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 2003:70:2e20:2400:5daa:36f1:bee:c7bf (talk) at 05:05, 18 March 2017 (→Henri Lebesgue: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.



Let's chat


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

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


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


Oge Okoye

Thank you for protecting Oge Okoye article. The vandalism on the Wikipedia page is all over local news and blogs in Nigeria. Just Google search "Oge Okoye wikipedia", and you will see the results. I wish I was more frequent to stop this bad publicity earlier, I really want to improve the accuracy of the contents on Wikipedia. I don't like it that Wikipedia will now be seen by Nigerians as a place where anything goes. Darreg (talk) 15:01, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! Let me know if I can be of further assistance! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:30, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Birmingham Mail Edit Message

Hi,

The edit note stated " (updated circulation figures released today)".

The new figures were released today for circulations, and that was the data inputted and updated - with reference.

I would be interested to know how you would describe that change, and if you are happy with out of date information being publicly shown rather than the new correct data.

Thanks.


UPDATE - No reply... what is the point of removing correct information from wikipedia, sending an automated message stating you are happy to discuss, then ignore? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.159.93.135 (talk) 18:57, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Reply: " I apologize for the delay responding to your message. I've been busy with real-life lately. Thanks for letting me know what your edit intended to do. It just appeared that you removed content, and I was puzzled as to why. If you have any questions, please let me know. Thanks again for messaging me! Cheers -- ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:21, 27 February 2017 (UTC)"

-- This was archived , despite being very recent. Life may have made you busy but you had done further edits since that point. The unanswered point is what about the note "updated circulation figures released today" made you confused and 'puzzled' as it is very clear. If you are an editor using auto tools take more care, and read and research what real people are doing. Auto tools without care are very dangerous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.175.103.226 (talk) 16:44, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I understand and I apologize. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:33, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oshwah

So exited that you have adopted me. My eyes are gushing with tears. Just Kigdding. But really thank you for acceppting. I preiviously have ben know for copying and pasting articles off of Citizendium. And would love for you to give me tips on edting sports articles and more. My goal is to have an article on the Did You Know front page and believe you would be the best mentor. Thank you so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Izaiah.morris (talk • contribs) 17:35, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Izaiah.morris It appears that Oshwah is busy in the real world. Until he gets back if you have any questions or need help contact either me, 78.26, or White Arabian Filly. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:12, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Glad to see you back. Izaiah has been quite busy. I hope all is well. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:41, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ad Orientem! It's nice to be able to sit down and catch up with things here again :-). I'm doing quite well; just been busy!! Things should slow down next week though! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:50, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Izaiah.morris! My apologies for the delayed response. As Ad Orientem stated above, I've been very busy with real life stuff lately and have only had a chance to log on and catch up just now. You're very welcome; I'll be happy to provide you with any assistance that you need :-). Regarding the inclusion of sources in articles: Indeed, copying and pasting content from other sites directly is a big no-no; it violates Wikipedia's policies on copyrights. Since we aim to make all content on Wikipedia completely 100% open, available, and free for anyone to access -- we obviously can't violate copyright policies or copyright laws, as it would obviously compromise our ability to do this. Instead, you'll want to summarize or paraphrase the content you're trying to reference from an external source, then cite the source in-line with that content. This assures that nothing is copied and pasted (or "stolen") and that credit is given to the source where it is due. The guidelines I provided you here will be important to read and understand, as it will show you how to properly cite sources and make sure that you're doing so correctly. Please do not hesitate to reach out to me with any questions, requests for help, or anything else you feel that you need to ask! I'll be more than happy to answer them and help you with anything that you need. Happy Friday! :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:49, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

March 2017

Information icon In a recent edit to the page Commonwealth Lawyers Association, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to India, use Indian English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author of the article used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. AusLondonder (talk) 18:06, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is the edit in question AusLondonder (talk) 18:06, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
AH DRAT! Yep. You're right, AusLondonder. I totally did do that. Thanks for catching that and for letting me know! Happy Friday! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:52, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Advice needed

Hello. I am seeking advice on what to do about an experienced editor who I noticed was making edits contrary to the guideline WP:NOTBROKEN, in many articles. I contacted them about it and their hostile response has been essentially that (1) NOTBROKEN is a bad guideline, and (2) I should stop obsessing over them and this guideline.

Even if NOTBROKEN is a bad guideline, I think they should observe it or try to get it improved or eliminated. Otherwise they are simply creating work for editors who follow guidelines. To the extent that editors pull in opposite directions, we have churning disguised as progress.

Our brief interactions can be found on our respective talk pages, linked below. Note for context that, when I posted on their page, they responded by adding a comment to the existing thread on my page.
User talk:Mandruss#PT-109
User talk:Hydrargyrum#Continued edits contrary to NOTBROKEN

If this is a content dispute, am I expected to start a discussion at every article where they make such an edit? Please advise what I should do, or whether you think I should just let this go. ―Mandruss ☎ 00:12, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mandruss! I apologize for the delayed response; I've been very busy in real life and have only had a chance to catch up on my messages just now. I agree with the WP:NOTBROKEN guideline in general, as the act of making these changes (unless they're for reasons that are in the "Good reasons to bypass redirects" list) generally does have more negative effects than good ones should certain situations arise down the line. Sometimes it helps if you explain why directly on their talk page so that they might understand what the reason is for having the guideline in the first place. For example: Explain that if a link on an article is changed to be from a redirect to another article and instead to a direct link to that same article, that link would become broken if the target page is eventually moved without leaving a redirect behind. You could also add that unnecessary pipes (unless needed for grammatical reasons and for the sentence to make sense) does add a degree of difficulty for other editors (especially new or novice editors) to view and edit that article's page source -- no matter how minute the increased difficulty may be. Ending with, "Remember that, while we may be extremely proficient at doing so, others certainly are not.", would also drive the previous point across in a logical and well-mannered way.
The situation that you're going through is quite sticky (especially regarding the user who isn't responding to your messages and is continuing to do this). Is not adhering to this guideline and continuing to not do so despite being asked to stop considered potentially disruptive? I'd say "yes", but it wouldn't be something I'd jump on the block button unilaterally to enforce. I'd personally want to get the input of other administrators who have had the tools longer than I have, and ask them what their thoughts and past experience has been in regards to enforcement. I'm going to ping NeilN, Drmies, and Ad Orientem for their input regarding this situation. When there's a question being asked from an editor regarding the editing or interaction behavior of another, I ask myself "what should be done if someone were warned 5+ times about this and I was asked to do something about it". If I don't know or feel comfortable with the answer that I come up with, then I know that it's time to ask for the input of other administrators. Thanks a lot for your message and for your request for assistance :-). ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:26, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the considered response as well as the pings. As for explaining the guideline's rationale, I doubt I could explain it any better than it does itself, and I linked to it multiple times. It's pretty clear to me that the user understands that rationale but feels that it's less important than having a tooltip that displays the target article title. Again, my view is that it's counterproductive to have editors pulling in opposite directions (often without knowledge of each other's activity), and the guideline describes the direction that the community feels we should be pulling. ―Mandruss ☎ 00:43, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
One admin admonished the user for tone. No admin has really answered my question, and I'll assume that's because there is no good answer to it. As is often the case with me, I don't care about the immediate situation so much as the larger issues that it exemplifies (there are at least two here). Absent the community will to confront and address those issues, I constantly have to remind myself of my own motto, In the end, it's only Wikipedia. Thank you for your attention; I will let this go and try to do likewise for similar situations in the future. ―Mandruss ☎ 17:54, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed Deletion of Bello Shagari

Hello, I created a page Bello Shagari and it was marked for deletion. Please can you help me stop it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anas Usman (talk • contribs) 00:26, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Anas Usman! It looks like the page was deleted, but I can certainly help you with article creation in the future. Since you're new to Wikipedia and content creation, I'd recommend that you use Wikipedia:Your first article next time, as well as Wikipedia:Articles for creation (which lets you create an article in the draft space and get it evaluated before being published). These places will help you to learn Wikipedia's various guidelines (such as our guidelines on notability and verifiability) before you allot too much time towards building an article and end up wasting your time. If you have questions about these places, please let me know. I highly recommend that you use them. Thanks for leaving me a message :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:58, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:Arunkapadia

Please see the note he left for me on his user talk p., and my reply. Obviously, I will consult with you about unblocking, and will of course only consider it if he is totally candid. Most similar requests have not been, but it has happened. DGG ( talk ) 18:38, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DGG! Sorry for the really delayed response. I also got your email (and I believe I responded to it that day). It looks like this user is a confirmed sock puppet, so all is resolved in this aspect. I just wanted to make sure that I respond and acknowledge your message nonetheless. Please do not hesitate to reach out to me; my talk page (and email) are both always open to you. I hope you're doing well, and it's great to talk to you again! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:00, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
sure. I too saw the result. I can't say I'm surprised. DGG ( talk ) 22:50, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of tea for you!

Have some tea and listen to what i have to tell you. I have made a great Article and I think your going to like it. Read Clay DeBord Izaiah.morris (talk) 19:31, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Izaiah.morris! Awesome job! Just make sure that you take the response I made to you on Ad Orientem's talk page to heart, and know that we're both available and more than happy to assist you whenever you need it! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:01, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Acetone Award

 Slakr's Acetone Award

For excellent effort in reverting vandalism, you are hereby awarded some acetone to help scrub out the toughest of attempts at turning articles to mush. Plus, if you ever need to get nail polish off, it'll help with that too. :P

Thanks for helping out. =) --slakr\ talk / 01:57, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Slakr! Sorry for such a delayed response. I've been extremely busy in real life... good times...
HA! Awesome! I'll definitely need some of that! lol. Thanks for the wikilove, dude. It's a pleasure to run into you (as always); hope you're doing well. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:03, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong birth year

Hi , I'm the mom of Gretchen. Please correct her birth year.You're asking me to provide my source,I am the source.Sarahgf (talk) 03:12, 9 March 2017 (UTC) I'm sorry to say but your source is wrong.Thank you Sarahgf (talk) 03:12, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Please see reliable sources. You are not a reliable source just because you claim to be the subject's mother, and your claim is not verifiable. General Ization Talk 04:14, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Persistent vandalism...

This user - User_talk:220.208.52.119 - is continuing to make disruptive edits, despite a temporary block in January, and numerous warnings throughout February and March. Chris Keating (talk) 04:52, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chris Keating! Sorry for the delayed response -- I've been extremely busy lately. Looks like the IP is now blocked -- if anything else continues, feel free to let me know or file a report at AIV. Cheers -- ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:06, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

need to delete an image

Hi Oshwah, I am a new Wiki user and I wanted to include an image on my personal sandbox page. I uploaded it, but I accidentally uploaded it to Wikipedia / wikimedia! I read the delete images wiki page and I'm not an admin so I can't delete it. A bot is asking me to include copyright info, but I just want to delete it. As of now I will try to include copyright info just to be safe, but ultimately I made an upload mistake:( Here is a link to the image: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sikhote-alin_3_20130204_1012322404.jpg Can you help me? Thanks so much! Sheimanj (talk) 00:54, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sheimanj! Sure --  Done. I deleted the image for you so that you can start over without worry. If you need anything else, let me know. Happy Friday! ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:59, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much! :) Sheimanj (talk) 02:07, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No problem! Always happy to help! :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:06, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Edits to The Good Wife

Are the sources that were removed[1] reliable? Holla! We gonna ball! 06:48, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Boomer Vial - Taking a look. Stand by. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 06:49, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Boomer Vial - Good question. What do you think, honestly? ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 06:50, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe. I see it is possibly a subsidiary of Tribune Media Company. Does that help at all? I'm sorry if I seem stupid for asking. If I'm ever unsure of whether or not a source is reliable, I either defer or in this case, ask. Boomer VialHolla! We gonna ball! 06:55, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again, Boomer Vial. Sorry for taking so long to follow-up... I've been very busy in real life. Good times haha. Just checking in -- did you get your question answered, or do you still need help? ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:09, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, I thought you didn't response because when I mentioned Tribune Media, it was a "Dude, seriously? You just answered your own question." moment. Long in short, yes I did. Thank you for the help, nonetheless. Boomer VialHolla! We gonna ball! 22:13, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
HA! Boomer Vial, don't be silly! There are no stupid questions here! I've just been swamped in real life and haven't been active here lately as a result. Awesome; I'm glad you got your questions answered and that all is well. Message me any time you need help, and I'll be more than happy to lend a hand! Cheers -- ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:16, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Uncovered an IP User whose commited nothing but Vandalism

It seems we have an IP User who committed nothing but vandalism on a number of pages. The common theme was copying information from an article's infobox and repeating it a number of times on most of the articles they affected; they were reverted as soon as they occurred. I figure you may wish to view this user's recent contributions, to see for yourself what they did and determine a course of action. GUtt01 (talk) 07:10, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GUtt01! Thanks for the heads up. It looks like this IP has since stopped, so I'm going to hold off on any action. However, if it picks back up, do let me know and I'll jump on it. Thanks for the message! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:08, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

William Lever, 1st Viscount Leverhulme

Hello, I don't understand how you can remove edits when I'm still writing them. Its 22.28 and you removed my edit at 22.22. Why?

If you look at this paragraph:

Lever started work aged fifteen at his father's wholesale grocery business in Bolton but, as a businessman, he is noted for founding the soap and cleaning product firm, Lever Brothers, with his younger brother James in 1885. He began manufacturing Sunlight Soap and built a business empire with many well-known brands, such as Lux and Lifebuoy. In politics, Lever sat as a Liberal MP for Wirral and then as a Peer (as Lord Leverhulme). He was an advocate for expansion of the British Empire, particularly in Africa and Asia, which supplied palm oil, a key ingredient in Lever's product line.

You will see that it is poorly written, disjointed and crudely worded. Is that the standard you prefer?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fairchristabelle (talk • contribs) 22:31, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fairchristabelle! My apologies. I saw in a diff here that you removed content from the article, but you didn't leave an edit summary explaining why. I see now that you're making multiple edits and improvements to the article; I've undid my change and restored the changes you made. In the future, you'll want to explain your edits using the edit summary so that other editors will know and understand what you're doing and why. If you're simply moving content from one paragraph to another, you can also avoid confusion by removing the content and then adding it in the same edit instead of doing so in separate ones. I apologize for the confusion. If you have any more questions, or need more assistance with edit summaries, please let me know and I'll be happy to assist you further. Thanks for leaving me a message with your concerns, and I wish you happy editing. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:36, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, but I'm working from a first class secondary source (W P Jolly) and trying to correct some fairly amateurish writing style at the same time. Its also clear that the article is very poorly structured. I take in what you say about explaining the edits though and I'll take care about this in future. I'll also make changes more complete in future so as to reduce WIP. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fairchristabelle (talk • contribs)
No worries, Fairchristabelle. I appreciate you for bringing the concern to my attention; I certainly want to make sure that my edits don't interfere with the constructive and good faith edits' of others. In this case, it did. Please do not hesitate to message me if you need anything else. I'll be happy to help! Happy editing :-D! ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:53, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your Apology

No need for an apology, I thanked you for fixing the article! The Someday (talk) 22:47, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi The Someday! Cool deal! Either way, my method for fixing something accidentally restored was not within policy; I used rollback as if you added it purposefully, which was not the case. I figured apologies were owed, even though you surely understood what happened :-). Thanks for being a diligent vandal fighter -- we need more of you around! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:49, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Shot

Good evening,

I would like to discuss the topic of The Shot, as we might have some misunderstandings or miscommunication as to what the topic entails.

As someone who has followed the NBA closely for over 30 years I do not take this lightly or with reckless abandon. Please understand I am not trying to assault or attack anyone. The fact is, on June 19th 2016 at approximately 10:30 pm eastern time, the definition of "The Shot" changed. Completely. Permanently.

I have cited a link to the article from the Wall Street Journal that explains and defines this as such. Please see this link: 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-biggest-shot-in-nba-history-1482235610

Michael Jordan's 1989 "The Shot" was no doubt "THE Shot". Until June 19, 2016.

I will explain: Jordan's shot merely won the first round of the Eastern Conference playoffs. Irving's shot won the Championship. A shot to win the entire championship with the championship in the balance to where Golden State still could have won it, is monumental. Epic. Transcends the history of the NBA.

Please consider this and I ask you to allow this new definition to be permanently installed on the wikipedia link for it.

If not, I ask for your specific reasoning WHY it is not acceptable to change it.

Thank you.

2602:306:34BA:5280:C5DC:9238:456:475A (talk) 03:41, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The reason you're blocked is due to edit warring on the article, and also due to the fact that the changes you were repeatedly reverting back were disruptive. The changes you were edit warring over not only removed important sections from the article (i.e. "See also", "References", categories, and others), but also looked to change the topic and subject of the article entirely. It's not that your changes are 100% unwelcome or disallowed, its that what you're proposing to change needs to be discussed and a consensus reached before they are allowed to be placed. When your block expires, you need to start a discussion on the article's talk page here and propose your changes, and let those involved know about the discussion by either pinging them, or letting them know on their user talk pages. This is proper dispute resolution practices and must be followed. Edit warring, or repeatedly reverting an article in a back-and-fourth manner in order to substitute proper dispute resolution practices -- is not allowed and will result in blocking if it continues despite being warned (as you were).
While you are blocked (which is only for 24 hours), you have the opportunity to review Wikipedia:Dispute resolution and Wikipedia:Edit warring and make sure that you understand these policies and guidelines moving forward. You're welcome to ask any questions on your talk page during the time you are blocked, or you can message me on my talk page with any questions after it expires. Thank you for your message, and I hope I answered your questions and concerns. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 04:03, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If you're still visiting here IP, even with discussion on the talk page, you cannot just entire replace existing content with content about another event. The existing content covers a notable event and what you're trying to do is essentially an article deletion without going through the proper process. What you can do is propose the existing article be expanded or create a new article if there are enough sources. --NeilN talk to me 12:18, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you're going to be around...

Can you keep an eye on User talk:Gualt Mariana and do whatever you think is best? I'm heading out. --NeilN talk to me 03:55, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NeilN. That's a big 10-4, my friend. I'll be around and I'll keep an eye on things. Have a great rest of your day and I'll see you when you're back on. Until then ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 04:04, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

JUSTICESEEKER

I think he was clearly NOTHERE, so block ed and rev/d el'd the edit as purely disruptive. I hope you're ok with that. Doug Weller talk 06:18, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Doug Weller - Perfectly fine by me! Thanks for the heads up :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 06:38, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

sorry — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.217.215.132 (talk) 10:59, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yo 'Shwah

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.

— O Fortuna! Imperatrix mundi. 11:51, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi - Received and responded. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 11:59, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Compliment

I like your user page heading! 🙂🙂 UpsandDowns1234 04:46, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi UpsandDowns1234! Thanks for the compliment! I really appreciate it, and I'm glad you like the page heading! :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 05:01, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Henri Lebesgue

Hello. I corrected a typo in the article Henri Lebesgue and you reverted the change. In Paragraph 4 "Implications for statistical mechanics" the name of Norbert Wiener is incorrectly spelled "Norbert Weiner". If you click on the link, you will notice that the page Norbert Weiner redirects to the article with the correctly spelled name. Please don't hastily dismiss legitimate edits as vandalism. 2003:70:2E20:2400:5DAA:36F1:BEE:C7BF (talk) 05:05, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Oshwah&oldid=770882309"