Jump to content

User talk:Oshwah

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Thelostone41 (talk | contribs) at 04:11, 30 July 2021 (→Administration help). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.



Let's chat


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

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


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


Newuserpatrol bug

So I saw that the newuserpatrol script has a breaking. Basically, it got stuck on the name "Niels is een cummer". After some investigation, I noticed the name was globally suppressed. Is there a way to make the script not get stuck on hidden usernames? aeschylus (talk) 13:03, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Aeschylus - Are you talking about the script I wrote and use? If so, then yes, it is a problem that I couldn't fix. Basically, when it reads the list of new accounts, when a username is redacted, a record of its existence exists - you just can't see the name. The script basically hangs until that record is not one of the newest created. It was annoying as hell, but then I became an oversighter and that didn't affect me anymore, so I never put effort into fixing it. lol ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 20:48, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Oshwah, any idea why that username got globally suppressed? I don't see anything oversightable in this name. And is there any other way this script can be fixed? aeschylus (talk) 20:56, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) Aeschylus, off the top of my head (and bearing in mind I'm not an admin, let alone an oversighter, so can't see for myself) I'm guessing it has something to do with a long-term abuser vandal? There was one vandal in particular that used to take usernames and add inappropriate strings to them, thinking this may be linked? Patient Zerotalk 04:42, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Patient Zero - Oh, probably... There are a couple of LTA users that tend to create abusive usernames with the sole intention of trolling and causing as much havoc as they can before they're discovered and blocked. When usernames get revision-deleted or oversighted from the new user log (where this script pulls the information from), it will still see that a log record exists if you don't have access to the redacted information; the script will hang and not function properly when it runs into this. It will function again when that redacted record is no longer on the list of 25 newest-created usernames that it pulls from. Again, I meant to come out with a fix for this, but just haven't done so since I became an Administrator and Oversighter. I'll put this on my "to-do list" - a fix for this shouldn't be too hard to come up with. If the record won't return the information, I can make the script insert "[REDACTED]" as the username instead of having the value just be null. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:24, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I must admit, it was my first guess based on my encounters with those LTAs in the past; I can recall a few of those usernames off the top of my head from a few years ago! Ah, that’s a pain. I can see how such a bug might occur, in that case. I’m thinking redacting usernames within the script wouldn’t be such a bad idea (even though I’m assuming it would be a contingency plan, I actually quite like it as an idea if all else fails). Congratulations on OS, by the way! :-) Patient Zerotalk 23:37, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Patient Zero - I'll need to do some debugging on a test or beta project and come up with a solution that works. Thanks! I've been an OS for a few years now. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:51, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome - here’s hoping this works! No worries - it has just occurred to me that I was still very much active here when you were granted the OS user right! I blame my brain temporarily malfunctioning, lol - and perhaps the fact that it’s quite late here. 😆 Patient Zerotalk 00:03, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Patient Zero - HA! No worries. Keep in touch and don't be a stranger if I can be of assistance with anything... :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:31, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If there’s one thing I’ll never forget, it’s that you were of great assistance to me when I first started out here! Thank you, I shall do - always a pleasure catching up with you. I’m back using Huggle again here, and have recently started using the IRC and Discord, so I imagine I’ll see you around there, also :-) Patient Zerotalk 01:28, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Patient Zero - Indeed! It's always a pleasure to see you online and to catch up with you. I'm glad that you're on IRC and Discord - I'm on both! Oshwah#9999 is my Discord. If you're not in the Wikimedia Community Discord, let me know and I can email you an invite link. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:20, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much! :-) I'm patientzero#8254 on Discord - have already joined it! All the very best, Patient Zerotalk 03:05, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Oshwah, I found another bug, where usernames with question marks in them do not render properly. The question does not show in the link. aeschylus (talk) 17:41, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Faking signatures etc.

I should think an edit filter should be made to disallow edits which add a user's user page link and talk page from anonymous/new users - from our administrators noticeboard made by sock puppets whose usernames are in the form of a first name, surname and a random number (like "Ronald3Carlsen12"), the edit made had "[[User:Iggy the Swan|Iggy]] ([[User talk:Iggy the Swan|Swan]]) ([[Special:Contribs/Iggy the Swan|Contribs]])" after the request to have another innocent user blocked. I hope these page watchers think I did not do any of that. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 20:41, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Iggy the Swan - I would agree in general due to the potential for abuse, but the problem is that this would likely cause signatures from unconfirmed accounts to be blocked or not display properly, and we try to encourage and have users leave signatures when they add comments or leave messages on talk pages... Even if you were to somehow be able to write a script that could tell if an account is using a signature that isn't the same as their account username, I'd imagine that there would be a lot of false positives. :-/ ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:29, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That is a good point Oshwah. We should not have any new/IP users not having the signatures to be disallowed. [REDACTED - Oshwah] 08:31, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
(That IP address used above is Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) , I failed to check if I was logged in first before replying to you). Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 08:34, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Iggy the Swan - No worries; we've all done it (including myself). :-) I've suppressed your IP address and information for you so that it's not public. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 09:38, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, I should think the talk page of that IP should be deleted as I'd admitted it was used by me. In my list of contributions, the user talk page was created at 8:36 (UTC) today. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 10:01, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Iggy the Swan -  Done. The page has been deleted and suppressed. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 10:05, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Flag request

Hello Oshwah, long time no type. Could you please remove my ACC flag from FlightTime, I doubt I`ll be needing it anytime soon (if ever). I edit very little anymore, mainly due to having to use my smartphone, it`s a real pain to do anything, miss my laptop.

Cheers and happy editing.

- FlightTime Phone (open channel) 01:47, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FlightTime Phone -  Done. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:32, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

about mr jackub from prague

well, where do i start, looking at his contributions page, he always says everyone that reverts his edits (almost all of them got reverted at least once) are doing vandalism, a thing past marquinhos socks usually did, he also is obssesed with this marquinhos dude claiming that random people are his socks, a thing marquinhos socks usually did, and, due to all of this, i wouldnt really take much seriously what he does, im not accusing that hes a sock, its just that, he looks quite more like a troll than a sock, also, hes not new here, he obviously edited as a ip or had another account beforehand. Private Hans' Flammenwerfer (talk) 17:24, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

2603.9000.9907

Hello, that roaming up based in Florida just got off his 30 day block several hours ago and is on the loose, his edits have already been reverted by other editors already, this guy must be stopped. Can you please be of assistance? Thank you, Doriden (talk) 02:58, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Doriden! Sorry for the late response to your message and request for assistance. Looking at the IP range's contributions, it looks like no further editing has come from it since June 28. Because of this, I'm going to hold off on taking any action. If things do continue and if they're engaging in repeated vandalism or disruption, please report the user to AIV or ANI so that an administrator can review your report and take action. It'll be faster than contacting me. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:41, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

2603.9000.9907

Did my message register?Doriden (talk) 03:04, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Doriden - Yes it did. See above. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:41, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

note to say hello

this is my first time visiting your page. just wanted to say hello. your efforts are very impressive. keep it up!! ---Sm8900 (talk) 🌍 20:33, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sm8900! Thank you for the message and for the very kind words. :-) Don't be a stranger if you run into any questions or if you need help with anything. I'll be more than happy to help you. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:42, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
sounds good! thanks for your reply. see you! ---Sm8900 (talk) 🌍 13:46, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sm8900 - You bet. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:27, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Claederis17

Oshwah, could you please take a look at this editor, and take whatever action you deem appropriate. So far we have a pattern of Disruptive editing, especially ignoring the details of WP:FILMOGRAPHY, esp. MOS:DATERANGE, even after I've warned them about it. Thanks. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:33, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Editor is still at it, and has now received a second Level 4 warning from another editor. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:39, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi IJBall! I apologize for the delay getting back to you here. I've been very busy lately with real-life things, and I'm just now getting caught up with all of the Wikipedia messages, emails, pings, and requests for assistance that I received while I was away. Is this user still being disruptive? I see from their contributions that this user hasn't edited since June 30th. I just wanted to check in and see if there's anything that I still need to look into. :-) Thanks - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:45, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oshwah, I think nothing since they indicated that they wanted to "learn from their mistakes". I'll let you know if anything changes... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:09, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
IJBall - Sounds good. Keep in touch! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:30, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oshwah, unfortunately they came back with the same type of WP:DE, but just at Maya Hawke. Hopefully one final warning from an Admin will get them to stop with these types of edits. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:50, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
IJBall - I've left the user a message here on their user talk page. Hopefully the user will take my advice and do what I recommended that they do. This is kind of a rough spot; I think they're trying to edit in good faith (unless you have diffs that show otherwise that I didn't see?), but there seems to be numerous warnings on their user talk page in regards to Wikipedia's manual of style. I don't want to block a new editor who's likely trying to edit in good faith, but I know that the disruptions can't continue either. Hopefully they'll respond and ask for some input and for some help. Keep me updated. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 15:17, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oshwah, this editor is still at it – same pattern of ignoring warning on Filmography MOS. At this point, I feel like there's no choice but to seek a block here, as they've been warned plenty to stop this. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:02, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IJBall. Thanks for keeping me updated on this user, and I apologize for the delay responding to your message here. I was busy in real life and I'm just now getting myself caught up with all of the Wikipedia messages, pings, emails, etc that I received. This user hasn't edited for the last few days, so I'm going to hold off on blocking until the user becomes active again. Please let me know if disruption continues from this user, and I'll be happy to take another look. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:02, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oshwah, I'm now a little concerned that this editor may also be editing while logged out to avoid scrutiny – the interaction report only shows 4 articles in common between Claederis17 and 112.210.35.170, but the kinds of edits performed by both are very similar IMO... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:40, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User Alandyept

Hi. Can you check whether the User Enronsap is a sock puppet of User Alandyept? 06:16, 2 July 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.129.101.67 (talk) [reply]

Hi there! It looks like ST47 has already done this and has made that determination. If you have any questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:40, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion on a matter

Hi! Sorry to bother you out of the blue, but User:MjolnirPants referred me to you to possibly deal with a certain matter. It's already been raised at ANI (not by me), but would you mind taking a look anyway? Brevity being the soul of ... getting anything done on ANI, when posting this I deliberately refrained from posting any diffs that weren't specifically either remarks about me or refusals to retract those remarks about me, but there's also this. (MPants referred me to you after posting that, but if you consider it to constitute a "too many cooks" situation, I apologize.)

Anyway, whatever you think of the matter, I'll bow to your judgement, and if you think the Nazi allegations don't rise to the level of being blockworthy, I'll just accept that and move on with my life. (Since I wasn't the one to open the ANI thread, I can't withdraw it unilaterally, but I suspect if I apologized for saying the remarks were blockworthy that would be the end of it.)

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 11:53, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hijiri88 and thanks for leaving me a message about this. I went to the ANI discussion and added a few comments there. While I'm not sure as to whether or not the user's intent was to attack and cast aspersions onto you (and others) - especially regarding WP:NONAZIS, I definitely believe that the user should've chosen better words and that they knew better than to make those comments in the first place. They weren't intended to add positivity to the discussion - especially comments like this. The user has since apologized and has verbally stated that he'd retract the statements if he could. So long as the user doesn't continue to make such comments, I don't see that blocking him/her would yield any benefit at this time. I did tell the user that the behavior is expected not to continue, and that blocking would be justified if it does. In all honesty, I know that tempers have flared and that things got a bit heated - but if I were to give you advice, it would be to do your best to try and let it go and move on. It's obviously not fun to believe that someone is calling you out on WP:NONAZIS, and it can definitely be infuriating when you see that no action is being taken despite your belief that it should be. However, I would wager that you probably want this matter to be over with, too, just for the sake of everyone being able to get back to work improving the project. I'd encourage you to accept his/her apologies and move on. You don't have to accept their apologies because they deserve forgiveness; you can always do it because you deserve peace. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 04:12, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

2603.9000.9907

Hello sir, the persistent disruptive editor with the roaming ip address 2603.9000.9907 based in Florida was blocked for a month, when his block expired on 6-27 he went and did the same disruptive editing, Hankscorpio reverted them. He then was suspended for 3 months. Now he's back again using 172.58.172.6 out of same state, Florida and same subject matter. Hankscorpio has been reverting them. This person must be held accountable for his behavior. He's persistent, and disruptive. Even after warnings and blocks. Thank you, Doriden (talk) 14:43, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(TPS) The 2603:9000:9907:1100:0:0:0:0/64 range and the 172.58.172.0/22 have been blocked for 3 months. Rather than canvass multiple users about this, in the future I recommend that you use WP:AIV for such reports. OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:04, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Doriden - Ohnoitsjamie is right; I highly recommend that you report these users to WP:AIV. I know that you said that it's difficult to do while on a mobile device, but you can enable tools such as Twinkle that make it super easy to file a report. Just point, click, fill out the form, and press 'submit'. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 05:17, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

2603.9000.9909

Hi Oshwah, the reason the active stopped on June 28 is because Wugapodes blocked him again for a little bit longer. Then he started using 172.58.176 yesterday and today Hankscorpio has been busy reverting all of the disruptive editing. Same city and state, same subject matter, same disruptive behavior. Another administrator put a temporary block on it for sockpuppetry. So every thing is ok for now. Hopefully he will not turn up again using another ip address. Thanks Doriden (talk) 01:38, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Doriden - You bet; always happy to help where I can. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 05:16, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your two excellent questions

I want a bit of time to give thoughtful answers. Please forgive me if I don't answer them right away. Thanks! Your questions are the best things to happen to me today (a very good day for me), and not because I'll nail the answers. BusterD (talk) 02:19, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BusterD! No worries; take your time. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:18, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for questions and your patience. Answers are up now. Your second question reminded me how I felt and how ultimately it made me a better human being. Appreciate the reminder that I've improved. BusterD (talk) 18:21, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
BusterD - No problem; thanks for answering them! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:19, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In the event I'm handed a mop, may I ask you a question/look over your shoulder from time to time? I'll need to watch good people at work. BusterD (talk) 19:24, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
BusterD - Unless something crazy comes up, your RFA is going to pass. ;-) I'll congratulate you in advance and welcome you to the admin team! Absolutely; my user talk page is always open to you, and you're welcome to come to me any time you have any questions or need my input on anything. I'll be more than happy to answer them and help you. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:32, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your questions and support in my RfA. Perhaps folks might have preferred me to give more detail or focus on different aspects of civility. I found your questions a perfect chance to shoot from the hip without contrivance. My first draft on your first question started down a completely different road, but I felt the community deserved a more visceral personal response from me about the blocking experience. The fumble-thumb question was right in front of me after I answered question 8, and while it didn't satisfy all, my answer satisfied me. It was true. It read honestly. Yours are the sort of questions I wished I'd been asked in my first RfA. BusterD (talk) 17:01, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BusterD! I offer my official congratulations now that you've passed your RFA! These kinds of open-ended questions are the ones I like to ask in RFAs. The answers, depending on how they're given, show many different aspects of one's experience, temperament, and ability to handle the tools. Don't fret it, think back, or wonder how you could've answered the questions better... You passed. It's done, it's over, and you can move on. Look at it this way: Your RFA went A LOT better than mine did... ;-) Let me know if you run into any questions about the admin tools, and I'll be happy to answer them and help you. :-) Cheers, and congratulations! ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:08, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This is by far the best RFA I have ever voted in. BusterD should have been admin in the first place!! --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 02:24, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Technical Barnstar
Thanks for your help fixing my scripts! Enjoy! Signed,The4lines |||| (You Asked?) (What I've Done.) 04:07, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi The4lines! Thanks for the barnstar and for the very kind words. I'm glad that I was able to help you figure out what the problem was with your scripts, and I'm happy to see that you're up and running again! If you need help with anything else, don't be a stranger. I'm available and happy to help! :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 05:12, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail

Hello, Oshwah. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Firestar464 (talk) 10:22, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Firestar464 - Received and replied. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 10:25, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Per email discussion

Hi Oshwah, This is Nim. I vanished two years ago (by mistake), and would like to know if it is ok for you to rename my account back to EurovisionNim. This was discussed on the last email I sent you. I promise to abide by the ban and do whatever it takes to get back on good standing. A two year break was well worth it. Many thanks --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 12:54, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

EurovisionNim -  Done. Welcome back! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 13:05, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Oshwah, many thanks. Can you please recheck your email, because I might have some issues as I cannot edit my userpage as I originally asked for it to be semi-protected and I had that user rights back. Would that be possible please? --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 13:09, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
EurovisionNim - You should be able to edit your user page without issue. It's semi-protected, and your account is autoconfirmed. I've restored the user rights that you had at the time that your account became vanished. If you still have trouble with editing your user page, try logging out from your account and logging back in again (just make sure that you enter 'EurovisionNim' as your username). Please let me know if you need help with anything else. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 13:16, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Replied to your email champ! Just need help re my ban area whether its ok to upload images but not contribute them to the article. I got in trouble for them on Wikipedia, but never on Commons. --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 13:55, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
EurovisionNim - It wouldn't be a violation of your ban on Wikipedia to upload images to Commons if your ban only pertains to the English Wikipedia. However, I would be careful and be very conscious and aware of what you're doing before you do it; I just don't want to see you traverse down a pitfall where you're starting to push the boundaries and tread closer and closer to a point where you'll start violating the conditions of your ban. Speaking of your ban, what are the exact conditions of your ban on the English Wikipedia? Are you topic-banned from all pages relating to automobiles? Are you just banned from changing images of automobiles? What are you banned from doing? What is the exact basis of your ban on the English Wikipedia? Is this a self-imposed ban or a community ban? I don't see a record on Wikipedia's editing restrictions page. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 14:11, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
EurovisionNim - Nevermind - I found it in the archive and restored it to the editing restrictions page, since you're now an active editor again. Please be careful and please don't violate the conditions of your ban. I don't want to see you getting into more hot water. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 14:29, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't intend to touch any article I am banned from on the English Wikipedia (nor do much editing), however I am not sure because I have seen users who have had similar bans still upload images on Commons. Davey2010 or someone else might be able to help out, as I am not too certain where I am heading and he is quite active on Commons so possibly he could assist me as a mentor?? I might not be new, but coming back from a two year stint on the sidelines would graciously be helpful in analysing my situation. If its not a violation of my ban to upload images to Wikimedia Commons, I don't see the need to touch any articles that I am banned from, just upload my images for my own pleasure and let the other users decide if they want to use it. It would be great if someone can give me a guided tour, and get me into the rhythm of things... After all 2 year break, well I might have forgotten. --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 14:52, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I just had a read of it again and it only relates to "all edits and pages broadly construed" – so I don't see anywhere where it is restricting me from uploading on Commons. I am just completely jumbled up on what to do --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 14:56, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
EurovisionNim - Your ban only applies to the English Wikipedia. The way that your ban would apply to Commons is if the community or a process at Commons wishes to impose a ban upon you there. I wouldn't worry about it too much, but I'd also question why you still wish to upload images of automobiles to commons. I just don't want to see you get into any trouble over there, so definitely connect with someone who is proficient on commons who is willing to help and mentor you. You definitely want to make sure that you don't repeat the same behavior on Commons that got you into trouble here. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 15:09, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Nim, Welcome back, I can't remember much in regards to your bans or topic bans but I would suggest editing in ways that wont lead to you being blocked or having ANI reports created, So no replacing images etc etc,
I'm not on here much myself these days as simply put En isn't the place it used to be and truth be told I've become bored with it. I've become bored with being dragged to ANI for every stupid reason imaginable, I've become bored of putting so much life and effort into articles just for no-mark morons to undo that work. That fire I had in me has died a long time ago.
Put your work into projects where it's appreciated and where it counts. Anwho unfortunately I won't be able to mentor you but I'm sure someone who's active here will,
Happy editing, Cheers, –Davey2010Talk 15:13, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Bro, Davey2010, it was you who suggested I take a break for a long time haha. I do not want to repeat the actions that happened, I'm 22 now, have a heavy uni load so I won't be too active. I think Davey what we can do is maybe continue editing, not revert each other unnecessarily. You had a preference I remember, by using different peoples' images, and from there "So no replacing images..." – Ok in that case I won't upload anymore and do some work with the other authors. I mean, Wikipedia is supposed to be fair you said, and you mentioned for me to utilize different authors' images. I also noted you reverted all my edits on Simple Wikipedia. Why did you do that? It was not necessary and that lowered my self-esteem. But in hindsight it wasn't necessary as Transperth there are some superb images I want to update, not the ones you reverted of course, I just cannot edit the automobile section on the English Wiki, but didn't see the need for the reverts on simple?? --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 15:21, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Davey2010 - I'm sorry to hear these thoughts about Wikipedia coming from you. Have you considered performing other tasks and duties on Wikipedia? You don't have to add or expand content, you know... ;-) We have plenty of other projects and tasks (such as recent changes patrolling, copyright violation investigation and cleanup, participation in noticeboards, etc) that could use an editor like you. I'm sorry that your passion for this project has diminished. If my suggestions don't interest you, maybe after some time has gone by and after you've had a much-needed break from the project for a bit, you might find yourself looking to come back and give us a hand. ;-) I really don't want to see you go! ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 15:23, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oshwah, yeah look Wikipedia was not like that for me when I came into play. Davey2010 please check your talkpage as I left you a message. Try WP:BACKLOG, that's the god to editing. Or in some instances take a break. Remember, we are all friends now, and I want it to stay that way for the time being. Good luck all --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 15:29, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In addition, there's not really much to reverting others... simply having your own preferences accommodated isn't going to work. My style is this, I try my best not to get into stuff like that, but replacing with low quality images etc. can cause problems especially with people. I am not too worried now if my images aren't used. A lot of users have WP:OWN behaviour demonstrated (replacing with own images) which I am at fault myself. So in summary Davey2010 no point just reverting images just to see your side of things. I myself am guilty of it and I'm trying to avoid it so am reducing uploading unless its a last resort. --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 15:33, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Oshwah, Hope all is well with you and yours, Unfortunately mate the fire I once had in me has long gone. En used to be a fantastic place to edit but not any more and with WP:UCOC coming in to it it will be even less fantastic. I used to spend my time happily participating at AFD and look where that got me .... a very near topic ban from AFD closures altogether and a block to show for it .... that's the thanks I got ...
Guess En like all projects have their ups and downs but unfortunately I wasn't happy here any more and it's been that way for some time, Anyway take care Oshwah and thank you for your help and guidance you've given me over the years I will forever be grateful!, Take care and stay safe mate, Dave // –Davey2010Talk 15:45, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Davey2010 - You're very welcome; I'm glad to have been given the opportunity to work with you here. Are you participating on other Wikimedia projects? Or are you done with Wikimedia completely? ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 15:47, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much that means a lot :), I mostly edit at Commons these days, just help out where I can lol, –Davey2010Talk 15:54, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Davey2010 - Hey, that's cool. At least you're contributing to a project - it doesn't have to be this one. :-) Keep in touch, and if there's anything you need or that I can help you out with, don't be a stranger. ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 15:59, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nim, Stop pinging me, I made it very clear to you I don't edit here and If I did return I would do more productive things with my time than to revert you on car articles!. Kindly stop pinging me further. –Davey2010Talk 15:45, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies for that, had too much to drink. Yeah don't worry, you aren't the only one. I think 2021 is gonna be a better year. Just get rid of Covid and we are all good!!! --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 15:52, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
EurovisionNim - Don't drink and Wikipedia! ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 15:57, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Redbutterfly0987

3 July 2021

– A user has requested CheckUser. An SPI clerk will shortly look at the case and endorse or decline the request.

Suspected sockpuppets

Check User: Compare edits of Worldofknoledge121 (talk · contribs) [1] with Redbutterfly0987 (talk · contribs) [2] .It is clear that these are two different accounts used by the same person. Both are accounts created on the same day. Therefore, he has proved to be an exaggeration of the Ezhava caste and it is appropriate to prevent these.At the same time, both of them have made similar edits on the Itti Achuthan, Cheerappanchira pages.User:106.208.1.114|106.208.1.114 ]] (talk) 17:16:59, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I'm not sure what this message is about, but I believe that you're asking me to take a look at this SPI case? I can certainly do so. However, I just need to make sure that I give the other SPI cases fair and equal attention as well. Be patient; someone will review your report and investigate if the evidence merits a further look. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:08, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Daisy

Hi, I don't know if you remember, but on IRC a while back, you redacted content on Princess Daisy that was copied from Mariowiki. I have since become more informed on copyright policy, and I now realize that the licensing was perfectly compatible with Wikipedia. It is up to you if you want to bring the revisions back. Scorpions13256 (talk) 20:52, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Scorpions13256 -  Done. Thanks for letting me know! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:05, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested proposal

Hi Oshwah, I was having a think of the WP:BRD system and think an additional supplement would work for editors. I am suggesting we have a BDR (bold, discuss, revert) as an optional alternative. So what this means for example, is I bold edit take it to talk page and then users can revert after discussion. Is this a viable solution to prevent edit warring? --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 05:17, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi EurovisionNim! Thanks for the message and your thoughts. I'll be happy to provide you with input as to why the BRD cycle is in the order that it currently is.
The issue with discussing first is that the edit might need to be reverted now. For example, if someone adds a copyright violation, BLP violation, content that's libellous, or something else that's a serious violation of policy, it must be removed immediately. We can't wait for a discussion with with the user to conclude before we remove that kind of content. The issue should definitely be discussed with the user so that they know and understand that what they're doing constitutes a serious violation of policy, but the content must be removed as soon as it's discovered.
Another important policy to keep in mind is Wikipedia's verifiability policy. Remember that, per the policy, the onus is on the person who's adding the content to show that it's verifiable, supported by reliable sources, and should be included in the article. The fact of the matter is that, hypothetically, the order could be anything else. The issue with edit warring isn't because the order of WP:BRD is wrong or should be changed. Edit warring occurs because users fail to follow all steps of the cycle - they fail to discuss the matter at-hand and instead go straight to adding the content back to the article.
While your thought sounds good initially, there are important reasons as to why it's ordered as BRD and not BDR. Please let me know if you have any more questions, and I'll be happy to answer them and help you. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 17:53, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah well, such happens. Anyway, I should really get back to studying. Ciao :) --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 02:45, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
EurovisionNim - Have fun studying! I hope that my response was helpful. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:57, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It was very helpful. I am trying this new challenge. I want to try and sing in 60 languages... but I've only mastered 15. Got a long way to go. I need some song recommendations not in English. If any user from various nationalities e.g. Bangaldesh, Slovenia etc. can throw me some great singers from their country (non-English) of course, it would be great so I can play some at a NYE party I'm hosting at the end of the year!! --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 03:38, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
EurovisionNim - Wow! Good luck with the challenge, and keep in touch! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:10, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Independence Day


🍓⋆JennilyW♡🍧 (talk) is wishing you a Happy 4th of July! On this day, we recognize our independence from Great Britain with the adoption of the Declaration of Independence, which ultimately paved the way to our freedom. Celebrate this day in many different ways, such as hosting a barbecue, watching baseball games, or even attending a fireworks show! Happy Independence Day, fellow American!  
 

Share this message by adding {{subst:Independence Day}} to a fellow American's talk page.

🍓⋆JennilyW♡🍧 (talk) 17:27, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JennilyW! Thanks for the holiday wishes! I hope that your Independence Day went well and was safe and fun (assuming that you live in the United States). I can say that mine was both productive and relaxing, which is what I definitely needed! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 18:10, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oshwah yes, I live in the United States! It was well and safe and fun! Thanks for replying! 🍓⋆JennilyW♡🍧 (talk) 23:56, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
JennilyW - That's great to hear! I'm glad it was safe and fun! No problem; if you need help or input with anything, please don't hesitate to message me. I'll be more than happy to reply and help out! :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:18, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The opposite of a merge?

Is there a guideline for when an article section should be a standalone article? For example, Charles Darwin's education is a standalone article but it would be ludicrous to create a standalone article supplementing the "Education" section of every biography. I am asking in relation to merger proposals regarding this AfD. HouseOfChange (talk) 15:01, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) The opposite of a merge is a split. See Wikipedia:Splitting for the basic guidance on splits. BilCat (talk) 15:55, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, the opposite of merge is butter. EEng 16:31, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Think that is the opposite of mergerine. — xaosflux Talk 18:57, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I always thought the opposite of mergirine was splitter. BilCat (talk) 18:59, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
HouseOfChange - BilCat is correct. See this page for more information. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 18:26, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, all, for an informative though mind-splitting discussion. HouseOfChange (talk) 02:48, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
HouseOfChange - LOL, you're welcome. Message me any time if you need anything, and I'll be happy to help. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:56, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

chat

I want to chat with other people — Preceding unsigned comment added by Precious744 (talk • contribs) 19:05, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Precious744! Welcome to Wikipedia! If you're looking to chat live with other Wikipedians, you can do so on Wikipedia's IRC channels, or Wikipedia's Discord server. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:09, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
Thank you for your support/endorsement over at WP:EFN. Whatever the outcome may be, I really appreciate you taking the time to write that. Have a good evening! :-) Patient Zerotalk 01:16, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Patient Zero! Thank you for the barnstar and for the kind words. You're very welcome - I'm happy to do it! Keep in touch, have a great evening, and good luck! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:18, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No worries! I shall do, and thank you very much! :-) Patient Zerotalk 01:20, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Patient Zero - You bet. ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:21, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

SPI

Hello Oshwah. Can you take a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Haddie1088? --Minorax«¦talk¦» 05:15, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Minorax! Sure,  Done. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 05:32, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Stale?

Hello Oshwah, I'm quite confused as to why Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Certif-ID Network was declined as stale given that Certif-ID Network (talk · contribs) was active today - see Special:AbuseLog/30366378. Could you elaborate? Thanks, Pahunkat (talk) 18:25, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pahunkat! Thanks for the message! I took another look at the user, and I didn't realize that they generated edit filter logs today. So, the elaboration you're looking for is that I'm an idiot and that I didn't check there. :-) I'll update the status of the SPI and take a look at it. Sorry! ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 20:52, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for running the CU Oshwah :-) Pahunkat (talk) 21:10, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Pahunkat - You bet. ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:41, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can you assist me with editing the Draft:Markand_Adhikari article? Aditi Bansal Dhar (talk)

User:Oshwah Hi, Aditi Bansal Dhar this side. You can call me Aditi. I am new to Wikipedia and have not experienced using such a big platform, that's my genuine side. I am writing this to you to look into the article of Mr. Markand Adhikari. He is the Chairman and Managing Director of Sri Adhikari Brothers (SABGROUP). He founded the company with his brother Lt. Shri. Gautam Adhikari in the year 1981. Adhikari has been one of the first ones in creating content for the national broadcast channel, Doordarshan, Shrimaan Shrimati (TV series). He was the producer of many long-running iconic Hindi sitcoms and Dramas. He has also been one of the first content creators for the first Hindi Satellite Channel ‘ZEE TV’ back in 1992.

Adhikari led the SAB group to not only have a fair amount of experience in the production of content but also in the broadcasting sector by creating a light humor-centric television brand, SAB TV. He has been instrumental in SAB Group’s foray into all verticals of media & entertainment like content production, broadcasting, film production and distribution, VFX studios, digital platform, and current affairs and news arms. In addition, he is in the production of Bollywood movies like Great Grand Masti Total Dhamaal Missing (2018 film) Chehraa (1999 film) Bhookamp Thank God (film) . He is the founder of the world's most watch comedy channel “Sony SAB”. Also running successful Channels like Mastiii, Dabangg, Maiboli. Moreover, he is also running creditable digital platform “Governance Now”, which is effectively addressing governance-related issues on a public platform and thus, created its own niche within the media segment.

I wanted to learn and want to improve the article for Markand Adhikari and would like to have your assistance and guidance to draft the article for him. As you are a senior to this platform, Please be my mentor. I would love to learn from you and explore the synergies in line. Can you please assist me with how we can make this page live again. Sorry If I am sounding desperate or else, I am just trying to figure out for some accounts why they are not eligible.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aditi Bansal Dhar (talk • contribs) 10:41, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker), Please read WP:BLP. Also you cannot do this as WP:PAID prohibits paid editors for articles, and finally, you need to be aware that you have to sign your posts before posting. Also Oshwah, this user has been blocked by TheresNoTime per this sockpuppet investigation. This is definitely fishy as this article might be deleted due to it failing WP:NOTABILITY--EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 04:49, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A brownie for you!

Sharing my WikiLove to all my friends on Wikipedia!!

You're a legend. My mum made this brownie for you, hope you like it. EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 04:47, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi EurovisionNim! Thanks for the brownie! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:13, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User talk: Suckdicck4ever

You might want to revert and nuke this user’s only edit. Johnnyconnorabc (talk) 09:31, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Johnnyconnorabc, and thanks for leaving me a message here and for the heads up. I don't see any edits or contributions that this user has made. Can you tell me where you saw it? ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:14, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

sockpuppet investigation FFA P16

I thought opening one of my own somewhen but left it. Now we just missed the three months with "Nüedi". Would you still check for logins? see investigation. Regards --Caumasee (talk) 20:07, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Caumasee - I'll be taking a look at the current SPI cases here shortly, and I'll review this SPI report when it's next in line. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:16, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think you got it wrong

Hi, I received your message and I thought it would be better to clear this out. I haven't added links to Tote bags. I don't know who made that edit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drelite (talk • contribs)

(talk page watcher) comment: Hi, Drelite. Your account added a link to uniqueleatherbags.us in this edit last Feb, which Oshwah warned you about. If that wasn't you, who else is using or has used the Drelite account? Schazjmd (talk) 16:40, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker), Maybe revert the edit in question if its not you and then place your edit. At dad's workplace, all his colleagues use WP:2FA to prevent such issues like this. Please note, if this is the case, this is likely a WP:COMPROMISED account and must be blocked. Now I'm no expert in this area, but Schazjmd might want to take this to WP:AN, maybe that could solve this. O/W maybe a revert is worth it. If the account is blocked, either myself or Schazjmd can vouch for you. Since my topic ban a couple of years ago (I temporarily retired until this month), I want to get to the pastoral side of things for users, and therefore act as a 'chaplain' to them in difficult times with the help of my friends, in some sense to get a good solid understanding and avoiding conflicts. If that's so, maybe we can help investigate it. --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 16:44, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) Update: Drelite has been blocked by Discospinster as explained in the diff. Case closed --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 06:23, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/The Train Master‎

Could you take a look at this spi? Just showed up again, roughly twice a year. Cards84664 13:03, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cards84664! I have a few things on my to-do list to get done, but I'll try and see if I can take a look at it tonight. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:20, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thank you Cards84664 17:23, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mail

Check email please, thank you. FDW777 (talk) 17:44, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FDW777 - Received and replied. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:15, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI

I feel bad on the way I acted. I didn't know I was edit warring. With the selfie article, I did a half and half method so basically we keep Davey's edit and mine, so we can have equal share. I am sorry, this was wrong of me and I will not make the mistake again. Also I don't feel like editing since this warning, but there's nothing much to do, can you please send me some fixups to do please? Otherwise I'm just going to ask an admin to block my account per self-requested and leave forever --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 06:36, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

EurovisionNim - Why are you suddenly so set on leaving the project again? Everyone makes mistakes; it's okay, and it happens. Just learn from it and improve your edits moving forward to reflect what you learned - that's all. :-) Like I said in the ANI, I've made many mistakes on Wikipedia over the time that I've been an editor here. Where would I be today if I responded to the feedback and criticism I received by leaving Wikipedia each time and avoiding the project entirely? I wouldn't be where I am today, that's one thing I can say with certainty. ;-) There's no need to be afraid; keep editing, be a part of this community, and continue to learn and improve. Move on from this, and so will everybody else. They're not out to get you! They don't hate you, and they want to see you successful just like I do. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:24, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm fair point. Maybe a block on Commons will avoid my image temptations. --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 07:57, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
EurovisionNim - Why a block on commons? Why not just avoid the temptations on your own? :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 09:45, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ideal. Can you help me understand the WP:STACKING and WP:NOTAGALLERY rules. Someone is using these policies and i want to help do the cleanups. A successful WP:BRD and WP:3O. I closed it and no longer will edit this article again. Anyway, back to the drinks with the lads :) --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 09:47, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
EurovisionNim - They seem pretty straight-forward when I read them. WP:STACKING simply refers to floating images that are vertically above one another where there isn't enough text in the article to space them out. On some browsers, this can make the article display awkwardly. You want to add text between the images and space them out. WP:NOTAGALLERY refers to many things, but I believe that the user was aiming more toward point #4 - "Photographs or media files with no accompanying text." Images in articles should accompany encyclopedic text. We don't want to have a stub article with 50 images in it that don't mean anything. The images should supplement text, is what it means. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 09:52, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ok no worries. But that's cool. Hey if they wants it that way then I shall respect it. Did you like my BRD closure on MAN SL202? --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 09:53, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
EurovisionNim - Just read through those guidelines and make sure that you understand what they're referring to. Upon first glance, I don't see any issue with the closure - I didn't read it very in-depth though. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 09:56, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
EurovisionNim - I just had a chance to look at the discussion more in-depth. You're violating your topic ban! Please see the message I'm leaving you on your user talk page. This is not good! ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 11:48, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Dang I didn't realise! Sorry... I removed the post quickly... I didn't realise mentioning the topic was not allowed. My apologies I removed the post. I feel like a tool now. I never intended to, I didn't think such a small thing could cause such a headache. ---EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 11:49, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
EurovisionNim - Take a look at the message I left on your user talk page. You can't be doing this... You're going to end up temporarily blocked if you violate your topic ban again, and I don't want to see that happen! ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 12:00, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Did and replied --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 12:01, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Leave me alonee

I am experiencing a period of upset, anger and depression that I cannot function properly on Wikipedia hence my erratic behaviour today. I somewhat went off my medication and then just went riot today as I forgot to take them. It is no point me just editing when you can't help me. I am no longer interested in editing Wikipedia and that's why I am misbehaving worse today --EurovisionNim (lets talk!)(contributionnes) 16:49, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

EurovisionNim - Listen to me... You need to calm down and relax, okay? Nothing bad is happening to you on Wikipedia, and there's no reason for you to be feeling as if you're going to be blocked or that you don't belong on this project. Just take the feedback that you've received lately, and work on improving your edits in the future. If you need to take a break from Wikipedia, catch your breath, and get your personal matters sorted out, I highly recommend that you do so. What you're doing right now (allowing your mental well-being to slip, and allowing yourself to be upset and frustrated over trivial things on Wikipedia) is not healthy for you. If you're going to be a long-term editor on Wikipedia or any other project, you need to get yourself to a place where you can control your emotions and edit with a healthy mindset. You won't be successful if you don't... ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 17:03, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want to anymore. I have had enough, Yes, I will take a break but its not worth the effort to edit anymore. I can't handle this stupid site. I have better things to do and a temporary block is enough for me. Bbb23 should have done what I asked which was to clarify, nothing else --EurovisionNim (lets talk!)(contributionnes) 17:08, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

HI

I need help== — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.47.142.225 (talk) 22:34, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! Sure, what do you need help with exactly? :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:44, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! Where’s my credit?

Following this, don’t I get a Barnstar or any form of appreciation for de-escalating the situation? You know what, next time I’m in your city, you owe me coffee and pack of fine cigars 😎 Celestina007 (talk) 23:29, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Celestina007 - LOL. I'll definitely pay up if you're ever in my area. ;-) No, but seriously - thank you for doing your best to de-escalate the situation and calm things down. EurovisionNim ended up being indefinitely blocked due to issues that you can read about in this discussion, but I still commend you for your efforts nonetheless. In the end, we had to say goodbye to EurovisionNim, but it was for the right reasons and to assure that the project moves forward in a positive direction and without disruption or acts of incivility. Keep in touch, have a great rest of your day, and happy editing! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:44, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It’s a shame, I certainly don’t deserve anything if an indef block was evoked, my expectations were both editors coming out of ANI and settling the issues like mature adults they both are. It’s a shame really. Having done a little reading, I do see, appreciate and understand why the indef was evoked. Celestina007 (talk) 01:16, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Celestina007 - Hey, credit is due where credit is due. The user was indefinitely blocked in the end, but that doesn't negate the fact that you did your best to try and help and diffuse the situation. A person I knew back in college said it well when he described situations like this: "Take the meat, and leave the bones". You did well to try and calm things down, and you gained experience from it. Take the good things that came out of the events that happened, and leave the rest - don't take the bad things with you. I agree - it's definitely a shame that it had to come down to an indefinite block in order to resolve the situation, but as you can see in the discussion over at AN, the block was absolutely warranted. EurovisionNim became unruly, uncivil, and openly combative. It got to the point where a block was needed in order to put a stop to the disruptive behavior, and I believe that EurovisionNim's behavior was only going to keep getting worse and worse had we not stepped in. EurovisionNim stated on multiple occasions that he has personal, mental, emotional, and health-related issues that were responsible for his edits and behavior on Wikipedia. If what he said was true, I hope that he does what he needs to do in order to sort these things out and that he gets healthy. Unfortunately, until that happens - Wikipedia is not the right place for him to be spending his time. :-/ ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:34, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

unhelpful admin

I was thinking of launching a complaint against an unhelpful admin User:Ponyo, but unsure how and I worry they will just retaliate with more punishment. Should I just not bother? Cladeal832 (talk) 18:11, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cladeal832 - If you feel that an administrator acted inappropriately, or used their tools inappropriately, you definitely should say something and open a discussion about it. I would take your concerns to the administrator directly as a first measure and try and sort things out with them. If things can't be sorted out with them directly, then I would open a discussion at ANI or another suitable noticeboard. Administrators are not allowed to use their tools in a retaliatory measure or where they are involved, so I wouldn't worry about that. What happened? Why do you believe that Ponyo was "unhelpful"? ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 18:15, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Likely because I closed a discussion on my talk page that was going precisely nowhere; I have no interest in getting drawn into yet another one. Oshwah, you have near infinite patience in comparison to me; you may be able to give Cladeal832 the attention they appear to need.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:25, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ponyo - Sure, I'll be happy to help them out and point them in the right direction if that's what they need. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 18:26, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe somebody who lacks both patient and interest in discussion isn't particularly suited to be an admin.Cladeal832 (talk) 18:40, 15 July 2021 (UTC).[reply]
I don't lack patience, I lack Oshwah's patience. If the litmus test for adminship is "Oshwah-levels of patience" the admin corp would be reduced to three. Oshwah, User:JBW and User:Cullen328.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:25, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I would love to have a conversation with User:Ponyo, but it has been closed off with no notice. I think asked some legitimate questions that were unanswered. I disagree with the block, but even so, I get my behavior wasn't helpful in the dispute and won't be repeated in a week and besides one week isn't the worst punishment and some cooling off is usually a good thing too.
I wrote that I revert an edit because it was unharmful with it added inaccurate information already discussed on the TalK Page [i.e. Ian Fleming failed his exam for the Foreign Office posting and sources such as A. Lycett's biography[3] show that is incorrect and also the timeline presented in the article makes it seem as if Ian Fleming's mother broke off his engagement before he took the exam, but in sources show he toke the the exam in September 1931, but didn't end his engagement until April 1933 and was told by the admin I only reverted because I thought I was right and thinking I was right doesn't make it so. Cladeal832 (talk) 18:30, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Cladeal832 - I took a look at the article's edit history, as well as the discussion on Ponyo's user talk page, and I agree (as well as you do) that you were engaging in edit warring on the article. You not only reverted Nikkimaria's changes three times, but also reverted the edit that Black Kite made to the article shortly afterwards. I'm not going to nag at you or wave my finger at you about it, since you agreed that this is what happened and you apologized for it.
You just need to understand the policies of edit warring and the three-revert rule and exactly where each of them relate to one another. Edit warring occurs when a user reverts the changes to an article that were made by another user and in a back-and-forth fashion - even if a discussion is currently taking place on the article's talk page. If Person A makes a change to an article, Person B reverts that change, it would become edit warring if Person A were to revert Person B's changes and restore the article to their desired revision. Once a back-and-forth cycle of reverting starts to take place, it becomes edit warring. Edit warring is obviously a disruptive behavior, and administrators can use blocks, page protection, or other means in order to put a stop to it.
Wikipedia's three-revert rule policy relates to Wikipedia's policy on edit warring in that the three-revert rule is a bright-line rule. The three-revert rule is in place in order to define a clear line for users where, should this rule be violated, will almost certainly always be considered edit warring and therefore actionable by an administrator. It doesn't define where edit warring begins from where edit warring is not occurring. It only serves as a line that, if crossed, will be considered a policy violation for edit warring in nearly all cases. Just because you don't violate Wikipedia's three-revert rule does not mean that you're not edit warring. If I were to revert someone three times, wait 25 hours, and then revert them again, it obviously doesn't mean that I'm not edit warring - I most certainly am.
Your block is typical for users who engage in edit warring. You're simply partially-blocked from editing the article in question for one week, and in order to nudge you to take the discussion to the article's talk page, discuss the dispute, and work things out peacefully. Before partial blocking was developed and became an option for administrators to consider and use, administrators could only apply full site blocks, and users who were engaging in edit warring would be fully blocked from editing (usually for 24 hours), which is a lot more strict in my opinion, another reason why I'm happy that partial-blocking is now possible.
If you still have sincere concerns and questions that are unanswered, please feel free to ask me so that I can answer your questions and help you. However, you might have better luck talking to Ponyo about your concerns, since she was the administrator who took action and who will have more information regarding the dispute. Just please don't pester Ponyo with questions that have already been answered. If you wish to talk about a question or concern that Ponyo has already addressed, you can ask them to me. I hope that I was able to answer some questions and address some concerns, but like I said... don't hesitate to let either Ponyo or myself know if you still have questions or need help with anything. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:02, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oshwah, if I can maybe short circuit at least one cycle of this: I think the problem is they have already asked Ponyo several times, she has clearly answered several times, they aren't accepting the answer, and it's now become pestering. In this particular case, I don't think it's a good idea to recommend that the user go back to Ponyo's talk page yet again. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:15, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Floquenbeam - Yeah... I felt the same way that you do, and I hesitated directing this user back over to Ponyo because of that. I went ahead and modified my response above to be more clear, and to encourage the user to direct their questions to me if they've already been answered. Thanks for the response. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:25, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, that's better. If "Oshwah-level patience" is set at a baseline of 100, I wonder what 1-digit number Floquenbeam-level patience would be? I like to think 9, but I'm probably kidding myself. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:32, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Floquenbeam - HA! I think you're more patient than a 9/100... Give yourself some due credit here. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:36, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oshwah, if your patience is a 100, then I'd say the average Wikipedian has a two digit amount of patience. Of course, those digits are arranged over a slash, like 1⁄9. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:19, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
MPants at work - LOL ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 20:28, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Flattered though I am to be placed in Ponyo's top three administrators on the patience scale, I think her information is seriously out of date. Twice in the last couple of days I have had another administrator draw my attention to incidents where I was unnecessarily brusque towards an editor, where years ago I would have been more patient. I seem to be gradually mutating into a grumpy old person. JBW (talk) 22:17, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well tried again to discuss it, but User:Ponyo is really bad as an helpful admin by their own admission lacks patients as well as interest in discussion which is odd for a super Wikipedian to be since discussion is so paramount to it Category:Wikipedia discussion. I have no pretense of being a great contributor, but aren't we expecting more from admins? They said they wouldn't respond to a notice board complaint until after they did some editing on another page so figured to be polite and wait. Didn't really expect the notice board to do anything real, but only hope against hope a post to the notice board might shake up them try to be a better admin, but the needless and near constant mockery since showed it only made them worst. So may I bring my issues back here I ask it here?
It was also what the admin notice board told me.[4] I figured deferring to the guidelines and essays were a better way to avoid blocks. I'm sorry to push on my misunderstandings, but this is something else I don't understand in order again avoid future blocks. I read Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a democracy and Wikipedia:Silence and consensus [again why have these pages is this isn't what we are suppose to do or at least try] and getting consensus doesn't me I don't have to mount a campaign to get votes or even other users to agree or even care, let alone weigh in. When nobody responds on Talk Page, there are plenty of real guidelines to go ahead with it. If somebody else has an objection, I get I can't ignore it, but is there is the slightest burden on the person reverting to give a legitimate reason or burden to discuss to try to form consensus rather than just find consensus? Cladeal832 (talk) 22:07, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think these edits [5] and [6] were Wikipedia:Gaming_the_system#REMOVELARGE since clearly only had issue with the minor wording of a single sentence [7] and [8] and again [9]. I thought those minor wording violated Wikipedia:Reliable sources#Context matters, but now also realize I was being too precious with my edits since I had taken the time and effort to get read a lot of sources and word to accommodate other contributors' concerns and I can't get upset at others for editing any more than they can get upset at me for editing. There are excuses for edit warring, but removing all my edits to game the system is not among them. I get now reverting and reverting again isn't the solution, but what is? If that Wikipedia:Restoring part of a reverted edit essay is wrong, then what is right? The lesson I learned from burnt bridge interaction with my new favorite person in the whole wide world Ponyo is that unless it's about waffles/blocking stuff, admin don't care and take one look at block history and dismiss me. Cladeal832 (talk) 00:22, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Cladeal832 - The right thing to do would be to start a discussion on the article's talk page and bring your concerns directly to the editor. Wikipedia has a dispute resolution protocol that outlines what you should do, and the different ways that a dispute, conflict, or issue can be resolved between editors. I'd give that page a read, and let me know if you have any questions. I don't believe that the editor was trying to game the system; I think that the editor was trying to fix content while reverting your changes. Again, I'd take your concerns up to the editor directly and ask them why they removed the content that they removed. They'll likely be able to provide you with a logical and reasonable explanation. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:43, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No they don't. I thought there was behavior guidelines stating Editors should make a good faith effort to reach a consensus. That means that the dissenting party has to state how the current proposal fails to meet the interests of the wider group, rather than merely stating they will not accept it. There's no case or counter case which I'd love. It's other editors who don't bother to join the discussion let alone make an objection just Wikipedia:Status quo stonewalling#Arguing more discussion is needed, without discussing more again[10] and again[11] [I'd point out only one editor, which again wasn't either of these editors, made any logical or reasonable objection and even then we'd had agreed on most other stuff i.e. the current citation didn't match content of the article. And I did accommodate their concern, not using sourcing they dislike for no reason or wording that bothers them despite it being exactly what was in the citation. Still why reverted stuff like this? [12] or [13][14]. They reverted the mention of the hospital where Ian Fleming died. Do I really need to get consensus for all these edits? I guess I was just wondering if I had a case. I honestly don't know why Wikipedia has these Wikipedia:Gaming the system#REMOVELARGE or Wikipedia:NOTUNANIMITY best practices pages if nobody can meet that standard of violating them?
Even if these aren't the answer I'd like and still confused, I just like you to know you indulging my taxing of your time has not gone unnoticed or unappreciated. Cladeal832 (talk) 01:28, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) Cladeal832, the major problem here seems to be that you feel like the other editor you were edit warring with was wrong, you were right, and Ponyo was wrong to block you. The problem is that nobody but you cares about that. I know it's unfair, and maybe it's "wrong" in that you were completely justified, but that doesn't matter. What matters is working together, achieving consensus and improving the project through that. So I strongly urge you to take Oshwah's advice (in fact, I'd perfectly happy to suggest that any time Oshwah gives any editor advice, it'd be in their best interest to take it). If you continue to argue about this, that very argumentation will become seen to others as disruptive, and you are very likely to face further sanctions, especially if you bring this up at ANI. Your page block was for 1 week, which isn't that long. You are still able to edit the talk page and discussing Fleming elsewhere, which makes this the mildest possible sanction you could have gotten. Oshwah is such a patient editor that I think it's very likely they'll never sanction you for continuing to litigate this, but many, many admins with much, much less patience watch this page.
I'm not trying to be a dick here, I'm honestly trying to help you out of a jam you look very likely to get stuck in very soon. Please take my (and Osh's!) advice here and save yourself the headache. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 14:38, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
My issue was with the admin's behavior. I know why I got blocked. I said multiple times after the first exchange I accepted one week blocked. If you check today's version of the Ian Fleming article and 99% of what I tried to add is there from a pretty simple Talk Page exchange.
I was trying to obtain understanding on something different, but related to the circumstances around the block. I'm realizing I gotten scarred on negative experiences with a bunch of wikibuddies using micro-consensus as kind of explained here Wikipedia:Don't be high-maintenance#Convinced consensus is flawed so find consensus were trigger words for buzz off which is my issue to resolve and get past. I've probably benefitted just as much by admin's not trying to fix any and all good faith intraeditors disputes.
Fine, this admin felt I was just bothering them, but regardless immediately going to aggressive curtness and needless snark still wasn't helpful outside of not willing to be helpful on my questions. I'm a lowly editor, they're an admin so seems they have more of a bigger burden to be above it even when interacting with somebody they might justifiably find irritating, silly, tedious and longwinded. 99% of civility guidelines seem to be about placating other contributors despite privately thinking they're jerks. Fine to think they're jerks, but sending understanding words will often make discussions move more smoothly as shown by nearly ever other admin who sent me a messages so far using stuff like I'm honestly trying to help you or that can absolutely be frustrating, especially when it feels like you're 100% objectively right despite all of them thinking I was in the wrong and not listening. Hopefully pausing on the snark and contempt will help another contributor have a better experience the next time Ponyo unfortunately has to deal with somebody else even worst than me if such a contributor could even possibly exist. Cladeal832 (talk) 15:59, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit to Mark Milley page

Was not a mistake. Someone wrote "Barack Obama" as "Barrack Obama" and I corrected the spelling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:8000:a703:a20f:f894:a358:4928:7b63 (talk) 19:09, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message here. You're absolutely right! I owe you an apology. I thought that Barack Obama was spelled with two 'R's instead of one. I have gone back and restored the edit you made to the article. Thanks for fixing that, and I apologize for reverting your edit. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:13, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dick Tidrow's page

Hi there! I am struggling to find any sources of that online, but my coworker is Tammy Tidrow and that is her father. It's disappointing to see her excluded from all of these articles during this difficult time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:645:480:5060:a1dc:d4d8:7af4:e8f8 (talk) 19:11, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message here regarding your edit to the Dick Tidrow article. Sorry, but what you're describing with your co-workers as a source won't work. That constitutes original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. In short, original research is when you "cite yourself", or cite your own knowledge, relationships, experience, or even your own published works on Wikipedia as a reference. Content that is added on Wikipedia must be attributable to a reliable source that's secondary and independent of the article subject. See Wikipedia's policy on verifiability if you have any questions. I'm also more than happy to answer any questions and help you should you need assistance - please don't hesitate to ask. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:21, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Block q

Is this the SPI script ([15] [16]), or did I screw something up with my original block?-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:08, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ponyo. It was the SPI script that I used. Your original block seemed fine. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 20:27, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Page edit

Hi Oshwah, Thanks for your message. Sorry I didn't think sources were required for all edits since a third of the current list appears to be without any source. Is this because long time contributors are allowed to edit without source?

I'll try to find sources. Are videos accepted as sources too? Because for nicknames it's often the commentators who call it on TV but there's no written article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpvoixoff (talk • contribs) 21:27, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jpvoixoff: there is no exception for long-time editors, but not all unsourced content is immediately removed. You're always free to remove it though. Elli (talk | contribs) 00:36, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Hi Jpvoixoff, and welcome to Wikipedia! All edits on Wikipedia must be attributable to a reliable source or cited by one if the content is challenged or likely to be challenged. Editors who have a longer tenure on Wikipedia must abide by the same policies and guidelines as any other editor on Wikipedia. No editor is exempt from the requirement to follow Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and they can be held accountable for their actions just like any other editor. See Wikipedia's verifiability policy for more information on references and verifying content.
Since you're brand new to Wikipedia, I highly recommend that you go through Wikipedia's getting started page and that you complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial before you make any edits or take on any major tasks around here. It will provide you with many important walkthroughs, guides, interactive lessons, and other information that will familiarize you with our policies and guidelines, how Wikipedia works, how to navigate around the site, and how to find important locations and pages. Most users who take this advice and complete the tutorial tell me later that it was significantly helpful to them and saved them hours of time and frustration they would've experienced otherwise.
Please let me know if you run into any more questions or if you need help with anything. I'll be more than happy to assist you. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:38, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Oshwah Thili765 (talk) 04:45, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thili765! Welcome to Wikipedia! If you haven't already, you should read Wikipedia's getting started page and go through and complete the new user tutorial. It'll help you get started and become familiar with very important things. If you have any questions or need help with anything, please don't hesitate to let me know. I'll be happy to answer them and help you. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 04:47, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks notification

Hello Oshwah. I noticed that you have thanked me by clicking a "Thanks" notification because you noticed my anti-vandalism work on Wikipedia. However, you need to limit your thanks as, well, it appears to be annoying according to others. Please take note this. If you have any questions or objections, please reply to this, or alternatively, I think mine? Anyways, thanks,----Rdp060707|talk 06:25, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rdp060707 - Sure. If you think that I'm thanking you too many times, I'll refrain. Thanks for the message and for letting me know. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 06:27, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bank of Issue in Poland

Hello! I just changed awkwardly sounding "by the Germans" to "by Nazi Germany".I don't think I need a source for this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.197.251.216 (talk) 06:36, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! Was this bank actually created by the Nazi regime of Germany as you stated in the article? I didn't see any mention of fascism or Nazism in the article... ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:41, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"in the General Government (occupied Poland) in 1940".Literally the next sentence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.197.251.216 (talk) 08:06, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I understand. If I made a mistake, please accept my sincere apologies and please feel free to restore your edit to the article. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 08:11, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Don't apologise,everyone makes mistakes.Thank you very much and have a great day)). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.197.251.216 (talk) 08:21, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I hope you have a great day as well! If you get stuck anywhere or need help with anything, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be happy to lend you a hand. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 08:33, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

About Use Wikipedia

Hi Brother How Are You? I Don’t Know That How To use It and Why use It? Can You Help me about using. Thank You.

SPI

Hi Oshwah. How are you? About this SPI case: I think checkuser would be helpful because Special:Contributions/81.213.85.174 looks related to both users. See the timestamps [17][18]. And the IP user just restored [19][20] the problematic edits of the blocked user.[21]. @El C: This new account reminds me of those "Histor*" accounts. Same behavior, same tone. Even this comment is similar to theirs. Notice how he/she waited for one week and then appeared on SPI case just after Oshwah declined the checkuser. Looks something fishy in my opinion. Wario-Man talk 03:50, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pseudonym

After Bryanbrace's editing privileges were revoked, writing with identical mistakes appeared in the Syrian churches of Kerala article. Perhaps Simonjoust is the same editor. Jellysandwich0 (talk) 14:23, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Recently blocked user resumes disruption - User:16ConcordeSSC

User has returned to business as usual with edits like this. It appears they simply waited out the block and resumed. --GoneIn60 (talk) 00:00, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Uglydolls

The user that was vandalizing Kelly Clarkson also is at it on Uglydolls. They messaged me asking why I reverted and I told them but then realized they were sock-puppeting when I noticed two different IPs and that one of the IPs had been blocked (I know two different IPs doesn't always mean sockpuppetry but since one is blocked I assume that is. I let the user know, after I posted to their second page the answer to the question on mine, that they were sock-puppet-ing and to stop. If they continue, here is the other IP, if you need to block it. Though I did warn them so perhaps it will not be necessary. Special:Contributions/2603:7080:C43E:B500:B5FD:3F78:98AE:28A0 EEBuchanan (talk) 01:54, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocking MevanKiri

Could you take a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/JoannaLetren#15 July 2021? I'd like your permission to unblock MevanKiri. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:47, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16ConcordeSSC unreformed

When 16ConcordeSSC returned from the 36-hour block you gave him, he simply resumed his prior behavior, adding unsourced material to the encyclopedia and, on the very rare occasions that he makes an attempt to source, doing it like this putting the reference in the article text. There's a CIR problem here involving an inability or refusal to learn how to use our system, causing him to be NOTHERE. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 16:30, 20 July 2021 (UTC) PS: Pinging @GoneIn60 and Grandpallama:[reply]

Thanks, TransporterMan. I actually dropped a note yesterday a couple sections above. Yes, it is clear to me as well that the actions by this editor (while they may have good intentions), serves as a net disruption that sucks time away from multiple editors to cleanup the mess left in its wake. It becomes a tedious effort, since the unsourced editions often occur in the middle of somewhat helpful punctuation changes and have to be carefully plucked out. The editor also continues to use the "minor edit" label for every edit. --GoneIn60 (talk) 17:57, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There is a new AN-notice concerning this editor here Blue Riband► 05:56, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Editor's Barnstar
You are doing a great job! Keep up the good work! Leslie Blue7 (talk) 14:49, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diligence
For your tireless contribution and diligence in reducing the SPI Backlog. Thanks mate. Celestina007 (talk) 23:38, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A recent revert of yours

The diff is here. Your revert restored the following content:

* On May 25, 2020, George Floyd died to due to a fentanyl overdose, George Floyd's death occured shortly after he was placed under arrest by Derek Chauvin, so his death was erroneously believed to have been caused by Chauvin having placed his knee of Floyd's back for a duration of 10 minutes until paramedics arrived to treat him, as they were called when the fentanyl George had taken was starting to take effect. George's death due to fentanyl sparked global protests, as the erroneous claim that he died due to "lack of oxygen" was unfortunately spread around, before his fentanyl/blood levels were tested.

There were other problems in the restored version, as well, but that one jumped out at me.

I'm not sure if this was an edit conflict, editing an older version, or you just didn't see all the changes you were reverting. I figure you were trying to revert the addition of that content and something went wrong. It's already been corrected, but I assumed you'd like to know, in case an Angry Mob comes after you over it. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 17:38, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. if you don't like that content being here, feel free to edit it right out of my comment. I won't object. Hell, you can revdel me if you think it's warranted, I wouldn't blame you. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 17:39, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:86.58.125.137 and a campaign to purify the record on Russia...

Hi, you blocked User talk:86.58.125.137 a short while ago for disruptive editing. The basic pattern is that they try to remove references to Russian figures having any non-Russian heritage, or that there has been prejudice against non-Russian ethnicities in Russia. The block ended, and they've been doing it again. Any chance of another block, preferably for a bit longer? Thanks, OsFish (talk) 02:40, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hetchham SandBoxes and Mubeen AI

Copy and paste: Master Hakeem Sign yourposts on talk pages: Tanasak Matchawanit.at Homework Na Thap Chana Songkhla Cite your sources: <90150><90130/10120>

Master Hakeem Matchawanit

I can't write computer programs at all. Please help me. don't block me again I try to do it every day. I can't go yet. with respect to me Tanasak Matchawanit (talk) 05:32, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Email

Hi Oshwah. Just a note to say I've sent you an email. WormTT(talk) 13:10, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tricky question

It appears that the "history" section of Gono University was taken from the university's website itself [22]. I removed it as a copyvio but you can see it in this revision. It was added by an IP, 103.62.143.6, back in 2016 and somehow never got noticed until today. Would this require five whole years of revdel? Notfrompedro (talk) 22:13, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to this, I have blanked information that was likley also a copyvio. NW1223(Howl at me|My hunts) 22:46, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good job

I have just been exploring the behind-the-scenes of Wikipedia, such as mods, commons, etc. and I happened to find this page. I took a look around, and I am impressed by your contributions to Wikipedia. On behalf of many people, thanks! 116.68.83.35 (talk) 03:19, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hair

Dude, nice hair! 208.184.20.116 (talk) 02:32, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Huggle tags

Hi, could you please add the following tags to Huggle's config? This will greatly improve Huggle's effectiveness

  • possible vandalism (lowercase "p" is a different tag not currently included)
  • Non-autoconfirmed user rapidly reverting edits
  • possible conflict of interest
  • RedWarn (make it -2000)
  • SWViewer [1.4] (make it -2000)
  • reverting anti-vandal bot
  • shouting

aeschylus (talk) 02:22, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administration help

Hello I have Messaged you before it seems like I'm having the same problem with the same user. Everything I do they say is wrong or they delete the sources, that I put and it seems like they try to promote fringe views of certain authors. They have accused me of being a sock puppet of two different people [23] it seemed like it was a retaliation for edits that I made.

If you could be a mediator to this it would be appreciative. The page That the problem is on Soviet offensive plans controversy now before it was the Viktor Suvorov page.Thelostone41 (talk) 03:33, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Oshwah&oldid=1036205820"