. Also the airport has CAT I not CAT II ILS Xkd2626 (talk) 03:00, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

thanks

thank you very kindly for catching and correcting the disruptive edit to my talk page. I was far from home at the time!HappyValleyEditor (talk) 19:36, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

I am looking for a started namespace template Based on abstract theory dated April 2012 under Rowbal as abstract description. It is my ongoing project claiming and defining name Rowbal.

Wjr3. Or Buzzmon1 or Freemynam$335

Thanks.

How to do a digital damnatio memoriae?

Dear Oshwah, thank you for undoing the vandalism inflicted on my user-page by one of my less intelligent and more immature former students. I would really like to a digital damnatio memoriae and have my user-page erased. I am not the most computer-savvy of people, and I was wondering if you had the time if you could assist me with my efforts? Thank you so much, and please have a wonderful day.--A.S. Brown (talk) 20:50, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Done. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:57, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank so much for deleting my user page. Much appreciated and please a great day!--A.S. Brown (talk) 21:09, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

You are most welcome, A.S. Brown. I'm happy to help. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:32, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Edit to User:WIKIswagmaster842

Hey, Oshwah. Thank you so much for the alert, but I edited that because that is my user profile page and I added some things about myself. It's nice to know that people like you are out there keeping fresh content on all Wikipedia pages when the Wikimedia Foundation people can't do that. I'm not a moderator, so you might not take this very seriously, but know that I appreciate people like you. Like I said before, THANK YOU!!!!!!

WIKIswagmaster842 (talk) 03:22, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

"" Sorry you thought I wrote at too great a length. I wanted the H.M.Stanley page to be accurate which is a matter of detail and that takes space with citations and quotes.

I want to discuss with IP 2208.54.4.237 changes which I had made and which he or she recently changed. Unfortunately I can find nowhere on his/her user page to leave a message. Can you please help me? 94.175.12.230 (talk) 16:08, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

I replied on your talk page. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 17:23, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

No clinical significance?

"How is there no information on "clinical significance" of a "gland" on this page? I'm sure there must be pages and pages of "clinical significance" on glands...."

NIce Hair — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.93.131.225 (talk) 03:54, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

No subject

Im sorry of r editing the page Scorpion I will never do it again. If I have a reason to I will make sure to notify someone on Wiki to make this edit for me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.93.131.225 (talk) 03:55, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Really my article is eligible for speedy deletion?Barbro Gunilla Kristina Brorsson Wolde?I want your personal openion

(Niceeditor100 (talk) 04:11, 8 April 2016 (UTC))

Hi, (Niceeditor100! Thanks for leaving me a message. It appears that it is, under the A7 section under Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion. Articles written about companies, clubs, websites, people, etc must make a credible claim of significance. Otherwise, it can be eligible for A7. Check out the policies I've linked you; they will answer your questions and provide you with all of the details and explanation that you need. If you have questions about any of them, please do not hesitate to ask me them. My talk page is an open place for you :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:14, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, (User:Oshwah! Thanks for leaving me a message,Justice equal to all editors of wikipedia, with your answer i am very happy that, you given answer that the above my article is eligible for deletion,you personal opinion also the same to delete,i know the article will be deleted with in minutes,But please see the below link,please add speedy deletion tag to the below araticle ::https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunilla_Wolde

Thanq

(Niceeditor100 (talk) 04:34, 8 April 2016 (UTC))

Hi, Niceeditor100! No problem. Please know that you're more than welcome to ask me questions any time that you have them. Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy your stay, go through our tutorial for new users, learn and help make Wikipedia a better place, and (most importantly) that you have fun and become a long-term contributor here! Cheers! :-D ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:37, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanq sir ,i am lover of wikipedia,i can give my life time to wikipedia (Niceeditor100 (talk) 04:47, 8 April 2016 (UTC))

FTR, Niceeditor100 is another Nsmutte sock - see the SPI where this most recent kind of trolling is discussed. (The subject trivially meets GNG as shown in the original article which is sourced to a major print encyclopedia; Nsmutte's malformed version did not show this and so they clearly intended to use that deletion to get the original article deleted. Not because they believe it merits deletion on the strength of the article itself, but in order to make a point.) --bonadea contributions talk 05:58, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Bonadea - Oh! Well... the proper and appropriate saying here is, "All's well that ends well"! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:01, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes, hopefully it will end well, eventually. --bonadea contributions talk 06:32, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Reverting my edit

Hi, Oshwah. I understand that you don't believe my edit was informative, and I respect that. The reason I made this change was because the new description was more accurate, and although it wasn't very helpful, at least it was more truthful than the previous description. Please explain to me why exactly you would have to undo my edit. I hope I have made everything clear enough. I am not here to troll wikipedia users nor article readers. Eliseo 3.14 (talk) 06:06, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Eliseo 3.14 - This edit was definitely not informative as you stated above; it adds a point of view that is absolutely isn't neutral (a neutral style of writing isn't only required on Wikipedia, but is also one of Wikipedia's five founding principles). I always try to assume good faith as all editors can and should do, but that edit can be easily viewed as vandalism by the community and can lead you to being blocked from editing if it persists after being sufficiently warned. Please exercise more caution in the future, and please do not hesitate to message me with any questions or requests for assistance if you're not sure as to whether or not a particular edit you want to make would violate any Wikipedia policies and guidelines. I'll be happy to answer them and give you a hand. Thanks again for your message :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:25, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:30/500 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:30/500. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:30/500 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. —Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 06:17, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Godsy! Ah, perfect! Thanks a lot. I'll take a gander and help discuss the issue! Thanks a bunch! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:26, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Don't revert IP edits without a careful read

There was nothing wrong with the IP edits at Todd Rose, and in fact called attention to longstanding problems. Had you looked closely, you would have seen that all the unsourced text existed before the IP editor's edits, and that what he had discovered was, in fact, earlier plagiarism of another editor. Bottom line, our founder's introduced and allowed IP editing, and we can revert it, but only with real cause. Cheers. Leprof 7272 (talk) 06:31, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

If you want to do the article a real service, have a look at the citations, and make them standard using a {{cite | … template. They are garbage now, and as long as they are so, they invite more of the same. Cheers. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 06:36, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Leprof 7272! Ah, good call. It looks like I failed to notice that multiple changes were made and only saw one of them. Thanks for reverting and for letting me know. I make mistakes sometimes; we all do it. If you'd like my help doing that, I'll be happy to lend a hand. That's not a problem at all. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:39, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

No subject

Hello so I think you and few other users made a mistake about me "vandalizing" Deep web page.So i tried to edit it and put information on page but i was using mobile phone to edit so editing was harder and it couldn't save the changes i made.I don't want people to think that i am "vandalizing" ANY page.I am up to good.I didn't meant to vandalize Deep web page or any other. Rebelwhitegirl (talk) 09:30, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

I didn't

I have no idea what edits you're talking about! I almost never edit wikipedia, just read it. There's two other guys who live here who are both pakis and I'm pretty sure they did it because I have never even heard of those pages. Please contact the police if you suspect vandalism, instead of accusing everyone. Wikipedia is an important source of information for me for my schoolwork and I don't want to lose access because of some immigrants. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 135.0.145.132 (talk) 09:59, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Gaad

I've lost track of how many time this editor has been blocked, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gadri. However, if you want to monitor him/her I'll unblock the latest incarnation. But note that so far as I can see, the academic.edu source[2] doesn't seem to mention anything relevant, and I think there is a serious competence issue. Doug Weller talk 10:59, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Doug Weller! Nice to shake hands with you again! Thanks for linking me to the SPI case. Indeed, this user is familiar for sure. That's completely your call and up to you; you just tell me what you're going to do and who/where I should keep my eyes on, and I'll be happy to keep an eye on any accounts, articles, etc. That won't be a problem at all :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:04, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. See my comments at User talk:1Tolasona. If you are interested, post there and offer and we'll see if we get a reply. Doug Weller talk 11:06, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Doug Weller - Done. Let me know if they respond and what the plan is, and I'll be happy to take him under my wing and offer help. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:10, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Much appreciated. Doug Weller talk 11:11, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

You may want to note my comment here. Aside from the obvious issue of not yet understanding WP:RS (fair enough, it happens), there is a much bigger fundamental problem that is very likely to thwart their desires. - Sitush (talk) 11:30, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Sitush - Ruh roh! I'll take a look at your comment right now. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:33, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Doug Weller - I told him that you'd respond to his unblock request, and also linked him to the appropriate guide to appeal his block. He copied my signature formatting too..... lol ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:47, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

2016 in video gaming

Stop freaking removing my edit. I have done no vandalism. It is you who is doing it. I have revert your revert --117.192.138.196 (talk) 11:08, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Looking at your edits in chronological order here, here, and here, as well as this one here - it appears that you're re-arranging the list in the article? To avoid frustration and confusion in the future, you need to do explain each of your edits using the edit summary. I didn't know what you were doing any why, since you didn't give an explanation. It's obvious that you know how to use the edit summary, as you did so here and here. Lets avoid uncivil edit summaries and comments, okay? If you need to message anyone about mistakes or changes you feel aren't correct, civility is the right way to go ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:15, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

So it was not oblivious to you what i was doin?. I was removing and re-adding a game which has a release date. I was doing a constructive edit. --117.192.138.196 (talk) 11:24, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

No, because of the fact that the first edit you made to the article (this one) simply removed content from it and did not have a useful edit summary explaining what you were doing and why. Now, had you removed that content and then added it back in a different part of the article within the same edit, I would have seen that the edit was a move - not a removal - and knew what you were doing and moved on. But that wasn't the case. The bottom line is that describing your edits each time using the edit summary will avoid frustration on your part (such as this one... haha) in the future. I hope that this response has helped explain things, and I appreciate your understanding. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:32, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

"Markus Bacher page deletion"

Dear Oshwah

i created the page for Markus Bacher, an austrian artist recently ranked among the most influential 40 Austrians from a significant austrian magazine. I do not understand the cause of speedy deletion, and I would kindly ask you to recover my page, since there is no probable cause for deletion.

agnesogaAgnesoga (talk) 12:16, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Agnesoga. The article you created was tagged for speedy deletion under this criterion (the article was about a person and did not make a credible claim of significance, or A7 for short). I highly recommend that you review the guidelines that I listed in this response, as they will answer your questions and provide you with a full explanation. Please do not hesitate to let me know if you have any questions regarding these guidelines. I'll be happy to answer them. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:22, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Request names on Panama Papers

″Hi. I am looking for names from the country of Suriname which may appear in the leaked documents aka The Panama Papers. Can you provide me with the names? Kind regards. "

Nicoleiceberg (talk) 12:40, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Nicoleiceberg! I believe that the articles you're looking for are Panama Papers and List of people named in the Panama Papers. Let me know if you need anything else! Cheers -- ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:41, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Regarding my page Abaya Hastha Swayambu Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Temple , Agaram ,Hosur Suggestion

Dear Mr.Oaswah

I have recently created a page about our temple Abaya Hastha Swayambu Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Temple , Agaram ,Hosur on wikipedia .

Since i am new this and come across many difficulties in creating a perfect page .please kindly help me to sort out the issues available on my page

Regards, JP.Krishna Prasad — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krrish1971 (talk • contribs) 13:39, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Krrish1971. It's good to see you again. If you remember, I responded to a previous request for assistance from you regarding this article (just five days ago). I dedicated a lot of time for you and made some major improvements and fixes for you with this edit, but it appears that you've removed the changes I made and have restored problematic and unreferenced content back onto the article. After spending such a long time attempting to help you the first time, I'm hesitant to do so again - especially if you're going to simply restore and overwrite what changes I make. Since I am a true believe of the end mission of expanding and improving Wikipedia, I'm going to set aside my doubts and help you again. However, it might take a little while before I do so. You should also know that I'm going to improve the article so that it meets Wikipedia's guidelines such as verifiability, neutral point of view, no original research, and reliable sources. I suggest that you locate and cite sources before you have me fix the article; this will help me out significantly. What exactly do you need help with? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:59, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Could you slow down a little? ;-)

Half the time I revert, I see Error: Latest revision was made by Oshwah, so it might have already been reverted, stopping reverting. Bronze2018 (talk) 13:49, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Bronze2018! I saw the edit summary "Compliments!" with your edit here (I wasn't sure at first if you were joking or not); thanks for the message and the compliment! I get that a lot from people... "Oshwah beat me again!", and such. Vandal patrolling is something I've been doing for over 8 years now, and I'm glad that someone such as yourself is getting into it as well - we can always use the help! So long as it's something you enjoy (most people I talk to really don't like RC patrolling), more power to you! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:02, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

I've gotten a little addicted. Twinkle messages have started to make appearances in my dreams :D Bronze2018 (talk) 14:04, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Oh, I completely understand where you're coming from! If you like talking to people in the community, consider joining us on IRC (#wikipedia-en)! We could always use more awesome people to chat with! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:09, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

How long should I wait before applying for rollback or pending changes reviewer? I pulled my old account out after doing about 2 months of RC patrol as an IP, and now my account has 2 weeks of me doing RC patrol 4 hours a day on it. Bronze2018 (talk) 14:16, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Good question, Bronze2018! If you reached about 2,000 reverts that are correctly identified as vandalism, have about 50 successful and correct AIV reports filed, and know and understand what is and is not vandalism, I'd say that you have rollback granted no problem. Users that are eligible or have been granted rollback are usually also eligible to receive pending changes reviewer rights as well. Different administrators have different standards and criteria for accepting or declining requests for those privileges; I'd check out the rollback and reviewer pages and see how you feel. Worse case scenario, they tell you "no" ;-). ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:24, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

How hard would it be to get them to remove the 1RR fetters from Cluebot? That might cause a few issues, but it would make RC patrol almost leisurely. And it would make you seem snail-like. Bronze2018 (talk) 14:34, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Bronze2018 - Programmatically, not hard at all. In fact, it could probably be done in a few minutes. However, it's done purposefully and at the consensus of the community in order to help control false positives by allowing editors to restore the content reverted by the bot. If I recall correctly, ClueBot won't revert your edit a second time if it's made on the same article on the same day. Otherwise, it'll do its thing if the edit falls within its algorithm and probability thresholds. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:38, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

In the program, it could be done in less than a minute if you knew what file it was in. I have just found the false positives to be few and far between. You could have a few dozen people who patrolled cluebot's change log and had permission to give it a "cease and desist" order If you were worried about those. Bronze2018 (talk) 14:43, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Indeed, but I'm not in charge of it and changing it without input and consensus would get me a swift kick in the butt by the community at large. I prefer not to have that happen ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:52, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Bronze2018 - Your signature doesn't link to your user page. Go to your preferences and replace it with this in order to fix it:

Signature code fix
[[User:Bronze2018|<span style="text-shadow:#000 0.1em 0.1em 0.3em; class=texhtml"><span style="color: #117">Bronze</span><span style="color: #712">2018</span>]] ([[User talk:Bronze2018#top|talk]]) </span>

Cheers -- ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:02, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

IP editor at my talk-page

Hello,
Thanks for restoring the message at my TP. The IP referred to is a long-term IP-hopping persistently disruptive editor of F1 related topics. I'd just had to undo a batch of his edits where he ignored previous edits / advice, so he obviously thought a bit of 'revenge' was in order. He has no concept of any sort of policies or guidelines so messing with TPs is par... Thanks, Regards, Eagleash (talk) 13:52, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Eagleash! Of course; you're very welcome. The edit he made definitely looked like trolling, so I went ahead and took it off for you. I got your back! ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:03, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Nick Atkinson

Hi, Ive just removed some information from my wiki page, that I feel is detrimental to my career. I have previously deleted this information, regarding my involvement in a Pokemon single, but it keeps reappearing. I would appreciate it if this specific piece of information was omitted from my page, as it discouraging artists from writing with me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.146.203.147 (talk) 14:21, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for leaving me a message with your concerns. If you are who you claim to be and have concerns about the article, then you need to contact the volunteer response team by clicking here. This is the proper contact method given your situation; the OTRS team has the proper training and tools to verify your identity and help you with your concerns. In the meantime, please do not continue removing the content from the article, as doing so will not resolve the issue and will only make resolving the situation harder when contacting the OTRS team. Thank you! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:28, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Ummm...

Talk:تور کوش آداسی I think it's the wrong language. Bronze2018 (talk) 14:22, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

It's deleted now ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:25, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Question (Please ping me if you reply)

I have thoroughly reviewed your contributions, and your only block was a mistake. Would you like it if I nominated you at RFA? --Peter Sam Fan 15:04, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello again, Peter SamFan! Thanks for your message and for your question; it's a pleasure to shake your hand again! I've discussed an RFA with a few other editors just recently, and I believe that the wise thing for me to do is wait until August or September 2016 before running again, since it will be about one year since my first RFA (I withdrew due to the opposition - lack of content creation, something I've well since resolved in my opinion). This will also give me some time to venture into other areas, as well as make some more content contributions. I feel like I'd have a decent chance of passing if I ran today, but I think that it's smart to wait. I think that it'll improve my chances if I do. If you're still down for a nomination (or being a co-nominator) a few months from now, I'll give you a ping when the time comes; I'd be happy to have you as one if you'd like. What do you think? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:27, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks! Just be warned, I don't edit on Sundays, and usually Saturdays. Peter Sam Fan 15:28, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

No worries, Peter SamFan - There's no such thing as a deadline here ;-). And thanks again! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:31, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

I'd like to encourage you to have another RfA, Oshwah but only when the time feels right. I don't think it's possible to be overprepared for an RfA and I think there are some unsuccessful RfAs that would have passed if the candidate hadn't rushed into the process too soon. I don't think that judgment applies to you but I've seen enough RfAs that could have gone either way except for a lack of experience in one or two areas of the project. I'm glad to hear that you are thinking about it and let me know if there is any way I could help. I don't think I'd be a good choice for nominator though and I'd be careful when selecting those people because some--not many but some--editors will vote based on the reputation of the nominator(s). Considering how contentious my own RfA was, I wouldn't want to bring any of that baggage to your RfA. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:46, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Liz! It's good to see you again as well! I really appreciate your tips and your input. Not to worry; I'm thinking about running again in a few months. I originally didn't want to run before September, since it could be seen by others as a "mad dash for adminship". I agree with your input regarding the wise choosing of good and experienced nominators. I have nothing against those that nominated me on my first RFA. However, many have correctly said to me that the opening statement made from my nominator, "Oshwah may not be the most prolific content creator here on WP. Content creation should not be an important part of adminship..." definitely shot me in the foot before the RFA had really begun. As cliche and "political" as it may be, lining up good nominators that are trusted and liked by the community does make a huge difference. I'll be exercising much more hesitation and care this time (now that I've gone through an RFA and know what to look for and what's important).

I feel like my vandal patrolling and AIV record is good, as well as my CSD log, AFD stats and ACC stats. My content creation/expansion is good now (I'm pretty sure), and my ANI participation and communication with new users and editors (all over my talk page) seems good as well. I think that right now, it's just about waiting and being patient, as well as continuing to do what I've been doing (unless I'm missing a key area that I must be involved in)... Maybe you can think of an area? lol :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:37, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

I haven't looked over your RfA recently but from recent RfAs I'll add (and you probably know this already), in Q1, mention admin activities that you have some experience in. I know you do a lot of vandal fighting so it is logical to say that you would use admin tools in your efforts to eliminate vandalism. Some unsuccesful candidates for this question either a) list admin activities they have little experience in at the time of the RfA or b) list activities that don't require admin tools. The latter raises the question, "Then why do you need the bit if you're going to focus on content creation/dispute resolution/new page patrol/etc.?"

My only other comment is that AfD participation is always looked at because it demonstrates a familiarity with deletion policies and editors want to know that you'll use the deletion and block buttons responsibly. It's also a bellwether that reveals a candidate's knowledge of Wikipedia policies and guidelines that goes beyond just whether you voted "Delete" or "Keep". Basically, I think that most editors participating in an RfA are looking for four main qualities: evidence of solid, well-rounded editing experience, evidence of good judgment, the ability to discuss differences calmly with other editors and, if there have been any major errors or misconduct in your background, a) an acknowledgment from the candidate that there was a problem and b) credible assurances that this conduct is in the past and is no longer a concern. That's my general remarks but let me know when you get closer to the date and I'll look over your previous RfA. Happy editing! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:56, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Will do. Thanks again, Liz :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:57, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Re: Paul Ryan

Oshwah - How about you spend some time fixing issues where you reverted people's valid edits. I know you block a lot of vandalism, which certainly has value, but you do a poor job of addressing people's concerns when you revert people who aren't vandals. You agree my edit was not vandalism and that I have good points, you ask me to wait to get feedback from you and I see you have dozens and dozens of new vandalism reverts, while I have been waiting several days on feedback. Not particularly well-rounded and now I am starting to get annoyed. If you don't care about the encyclopedic content in question, how about you undo your revert and let me work out how to proceed with page editors who do care about this content? Lipsquid (talk) 18:08, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Lipsquid - I responded to your message earlier regarding Paul Ryan a few days ago (I also see that you responded just a bit ago). I've read the relevant guidelines (words to watch) and found this section on contentious labels. You've heard my arguments in opposition, and I've heard your arguments in support - I'll leave that in your hands. You're more than welcome to re-instate the change that you wished to originally make to Paul Ryan. I've already explained my rationale and apologized for making you upset with the template left on your talk page. Continuing to impatiently nudge on and on with responses like this, which you made only a few hours ago - and then nudging again here stating that I don't fix issues and don't expand content... it doesn't help the project, nor does it help others to want to work with you. You're certainly entitled to your opinion, and I won't stop you from expressing it. All I ask is that you remember that there is no deadline on Wikipedia, and that keeping a cool head and remaining civil is a powerful skill that will get you much much further than becoming angry at others (especially if they've already expressed willingness to help you and treated your input and responses with respect). Nobody is perfect; assume good faith :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:37, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

You asked me to wait, I have been waiting for several days. If there is no deadline and we try to keep it cool, why did you revert my change within 2 mins without even having the courtesy to check with me in the first place. You are active on Wikipedia, my edit was obviously not vandalism. I am asking you to put down the revert button and help with some content, which you said you would help with, or undo your revert if you don't want to be involved with improving the content. I am not saying you have bad faith at all, what is unreasonable about my request that makes you think I feel you are acting in bad faith? I am just asking you to pick whether you are involved or not. If you are not involved, undo your revert and step aside. If you don't want to undo your revert, then you do have an opinion and you should focus on this content issue and let others revert vandalism for a bit. Your choice. Lipsquid (talk) 19:20, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Lipsquid - I believe that I have fairly responded and provided you with the input, discussion, responses, and policies in order for you to make a fair decision with the section header. I am not going to make any further changes to the article, nor am I not going to intervene or stop you from continuing on with your intended changes. It appears that we're going in circles now; I'm going to let you make the decision, make whatever appropriate change you feel is right, and continue onward with the article. I think that the earlier discussion we had was interesting, and I learned a lot from your arguments in support with the change (which is always a good thing). But I don't want to stand in your way or make further arguments about it. Given the time and discussion we've had, I don't think that the section header title is that big of a deal at this point - I have my own content expansion projects to complete as well ;-). My talk page is always open to you if you have additional questions or concerns :-). I know we initially got off on the wrong foot; my goal now is to make peace with you and be friends instead of enemies... if that's okay with you :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:37, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

If you want to step aside and you leave it up to me, which is certainly your right, why won't you revert your edit? Why would you want to keep the revert you made if you don't think it is a big deal. I think it is a pretty big deal that you reverted my edit as unconstructive, now that we have talked you are open to my decision and won't revert me again, but want your own revert to stand. Why should that be so, that is illogical? if you undo your own revert and walk away, we are done. If you won't undo your revert, I want to know why? I want to leave as friends too, I am not sure why something that seems straightforward is hard. Lipsquid (talk) 20:30, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Lipsquid - I went ahead and left a dummy edit to Paul Ryan (here) explaining the situation and that your edit was in good faith. This should allow you to proceed as normal with the article without any problems, and with an edit summary stored and on the record for backtracking and reviewing as necessary by others. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:40, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, have a good one Lipsquid (talk) 20:48, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Of course; you're very welcome. I'm happy that we were able to work something out, Lipsquid! :-D ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:53, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Tampere Saints

Hi!

You reverted my change in Tampere Saints, as you considered my edit as test. Edit was real. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.155.216.140 (talk) 15:42, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

No worries; I was just confused about your edit here. You didn't leave a description in the edit summary, so I thought that you were perhaps making an editing test. In the future, if you describe each of your changes using the edit summary, other editors will know and understand what you're doing and why. It will avoid confusion (such as this). Cheers -- ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:04, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

With your blessings my 2nd article

I succeeded in my first article with your blessings,now i created my 2nd articles Dr Sreehari,it was reviewed.I want to give my total life time to wikipedia.Thanking you sir'

Sir Bonadea requested speedy deletion for my first article Barbro Gunilla Kristina Brorsson Wolde ,but you removed the speedy deletion tag and redirected it.Just now Bonadea again wantedly to harass me added speedy deletion tag to my 2nd article Dr Sreehari‎ .I am very much interesting in wikipedia.I am requesting you plese give me blessings to create some more articles in wikipeida — Preceding unsigned comment added by Niceeditor100 (talk • contribs) 16:04, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

(Niceeditor100 (talk) 15:55, 8 April 2016 (UTC))

The Huntsman: Winter's War Plot

"Hello. I think you should not post the whole story synopsis for the movie because it is going to spoil it for many people who are probably just looking at the page to find out about cast details and so on. Please do not ruin it for everyone. Your synopsis has spoiled it for many people. Twitter users have been posting about this problem as well. I hope you will wait until after the 22nd of April before posting it again. Thank you." 115.135.82.36 (talk) 16:14, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Your removal of content is not allowed. Wikipedia is not censored, and removing content like this simply because you don't like it is not a valid reason for doing so. Continuing to remove content from articles, such as what you did to The Huntsman: Winter's War with these edits, will result in being blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you for understanding. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:20, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

No subject

YOU MADE A MISTAKE — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.109.57 (talk) 17:39, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

bout the page ray Harmony

hi is gatbaba, a Ugandan anyway I want to reach on behave of the page Ray Harmony. so unfortunately I have written about it. and recently received some feedback from the team on wikipedia. mostly saw you too. on point it wasn't an aressment the way have written every notes on the articles. have did it with all my heart. thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garbaba (talk • contribs) 19:15, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Garbaba, and thanks for leaving me a message. I understand how much time and effort goes into the creation of an article, and how frustrating it can be to watch it be tagged for speedy deletion or tagged with drive-by maintenance and other templates. Removing speedy deletion tags from articles you've created yourself, such as what you did with this edit, isn't the appropriate way to contest your deletion. To properly contest your deletion, you need to follow the directions on the speedy deletion template. Administrators will look and read your rationale and reason for keeping before making a decision to delete the article. If you want to try again, I suggest using the articles for creation process, as well as the article creation wizard. It will give you step-by-step instructions and assistance as you proceed with the article creation. I hope this response helps you with your next article. Good luck :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:23, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Reversal to the article on Arnold Schwarzenegger

Hi, Oshwah, I think you just reverted an edit I made to the article on Arnold Schwarzenegger. Actually, since I know very little about Wikipedia editing, I'm not sure if it was you who reverted it or a bot (possibly owned by you). In any case, I'm surprised with the reason provided: Lack of reliable sources. I provided the most reliable source possible: The magazine itself.

Elendaíl (talk) 20:04, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Elendaíl! Thanks for leaving me a message. I saw your edit and was concerned that the sources you did provide didn't meet Wikipedia's reliable sources guideline, which is required when making changes to articles that are biographies of living people. The magazine source you provided is not verifiable, and the other source is simply a blog. Do you have other verifiable sources that you can provide that is secondary and reliable, such as a news article or published biography? We just need to be very careful when it comes to adding content to biographies of living people (especially if it could be seen or read as contentious or controversial), and make absolute sure that the references we provide are absolutely in-line with Wikipedia's policies. Again, I very much appreciate your message and that you took the time to discuss your concerns and the article. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:26, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

What do you mean the magazine is not a verifiable source. The Wikipedia article that you linked explicitly states magazines as verifiable sources. Regarding the blog, it doesn't matter what the blog says. What does matter is that it contains several of the pictures that appeared in the publication. It doesn't get much more verifiable than that.

Elendaíl (talk) 22:59, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Elendaíl - I agree that the magazine source you provided can be considered "reliable" (meaning that it is legitimate and not fake), but it is a primary source, since the magazine is being used as a reference for itself. Wikipedia's biographies of living people guidelines call for the use of secondary sources over primary sources. And since anyone can create a blog and post any picture they want and make claims, the blog is still not considered a reliable source and shouldn't be used. In order to add the content to the article without causing concern with other editors and Wikipedia's guidelines, I highly recommend that you locate secondary sources that meets the criteria and use those instead of the sources you have now. Please let me know if you have any more questions or concerns. I'll be happy to answer them and assist you further. Cheers -- ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:12, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

The magazine is not meant to be a primary source about the magazine. It's meant to be a secondary source about the posing for the photoshoot and the interview Arnold gave. Regarding the blog, not everybody can post any picture they want. I'd love to post a picture of myself dating Salma Hayek, but that's impossible because such picture doesn't exist (because I don't even know Salma Hayek, unfortunately).

Anyway, there you go, secondary sources (on the magazine) aplenty (there are thousands out there):

http://www.ebay.com/itm/AFTER-DARK-muscle-bodybuilding-gay-interest-magazine-ARNOLD-SCHWARZENEGGER-2-77/152014475003?_trksid=p2047675.c100011.m1850&_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIC.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D35625%26meid%3D8816a1e3fa264e6ca20cfee6f636ca16%26pid%3D100011%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D2%26sd%3D400614803167

http://www.filmbokep69.com/download-pic/arnold-schwarzenegger-after-dark/id-aHR0cDovL3Bob3RvczEuYmxvZ2dlci5jb20veC9ibG9nZ2VyLzY2NTIvMTIxMi8xNjAwLzYyNzA4L3BlbmlsZSUyMGNvZGUyLmpwZw==.html

https://books.google.es/books?id=g6rU59neX34C&pg=PA146&lpg=PA146&dq=schwarzenegger+%22after+dark%22&source=bl&ots=uZPCXNpvni&sig=eDCpcp1GwTXc44lMCtCkpTqAxFw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiKvseLm4DMAhUJ1xoKHemMAfc4ChDoAQhUMAk#v=onepage&q=schwarzenegger%20%22after%20dark%22&f=false

http://www.peimag.com/10-actors-who-did-adult-films-before-they-were-famous/

http://www.diariolasamericas.com/4942_portada-vida-y-artes/3264015_fotogaleria-estrellas-alguna-vez-hicieron-porno.html&prev=search

http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/entertainers/actors/arnold-schwarzenegger/

I hope this is enough to revert back to my edit.

Elendaíl - I'll go through each of your listed URLs and tell you what I think: The ebay auction is definitely not a reliable source. Let's just get that one out of the way. The image of the front cover, while good at showing "See? It's here!", it doesn't provide in-depth coverage. The best sources that I think you found that looks to meet all of the guidelines are the rotten.com biography and the book (The Village Proposal). The book is also considered secondary, as it was written by someone other than the article subject ;-). The rest that you provided don't cite their sources, or were not written and published and available for reading and verification. I think you did it! Use those two sources, and I think you're golden! Nicely done, man! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:26, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your help and encouragement. I've done the editing already. Elendaíl (talk) 02:23, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Elendaíl - No problem! It's what I'm here for! :-D Did you need help with anything else? I'm happy to lend a hand if you do :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:59, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Our Sandbox got some help

	Protector of the Wiki
	Keeping the Richards at bay. Good job 7&6=thirteen (☎) 22:19, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, 7&6=thirteen! Thanks for the wikilove. Always happy to help! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:22, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

HA! - 7&6=thirteen, call me an idiot but that took me way too long to realize what you were referring to. "Richard"... why did that take me so long? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:36, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

You have a clean mind. Cleanliness is next to godliness. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 00:09, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

7&6=thirteen - Yeah, but it's not as fun!! :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:10, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

We have a persistent and pervasive problem at the SB. Very difficult problem. The range of images is limitless, and our nemesis has a trunk full of IPs. And by and large, we want to keep it open for newbies to edit. Without being inundated with horrific pictures. So keep an eye out. I regularly put in a request to Wikipedia oversight to REVDEL. Keep up the good work. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 00:15, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

7&6=thirteen - Roger that ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:18, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Userpage Shield
		So, when I was eating my user page was vandalised? Thanks for reverting it. Peter Sam Fan 23:20, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Peter SamFan! We meet again! Thanks for the awesome wikilove! ... And you bet! Always happy to do it :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:30, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Sockpuppets EU referendum

Sock of Sockpuppet of sockpuppet of sockpuppet of sockpuppet of sockpuppet of sockpuppet? Adam9007 (talk) 00:34, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Adam9007 - Joy! Isn't it so much fun?!! Socks! Socks everywhere! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:36, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Adam9007 - And yes. Definitely him. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:38, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Is an SPI in order? Or has it already been done? Adam9007 (talk) 00:37, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Adam9007 - I assume it's being done, but every time I get a chance to go check, he comes back and I get to play "whack-a-mole" again ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:39, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

It's got to be him; he's done the same speedy tags and templates. Adam9007 (talk) 00:45, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Oh, there's absolutely no doubt in my mind. I wonder who the original sock master is? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:46, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi

I was editing one of my older Wikipedia arrivals from my old account and can you let me edit it as I was trying to until the page reverted back to a older vetsion CraigTski (talk) 01:11, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

CraigTski - It would probably be better if you copied the content to your user space and edited there, since other editors may also revert your changes as well (especially given the fact that we can't verify your claims and that this other account actually belongs to you. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:14, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Warning - ANI

Due to your edit-warring on the Licorice McKechnie article (THOSE ARE NOT RELIABLE SOURCES - those are anon forum postings and they FAIL the Wiki guidelines!) I will be bringing you up on ANI. Sorry, but you are being obstinate and Wiki warrioring. 98.67.190.23 (talk) 04:15, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

If you're not willing to explain on the article's talk page exactly why they fail the guidelines, then you're more than welcome to file a report. All I asked is that you explain your removal on the article's talk page, and you have not done so. Using aggressive word choice and tone in this manner will not resolve the situation. Please follow proper dispute resolution protocol and respond to my questions on the article's talk page. Thank you. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:18, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

See the updated responses on the article's talk page. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:31, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Pagar Alam

Thank you for the response. Sorry for my bad English. About the wikipedia page of Pagar Alam, my reason to edit the page is to synchronize with its Indonesian version of the page. About the deleted one, I forgot to preview the edited page before it was posted and I notice some problem in the layout after the edit was done.Bondguevara (talk) 07:28, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Bondguevara - It's all good, man. We all make stupid mistakes ;-). Cheers -- ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:30, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

A bastard child is an illegitimate child born out of wedlock (Modern Concise Oxford Dictionary of the English language)

Justin Welby, Archbishop of Canterbury, is the bastard child of the late Sir Anthony Montague Browne (1923–2013).

Please look up the word bastard child in any English language dictionary. It is correctly used. It is also correctly used in regards to the teachings of the Anglican Church, of which he is the head, as Archbishop of Canterbury.

This is constructive and relavant editing as ANY powerful and influential person who takes up the role of political/religious power to represent certain values and preach them to others..... should not be hypocrite himself, and actually believe in what he preaches.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.29.81.214 (talk) 07:33, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Your edits here change the wording in the sentence from a description that is neutal and scientific to a description that adds a word that many would translate as implying a point of view that isn't. The words and description used in the sentence is fine as-is; your changes do not appear to improve upon it's neutrality, and hence isn't an improvement nor is it needed. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:40, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for removing the vandalism from my user page. Aoa8212 (talk) 07:46, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

No, problem Aoa8212. Always happy to do it :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:47, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Possible sock puppets

If you follow the conversation, "Is this the 32.218 that I think it is?", on User_talk:32.218.45.217, you can see the reply, "Yes, it is", on User_talk:John_from_Idegon, has IP address 32.218.40.85, yet refers to "overwriting my talk page comments", a comment clearly made by 32.218.45.217, and the similarity in locale, Wisconsin, of articles edited by all three contributors. 82.30.110.20 (talk) 08:23, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

A dynamic IP is not a sockpuppet. End of discussion. 32.218.46.71 (talk) 14:20, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Winterysteppe

Hey Oshwah, im actually User:Winterysteppe. I actually changed that due to personal conflict with some others. Clearly some users want to unilaterally witch hunt me so, I decided to do a fresh-start without notifying people of my new account. 2601:84:4601:D750:E5BD:D4A:855C:5710 (talk) 12:47, 9 April 2016 (UTC)