User talk:Oshwah

Hi everyone who knows me! ..........

I'm sorry that I haven't been active as of late. I've been dealing with... very extreme personal things that have suddenly come into my life. I will get back to you soon; I promise. I am committed to this project and (unless you ban me - I'll become the ULTIMATE SOCK PUPPET lol) I am not going anywhere! I just need a little time to pick myself up...

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

JavaScript Word Generator

We are trying to make random 5-letter words. Here is the source:

function word(let) {
var i, text;
for(i=0, text=""; i<let; i++) {
text += "abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz".charAt(Math.floor(Math.random() * 26));
}
return text;
}
console.log(word(5));

There are no errors, but we want specific letters like e to occur to match the letter frequencies. Can you help me with that? (talk | contribs)209.52.88.162 (talk) 16:49, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

It looks like you're passing in a number to this function which defines how long the random characters will be, but you're doing so by traversing down the alphabet and then choosing a letter from that string. This is fine, but I think your random function is inadvertently allowing a number greater than 26 to be generated. I would remove the " text="" " part from your for loop and add a bound to what numbers can be returned from the random number generator so it can't return anything higher than 26. You should replace the multiplication (*) and instead use modulus (%) so that the random number generated won't be above 26. However, I believe that the .charAt() function accepts a zero integer so that it stays at 'a'. If this is so, you want '0' to be a possibility. If adding 1 starts at 'a', then you need to take the random number and add a 1 to the end so that zero is not possible. Review this function and change the code accordingly. This is how I'd improve your code (see below):

function word(let) {
var i, text;
for(i=0; i<let; i++) {
text += "abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz ".charAt(Math.floor((Math.random() % 26) + 1)); // Check if adding +1 is needed. If not, remove the + 1 and the enclosing parentheses.
}
return text;
}
console.log(word(5));

I'm not an expert at PHP, but since you generated no syntax errors when building your above function, this should work. Anyways, hope this helps. Good luck with your code and have fun! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:41, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Some help needed regarding alternate account created

Hi, I've created an another account named User:MustafaAliIsAPakistaniWrestler for the reason mentioned there, Only I need is that is it OK that I've created an alternative account? Thanks. CK (talk) 18:41, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

 Administrator note Strange that this is here since they already started a thread at WP:AN and already got a reply in the form of me blocking the alt account. I’d welcome further comment from either of you there. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:51, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment) @Beeblebrox: Note that this was posted here before anyone responded at AN. byteflush _Talk 02:34, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Broken nutshell - Alternative accounts are allowed so long as you disclose them to your normal account (when applicable) and you use them only for reasons that are compliant with Wikipedia's sock puppetry policy. Using an alternative account for illegitimate reasons against policy is unacceptable - it is taken very seriously by the community, and can hurt your reputation and even your future on Wikipedia - so you definitely want to take care and use any alternative accounts you create for legitimate causes. Please let me know if you have any questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks for the message, and I wish you happy editing :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:06, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Broken nutshell - Based off the reply made here by Beeblebrox, it looks like you've also received input at the Administrators' noticeboard in a discussion here. Someone mentioned that you stated that you were going to use this alternative account in order to "stop edit wars at Pakistani-related BLP topics"; he followed up with the same question that I would have also asked: Why couldn't you do that with your main account? I think that the responses were appropriate and were made with good faith intentions and in order to help you and keep you out of trouble. I'd also recommend sticking to one account and asking for help or advice before considering the creation of more - it'll keep you out of trouble and prevent editors (and possibly the community) from mistaking what may be a good-faith misunderstanding of policy for bad-faith deception and disruption. Again, please don't hesitate to let me know if you have any questions. Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:24, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

RE :Oshwah Well Thanks for responding me, first of all Issue has resolved as I've found no edit war on the article Mustafa Ali till now, an article as I've discussed to Stop edit warring at Pakistani BLPs especially on the articles regarding Overseas Pakistani BLPs. Since the creation of the article Mustafa Ali, it has been claimed by some users that 'Ali is American Pro wrestler of Indian Descent' which appears to be incorrect because I watched show WWE Cruiserweight Classics and I saw that Ali Represented Pakistani Flag, so how it is possible that he is of India? referring Ali as Indian is incorrect information. For further assistance you can also seek through This. Second thing I want to tell you that I choose you for some assistance regarding alternate account creation because I see when I get engaged in any kind of war or attack at wikipedia as I got block for this reason 2 times, You and User:Fortuna Imperator Mundi made me keep calm down during previous incidents in which I got involved(especially at moment when I pluralize my self as WE or US). So once again Thanks for response. CK (talk) 09:31, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Broken nutshell - I'm both happy and relieved to hear that my responses (as well as the responses from others in the community) have helped to answer your questions and (more importantly) helped you to compose your emotions and avoid violating Wikipedia policies under duress and causing yourself major hardship due to the ramifications from doing so. It's very important that you continue to be mindful of how you're feeling while dealing with conflicts and disputes on Wikipedia, and to recognize when you're frustrated or angry and to take appropriate measures in order to avoid editing purely based on emotional flares and heated reactions. Since the edit warring and issues you mentioned being blocked for in the past, it sounds like you've improved and are trying to do the right things and avoid them from occurring again - that's excellent and I encourage you to keep up this behavior and continue reflecting on yourself and improvising ways to better yourself as an editor. Nobody is perfect - especially myself... I'm far, far from perfect. However, having the personality traits, skills, and the ability to accept responsibility for your actions (both good and bad), take feedback and enforcement from other editors positively, view "mess-ups" as a positive learning opportunity, and commit to improve yourself and not repeat any issues from the past - are the best traits for an editor to be proficient with, and are the very skill-sets and habits that will almost certainly set you up for success. Keep up the excellent improvements and continue doing the good work that you do here, and don't hesitate to message me if you ever have questions, need help or input, or just need advice on how to handle a frustrating situation professionally. I'll be more than happy to help. Thanks for the response, I wish you well, and I'm glad to hear that we avoided a potentially bad situation - I'm glad you took the time to ask questions before you decided to simply proceed. It most likely saved you from a lot of trouble ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:26, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

RE :Oshwah Thanks CK (talk) 10:41, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

You bet; always happy to help :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:42, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

BBC IP Vandal

Please see additional paragraph above on this problem. Regards, David J Johnson (talk) 19:56, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

David J Johnson - Sorry for the late reply. I'm catching up after a short break in order to get work and personal stuff taken care of. It looks like the IP hasn't edited for a few days, so keep an eye on it and let me know if things continue and I'll be happy to take a look. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:27, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Oh, and make sure to put the exact IP in messages like this one here (even if a previous one is nearby) - it just makes responding to issues easier for me ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:31, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Many thanks for all your help. Regards, David — Preceding unsigned comment added by David J Johnson (talk • contribs) 11:24, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

You bet; always happy to lend a hand ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:53, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

School threat?

On this edit, combined with the edit summary, the editor seems to be posting a threat for a 'Madison central school' (which isn't exactly a specific location). Is this something that would require more attention or should it just be ignored? LynxTufts (talk) 20:07, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)There are "Madison Central High School"s in Kentucky and Mississippi, and doubtless at least one middle and elementary school. It's very difficult to know to which this was referring. However, with a possibility space of only 2-6, it's not really much more difficult to contact the authorities.

While I'm normally quite the easy going guy, in this case, I would definitely pass this on. A CheckUser could get a geolocation on the editor to narrow things down, and they could pass on the name given in the edit summary. Stuff like this, it's really better to be safe than sorry. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:16, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

I notified User:Emergency and revdeled. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 20:18, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

@SarekOfVulcan: "Madison central school" is all over the news now after threats put it in lockdown. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 23:58, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Oh, good, it wasn't us. Students reported him. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 03:28, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

@SarekOfVulcan: I am relieved as well. I imagine/hope that the WMF will offer up that edit if requested & hopefully make it known to FBI or whatnot (about the edit). --TheSandDoctor (talk) 03:42, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for reporting and for taking the necessary steps to make sure the proper teams were notified :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:00, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

PHP Flip Coin

I am trying to make a coin flipper that flips a coin every second and sends it to the server and back to users. All I have is this:

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<title>Periodic Coin Flipper</title>
</head>
<body>
<?php
function flip() {
if (mt_rand(1,2) == 1) {
echo "Heads";
} else {
echo "Tails";
}
}
?>
</body>
</html>

209.52.88.34 (talk) 23:21, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Are you looping outside this function to call it every second in order to perform the flip? If you aren't, you'll need to create this loop and set it so that it is called one time per second. Otherwise, the function seems to do exactly what you're trying to do. However as a good programming practice, you want to try and make this function independent and then call it when needed. I'd instead create a text variable and then return the result instead of having the function display it. Then you can simply create a loop outside the function... then you should theoretically be able to simply write "echo flip();" inside the loop. Here's what I am envisioning for that function you wrote:

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<title>Periodic Coin Flipper</title>
</head>
<body>
<?php
function flip() {
var side = "Tails";
if (mt_rand(1,2) == 1) {
side = "Heads";
}
return side;
}
?>
</body>
</html>

Hopefully that provides some help and direction for you. You always want to exert good programming practice - even in small functions like this. This allows you to easily re-use code without having to change or restructure too much of it to perform similar or exact operations in other projects. Good luck! :-D ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:42, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

<?php
echo "<!DOCTYPE html><html><head><title>Periodic Coin Flipper</title></head><body>\n";
switch(mt_rand(1,2)) {
case 0: echo "Heads\n"; break;
case 1: echo "Tails\n"; break;
}
echo "</body></html>\n";
?>

Switch works too :) SQL^{Query me!} 04:17, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Kimberly Elise reply

I am replying to your message (dated 12/15/2017) to me regarding the Kimberly Elise page changes. This is my second time trying to contact you and I haven't heard anything back. Could you please tell me what is not neutral? Also why does her photo keep reverting to the old outdated one? I uploaded a current one that I own. I followed all wiki protocal when I uploaded it. Please respond so this can be resolved and we can get Ms. Elise's page accurate and current. Thanks GracieMnsotachicky (talk) 00:02, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Mnsotachicky, and thanks for writing me a message here with your questions and concerns. I apologize if your first inquiry to me went without a response, and I apologize for my delayed reply to your message here. I've been busy lately and I'm just now catching up with all of my Wikipedia messages and emails :-). I also try my very best to respond to everyone's messages here, but I admit that I sometimes will accidentally miss a few - please don't be offended; it's purely accidental and I don't mean to do that. The concerns I had with your edits to Kimberly Elise and Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy stemmed from some sentences you added to the edit you made here. One example is where you state, "The ecommerce company is lauded for its high-quality, natural and organic beauty products with a focus on natural and organic based hair products marketed towards people with kinky, coily afro textured hair." This appears to be worded to speak positively about the company, which is something we shouldn't be doing. I believe that there other sentences that had concerns as well - I'd review Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, look through the edit I linked you and work to identify any potentially concerning statements such as the one above. If you have any more questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them and assist you further. Thanks for leaving a follow-up message reminding me to get back to you, and I apologize for such a delay with doing so. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:13, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Hickory Dickory

It seems that I have been mistaken to have made an edit on a nursery rhyme. I only message to clear my name thanks174.109.212.153 (talk) 03:45, 28 February 2018 (UTC)wikitrice

(talk page stalker) Hi 174. Your IP address is dynamic: one day it could be used by one network, another day a completely different one, so indeed, you did not do that. !dave 15:58, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

The best way to avoid issues of receiving messages for vandalism and issues you didn't cause is to create an account for yourself and use it to edit. Please let me know if you have any more questions. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:14, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello

How are you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.16.24.39 (talk) 05:04, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Flagged user

Good day

Hope this email finds you well.

I'm Lynx Scar, I'm a passionate Wikifan and so I've decided to have my own account but everytime I make a edit it seems to be reverted.

Please assist as I'm trying to add content and all of it just scores low. I need help in on trying to add content cause I've checked this link out and it's not helping https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:As_of

Your assistance would be appreciated

Kind regards Lynx Scar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lynx Scar (talk • contribs) 06:48, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Lynx Scar, and welcome to Wikipedia! In the case of the revert I made: it looks like the edit you made here wasn't referenced by any reliable sources. This is why I reverted this edit and added a note to your talk page. Did you have any specific questions or requests for assistance? I'll be more than happy to help you if you do - just let me know :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:25, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Wrong person

I keep getting messages that I've edited something and its been reversed, problem is i havent edited anything and the example you's have shown me, something about tanks from ww1 I've never even been on that page before so it doesnt make sense, you's have obviously made a mistake — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.122.252.69 (talk) 01:29, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

The best way to avoid issues of receiving messages for vandalism and issues you didn't cause is to create an account for yourself and use it to edit. Please let me know if you have any more questions. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:26, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

RevDel request

Would you mind hiding an edit on Howie Stange, based on this [1].--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 01:34, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) To me, it seems it is just routinal vandalism and that there is no particular reason to RevDel that edit. However, Oshwah is free to decide. L293D (☎ • ✎) 02:54, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Loriendrew - I don't see what the reason is to apply revision deletion here. Am I missing something? What's concerning you exactly? Let me know and I'll take another look. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:27, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

The part added about being a mass murderer, rapist and sentenced to death by hanging. I know it is deleted, but it jumped well over my vandalism line and into the clearly offensive, degrading and quite a blp vio.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 19:33, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Why is PHP partially case-sensitive?

PHP variables are case-sensitive, but not functions. Why not? Like this:

<?php
mt_rand(); // No error
MT_RAND(); // No error
$_SERVER; // No error
$_server; // Error
?>

Thank you, 209.52.88.74 (talk) 23:23, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

@209.52.88.74: Google is your best friend, I would suggest looking it up instead of asking here as it takes about the same amount of time and you would get your answer a lot quicker. --All the best, TheSandDoctor (talk) 23:34, 2 March 2018 (UTC) (talk page stalker)

(talk page stalker)Because variables are the most useful place to have case sensitivity and when you're editing in a text editor without intellisense, capitalization of function names is a pain in the ass. That's just my guess, though. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 23:36, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

That's because "$_SERVER" is a system superglobal variable that's defined within PHP. It's generating an error because you're attempting to call "$_server", which isn't defined. All variable declarations are case-sensitive and for many reasons. Functions are also case-sensitive; your function call of mt_rand() and MT_RAND() being correct is most likely due to the functions' declarations in the PHP library - the author probably created a #DEFINE (or what the PHP equivalent is) so that you could call the function either way and it'll work. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:33, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

SWM seeks advice

Greetings. At Stoneman Douglas High School shooting we have a somewhat unusual case of an editor (1) whose talk page participation is very close to zero and (2) who edits the article like a machine gun. There is a lot going on on the talk page and he is not aware of any of it because he doesn't like article talk pages. My estimate is that his edits are about evenly divided between improvements, non-improvements (usually copy edits of things that didn't need copy editing), and bad edits. Policy says every edit should improve the article, but I'm prepared to ignore that and overlook the non-improvements. But there aren't enough 3RR's between editors who pay enough attention, and care enough to spend their reverts, to keep up with the bad third. I've probably exceeded 3RR a little on a couple of occasions, and I'm only reverting the worst of the bad. He repeatedly changes things that either have talk page consensus (or some level of agreement) or are under discussion. (To his credit, he doesn't edit war when reverted.) I have approached him once on his talk page, he removed it without a response, and nothing changed. Would you have any advice to offer? ―Mandruss ☎ 00:18, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Mandruss! Thanks for leaving me a message with your request for input. I apologize for the delay responding to you here - I've been busy lately and I'm just now catching up with all of my Wikipedia messages and emails. The article appears to be extended protected now, but I'd still like to respond to your request for advice regarding this situation (since the concerns fall into a number of "grey areas" if you know what I mean) - ;-).

If the user is making edits that aren't improving the article but also don't appear to be bad-faith disruption, it can still become disruptive if the user repeats the same pattern of editing and despite the messages and pings from other editors asking for the user to stop and discuss things. If the user "doesn't like article talk pages", then that's going to be a big problem if (s)he doesn't change that mindset (assuming that's really what they really believe). If you've tried messaging the user on their user talk page (which it seems that you did and to no avail since they just removed it), and also tried creating discussions on the article's talk page and pinging the user to respond and join in on the discussion at-hand - also to no avail, and they continue to repeatedly modify the page to add content that you feel isn't improving the article - my advice from there would be to nicely warn the user on their talk page. Leave a detailed message explaining that you've tried messaging them on their user talk page with your concerns and saw that they simply removed it without responding, that you also tried starting discussions on the article's talk page (link them to the discussion in the message!) and haven't heard back there either. Explain that their edits (provide exact diffs) are giving you concerns and explain exactly why they're doing so, and ask them politely to join the discussion on the article's talk page so that things can be worked out. Explain how important talk page discussions and proper dispute resolution is, and that you really want to work with him to make the page better. Keep the message extremely polite and avoid any kind of words or statements that would make your message appear punitive or that you're scolding them (even slightly) - otherwise, they'll probably not respond or will do so in the way we don't want. If they fail to do anything after you leave this message and they continue making concerning edits, I'd take the next step and report them to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents and explain the situation there. If they're making reverts and violating 3RR, report them to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring instead. At that point, you've done everything that you could do to try and educate and help the user, and it's clear that they don't wish to follow Wikipedia's dispute resolution practices and work with others. Like I said, if they're not willing to discuss things and work with others, it will wind up being a big issue for them (if not now, then at some point in time).

On a side note, I understand that following 3RR can be difficult at times... hell, I've violated them a handful of times in the past - so I get it. I just want to urge you - definitely keep watch on that and do your best to not let yourself slip into the "3RR pitfall" - aside from putting your account in "blockable territory", it only tells the person on the other end of the dispute that doing so is okay (after all, you're doing it too, right?), and it makes any subsequent report you file against someone for 3RR less genuine, since the reviewing admin will of course notice that you did it too ;-). Just keep doing what you're doing as far as starting discussions and talk page messages and attempting to ping the user to participate in discussions, keep out of "3RR waters", and it'll make any reports you make easy to enforce if needed. The thing I usually state to editors who ask for 3RR and edit warring advice when it comes to reporting users - (if anything and all else aside) think of the messages you leave on the user's talk page and the discussions you start on the article's talk page as documentation. If it comes down to having to report the user to AN3, you have diffs to show that you've tried discussing the issues and asking them to participate, and they chose not to and instead kept reverting things on the article. Not being able to provide those diffs in an AN3 makes it harder for an admin to review and enforce. And keeping yourself out of 3RR and keeping clean from that pitfall will assure that you're not blocked for the same thing (remember WP:BOOMERANG).

I apologize if this response was a bit long - I wanted to give you specific advice regarding the particular situation you asked for advice about, as well as help you to prepare yourself in the future for similar situations. If you have any questions or further concerns, don't hesitate to respond and let me know and I'll be happy to help you further. Hope my response provided some help to you :-). Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:08, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Newbie looking for tips at improving my editing skills.

Hi there!

I'm new to editing Wikipedia pages and I am really overwhelmed with the systems to modify pages. I tried reading the article but some of it I still don't understand. Do you have any tips or advice on how to progress with editing more slowly so that I can understand what each function does?

Thank you very much and have a good day!

CFrederickL (talk) 04:07, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi CFrederickL! Welcome to Wikipedia! Have you gone through and completed Wikipedia's new user tutorial? If not, I highly recommend that you go through it entirely and complete the tutorial. It will help you with discovering and learning all of "the basics" on Wikipedia, as well as where to locate important guidelines and documentation, how to communicate and collaborate, as well as how to improve articles and where to find useful pages to help you with doing so. Please let me know if you have any more questions or need additional help, and I'll be happy to lend you a hand ;-). Again, I welcome you to Wikipedia and I hope you enjoy your stay and become a long-term editor with us! Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:15, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

You don't think it is relevant? Seriously?!

Special:Diff/826407384

How can you say it is not relevant? It is game-changing for the LGBT community. Ohh, imagine what people would say if I would disclose this message to the media! Maybe we should really let PinkNews know what a Wikipedia contributor said about this. Huh, what do you think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.233.165.196 (talk) 18:16, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Well, for starters it wasn't referenced by any sources. It also appears to imply a point-of-view, which is not compliant with Wikipedia's policies on neutrality. This is why I reverted your edit. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:21, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Archiving help needed

Heya,

Could you archive a considerable number of discussions on Talk:The Apprentice (UK TV series)? There's about 49 discussions there that need to have the majority archived. GUtt01 (talk) 14:12, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi GUtt01! Sorry for the delay getting back to you here - just getting caught up with my Wikipedia messages and emails ;-). I manually created Talk:The Apprentice (UK TV series)/Archive 3 and moved all discussions created earlier than 2018 into it and made sure everything linked. I think you should be all set. Let me know if you need anything else and I'll be happy to help :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:44, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Possibly good idea

Hi Oshwah,

I have noticed some template which users have been entitled to deny bots from posting to their talk pages - e.g. {{bots|deny = DPL bot}}. I was wondering if there is some sort of equivalent template to deny certain IP addresses/ranges from editing pages like the ones affected by the 'My Royal Young' vandalism and other frequent sock IPs like the one I've noticed on a random article which somehow has over 50 edits made in a single day. Iggy (Swan) 18:27, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Iggy the Swan! Aside from applying page protection to one's talk page to restrict certain user levels from editing it, there currently is not a way to technically prevent specific users from doing so. While bans and other sanctions exist as formal restrictions, they do not prevent users from doing so on a technical or software restriction level. I know that the Wikimedia Foundation just finished developing and deploying a way for users to add other accounts to a list in their preferences so that pings, notifications, and "thanks" from those users are ignored in the notification bar (See this link to view the option), but it doesn't restrict them from editing your talk page if they choose to do so. Are you currently dealing with harassment from anyone right now (or very recently) that brought you to message me with your question? If you'd rather email me about this, please don't hesitate to do so - if you're being harassed, I'd like to know so that I can help take care of it. If you have any more questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:01, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

While looking for the URL to link you to the preferences option to mute users, I ran into this wish-list discussion, which calls for the development of "per-page user blocking", or the ability for admins to protect pages from being edited by certain users - it's application and idea isn't the same as what you're looking for, but it's at least a step in the right direction (somewhat). Thought I'd link you to this in case you were interested... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:04, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

conner

Hi my name is conner and you texted me.Conner hopfer (talk) 22:08, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Conner hopfer! Yes, you can ignore the message I left (and subsequently removed). I apologize for any confusion that it may have caused you. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:05, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

So cute!!!

Conner hopfer (talk) 22:09, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Heh, thanks for the kitten! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:05, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Notability of low-profile people and their brush with the media

I'd like to get your opinion on WP:BLP1E and WP:BIO1E. My reading is that the former indicates that, despite coverage that would otherwise pass GNG, if the subject is low-profile and is known for only 15 minutes of fame, then the article should be deleted. In at least one case, the community says otherwise. BIO1E, however, doesn't read that way but I've felt that ought to be the case, that there has to be some significant coverage about the subject and yet some editors don't see it that way. I'm getting hung up on these low-profile people that get a dozen mentions; Wikipedia seems to prefer having an article than not. What's your opinion? Chris Troutman (talk) 22:17, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Chris troutman! It's good to see you again! I hope things are going well for you. Your questions are quite common when it comes to the notability of people and how "one event" applies. When responding to AFD discussions and questions about one's notability and if WP:BLP1E and/or WP:BIO1E apply, a key thing to know is that WP:BLP1E is written for articles regarding the notability of living people and one event, while WP:BIO1E applies to articles about people regardless of if they're living or dead and one event. So depending on the person, one or both of these notability policies will typically be cited. It doesn't mean that you can't cite WP:BLP1E for a recently-dead or dead person when discussing notability, but you may encounter responses from other editors and in rebuttal to yours that state this.

If you look through my AFD stats regarding discussions about the notability of people and "1E" (as we'll call it), I typically explain my argument and how it applies to "1E" like this: There are certainly many article subjects that could be argued that they became notable for their involvement in a single event (such as Mark David Chapman, John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, and many others) - but if their event caused or resulted in a significant cultural, societal, governmental, economic, national or international, or other notable event, change, or recognition, they'll definitely be covered by numerous reliable sources per WP:GNG and will definitely be notable enough to have their own article. The examples I listed fall into this category easily, and I'm sure that you'll understand what I mean as soon as you click on them and read through the summary paragraph of each one. If their involvement in this "single event" didn't do so or if the references (or lack thereof) fail to show that the event did so, then yes - you definitely want to read through the references and sources you located in your research and consider whether or not they're providing primary coverage and information on the person, and instead providing primary coverage on the event. If the majority of the sources provide primary coverage of the event and in retrospect provide little or non-complete coverage about the person, then the argument should be made that the article should instead be of the event itself and with a section about the person in that article. This obviously goes without saying that you should also determine whether or not significant primary coverage from reliable sources exist to assert notability for the person or event. Events or people that only have local coverage or impact from references (or only show an impact on a local or limited area and nothing beyond that), don't have enough coverage to write a complete article without the use of original research (another requirement for GNG to be met), or clearly don't show a significant notable impact on national or international or world history, society, culture, etc are probably not notable enough for an article per GNG (and hence the "1E" guidelines).

Really, you can look at it like this in a nutshell: The best thing to do in these situations and discussions is look at the sources and references provided and found (WP:GNG) and make a determination based on their coverage and how the person or event impacted... humanity I guess (to abbreviate what I mean in a short way). There are numerous events that people find very evocative and feel should have an article, but fail to either show that significant and complete coverage exists per GNG or that the event directly triggered or caused other notable events, changes, or recognition (the "impact on humanity" as I called it). That's what these two guidelines (WP:BLP1E and WP:BIO1E) help to further define and clarify when it comes to these particular situations.

I hope that my response wasn't too long and that it at least provided you with some help :-). If you have any more questions or need my input about anything in regards to notability, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be happy to help! Thanks again for the message and the excellent questions, and I wish you happy editing! ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:09, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Your answer provides a lot of grey area, which is understandable. I think if the Mark David Chapman article were to come up at AfD, I might !vote delete. He's arguably not generally notable. He killed Lennon. So what? The coverage about his life prior to the murder comes from Crime Library, which isn't saying much. The Villard Books publication Let Me Take You Down: Inside the Mind of Mark David Chapman, the Man Who Killed John Lennon might be a clincher for notability but I'd point to the fact that nobody cares about him except that he shot Lennon. I'd probably have that content redirected into an article about the killing and trimmed down per WP:UNDUE. Maybe I've become too exclusionist for most editors.I'm dealing with a similar issue with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shannon Faulkner. It's another 15 minutes of fame case. I think many editors are confusing recent media as being "ongoing coverage" but it seems like Faulkner really is a low-profile person. Nobody else agrees. At least there is some background info about Faulkner and Chapman, whereas there was essentially nothing about the Stefanie Rabatsch article I linked above. I think "humanity" makes a bit too much of a fuss about this stuff, generally. Thanks for your help. Chris Troutman (talk) 21:55, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Chris troutman - There you go... that's the spirit! Vote delete on Mark David Chapman :-P! I was hoping that my answers wouldn't further the adventure down the "grey area" rabbit hole, and I hope it didn't confuse you ;-). If you need clarity on anything, don't hesitate to push back and ask - I want to do my best to try and make things as... not grey area as I can based off of what my experience showed me... even though the whole matter in general is quite grey... haha. Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:27, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Please help me sir this article

Hi sir . This is a famous radio in iran online radio. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RadioFaryad Please help me why this wiki article deletepolicy right? Please sir do anything . This a real official onlineRadio . Sir check also Google. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.30.32.17 (talk) 23:19, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

FYI - Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Abdullah Zubayer -- Cabayi (talk) 03:55, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Cabayi - Oh... wonderful... thanks for the heads up - I'll look into this deeper. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:23, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Harassment and just outright offensive

Hello. While reverting vandalism by an IP user, they reverted my edit and in the edit summary put 'why revert my edit stop ignoring the fat dick in your mouth'. Their edit was the blanking of a section. I reverted it again, and gave them a warning with Twinkle. They responded on their talk page with my username next to three emoticons, representing a person putting a penis in their mouth. As I cannot find any section to report harassment, I decided to message you (as you seem to be very helpful on the site). Their IP talk page is User talk:2600:100D:B101:F3AF:44F2:BCD9:90DE:B79C AllyGebies talk 03:37, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

IP blocked. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 04:01, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, NeilN, for taking care of that :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:31, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

AllyGebies - Thanks for letting me know about the harassment; I'm sorry that it happened to you. NeilN blocked the IP user due to the harassment the user caused. If this continues or if you see any more of it, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be happy to take a look. Best regards and happy editing! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:33, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

you messaged wrong

Igot a bunch of messages for things I didn't do that were from you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.21.224.201 (talk) 13:32, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

The best way to avoid issues of receiving messages for vandalism and issues you didn't cause is to create an account for yourself and use it to edit. Please let me know if you have any more questions. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:24, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Request for semi-protection

Hello Oshwah. Could you semi-protect Mushabian culture, please? It has been vandalising by an ip-hopper for a long time. See the revision history[2]. 188.120.239.141 (talk) 17:55, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

I've applied pending changes protection for one month. Let me know if it needs to be extended. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:29, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

It

There is no info where it says it have chances to form a black hole so I added it and later I added with citation but again another guy deleted it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pranith cr (talk • contribs) 02:49, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Pranith cr, and thank you for leaving me a message here. The issue with your edits to White dwarf is that your addition of content did not cite reference any sources to verify that the content is accurate and true. I recommend that you review Wikipedia's guidelines on identifying reliable sources and how to cite sources in-line with content. It also appears that you haven't gone through and completed Wikipedia's new user tutorial - I highly recommend that you do this first, as it provides you with a number of important walkthroughs and tutorials that you'd benefit significantly from being guided through. Please take my advice and complete the tutorial - it will provide you with important information and guides that are good for you to be familiar with. If you have any more questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them and help you further. Thanks again for the message, and I wish you happy editing :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:44, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

POV Editor?

Hi Oshwah, looks like the Berlin article is back to normal, thanks for your help with that! I wonder if you might give me some advice about another matter? It's related to the Checkpoint Charlie Museum. The editor Eintracht123 is an SPA, who seems to have some personal connection with the museum and/or its director. They're editing with a POV of advocating/promoting for the museum, and repeatedly removing well-sourced material that might be critical of it - the museum has been involved in a number of controversies. Basically, I don't know how to deal with it...

I think they're probably the same person as Nillsson. Both have a history starting in 2016 of editing only articles related to the museum. They edit both on English and especially on German Wikipedia where they've been involved in a drawn-out edit war of the two of them against basically everyone else (I wasn't involved), until the page was finally protected in November. [3] As soon as it expired, they started up again... It's been relatively under control on English Wikipedia so far, but in the last couple of days the same POV editing is flaring up here, repeatedly deleting the same material they object to from the English article.

It's a bit difficult to see the whole picture, because of a lot of it being on German Wikipedia, and because many edits have been redacted due to them adding large amounts of copyrighted material from the museum. I got involved with the article when I discovered and fixed the copyright infringement here, and then also in the German article. It's mostly a clean-up operation for me. Anyway, I'm not sure how to proceed, in one sense it's about a couple of particular edits right now, but it's part of a larger pattern of POV advocating and edit warring. Any advice would be appreciated, thanks! --IamNotU (talk) 03:00, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

IamNotU, I would start a new discussion on the article's talk page regarding the user's edits and explain exactly why the user's changes are concerning you, and provide your input and thoughts. Make sure to ping the user in the new discussion and leave them a new message to notify them on their user talk page. Make a legitimate and fair attempt to try and discuss this issue with the user. I know that you've left the user a warning about removing templates from that article, but there aren't any discussions or warnings regarding the POV concerns and editing dispute - you should make those attempts in order to both try and help the user, and provide diffs if your attempts are made to no avail. To quote a response I made on my user talk page just a few hours ago and to someone requesting similar advice:

"The thing I usually state to editors who ask for 3RR and edit warring advice when it comes to reporting users - (if anything and all else aside) think of the messages you leave on the user's talk page and the discussions you start on the article's talk page as documentation. If it comes down to having to report the user to AN3, you have diffs to show that you've tried discussing the issues and asking them to participate, and they chose not to and instead kept reverting things on the article. Not being able to provide those diffs in an AN3 makes it harder for an admin to review and enforce. And keeping yourself out of 3RR and keeping clean from that pitfall will assure that you're not blocked for the same thing (remember WP:BOOMERANG)."

I hope that my response here provided you with at least some help and guidance. Edit warring, 3RR, and situations like this can easily (and often) fall into those weird and difficult "grey areas", so I understand how frustrating and somewhat challenging it may be to properly address the dispute and resolve the issue. Please let me know if there's anything else I can do for you, or if you have any more questions or need more input or advice - I'll be more than happy to do so. Keep me posted, and if things fly off the handle or go off the walls, definitely let me know so I can step in. I wish you well, that the issue gets resolved peacefully and frustration-free for all, and (of course) happy editing :-). Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:24, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice! You're right, although there's been a lot of discussion of POV and edit warring problems, it's been on the German Wikipedia. I haven't been involved with it. I can see that can't really be taken into consideration on English Wikipedia. I'll open a discussion on the talk page. Thanks also for the intervention. I never know what to do when someone edits against policy and doesn't follow WP:BRD. I haven't actually encountered it very often... I've usually given up after a couple of reverts, so it doesn't get to the 3RR stage. But then it ends up with unencyclopedic changes in the article, because they're willing to edit war and I'm not. Should I just leave it that way, until a discussion or dispute resolution plays out? Or is it a good idea to ask an admin to intervene, as you've done? Or something else? --IamNotU (talk) 16:48, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

IamNotU - If the edits are vandalism or absolutely bad-faith edits or disruption that's exempt from being considered "edit warring" or 3RR, then revert the repeated vandalism and report it so we can take care of it ;-). You won't be blocked for edit warring if what you're reverting is blatant or obvious trolling or something bad-faith. If it doesn't fall into that list of exemptions or if you're not sure, then just hang back if your edits are going to be in the "edit war territory" and don't edit war. Avoid letting yourself inadvertently get sucked into that hole... it's easy to do, trust me ;-). If you violate 3RR or engage in the same back-and-fourth behavior and the issue is seen purely as a content dispute by an admin and not as disruption, you risk also being blocked - which would absolutely suck and wouldn't be good to have happen :-). If it means leaving their "questionable but not 3RR exempt" changes live, then do it. If anything, someone else will revert the changes. Remember: there's no deadline or rush - don't let yourself think or react as if this weren't so ;-). I've done this a handful of times in the past, and there were situations that I realized later that I actually made worse by letting myself "get into the rush" of "fixing things" too quickly.

If the rabbit hole of "the grey area" goes deeper and you've done what I recommended in my previous response above (you created user talk page warnings about the edits, created an article talk page discussion and pinged the user, notified the user on their user talk page and linked them to it, and warned them for edit warring) and they still continue to go about their business and disruptively edit the article (even if it's not within "3RR territory" or if it's what many users refer to as "slow edit warring" or "slow 3RR")... if they're edit warring, then they're edit warring; report them to WP:AN3 and include diffs to all of your attempts to try and discuss the issue with the user. It'll make enforcement easy and an admin will quickly see that you're making a legit report and not falling prey to any pitfalls or boomerangs.

And of course, if the edits fall further down the "grey area" rabbit hole (lol) and you don't feel confident with creating an edit warring report for the situation but you feel like it should reported, just go to WP:ANI and file a report there :-). And, of course, if it really comes down to it and you're absolutely not sure - hit me up on my talk page and ask (just like you've did today). I'll be happy to take a look and point you in the right direction. Just remember that it's always better to not do something and to ask for help even if you're slightly unsure, than to risk it and just perform the action without being 100% certain. Nobody is going to think less of you or talk down to you (I certainly won't do that) for asking questions or asking for help. There are no stupid questions or requests! If you have any more questions or would like input or advice on any additional situations or hypothetical grey areas, let me know and I'll be happy to help! Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:32, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Need it

But Chandrasekhar limit is world wide known. If you ask proof for this it is like asking is e=mc square true. Bro it is physics from where should I get you the proof. I want this wikipedia to become the source of proof. So plz let me keep my content in wiki. Plz I plead u. And by the way your hair is crazy bro.Pranith cr (talk) 11:06, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Pranith cr - HA! Thanks for the comment on the hair - I'll take it as a compliment ;-). I understand that you feel that this information is common, but more than one user has challenged your addition of this content. Please understand that the burden and responsibility to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores content or material. It's easy - just find a reference to a reliable source that verifies your statement, then cite it alongside the content you want to add. If it's common knowledge, references that are reliable and peer-reviewed should be easy to find. If you need help with how to add references and citations properly, refer to this guideline for help. If you have any more questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks for the message, and I appreciate your civility and the fact that you're asking for help rather than resorting to disruptive behavior such as edit warring. It means a lot :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:44, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

No subject

Why do you feel my recent edit to Mount Hermon School, Darjeeling seemed less than neutral?

Did I write anything incorrect or false? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.7.131.178 (talk) 12:15, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi there! My concern was just with the changes you made here, where you add content referring to the school "one of the best" without including any kind of reference, and also referring it to as "renouned". This change appears to shift the wording away from being neutral, which is what we want the wording on all articles to reflect. I've kept your previous changes, however, which appear to add content about the school's history and other content - just make sure to cite sources where possible. If you have any more questions, please let me know. I'll be happy to answer them and assist you further. Thanks for the message, and I wish you happy editing :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:19, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Block notice

I remember quite clearly my first block notice. I was new at RCP, quite indignant, and it took me a moment to realize I was not actually blocked.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 13:56, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Dlohcierekim - If you're referring to this hilarity, it's definitely not the first... "block notice" I've received. If block notifications left by trolls and LTA socks counted as a block in the log for me... I'd... Oh man, I'd have one hell of a rap sheet LOL ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:08, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

That's the best ever. I think they are just jealous.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 14:11, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

I don't know why in the world anyone would want to be jealous of anything about me, but... alright I guess :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:02, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Vandalism, page blaning, and sock puppetry? You already have one hell of a rap sheet, going all the way back to 1970! —AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 14:15, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Touché, AntiCompositeNumber...Touché ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:01, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

All admins get these - either from close colleagues or vandals "having a giraffe". Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:41, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Source

https://www.britannica.com/science/Chandrasekhar-limit this is the source for the proof . At least am I allowed now to edit.Pranith cr (talk) 15:41, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Pranith cr - Of course you're allowed to edit :-). Just because someone asked you for a reference so we can verify the content added doesn't mean that you're in any kind of trouble... haha. Thanks for the reference - I went ahead and restored the content you added and added the reference as a citation for you (you can view the edit diff here - we're all set! Let me know if you have questions and I'll happily answer them. Thanks again for following up :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:54, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you very much and also thanks for editing by yourselfPranith cr (talk) 16:02, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Pranith cr - You're quite welcome; always happy to lend a hand :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:04, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

How

How to create a article I want to create a article name -Why is pulling preferred over pushingPranith cr (talk) 16:07, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Pranith cr - I think you should start by completing Wikipedia's new user tutorial before you begin creating any articles. It will provide you with a significant amount of guides, walkthroughs, and help with important things that you should know about and be introduced to. Complete the entire tutorial, and let me know if you still have questions regarding the creation of a new article. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:09, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

RCB

I am a fan since 10 years. SYED SUHEB (talk) 17:08, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

LaRue Martin

Reverted page on LaRue Martin because many of the changes you reverted to were incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.17.197.8 (talk) 17:11, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, that might have been vandalism that you restored. See https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/larue-martin-1.html, for example. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:14, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Closing ANI discussions

Don't mean to be a stick in the mud, but this discussion had reached a natural end. Was it important to actually put an archive template on it? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:39, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Ritchie333. I closed the discussion in order to make things easier for other admins that go through the ANI looking for open discussions to read through. Having it "closed" and marked and shaded as such quickly tells the user this if they're not interested in reading discussions that are closed. If anything, it's part of the discussion process in that it's formally closed and can be archived. And no, you're not a stick in the mud for asking :-). ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:40, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

49ers

But it is true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thedudeofdude (talk • contribs) 18:35, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

BBC IP vandal

Hello Oswah, I'm sorry to bother you again, but the BBC IP vandal appears to be block evading by making the same unsourced changes to BBC articles as previous 86.9.95.201 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Mainly from exactly the same part of the UK, this type of evading has happened before. Can I leave with you please for firm action? Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 19:51, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

David J Johnson - I've blocked the IP for 72 hours for the repeated addition of unreferenced content. Please let me know if anything else shows up and I'll be happy to take a look. Alternatively, you're welcome to report IP disruption and block evasion to WP:AIV if I'm not active. This will place the report on a page that's watched and patrolled by many admins, and will probably result in the issue being handled faster than I can do it ;-). Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:01, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Many thanks for your help. Will report to WP:AIV if disruption continues. Have a good weekend. David, David J Johnson (talk) 20:04, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

David J Johnson - No problem! You're welcome to message me here any time you need to - don't hesitate to do so if you have any questions. I wish you a great weekend as well and happy editing :-). Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:56, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

No subject

Other than accessing Ohio state birth records, and finding several other online sources that verify the Date of Birth for this article, what else needs to be referenced. There are Arizona public records to corroborate the information as well as United States Archives. I tried to add three different online sources and you knocked then all down. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pieson (talk • contribs) 23:29, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Pieson - The source cited in the article (located here - WARNING: A PORNOGRAPHIC IMAGE IS ON THAT PAGE) says that her birthdate is on September 14, 1979. Your changes to the article here and here don't reference any sources that are reliable or verifiable - the familysearch homepage and a link to someone's mylife account do not constitute as reliable sources at all - especially when adding or changing content to articles that are biographies of living people. Please review Wikipedia's policies on biographies of living people, as well as how to identify reliable sources (both links are provided for you here to those pages), and let me know if you have any questions. Thank you for the message, and I wish you happy editing :-). ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:41, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel article.

I've twice attempted to correct the paragraph that says Los is Los Angeles, but both times you've reverted it and accused me of making unproductive edits. My edits are not vandalism, practice edits, or otherwise unproductive in any way whatsoever. Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel takes place entirely within the borders of Texas, and Los Angeles is in California. Los Ybanez, Texas is the real location of Los. I don't know how you got the idea that my edit was anything other than a simple correction, but you were obviously misinformed. 75.86.83.210 (talk) 01:25, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Well, shit... that was my bad. I apologize for the mistake on my part - I thought you were changing "Angeles" to "Ybanez" to edit test or something of that sort... I see a lot of editors who change words like that and replace them to be their first name, random words, or other random nonsense - and I thought that this is what you were doing. Clearly, I was not correct with these thoughts. I've restored the article and your changes, and I sincerely apologize for the screw up. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:32, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Re

The edits for Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina has error for template and the language is made error, so it was a deliberate error. --Cyrus noto3at bulaga (Talk to me) 02:08, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for responding and for letting me know. If it's vandalism, fine by me... I just wanted to check and ask :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:11, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

excuse me i wrote fact in india verna had won 2018 car of the year pls stop this nonsense things — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaguar adarsh (talk • contribs) 07:33, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

About the change I made to Condola Rashad

Hi Oshwah,

The reason I made that change is because Condola Rashad's page has misspelled the character she plays in the tv series Billions in two locations. If you go to Billions' wikipedia page and look elsewhere online- you will find that the character she plays name is Kate Sacker not Kate Sacher. So I was attempting to correct the mistakes to her page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.46.104.15 (talk) 08:13, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

If that's the case, then please accept my apologies for the confusion and feel free to resolve the issue as you've been doing. If you have any questions or need any help, please let me know and I'll be happy to do so. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:13, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

can't believe what you have done.

I can't believe what you have done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gudodo (talk • contribs) 08:15, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Mon semblable! Mon frère!--Dlohcierekim (talk) 08:22, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

No subject

I'm updating my own resume as it has been incorrect for a long time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.160.34.222 (talk • contribs) 8:55, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

This is very problematic! You can't add unreferenced content to a biography of a living person like that... Your claim of being this person can't be verified here, and they do not change the fact that edits must follow and be in compliance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. I'm sorry, but I must undo the changes you've made to the article. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks for the message :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:59, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

No subject

I think you had made a mistake on the page about Grapefruits. Where I come from the Grapefruits are known as the Zekefruits and are highly respected as a fruit. Could we arrange to have a paragraph about what it is called in my homeland? — Preceding unsigned comment added by EzekielB (talk • contribs) 10:09, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Tutorial

The new user tutorial isn't working in my tab nor in one plus phone so how should I learn it.Pranith cr (talk) 10:50, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

See my responses below. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:10, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello

Are you there?Pranith cr (talk) 11:32, 10 March 2018 (UTC) Pranith cr (talk) 11:32, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Pranith cr - I'm still here. Are you saying that your using a mobile device? If you're not able to access the desktop version of Wikipedia, going through that tutorial I linked you will probably be difficult to do. I haven't tried doing so over the mobile site. What problems are you having exactly? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:34, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

== Stats ==12:20, 10 March 2018 (UTC)~

I was clicking on the missions and nothing appeared except for the stats were increasingPranith cr (talk) 11:40, 10 March 2018 (UTC) Pranith cr (talk) 11:40, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Pranith cr - I think you're going to have difficulties completing the tutorial over a mobile connection and through the mobile version of the website. Do you have a desktop or equivalent device where you can access the desktop version of the website and complete the tutorial? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:12, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

The Italian Job Dialogue

Don't look at me you stupid bastards.115.164.204.50 (talk) 11:58, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Of course. Oh, we weren't. What is the first thing someone does when you say, "don't look at me"?--Dlohcierekim (talk) 12:57, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Kuku Ciao Rotting

La-La-La, La, shake-shake-shake, kuku ciau lan.115.164.90.136 (talk) 12:04, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Pranith cr (talk) 12:19, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

12:19, 10 March 2018 (UTC)12:19, 10 March 2018 (UTC)12:19, 10 March 2018 (UTC)12:19, 10 March 2018 (UTC) Pranith cr (talk) 12:19, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

i can not include a citation for the edit on dom smith because it was stated via jess herself and not officially publish other than facebook — Preceding unsigned comment added by RyanJoshua1998 (talk • contribs) 12:42, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)@RyanJoshua1998: You could possibly cite with a link to that. Alas, that is not a wp:reliable source.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 12:55, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Unblock of new editor

I've unblocked User:Jbxviii, who is a new user at an edit-a-thon. This is a person, not an organization, and the link was just to their personal website, which lots of userpages have.--Pharos (talk) 17:50, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Pharos - Thank you for unblocking that user and for letting me know. I could have sworn that there was something that led me to conclude that the username was of an organization... Oh well. What's most important is that the user can edit and participate in the edit-a-thon. Thank you for resolving the situation so that the user can contribute - I appreciate it very much. I wish you a great weekend and happy editing :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:53, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

label bare References

Hi please label the bares reference that are on this page [4]. thank you (45.116.232.1 (talk) 18:14, 10 March 2018 (UTC))

Hi there! Thanks for leaving me a message here. I see that there may be some issues regarding some edits being made to the article. It looks like you've fixed the specific things that I saw which led me to think that your edit here was attempting to test changes. I accidentally reverted all of your changes instead of just this one - I apologize for that! It looks like you've since improved everything since then, which is good to see. I took a look at the article to try and figure out what you needed help with, and I noticed that there were extra reference tags inserted that didn't need to be there and fixed that for you - was this what you were asking for help with exactly? Or do you also need help elsewhere? Please let me know and I'll be happy to do so. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:22, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

I removed the previous reply here by someone else as that was clearly not me, LOL! Thank you so much, yes you've addressed it. Thanks once again (45.116.232.1 (talk) 20:14, 10 March 2018 (UTC))

Wan Abdul Muiz Wan Abdul Aziz

Dear, Oshwah. This is regarding, the page that i put up on Wan Abdul Muiz Wan Abdul Aziz. how can i improve the page as He is a national sports person in tennis as he has represented the Malaysia's National Team and also played in ATP events. by the way, you have cool hair. Cheers.

Thanks and Regards. Rachel Feyenoord (talk) 22:44, 10 March 2018 (UTC) Rachel Feyenoord

Rachel Feyenoord - HAHAHA... thanks for the compliment about the hair... it's got a mind of it's own ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:06, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks and wishing you a good day. Rachel Feyenoord (talk) 09:54, 11 March 2018 (UTC) Rachel Feyenoord

Rachel Feyenoord - Do you still need help with your question? Let me know. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:58, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

i have already put the page under a draft and lets see how it goes. thanks again. Cheers. Rachel Feyenoord (talk) 10:02, 11 March 2018 (UTC) Rachel Feyenoord

Rachel Feyenoord - No problem; always happy to help ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:08, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Cool. that's nice. Thanks. Rachel Feyenoord (talk) 10:18, 11 March 2018 (UTC) Rachel Feyenoord

Edit removed for being incorrect even though it is a proven fact.

Hello there! Today I found out about a study done of people who have played with toxic children on video games have a higher chance of getting brain tumors. I thought this was inmportant information and i think it should be able to stay on the aticle.

Sincerely GreedyFly — Preceding unsigned comment added by GreedyFly (talk • contribs) 23:20, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @GreedyFly: if you really saw a study that said that people who have played with toxic children on video games have a higher chance of getting brain tumors, then you can add the content to the article, but in the right place (where you had put it was not) and remember to cite your sources, that is, to provide a link to your reference between <ref></ref> tags. L293D (☎ • ✎) 23:27, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

What L293D said. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:29, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Note: Has become somewhat moot as this user has now left the building. I saw their final outburst (now revdeled) and to be honest I don't think we are missing a great editor of fabulous encyclopaedic potential ... <sigh> DBaK (talk) 00:22, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Oh darn... well, we tried... :-/ ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:24, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

As the revdeler, I feel this user may be temperamentally unsuited for a collaborative project. He lost it with a cluebot revert of an unsourced change. You did your best and better than many.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 00:35, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Well, quite. Some you win ... others, erm, not. Additionally, I am now furious because I seem (see above) to be losing the ability to differentiate between the AmE and BrE senses of moot. Not sure if this is a symptom of increasing internationalization or simply my increasing age ... sigh. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 22:18, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

labelling reference

I have added a reference on this page [5]. It is the reference #20. Can you please label the reference such as the title of the reference, author of the ref, time and date etc. Thank you (45.116.233.3 (talk) 00:37, 11 March 2018 (UTC))

 Done L293D (☎ • ✎) 04:03, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Venkateshwara Open University

Hi Oshwah. Regarding this suggestion, as all four edits were by four different IPs and I left warnings to the last three of them [6] [7] [8] I'm not sure how else I could have warned the user and I'm not sure what WP:AIV can do to an anonymous IP editor. Please advise. --Muhandes (talk) 01:45, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Muhandes! In this situation, the disruption appears to be coming from a specific IP range. If it continues, report one of the IP addresses to WP:AIV and add a comment stating that other IPs are also disrupting the same page and that it's from a range. The administrator will then know that they'll need to investigate the aritcle's history and determine how to properly take action. If you have any more questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to message me and let me know and I'll be more than happy to help :-). Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:55, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Tab

I have a tabPranith cr (talk) 01:56, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Pranith cr - I don't understand your message here... do you need help with something? Let me know. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:52, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Extended confirmed users

Does something like this get a user the 500 edits? It shouldn't. [9] TVGarfield (talk) 03:43, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

TVGarfield - Yes. The automatic granting of the extended confirmed user right does so by taking all edits made by the account in order to determine if 500 edits and 30 days of tenure have been achieved and therefore given to the user. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:47, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Let them knock themselves out. Wait until they learn it's a simple admin action to remove that status. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 03:52, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

I echo what NeilN just said above. If a user is clearly editing in order to reach that edit count, it'll be blatantly obvious and we can remedy that very easily. It takes literally two seconds to disable that user right ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:57, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Should have a pool on which admin will block/take away the right first. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 04:03, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

I got $5 on it being me :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:05, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Absolutely, you should wait until they've spent the entire evening making the 500 edits. They're closing in on 300. The account was created on 11/7/2016, so I'm sure it's one of our frequent fliers. Acroterion (talk) 04:08, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Well I'd have to wait... I can't turn off the user right until it's automatically turned on for them ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:10, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

I've wished more than once that we could turn off automatic granting of that right when appropriate. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 04:15, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

I also agree that this should be possible. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:15, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Seeing as this is probably a sockpuppet, might it perhaps be best to see what articles they intend to edit before they are blocked? Just an observation from an experienced non-admin sockhunter. - BilCat (talk) 04:38, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

BilCat - I'm not opposed to that. So long as an admin is actively keeping an eye on things and can block the user as soon as they go off the walls, I typically do that somewhat regularly on wiki. There are situations I run into quite regularly where I'll choose to purposefully wait to block a user or apply protection to an article - and I do so in order to gather more evidence or data in order to help me build editing patterns and information. This allows me do things such as apply a larger block that will resolve LTA or socking attacks, or to connect accounts and editing similarities to other events and identify other disruption as directly related. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:45, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Agreed, I don't always block a clear sockpuppet until they've shown what they're all about. It would be valuable to know what's so important that one would spend an entire evening doing one-letter edits to get the permission, and it will give insight for the next time it happens. Acroterion (talk) 15:18, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Tsakhiagiin Elbegdorj birth date

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

The beginning of the Article clearly says that he was born on 30 March 1963. What's the with the inconsistency of the infobox? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.40.99.2 (talk) 03:55, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

An IP user (139.5.218.117) had vandalized the page and changed his birth date in the infobox. I've fixed this now. L293D (☎ • ✎) 04:06, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

List of one-word stage names

In re Jeeva, YOB changed from 1983 to 1984 per article. 68.175.107.186 (talk) 03:59, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for leaving me a message here and for the explanation. I highly recommend also adding a reference, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt in the meantime. I've restored your changes to the article and have removed the subsequent warning on your user talk page. If you have any questions or concerns, please let me know and I'll be happy to help you. I wish you a great weekend and happy editing :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:02, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

James Allsup

Hey Oshwah,

Thank you for protecting James Allsup. I just have a small request. I was going to request indef semi-protection on RPP but another editor beat me to it for temporary semi-protection. Based on this IP edit [10] (honestly, does him being 13% Asian (that he doesn't self identify as) make it impossible for him to be a white supremacist? sigh), I think the war over "white supremacy" will always be a issue (despite consensus reached in 2017) and I want to request either a longer semi-protection or indeff. Despite a consensus being reached new users and IPs may not be aware of it/care and I fear warring over "white supremacy" doesn't have an end in sight. However, I want to note that I will respect whatever decision you decide.HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 05:53, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi

Yo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dabmaster123457 (talk • contribs) 05:57, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Was this by accident?

Yeah, sorry about that. I meant to unedit the vandalism or the premature editing. Pmaster12 (talk) 07:49, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Pmaster12 - No big deal; shit happens and I've done it too. I just wanted to make sure that I didn't miss something lol. Cheers ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:01, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Rich Fulcher

I just watched the episode Rich Fulcher appears on Love..it's called I'm Sick and it's season 3 of it. Idk how to add a citation yet. Sorry. It shows he's in the cast on imdb. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KojiSasori (talk • contribs) 10:24, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Order

Hi I would like you to change the order of the paragraphs to it is presented in the beginning of each paragraph that following is not believed by Shia Muslims. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DeleteLies (talk • contribs) 13:46, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

ACC account reactivation

Hi Oshwah! You kindly deactivated my ACC tool account and removed my Account Creator user right due to inactivity. As I plan to get back to actively editing again, would it be possible to reinstate these? Thank you! OcarinaOfTime (talk) 16:15, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

OcarinaOfTime -  Done, and welcome back! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:20, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Ashi Singh Wikipedia page.

Bro, I expect to have Wikipedia page of Ashi Singh, (the female lead of Yeh Un Dino ki baat hai) but it was deleted. There is a draft, I made some modifications, but it's not yet published, there r some error, can u complete & finalize that!??Manishkumar9495 (talk) 17:30, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

How do I delete my account?

How do I delete this account or this account?206.116.3.207 (talk) 17:51, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Accounts cannot be deleted. To no longer be associated with them, you just need to simply stop logging into them or using them. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:52, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Mac And Cheese

Hello Oshwah! I'm so sorry that I didn't leave a citation. It's just that my dear friend told me that so i decided to put it! I will not make any changes to your article. Thanks for the input!

                                                                               ~Trash Can  — Preceding unsigned comment added by TrashCan101 (talk • contribs) 20:10, 11 March 2018 (UTC) 

Some quick thanks

I learned how to detect vandalism by watching your edits. Just wanted to thank you for being an (unwilling) mentor for helping me start to combat vandals. Kirbanzo (talk) 23:12, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Kirbanzo - HA! Awesome! And no problem; always happy to help. If you run into any questions or if you need input or advice, please don't hesitate to message me here and I'll be happy to answer any questions and help you. Best -

Just curious what i did wrong

Hi , I am just curious on what i did wrong when i created this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boulder_Trail_Runners

Wikipedia had many pages related to running clubs or paid/membership clubs

We ( he boulder trail runners) are a not for profit , no dues, no money club

thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bogdandumitrescu (talk • contribs) 23:17, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Bogdandumitrescu, and thanks for leaving me a message with your questions here. The article was deleted due to being worded like a blatant advertising or promotion. Things that contributed to this fact were the content being worded in a manner that wasn't neutral and instead in a way that was making it appear as one. Another part of the content that added to this concern was the addition of the subject's contact and social media information and asking readers to learn more and join the cause by navigating to those links and to join. This makes the article an advertising page instead of an encyclopedia page, and was deleted due to this. If you'd like, I can restore the page for you and move it into the draft space so that you can fix it up. Would you like me to do that for you? Let me know. If you have any more questions or concers please don't hesitate to ask and I'll be happy to help you further. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:23, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes, please . Revert it and let me edit it, see if i can make it neutral. BogieD (talk) 23:31, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Bogdandumitrescu -  Done. It is now located at Draft:Boulder Trail Runners. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer then. Happy editing :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:35, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Erika Harold reverted edits

Re: not adhering to neutral point of view. Existing entry says that her statement had been revealed and didn't include rebuttal. To be neutral and unbiased it should be noted that unverified and unnamed sources were involved, and the entry should include her rebuttal and current positions about gay adoption. Please revert back to my changes, thank you.Bikinibomb (talk) 23:37, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Bikinibomb - Are you talking about this edit made to the article? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:42, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes, the original entry reads as though her 2000 statement was confirmed which it has not been. To be actually neutral (and not like a campaign attack) the entry should contain a summary of the facts from both sides. Bikinibomb (talk) 23:50, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Strange username

Here. Do you reckon this looks fishy? Thanks. Adam9007 (talk) 23:39, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Adam9007 - Yeah, I'm gonna call that username a no-go for me - I've soft blocked the account. Thanks for the heads up; let me know if you see any more concerning username creations and I'll be happy to take a look. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:41, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Well, there's this one. Their only edit (as of this post) looks kosher however... Adam9007 (talk) 23:43, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Adam9007 - Meh, I'll allow that one... the username is certainly not the best one I've seen, but it's not a blatant violation of Wikipedia's username policy. If you need anything else, you know where to find me ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:46, 11 March 2018 (UTC)