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 Contributer7 (talk | contribs) at 21:22, 6 April 2019 (→My Congratulations!!!: new WikiLove message). 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.


2 things

1. I need help with why this is spam: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:CaradhrasAiguo&oldid=870163302#Invitation_to_a_topic_on_a_talk_page_relating_to_an_edit_you_reverted_(no_offence) 2. You may wish to protect Anna Frodesiak's talk page for some time to prevent edits that require revdel. Thank you.111.220.164.171 (talk) 02:59, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I made a thread at the Teahouse relating to this. Thank you.111.220.164.171 (talk) 11:15, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your questions and concerns. To answer your first question: I would bring your concerns to CaradhrasAiguo directly and ask why he believed that your message was spam, and ask why he removed it without taking it seriously or answering it at all. It read to me like you were simply messaging him and asking for an opinion (which doesn't seem harmful to me...), but he might've seen things differently. The best way to get an answer to your question and have your concerns resolved is to message him on his user talk page and politely express your concerns directly and ask. I obviously can't answer that question for him; all I can say is that I didn't see your message as spam, but again... there are always two sides and two views to every story, and he's the one who can answer your questions. I obviously can't. :-)
Thanks for pointing me to Anna Frodesiak's user talk page. You are correct in that the messages left were not acceptable, and I've suppressed them from being viewable by anybody. If you see messages like this in the future that attempt to "out", or disclose someone's private information like that, please email them to me privately instead. We don't want such requests to be made publicly anywhere on Wikipedia, since it will draw attention to the edits or messages by other people that wouldn't have done so otherwise. For example: My user talk page is actively watched by 928 different editors, which means that they receive a notification on their watchlist each time this page is updated or edited. If you know the Streisand effect, you'll know that drawing attention to edits like these is something we want to avoid at all costs: People will see this message, realize that you're making a revision deletion or suppression request and that information is about to become restricted and hidden from being viewable to them... so naturally, they'll rush to the page, find the edits, and read the information before it becomes hidden. So next time, just email me these requests instead. :-)
Thanks, and please let me know if you have any more questions or need my help with anything else, and I'll be more than happy to answer them and lend you a hand. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 17:44, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Update: It looks like you created a discussion on the Wikipedia Teahouse as you indicated here, and others have responded with their individual input (permalink). Even if CaradhrasAiguo doesn't respond to it directly, I think it might be worth it to just drop the matter entirely (given the number of input and responses to your question that have provided more context and agreed that your message was disruptive) and move on. Their answers seem to provide sufficient context and additional details to the issue and story that weren't provided here, which is why I held off on giving too much input other than to suggest that you talk to the user directly. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 17:53, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
1. I can't email you. 2. Please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Chess_Championship_2018 (edits from November 2018 regarding framework if you know what I mean), 211.27.126.189's talk page (formerly me but IP's change), WP:ANEW Archives 379 (discussions 11 and 44) and 380 (discussion 37). CaradhrasAiguo knows I'm problematic with edit warring. He can't have done such things just so someone gets blocked.111.220.164.171 (talk) 12:13, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah... I didn't think about that when I responded to you above... lol. ;-) Have you considered creating an account? Among with being able to email other users, using a Wikipedia account comes with many benefits that you'll find very useful (such as having your edits attributed to you regardless of your IP address, being able to be granted user rights and privileges, and the ability to edit protected pages after your account becomes confirmed, many more...). I originally just helped you to determine whether or not a message you left was "spam", as well as responded to your report of abuse on Anna Frodesiak's user talk page. What exactly is going on with World Chess Championship 2018? Where does this connect with everything else? Sorry, just a little confused... :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 14:05, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want an account, no thanks. If you saw an article about a chess match where each game was described in detail, would you understand someone adding headers for games that haven't started? That's what I'm talking about for World Chess Championship 2018. That's where he started noticing me being problematic on edit warring because I thought that those headers should stay because they didn't look bad on the page and I thought such a thing happened for other related articles. 194.193.152.27 (talk) 07:19, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm the same person as the 111 IP but at a different location now for reasons unrelated to Wikipedia.194.193.152.27 (talk) 07:24, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm curious.... why wouldn't you want to create and use an account? Doing so adds a lot of convenience. Are there specific reasons? I'd be interested to hear them... :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:27, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think I'd be allowed at this stage by the people whom I know.194.193.152.27 (talk) 07:29, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You don't think that you would be allowed to create an account here? You mean by editors here? Or people that you know in real life outside of Wikipedia? ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 08:17, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Outside of Wikipedia.194.193.152.27 (talk) 08:31, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I see... I'm sorry to hear that. I won't poke any further into those details; your life outside Wikipedia is absolutely none of my business and I completely respect your personal life and your privacy. I'll take another look at the article and see what I can find... :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 10:09, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for File

Hi Oswah

Been a while since last chatted...

I have a query regarding how to resolve the "Unspecified source/license for File: Ashley Artus Wiki Profile pic.jpg"

What do I need to do next in order to get the pic up on the page ?

Being a newbie, not sure what I need to do next !

Can you assist/help with this Oswah ?

Many thanks,

Andy

AndycBtn (talk) 15:25, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AndycBtn, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your questions! I apologize for the delay responding to your message; I've been busy with real life obligations, and I'm just now getting myself all caught up with all the Wikipedia messages, emails, and requests for help that were left while I was busy. :-)
To answer your question: All images or files uploaded to Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Commons, or any other Wikimedia site must have their license information provided along with the file on its relevant file page. Is it an image that's in the public domain and therefore free to be used without any restriction? Is the image copyrighted or is its use restricted in any way? If so, what copyright license is the file under? Is fair use justified with this image? If so, why? What fair use guidelines are met that allow this image to be used and shown in articles on Wikipedia? Having the image's license information added to its file page in order to disclose its restrictions, origin, and use ability is what will answer all of the questions above.
For more information on copyrights and how to add license information to your uploaded image, please see Wikipedia's policy and guideline pages on image use policy (copyright section), copyrights (in general), and Wikipedia's policy and guidelines on non-free content. These pages will not only answer your questions, but will also help you understand copyrights in general, the importance with knowing and declaring them with images, files, and media, and which images we accept and do not accept due to their copyright status. If you have any questions after reading through all of these pages I listed for you here, please feel free to let me know and I'll be happy to answer them and help you further.
Thanks again for leaving your message here with your questions, as well as for being diligent and taking care to follow the notices and warnings that are given to you and follow-up with them (as opposed to just ignoring them and doing what you want without care... lol) - keep up the excellent work, and I wish you happy editing! :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 18:28, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dunkin'/Archive 1 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Dunkin'/Archive 1. Since you had some involvement with the Dunkin'/Archive 1 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 22:17, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GeoffreyT2000 - Yup, these look like redirects that are absolutely unnecessary; good catch. Thanks for tagging these for RFD and for taking care of the matter. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 18:31, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NYC area ip

Could you take a look at the history of Bronxville station?

67.85.55.146 is the latest in a long line of disruptive ips dating back to October of last year. They always edit in batches of at least 50 edits at once, and they still leave zero edit summaries. Can you please give them another range-block? Cards84664 (talk) 13:09, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(tpw) IP blocked for a month. —DoRD (talk)​ 13:28, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
DoRD - Thanks for following up and for taking the actions necessary. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 18:32, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Cards84664! I apologize for the delay responding to your message; I've been busy with real life obligations, and I'm just now getting myself all caught up with all the Wikipedia messages, emails, and requests for help that were left while I was busy. :-)
It looks like this matter has been handled and the IP user has been blocked. If you see any more disruption on this (or similar) articles in the future, please don't hesitate to file a report at AIV so that it can be quickly handled, or let me know and I can take a look. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 18:34, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Range block request

Hey Oshwah, can you take a look at 2600:1008:b100::/41 again? They are continuing their problematic behavior and block evasion. Nihlus 04:38, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nihlus! Thanks for leaving me a message here regarding this IP range and their continued shenanigans yet again... lol. I apologize for the delay responding to your message; I've been busy with real life obligations, and I'm just now getting myself all caught up with all the Wikipedia messages, emails, and requests that I received. :-)
I just blocked this IP range again for one month. Just looking at their edits made today shows mostly disruptive changes and uncivil responses to their user talk page. Given my last block, the IP range's huuuuge block log rapsheet, and their recent edits - this was a no-brainer. Thanks again for the heads up; if you see any more shenanigans from this same person (maybe from a different range), let me know and I'll be happy to look into it. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 18:39, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kalpana Mohan page

Hi, Sorry for the long message to be posted here. I had no option to attach the previous conversation so I had copy pasted it.

On last interaction on 22 Feb 2019. I had created the edit as per suggestion & it was included in the Kalpana Mohan page, Now It is removed again. Could you please clarify Wikipedia policy on the matter. As it has removed the person Filmography which was even there in the previous edits too. Please check the previous editions too. How it possible to remove Filmography, its there in public domain on other media as well. thanks

Collapsing copied and pasted discussion from archive (link)

Kalpana Mohan page Hi, Thanks for your response. I am glad you understood my point. I am just a fan & not an expert in editing. I trust your vision in editing. I request you to add these edit in her post.

Career: Nehru often invited Kalpana, a trained Kathak dancer, to dance at the Rashtrapati Bhavan whenever dignitaries visited. Actor Balraj Sahani and Urdu writer Ismat Chughtai spotted the beautiful dancer and encouraged her to come to Mumbai and try her luck in films.

Filmography

1. Pyar Ki Jeet (1962), as Chitralekha | Romance | 1 January 1962 | Director Vasant Painter | Stars: Mahipal, Kalpana, Indira

2. Naughty Boy (1962), as Meena Sharma / Edna Wong | Comedy Movie Director Shakti Samanta, Stars: Kishore Kumar, Kalpana, Om Prakash

3. Professor (1962), as Neena Verma | Comedy| 11 May 1962 (India) Director Lekh Tandon, Stars: Shammi Kapoor, Kalpana, Lalita Pawar

4. Saheli (1965), as Reshma | Romance | 1965 | Director Arjun Hingorani, Stars: Pradeep Kumar, Kalpana, Vijaya Choudhury

5. Teesra Kaun (1965), as Shobha | Action, Crime Director: Mohammed Hussain (as Mohd. Husain) | Stars: Feroz Khan, Kalpana & Shashikala

6. Teen Devian (1965) as Kalpana | Musical, Romance | 10 December 1965|Director: Amarjeet | Stars: Dev Anand, Nanda, Kalpana, Simi & IS Johar

7. Biwi Aur Makan (1966), as Geeta |Director: Hrishikesh Mukherjee | Stars: Biswajit Chatterjee, Kalpana, Mehmood

8. Tasveer (1966), as Piloo | Director: J.B.H. Wadia Stars: Feroz Khan, Kalpana , Helen & Rajendra Nath

9. Pyar Kiye Jaa (1966), as Malti | Director: C.V. Sridhar (as Sridhar) Stars: Kishore Kumar, Kalpana, Shashi Kapoor, Mumtaz. Mehmood. Pm Prakash.

10. Nawab Sirazuddaula (1967) Drama | Director: Ramchandra Thakur Stars: Bharat Bhushan, Kalpana, Naseem Banu, Murad & Johnny Walker

11. Ek Bechara (1972), as Radha | Drama, Family | Director: S.M. Abbas Stars: Jeetendra, Rekha, Vinod Khanna, Kalpana, Pran, Bindu & Anwar Hussain

She has 11 films to her credits, all films are not mentioned in the Biography. I request you to please restore the info in a tabular format as original version with the hyperlink leading to the movie. The list is genuine.

References Please add the link, as it was part of the earlier Biography. https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0436200/bio?ref_=nm_ov_bio_sm

I have edited it to make as brief as possible, you can make the relevant changes & publish it. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yashkkaryan (talk • contribs) 14:06, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi Yashkkaryan! You're welcome and I'm glad I could help. If you create an edit request on the article's talk page here, myself or someone else will add it to the article assuming no issues are found. If you have any more questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them and help. Thanks again, and I wish you happy editing. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 14:35, 22 February 2019 (UTC) Thanks for your advice. I have made changes in the edit page. please review it. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yashkkaryan (talk • contribs) 17:49, 22 February 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yashkkaryan (talk • contribs)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Yashkkaryan (talk • contribs) 14:40, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, Yashkkaryan! Thanks for following up here with your questions and concerns. Next time you wish to re-open or refer to a discussion that's been archived here, you just need to add a link to point there (an example is the link I put in the text above describing what was collapsed); there's no need for you to spend all that time copying and pasting the discussion. ;-) Adding a simple link is much easier for myself, as well as for you... lol. I apologize for the delay responding to your message; I've been busy with real life obligations, and I'm just now getting myself all caught up with all the Wikipedia messages, emails, and requests for help that were left while I was busy. :-)
It looks like the content you tried to add to the Kalpana Mohan article since we last talked was reverted by Bbb23, and I'm not exactly sure as to why he reverted it. Have you left a message on Bbb23's user talk page and talked to him directly about your edits? I would go there and ask him about it directly, as he'll obviously be able to answer your questions regarding the reverting of your changes better than I can; I can't speak for Bbb23 directly. If you have any more questions or need my assistance, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be more than happy to help you further. However, for your questions here, I must divert you over to Bbb23 so that you two can discuss the matter directly. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 18:51, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Query on how to add the correct "tags" for the uploaded file - Ashley Artus Wiki Profile pic.jpg for the Wiki page - Ashley Artus

Hi Oshwah

Just messaging again as not heard back from you ?

Unless you're on holiday or something ?

Being a newbie & understanding how everything works in Wiki...some things I am having a problem with understanding what steps to take next...

So...the pic was uploaded & as far as I can tell it has been accepted (I think? not sure)

So I understand that I have to put the correct "Copyright tags" in for the pic...

This is where I am stuck !!

Its saying that I need to put the tag in on the "File Description page" but I'm not sure what/where that is ? Is it the Ashley Artus Wiki Profile pic.jpg page?

It also says "Please copy the URL of this image or article in the email to assist OTRS volunteers to find it. If an email cannot be found in the OTRS system, the content may be deleted for lack of valid licensing information."

I did send a message the other day (about a week ago)...but have not received any reply ?

Apologies if you have been busy, but I could really do with getting this last part of the page sorted as then it will be finished !

Look forward to hearing from you,

Andy

AndycBtn (talk) 16:13, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AndycBtn! Please see the response I just made to your first discussion above. I apologize for the delay responding to you here, and I hope that the response I made above is helpful. If you have any more questions, please let me know by following up with the original discussion above that I replied to. It's easier for the both of us if we keep our communication and responses within the same discussion. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 18:54, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My username is blocked, Kindly review to unblock

Requesting to unblock my username:

Hi Wikipedia team, Glad to connect with you!!!

My username is Chennai Port And Dock Educational Trust Higher Secondary School - Chennai I have created an account to upload a school. I was collecting information(school information) after logging into the account. But I didn't start yet. My username is blocked as per the Wikipedia expiry time policy. I request you to consider and kindly unblock my username. Also have few doubts: 1) Whether username can be unblocked? 2) How much time it will take to unblock? 2) Is there any alternate options?

Thanks in Advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chennai Port AND Dock Educational Trust Hr Sec School (talk • contribs) 08:27, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Read the notice published on your Talk page by Alexf. Gareth Griffith-Jones (contribs) (talk) 11:33, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Chennai Port AND Dock Educational Trust Hr Sec School! As stated above by Gareth Griffith-Jones, the reason that your account was blocked is described on your user talk page along with some instructions you'll want to follow in order to resolve the issues and have your account unblocked. Creating new accounts in order to get around your original block, while I feel that you did so because you were confused and needed help, is a serious violation of Wikipedia policy (as outlined here); doing this will only make things significantly more harder for you in terms of getting your account unblocked. Just follow the instructions using your original account, and you'll be able to resolve the matters and be unblocked easily. Good luck! :-) - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 20:01, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

David Cone Edit Battle

Oshwah, just a heads up that someone has reversed your reversal of an edit to the "Retirement" section of David Cone's page. This is actually the latest in a series of edits and reversals for this section, and always the same changes - removing all references to Cone's eldest son Brian, and revisions concerning Cone's fiancé, Taja Abitbol. I noticed this change/reversal in January, and the process keeps repeating itself every few weeks. Different IP addresses each time. Not sure if this is trolling, or personal/family issues for David Cone. I sent a message to one of the IP addresses, noting that this change could be hurtful to the involved parties if not verified. No response. Fm451 (talk) 05:16, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fm451, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your concerns regarding the David Cone article and some edits that have recently been made. Looking at the edit history, I see that some IP users removed some content from it back on the 27th and 28th of February and due to being unreferenced and likely untrue. These removals seem completely legitimate to me given that they lacked any kind of references or citations. Not only are removals of this kind okay to be made, we encourage it. Editors can remove any unreferenced content (especially if the content is potentially negative, contentious, or controversial in nature) that exists on articles that are biographies of living people (or "BLPs" for short). We must scrutinize the content on BLP articles much more carefully than we do with other articles, and any content that isn't referenced by reliable sources that are secondary and independent of the subject are to be removed on sight if they are potentially negative, contentious, or damaging in any way. The onus is on the editors who are adding such content to provide the necessary references and that meet the requirements for being considered reliable.
Thanks for reaching out to the users directly and asking them about the edits that concern you. If their responses don't satisfy your concerns or answer your questions, or if edits continue to be made to the article that you feel aren't necessary, please let me know and I'll be happy to take another look. Thanks again for the message and for your diligence with this article. I hope you have a great rest of your day and I wish you happy editing. :-D Best regards - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 20:13, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Happy editing!

Hi, Mr. Oshwah! I. Really. Love. Your. Edits! I. Also. Really love that you fix so many. Vandalism! Happy editing! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael Boy Jordan (talk • contribs) 11:49, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Oshwah: This is one account I'd ask you to block immediately for spam and nonsense. WP:TEND WP:COMPETENCE WP:NOTHERE. — Smuckola(talk) 18:56, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Smuckola - I think we need to hold off on running toward administrative action at this time and spend more time trying to help and educate the user first. While they certainly have made some edits that others would see as disruptive and annoying, I believe that they're good faith attempts to be bold and try to help. I also see some edits that I believe are legitimate and even good ideas, such as their creation of 286 protected mode - a redirect page that you tagged for speedy deletion and an admin declined by inappropriately using rollback (I've since brought this up to the admin and talked to him about it). If, after reasonable attempts have been made to reach out to this user, talk to him/her, and ask them to review policy and offer to educate and help them - they continue to make disruptive edits and it's blatantly apparent that they're ignoring our attempts to reach out to them, we can consider action then... but as of right now, I believe that it's too soon. We've only left them automated warnings and threats, and told them to "stop it, you're new here and you should've been blocked earlier" - none of which are messages that are helpful. Keep an eye on this user, try and help them, and let me know if things escalate from there and another look into the matter is warranted and I'll be happy to do so. Best regards - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 20:44, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

user:RonBot

Hi, could you check if this bot working normally? It seems that it's adding broken image tag to articles that don't need it. Thanks.--SharabSalam (talk) 12:36, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SharabSalam, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your concerns regarding RonBot. I took a look at the bot's block log, and I see that the user was blocked and later unblocked after you created this message. I think that the issue you reported here has since been resolved, but please verify this for me and let me know if I'm incorrect. If you still see issues that were caused by RonBot and occurred after 16:01, 31 March 2019 (UTC) (when bot was unblocked yesterday after issues were reported and fixed), let me know and I'll be happy to look into it further, or file a report at the administrators' noticeboard by starting a new discussion. Thanks again for the message and for your diligence with this matter, and I hope you have a great rest of your day. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 20:53, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Did you make out with Bem?

Mr Sandman.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Contributer7 (talk • contribs) 10:26, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Contributer7 - I'm not sure what your message was about or what you were trying to ask. If you can elaborate with further details and what Wikipedia-related area, page, or issue this message is in regards to, I'll be able to understand your message better and I'll be able (and more than happy) to help you. Thanks - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 20:55, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User talk:Oshwah

User talk:Oshwah, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User talk:Oshwah and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User talk:Oshwah during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Hhkohh (talk) 11:42, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is just an April fool joke hope you not mind it Hhkohh (talk) 11:45, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hhkohh - HA! Not at all... ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 20:56, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hair Block

Smile
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for having crazy hair, as you did at User:Oshwah. Sadly your ability to grow hair can not be revoked.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, to bad, your hair is to crazy. APRIL FOOLS!

LakesideMinersMy Talk Page 12:16, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

LakesideMiners - Whelp... I figured I'd be blocked for this one day... I'm just surprised that I lasted this long. :-P ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 20:57, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:Oshwah

User:Oshwah, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Oshwah (2nd nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Oshwah during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 13:26, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(pretending to respond like a new user): This page should not be deleted, because... (your reason here) --~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:02, 1 April 2019 (UTC) i want to keep it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oshwah (talk • contribs) [reply]

I think I've run out of things to nominate for deletion.

I'm falling to bad jokes and nonsense! Please help me before I nominate all of Wikipedia!!!! One Blue Hat❯❯❯ (talk) 20:29, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(this is a joke)

HA! I'm sure that someone has nominated all of Wikipedia before, and many times... ;-) I also know that editors have started proposals to disable all editing on Wikipedia because "it's completely done"... If you want to make something that's a good April Fools thing, you gotta do something original :-P ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:04, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:TWW

I've MFD'ed this page for april fools', after april fools will the MFD close automatically and did i do it right? --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 20:48, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also can you block me for 5 minutes as the reason being WP:APRILFOOLS --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 21:05, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As long as you've added the humor tag at the top of the page, read this page, and followed the guidelines on this page - you should be fine and you created it correctly for April Fools day. ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:09, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please block me for 5 minutes as the reason being WP:APRILFOOLS, I want to see what it's like to be blocked. --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 21:15, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Will WP:TWW MFD close by itself? --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 21:26, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If you followed the directions on this page and made sure that it's not listed in places that it shouldn't be (where only legitimate discussions belong or should be listed), you should be fine. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:32, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Can u check for me? I am trying to study my science. Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 21:33, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're supposed to omit tagging the actual page with the deletion notice if you're just doing it for April Fools, but I'm not absolutely certain. I went ahead and removed it from the page just in case. ;-) If I'm incorrect and if it's okay to have the tag and notice present, feel free to revert my edit and restore it. Either way, I think you'll be fine and other editors will know that this was simply a joke nomination - no need to worry. ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:45, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Your upage has a deletion tag. Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 21:46, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah... and that's why I said that I might be incorrect regarding the addition of the deletion notice on the actual page. I added a dummy edit to the page with my updated thoughts. Like I said, if you find that I'm incorrect, that having the tag and notice present is fine, and if you want it restored - feel free to revert my removal and restore it back. I was just removing it so that other editors wouldn't confuse it for being a legitimate request for deletion. But since you have the humor template tagged in the discussion, it should be apparent and obvious to others that it's just for April Fools. ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:49, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like you're right, Oshwah is never wrong! Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 21:53, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yup, that makes sense. Otherwise, the page gets listed next to legitimate nominations by bots, which makes it very difficult for editors to discern the joke/humor nominations and discussions from the legitimate ones. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:55, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
How can I nominate Jesus or Homer Simpson for adminship as an April Fools? Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 21:57, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Umm... good question. I'm honestly not sure what the process is for an April Fools RFA. Don't get me wrong: Adding discussions, nominations, etc for April Fools humor is good fun... but don't let yourself get too carried away. If you're not sure as to how to add a humor page, discussion, nomination, etc and do so properly so that it's not disruptive or mistaken as vandalism or a legit nomination, don't create it. It's a much safer option to just hang back and watch others be brave and stupid in those regards than to try and "wing it" and do it yourself, make a mistake or go too far, and be the subject of frustration over something you were just doing as a joke and for a few smirks and a couple of laughs. ;-) Things can (and have) gone too far before regarding April Fools on Wikipedia. Last year, it even became the subject of an ArbCom case. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:08, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

April 2019

You have been blocked indefinitely for undisclosed massive reverts using Huggle and undisclosed I don't know, furthermore your crazy hair is causing disruption at Wikipedia if you think there are good reasons of why you should be unblocked you may pay us with burgers hamberders appeal this block by adding {{unblock|Reason=Your reason here}} --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 20:48, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I appeal. I'm innocent and the accusations stated are false! :-P ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:11, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Talk Page Access Revoked, WP:UTRS is your only choice now! Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 21:12, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
:-( ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:14, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You have been banned indefinitely. (Unless you buy me a big mac, I'll lift your ban and block.) --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 21:15, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
LOL a Big Mac? Why a Big Mac? :-P ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:16, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The 'Secret Sauce' What's it made from? Wikipedia Vandalism??? Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 21:17, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
*Shrug*... Beats me. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:33, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, weren't you BeanoJosh? Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 21:40, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
GOODUSER OSHY I'M CRYING😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣 GOLDIEM J (talk) 17:15, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Highway ip from January

2604:2000:1382:851A:7D88:E393:C028:64B3 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)

Clearly the same person as before, they left off where the last one did. Cards84664 (talk) 22:08, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cards84664 - I've reverted the IP user's last edit to the article and temporarily blocked it for suspected block evasion. Thanks for the message and the heads up! If you see any more edits like this, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be happy to look into it. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:35, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail!

Hello, Oshwah. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 22:45, 1 April 2019 (UTC). 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.

(Not a april fool's joke) Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 22:45, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Acknowledged. Will check it and respond in a bit. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:50, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:Prosper Mbongue Muna

writing an article about themselves. Please give the user a COI template. --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 23:09, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like Fastily has already taken care of the issue. Thanks for the message nonetheless ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:01, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WTF cnut

You look like a stinky cow urine freak too! 171.61.199.202 (talk) 08:27, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

*cunt Dusti*Let's talk!* 08:36, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Cnut was King of Denmark, England and Norway a thousand years ago. Just smile and accept the tribute from low life. :-) Martin of Sheffield (talk) 08:50, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
A thousand years ago I guess it's possible that folks, even royalty, would smell like Stinky cow urine? *shrugs* Dusti*Let's talk!* 09:07, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nah, see Cnut_the_Great#Bones_at_Winchester – just dry bones and dust. Sic transit gloria mundi. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 09:40, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A beer for you!

For all the abuse love you had on april fools heres a beer Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 12:18, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Zppix! Thanks for the beer! HA! April Fools is just a day where people have fun... I'm not one of those "hard-ass" users who get riffled, frustrated, or uptight about having his user page or user talk pages messed around with. If anything, I'm quite used to having those pages vandalized and trashed.... LOL ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 14:07, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My userpage

Hello. I got your message about trying to protect my privacy, and it confuses me that the info you removed even has cells in the {{infobox Wikipedia user}}. And I believe I've seen other users with that info corresponding to them on their userpages. This feels unexplained to me. GOLDIEM J (talk) 16:05, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GOLDIEM J, and thanks for leaving me a message here regarding your concerns over the removal of content that I made from your user page. You are correct in that the {{infobox Wikipedia user}} includes parameters that allow for one to add their date of birth, age, location, and other personal information. You are also correct in that other users have added their personal information to this infobox template and onto their user pages as well. However, the difference between the other users and yourself is your age. This is documented on Wikipedia's child protection policy and outlined and explained further on this page regarding the protection of children's privacy. In short, we will actively remove and suppress the personal information of any editor who self-identifies as a younger editor. This is done to protect their privacy and their identity, and is why your user page was edited and your personal information removed.
This isn't just Wikipedia policy, but also part of the Wikimedia Foundation's global policy and terms of use. We take the protection of the identity and privacy of all Wikipedia users very seriously. If (for example) I knew the real life identity of another editor on Wikipedia and I started purposefully and maliciously telling other editors their real name, date of birth, location, etc, or if I provide links or URLs to sites or pages that contain their information, or expose other private information that they did not disclose on Wikipedia themselves - I'd be violating one of the most (if not the most) serious policies on Wikipedia, and I would be indefinitely blocked immediately and with no consideration for being unblocked. It's a serious matter, and part of my responsibilities on Wikipedia is to comply with these policies, ensure the safety and privacy of younger editors, and make sure that any breaches of this policy are fully handled and the information completely removed.
I hope that my response has helped you to understand why I removed content from your user page, and has pointed you in the right direction if you'd like to read more about these policies. Like I said in my message, I know that having one's user page edited and content removed can be frustrating, but it's done within compliance of policy and my responsibilities, and it's for your safety, anonymity, and your protection. If you have any questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. You're also welcome to email me if you prefer to continue this discussion in private. I wish you a great rest of your day and happy editing. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 16:41, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thanks for telling me about that, and I understand what you said. I've got another question. Have you learned how to pick up an umbrella yet?😂 GOLDIEM J (talk) 16:49, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
GOLDIEM J - LOL... wait, what? Have I learned how to pick up an umbrella yet? I don't have an umbrella; I just wear a jacket... lol. I'm sure this is a joke or refers to something humorous, but I'm not familiar with this one... what exactly do you mean? :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 16:55, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
lol it's only a joke I made up! GOLDIEM J (talk) 16:59, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
GOLDIEM J - HA! Well, you sure fooled me. ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 17:04, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
😂 LMAO I didn't even MEAN to fool you😂 GOLDIEM J (talk) 17:06, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
GOLDIEM J - Well... I mean, it was just a really random question... LOL. I just figured that there was some connection, joke, or humor that I didn't understand or wasn't aware of. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 17:12, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

thanks for giving me one more chance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wwekid123 (talk • contribs) 22:15, 2 April 2019 (UTC) 22:18, 2 April 2019 (UTC)22:18, 2 April 2019 (UTC)22:18, 2 April 2019 (UTC)22:18, 2 April 2019 (UTC)Wwekid123 (talk) 22:18, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wwekid123 - You're welcome. I started out on Wikipedia as a vandal who wanted to cause trouble on the site, and I was given a second chance back when I was new... just like the one that I gave you just now. If I wasn't given that chance, I wouldn't be the Wikipedia editor I am today. I went pretty far out on a limb for you, and I might receive some frustration and grief from other administrators for unblocking you and giving you another chance, but I believe that you should have one. Please please don't make me regret my decision; be good, stay outta trouble, and make legitimate and positive edits to Wikipedia, will ya? ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:23, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

thanks again

thanks again22:21, 2 April 2019 (UTC)22:21, 2 April 2019 (UTC)22:21, 2 April 2019 (UTC)22:21, 2 April 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wwekid123 (talk • contribs)

No problem :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:49, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ur a good wikipedia user

I think you are a good Wikipedia user — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wwekid123 (talk • contribs) 22:23, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wwekid123 - I appreciate the kind words. If you start making good contributions and help us to improve the project, patrol and revert vandalism, fix issues, and write content - you'll become an experienced editor and you'll someday be able to help new user just like I do. I'm here if you have any questions or need help; please don't hesitate to ask. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:51, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some baklava for you!

you have very good experience in wikipedia Wwekid123 (talk) 23:21, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I really appreciate that! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 12:02, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Is there a general guide or anything to dealing with vandalism? I was navigating through different noticeboards underneath the community portal and just kind of guessed at where I should put it. It seems that my last two guesses have been right, but I don't want to guess. I want to be more confident and certain if I come across edits like that again and I don't want to accidently break any policies/guidelines while doing so. I have been reading through a lot of the links in-between my other edits to try and get a better idea of how the Wikipedia community works, but direction helps. While I'm on the topic, is there anything I could have done better on those two reports of vandalism? Clovermoss (talk) 02:23, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Clovermoss! Thanks for leaving me a message here with your questions and your request for input and advice. From what I'm reading, I think what you're asking is for how exactly you identify and handle vandalism? When you say that you "kind of guessed at where [you] should put it" when navigating through different noticeboard, what exactly are you referring to with "it"? What challenges or problems are you running into, or what exactly is making you feel unsure? I just want to make sure that I understand your message, your questions, and what's going on exactly so that I can give you good advice and input that addresses everything completely. Have you looked though and read Wikipedia's page on recent changes patrolling? This is where I send everyone to first when they come to me with questions, or when they ask how they can start to get into patrolling and reverting vandalism. That page will provide you with all of the guides, tools, information, helpful tips and tricks, and resources in order to help with that entire area. If you could just elaborate a bit more on exactly what you're looking for and what the issues or problems are, I'll be happy to respond with additional information and help. :-) Hope to hear back from you shortly! Best regards - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:45, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
By "it" I meant what was happening on the April Fools' Day article. I was fairly confident that those weren't constructive changes and that something should be done about it, but there were mutiple noticeboards and I wasn't 100% confident about which one it belonged in. I haven't looked at recent changes patrol (or its guidelines), but I might check it out later. I had the April Fools article on my watchlist and just kind of saw the back-and-forth changes of vandalism and other editors un-doing the edits. This article was the first time I reverted anything that wasn't an edit of mine. I was really hesistant to do anything, really, but I was pretty sure that I should do something. The first time (after the first revert), I looked around at different noticeboards, found the Adminstrator intervention against vandalism page and made an edit here. I mentioned one editor in particular that was kept changing the article after I had reverted their changes. Circleati was blocked and the April Fools' Day article was protected. From my understanding on page protection, it must have ended (and I noticed that there was more unhelpful edits to the April Fools' Day article since yesterday). Since these were different editors and not Circelati, the noticeboard about page protection seemed to be the best option. I guess what I'm asking for is advice on how I handled the situation (and my thought process). I'm a relatively new editor on Wikipedia (I created an account in September). I am interested in learning more about Wikipedia in general and becoming a beter editor, which is part of the reason I had an adoption request for Nick Moyes. Nick is sick right now and since you're the one who most recently protected the April Fools' Day page, I thought that it would be a good idea to contact you for advice. Clovermoss (talk) 03:04, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I did something wrong with the diff, I'm not exactly sure what it is. If you scroll down my contributions, it's one of my recent edits. Do you know what I'm doing wrong when linking the diffs? Clovermoss (talk) 03:06, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Clovermoss - AHA! That makes much more sense now! Please accept my apologies for needing you to provide more context; between reverting vandalism, taking action against disruptive editors and sock puppets, assisting new users and those who need my assistance, processing reports at WP:AIV, WP:RFPP, WP:UAA, WP:ANI, and other noticeboards, and making sure that those backlogs are clear, as well as other daily tasks - my ability to recall an exact event or issue that I took care of even just an hour ago becomes lost and I'll often need to ask the user to explain exactly what they're talking about. Many times, a user will message me and start a new discussion with, "Hey, that block you applied to that IP a bit ago..." Well, I've blocked about 30 IP users over the last hour... so I'm often forced to respond with, "Umm, which one?" :-)
You have absolutely nothing to worry about in regards to what you did in the article and where you asked for help regarding the disruption that was going on there and what needed to be done in order to stop it. Not only were there two sock puppet user accounts replacing sections of the article with spam links and vandalism, there were also groups of other editors adding unreferenced content and unverifiable information, and adding their own disruptive edits and shenanigans to the article. It wasn't anything that I would expect you to be able to handle perfectly on your own. I can definitely say that your revert here was made in good faith. This content isn't something that I would've kept, since its source was aprilfools-day.com - which doesn't look reliable at all. But, that's a content-related matter; no big deal. Even if your revert wasn't "correct", the proper thing for the editor to do if they disagreed with it would be to start a discussion on the article's talk page and ping you in the discussion so that you can respond and explain why you restored it. That's all part of the wonderful world of dispute resolution and why it's so important to follow. It doesn't make anyone's edits "right or wrong"; it just brings disagreements between what editors think is the right thing to do and mandates that they be discussed and sorted out. Easy peasy! :-)
Your request for page protection at WP:RFPP was completely justified. The article was being absolutely bombarded with vandalism, spam, disruption, and edits that weren't up to par with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you see any article currently going through a very high rate of edits that are blatant vandalism, disruption, or even content disputes or edit warring between a group of users, definitely file a request for page protection. If it's an issue of one or even just two editors causing vandalism, don't be afraid! Revert those edits! Roll back those bad changes! Warn those editors and tell them to stop (if you don't have Twinkle turned on, go to your preferences page by clicking here, go to the "Gadgets" tab and tick the box to turn it on). You're experienced enough on Wikipedia, and you seem to be intelligent and have all of your marbles... you know what is blatant vandalism and what isn't; don't question yourself when faced with edits that are blatant trolling and vandalism. I'm confident that you'll do the right thing. :-)
The noticeboards that you will want to bookmark or have available to easily navigate to in order to file reports on (when things happen) are:
  • WP:AIV (to report someone for repeated vandalism)
  • WP:RFPP (to request a page or article be protected)
  • WP:UAA (to report an inappropriate or offensive username that unquestionably violates Wikipeida's username policy)
  • WP:ANEW (to report someone for edit warring)
  • WP:ANI (to report other issues such as an editors inappropriate behavior or conduct, bad use or misuse of user tools and privileges, their long-term issues and problematic edits, basically anything that doesn't fall into the noticeboards above)
  • WP:SPI (to report accounts that you believe are being used by the same person and in violation of Wikipedia's sock puppetry policy in order to evade blocks, cause disruption or abuse, engage in deceptive behavior by appearing to be two different people - such as where they try to add more than one vote to a discussion, etc)
Once you have those known and bookmarked, it makes it much easier to know exactly where the right place is to report issues. Even if you're wrong or if you file a report in the wrong place, it's not a huge deal... it can be fixed, moved, and taken care of for you.
I hope that this response was helpful to you, answered all of your questions, and addressed all of your worries and concerns. You have nothing to worry about. Just keep up the great work, don't be afraid to stand up and do what's needed to remove vandalism and blatant disruption, and take some time to get familiar with the noticeboards I listed above. Visit each one, read through a few reports, get an understanding of what things are reported there, and make sure that you don't have any questions. The biggest advice of all that I can give you: turn on Twinkle! It will make reverting vandalism, warnings users, filing reports at these noticeboards, and many other tasks a completely simple task and automate all of the manual parts for you. Do it! Seriously! Go to your preferences right now and turn it on! :-)
Please let me know if I can answer and more questions or help you with anything else, and I'll be more than happy to do so. I hope you have a great day and I wish you happy editing! :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:44, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I'm going to sleep. Thank you for your response though, it was incredibly helpful. I think I already have Twinkle turned on my preferences, but I'm not really sure how to use it. I'm guessing the information about how to use it effectively is in that link. Also, thanks for the encouragement. It means a lot to me. Clovermoss (talk) 03:53, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Clovermoss - You're quite welcome! I'm happy to hear that my response was meaningful to you. Yeah, definitely some sleep if it's that time... :-) Feel free to follow up here with any questions when you return and if you find that you need any more input, advice, or help. I'll be happy to help with anything you need. Have a great night, and I'm sure we'll speak again soon. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 04:02, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I just noticed that the time in my sig isn't actually the time where I live. Although thinking that "it's only midnight" is an interesting first thought of mine. I'm guessing that's a preferences change? How do I change it to match my timezone? Also, I plan on going actually go to bed soon, but if you have the time to explain, I'd like to figure out what I did wrong linking the diffs earlier. Clovermoss (talk) 04:19, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Clovermoss - Make sure that the time zone is set to your region in the preferences page (it's located under the "appearance" tab), and it should reflect this change on all edit logs, contribution pages, edit histories, etc. and display relative to your local time zone. This however does not affect the timestamp next to anyone's signature - those are always saved in UTC. However, there is a gadget that you can enable in your preferences that will fix that. Just go to your preferences and under the "gadgets" tab, tick the box next to "Change UTC-based times and dates, such as those used in signatures, to be relative to local time (documentation)" so that it's enabled, and then click on "save". This gadget basically reads each UTC timestamp that's next to every signature on the current page, and then changes the resulting output text so that they display in your local time zone. Let me know if this resolves the time zone inconsistency that you're seeing. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 04:34, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I was able to fix the local time. I kept the automatic UTC preference in my signature the way it was. Thanks for all your help tonight, I've really appreciated it. Clovermoss (talk) 04:42, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Clovermoss - Perfect! I'm glad that you were able to figure it out! No problem; always happy to lend a hand. ;-) Have a great night, and I'm sure that we'll speak again soon. Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 04:46, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WBEY-FM

Hi. I’m with WBEY-FM and keep adding what I feel is pertinent information and it keeps getting reverted back which is why my edits have been so many in number. I don’t mind the page being protected from edits but I would like to add the information to it Dmvradioguy (talk) 03:27, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dmvradioguy! Were you editing this article earlier today and without an account? Were you blocked earlier today from editing Wikipedia? The more information that you can give me, the more that I can help you... :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:45, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No I wasn’t I’ve only used my account which I created after I directed an employee to make changes pertaining the station as we recently acquired WBEY. I’m new to all of this so forgive me if I’m doing something wrong. Dmvradioguy (talk) 03:48, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) I suspect that Oshwah may be asleep so I'll nip in here with a few points. Your username looks as though it might be a company one rather than a personal one. If it is please read our policy on this. Next, you state that you are "with WBEY-FM" and you "directed an employee". We require people with a close connection to the subject to declare a conflict of interest, policy is here. There is also an absolute requirement to declare any paid editing (policy here) and that applies if you are editing about your employer in your own time. Once you've read and implemented the policies then the best approach is to go to the talk page for the article and request the changes you want (with citations please) and a disinterested editor can then assess them and implement them. This may seem an odd way to do things, but please remember that the page is an encyclopaedia's view of your station, not a private promotional page. Regards, (and Good Morning from UK to you both) Martin of Sheffield (talk) 06:56, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Martin of Sheffield - Nope, I'm awake. ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 06:56, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Good Heavens! I thought you were US-based and it must be the middle of the night there. Anyhow, sorry for assuming things about you. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 07:09, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Martin of Sheffield - HA! No need to apologize at all. I am based in the United States, so your assumption was spot-on. I'm just having one of those nights where I can't sleep, so here I am..... ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:10, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Dmvradioguy - See the response from Martin of Sheffield above regarding your questions and concerns. There are important issues, policies, and guidelines that are being violated here, and this is very problematic. If you have any questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. Best regards - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:02, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect actions

Oshwah instead of making these strange warnings, you should better pay attention to my request about it on Admin Requests Page. and moreover, you protected not-consented version which is the result of vandal edits. you should correct your actions.--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 07:35, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Arsenekoumyk - but unless the current revision of the article violates any serious Wikipedia policies (such as biographies of living people or copyright), the revision of the article is the way it will remain during the duration of the protection applied. Looking at the diff comparison between the revision before you two began to modify the article and its current revision doesn't show any kind of blatant vandalism, disruption, or serious violations of policy. That's essentially the "luck of the draw" when it comes to stepping in on a dispute and directing the editors involved to follow Wikipedia's dispute resolution protocol. It would be inappropriate for me to change the revision to a "correct or preferred version" because I'd essentially be taking sides in a dispute where I must remain neutral, and "playing favorites" and giving an editor an advantage over others by picking a "good revision". You two need to work things out and discuss the issue and dispute on the article's talk page, come to an agreement or a consensus, and then edit the article to reflect the changes that you two agreed upon. Both of you engaged in edit warring on the article, which is disruptive and not the proper way to resolve disputes. The protection was applied to the article in order to prevent further disruption and to direct both of you to the proper forum in to resolve the dispute.
I really hope that you know and understand that I'm not doing this in order to be an asshole admin or a dick wipe toward you, or because I want to cause you frustration or hardship. What I'm doing (and what I'm not doing) is necessary in order to remain a neutral third-party and act in an administrative role in that capacity, to be fair to everyone involved, treat everyone the same where and when I should be, and to help the dispute and the issue to be worked out and the disruption to stop. If you have any questions or concerns, or if you believe that the current revision of the article violates a serious Wikipedia policy - please don't hesitate to let me know, and I'll be happy to respond and assist you. I wish you both well, good luck, and hope that you two work things out on the article's talk page, and that the dispute comes to a successful and peaceful close. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 08:15, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oshwah sure I understand your neutrality and that's why I'm explaining, that it led to a wrong decision. how can we reach consensus, if the other party with no explanations and no answer to around 4 calls to talk page continuous vandal edits? it's very simple to just pay attention to the request on admin requests page. the actions of vandal are clearly falling under long-term vandalism definition. instead of protecting the page, the actions towards the vandal should be taken. I mentioned you in the request there--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 08:21, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Arsenekoumyk - I'm glad that you understand my position and the need for me to be fair and neutral, and to help you two work things out. If the other user isn't going to work with you and if they're going to resort to further disruption, then we need to do what we can on our end to do the right things and give them the opportunity to participate. Start a new discussion on the article's talk page like you would anybody else and explain the disputes on-hand and what exactly is wrong with the changes being made. Ping the other user (Lamberd) in the discussion so that they're notified, then leave a message on his/her user talk page directly and point them to it. Be completely civil, respectful, and sincere in your discussion and your message, and do not proceed to repeatedly revert the article more than once after the block expires (else, you'll be seen as edit warring, which won't help your case). Then, if you turn out to be correct and Lamberd doesn't participate and chooses to engage in further disruption after the protection expires, you have all of your bases in order and he'll be blocked from editing for disruption and edit warring. You'll have done all the right things, and we'll have the necessary documentation and evidence to show that they were given the chance to work things out, and they didn't. Then, boom - all will be well! :-)
We of course hope that Lamberd will resolve the dispute properly by participating and helping things come to a consensus, but you still want to do all the things you'd normally do so that you're in compliance with policy and, if anything, you've created the diffs and edits that will serve as evidence and documentation when filing a report against him/her. It's a win/win! :-) Please let me know if I can answer any more questions or provide you with any more input or advice, and I'll be happy to do so. I know that this probably seems long, drawn-out, complicated, and quite silly to you given the content and the article - but unfortunately, this is what we need to do sometimes in order to remain in compliance with policy, avoid letting ourselves get sucked into adding to the disruption, and ultimately resolve the issues. Cheers :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 08:35, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oshwah I pinged him many times prior, links to pings here, he doesn't care. but ok, vandal succeeds, whatever.--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 09:44, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Arsenekoumyk - Can you provide me with diffs to these discussions where you pinged Lamberd? I'm interested to take a look and read them... :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 09:46, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oshwah, sure. here, and here--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 09:49, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
here also--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 09:52, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Arsenekoumyk - Gracias! I'll take a look at them. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 10:05, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oshwah sorry for disturbing you, but vandal edits are still there. text contradicts sources, half of the article with sources simply removed, vandal still makes his moves in another article (see original request on admin page. this is really demotivating. why at all read sources and try to write nice texts, when anyone could write anything he wants, ignore all questions and get successful in his disruptive activities.--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 09:21, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Arsenekoumyk - I'm really sorry to hear that you're frustrated and feeling that your motivation is being sucked from you... I'm going to go ahead and remove the protection from the article so that edits can proceed as before. It's becoming very apparent that a response isn't going to happen on the discussion you started on the article's talk page, so what's going to happen now is what will just happen two days from now if it were to just expire... This will allow you to make careful and appropriate edits to the article. I trust that you'll avoid any kind of edit warring and will promptly report issues to the appropriate noticeboard instead. Hopefully, this will restore some of that motivation that I sucked out of you. ;-) Stand by; the protection will be removed soon... ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 09:27, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oshwah thanks, in that case also could you revert to pre-war version if you may. otherwise it will seem I'm warring again even if I just revert to non-vandalized version. --Arsenekoumyk (talk) 09:34, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Arsenekoumyk - While it's temping to do because I want to be helpful to you, but sorry man... I can't do that. It wouldn't appropriate for me to get involved with the article's content after I applied protection to it in order to stop the same dispute that I'd now be editing... :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 09:37, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oshwah ok, I'm asking because on Russian wikipedia it's normal for admins to revert to pre-war as to stop vandal edits from being implemented. I see now it's different on English section.--Arsenekoumyk (talk) 09:39, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Eva Bartlett

I was about to request protection, but then saw you decided to protect this for 3 hours only - here. The edits being performed by the low edit account Firmfiasco and subsequently an IP run counter to a RfC that has been run on this very topic (concluding we should state "for promoting the falsehood that the While Helmets stage rescues". So TP resolution has already been performed here. I'll note that there has been a twitter campaign of sorts regarding this Wikipedia article (which has resulted in the very alternative Everipedia entry on this very subject). Also, as Bartlett is primarily known for Syrian civil war blogging - WP:GS/SCW&ISIL#1RR may apply as well. Icewhiz (talk) 09:11, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Icewhiz! Thanks for leaving your message here and for providing this information. That's extremely helpful and good to know; it would've been nice to have been told this in the protection request, but oh well... I try and do the best I can with the information I have. ;-) I've re-applied semi-protection to the article for one-month in order to put a stop to the disruption. Thanks again for providing me some additional context and details regarding what's been going on there... Please let me know if I can do anything else for you and I'll be happy to help. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 09:17, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please delete a page?

I want the page of Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal deleted, due to a name change. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Calvinkulit (talk • contribs) 10:09, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Calvinkulit! Thanks for leaving me a message here with your request. I'm confused; I don't understand why this article should be deleted and due to a "name change". Can you elaborate and explain a bit further? What's wrong? What exactly are you trying to do? I'll be happy to help you once I know what's needed. I just want to make sure that I give you assistance with what you really need... :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 10:12, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have already manually moved the page back to Nippon Steel, so there is no point in keeping Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal. Calvinkulit talk 6:22, 3 April 2019 (GMT +8)
(edit conflict) Calvinkulit - Uh oh! It looks like something went wrong somewhere with the page move. Looking at the page logs for Nippon Steel, it looks like you moved it to Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal Corporation, then moved it back? And it looks like there's another article, Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal, with the same content as well. Somehow, it's now at a stage where the content exists on both places and no redirect is present. I can certainly fix everything, but I'm going to probably need to peform some history merges in order to make sure that the edit history is accurate and all in one place. Just to verify: the place where this article should be is Nippon Steel - is that correct? What was the original name of the article? Where has it been for the majority of it's time on Wikipedia? ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 10:29, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) @Calvinkulit: Oppose. The article Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal has a long edit history, you should not request removing it and replacing it with a verbatim copy with you as the creator. --CiaPan (talk) 10:30, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
CiaPan - A deletion is not going to happen. The pages, content, logs, and edit histories will be moved and merged to its proper title and location. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 10:34, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Oshwah: Yes, I know that. I just wanted to point out to the requester that blanking pages, copying contents to a new place and requesting removal of the original or temporary copies of article is not a correct way to update and organize contents at Wikipedia. --CiaPan (talk) 10:40, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
CiaPan - Got'cha. ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 10:52, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Calvinkulit - Okay...... *whew*... it took me a little bit of time, but I got everything done for you. I had to perform a history merge to undo the manual cut-and-paste move that you made when creating Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal from Nippon Steel, and do so for the talk pages as well. I moved the article to the final location, and modified the redirect at Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal Corporation to point to the destination. :-)
Next time, please ask for assistance if you need an article or page moved. When editors who don't know how to properly move pages try to do so by cutting and pasting the content to a new title, they break a bunch of important things and create problems because they didn't actually move everything that's needed. There are edit histories, logs, page restrictions, redirects, and visibility settings that also come along when an article is properly moved, and merging them from two locations and back into one is a complex task that most administrators don't know how to do, or aren't willing to do themselves (due to how easy it is to do incorrectly and make things even worse).
In fact, you're actually quite lucky that you happened to message me for assistance, as I'm one of the few admins who has experience with performing history merges and knows how to do it properly. ;-) Most admins who find themselves needing to do this will have me do it... lol Anyways, thanks for coming to me and asking for help. If you need anything else, or if you need my input or assistance in the future, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be more than happy to help you out. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 11:16, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) As far as I can see, Calvinkulit made some edits (and moves) on these pages:
plus
which apparently describe the same entity. Possibly they will require some merge of edit history... --(talk page stalker) CiaPan (talk) 10:26, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Page Protection/Deletion Query

Hey Oshwah, bit of a weird one but I have a client here through Upwork who is basically a PR representative of a Uk based public figure, whose Wikipedia page is getting repeatedly vandalised by trolls/stalkers. They've hired me to try to get in contact with someone from here on their behalf. I haven't got the details of exactly which page it is, but is there any way we can get in contact about this, even if it's just to direct me to the appropriate ways to make a protection request? The client is also interested in having their page removed but I have explained for notable people that might not be possible. Anyway, thanks for any help. If you need to contact me via IM or anything that would be great.

[REDACTED - Oshwah] 11:04, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi there! Just message me here and tell me what article is having issues with vandalism and disruption, and I'll be happy to take a look. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 12:30, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Okay so basically it's kind of a big long saga on this article here -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shazia_Mirza
Go into the talk page and edit history for basically a long protracted argument over the person's age.
I have been contacted by her manager, Martin Twomey, to update her age on here to October 3rd 1982. Martin says he has her passport that confirms this but it's a bit of a stretch to put it into the public domain like that.
On the page there is a lot of discussion on this, sock investigations, a ton of drama, it's all pretty standard Wiki stuff. I have not much experience with Wikipedia but it seems there is a conflict here and I've been contracted to resolve it. It also looks like the 'source' given that's 'resolved' the issue is for a different person entirely. It says the date of birth is December not October, and the name is different.
But anyway, what's best to proceed? I'm not really here to sock if there's no way we can prove the info is wrong on the page, but if there's a way to get a more valid source up, I'd be able to try and ask for it to be done. As you can see from the talk page this is one of the more weird ones and I have been thrown into the middle of it because I do odd Fetch Quests on Upwork.
Anyway, let me know how we can proceed or what to do. Logged back in btw -> Minggut (talk) 12:39, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Minggut! Thanks for responding with the information. Because you made your original message here while you were logged out of your account, your IP address was used in place of your username in the edit history of this page. In order to keep this information secure and private for you, I've redacted the IP address information and suppressed it for you.
Content on a biography of a living person needs to be supported by reliable sources per this policy. Any content on a biography of a living person that isn't supported by a reliable source can be challenged and removed, and any content that's unfererenced or not supported by sources that meet this requirement and that's contentious in nature must be immediately removed and on sight. Content should not be modified or updated unless there's a reliable source to support the new information. What I'll do is take a look at the article and make sure that all content is in compliance with these policies. If there's any current and ongoing vandalism or disruption, I'll take care of it and make sure that it won't continue.
As somebody who is directly associating with the article subject and therefore has a conflict of interest with this article, you should not make any kind of edits to the article. You'll be violating a number of important policies and guidelines by doing so. If you are being paid or compensated in any way to be here and talk to me, and oversee what's going on with the article - even if you're not directly editing it in any way, you're required to disclose this information per Wikipedia's terms of use. You can follow the instructions here to quickly and easily disclose the information required and make sure that you're in compliance with this policy.
Please let me know if you have any additional questions or concerns, and I'll be happy to answer them and help you further. I hope you have a great rest of your day, and I thank you again for taking the time to make sure that you're following Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and get help with this situation rather than just trying to "wing it" and take care of things yourself. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 12:54, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah this all seems fair - I wasn't going to make an edit until there was a reason to or not. Will put the disclosure in my bio and read up on this also. To be honest I am only here to confirm what I have already told the guy, that he needs a super valid public online source for the age of the person and if one doesn't exist it's probably not going to be allowed to be changed on here - and that it needs to be uploaded by someone totally unaffiliated with the person.
What would you suggest to do next though? I don't really have much attachment to the issue, but would it be best to direct the guy to create a reliable public online source to back up this date, then someone unaffiliated can come back and link it into the page without conflict of interest?
Oh and also is there a template for disclosures somewhere? For now I have pasted a couple things to my user page.
Minggut (talk) 13:04, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Minggut - He cannot modify or edit the article himself. Make it very clear to him that if he does try to edit the article, it'll be caught very easily by involved editors and the community, and he'll just be completely wasting his time. References that are considered reliable on Wikipedia are required to be secondary and completely independent of the article subject, so no - he would not be able to just publish some public source with information he wants added or changed on the article and expect that it would be acceptable to use on Wikipedia at all.
Honestly, I would do my best to recommend that he leave well enough alone and try not to care too much about the Wikipedia article about him. So what if things aren't perfect? Why does he care so much? What underlying things are prompting him to hire you to do all of this? As long as there's no libel or false defamatory content on the article about him, there's not much for him to gain from putting any thought, time, and energy into the article and its content. Sure, the page will get vandalized and people will make stupid edits and be trolls... that's just as possible with any other article, and those usually get reverted and fixed very quickly. What do you think about all of this? Why do you think that he's concerned about all this? ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 13:24, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly it's just a guy who doesn't really know how Wikipedia works so well, and he's trying to make sure his client doesn't have their age shown wrong. But yeah, you are correct here, I read the rules. There is little that can be done except if a separate party releases information on her age into the public domain and he can hope that some fan will change the article and link to the information by themselves.
Let me know if my declaration is all correct and I will return this information. Oh and I forgot, thanks for the help.
Minggut (talk) 13:29, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Minggut - Yup, that's exactly right. These rules and requirements are what keep Wikipedia articles and content as accurate, fair, factual, neutral, and verifiable as possible. Without these rules and requirements, we would have no standard as to where content is acceptable and where it's not, and nobody could be able to trust any articles and content here at all. We would essentially crumble and we wouldn't exist as the website we are today. That's completely understandable; not everyone is familiar with Wikipedia and how encyclopedias work. At least he's doing the right thing by having you get input and help, so that policies are followed and things aren't made difficult or harder by ignoring them... ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 13:37, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
To tell you the truth buddy I was just told to go edit the page, but I was aware Wikipedia is governed by policy, and read that talk page, so I was not sure and made my way through a load of articles until I ended up here. Again, please make sure I have done that declaration properly and I will be on my way and relay this info in the simplest terms possible.
Minggut (talk) 13:40, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Minggut - By the way...... after your work is concluded with this client and all, and when you're no longer being compensated to be here, why not join us and help grow the project? You seem to be very intelligent and knowledgeable given that you've read and understand the different policies that are important here. You'd make a great contributor here, and we could really use someone like you... even if you're not interested in writing or creating content, there's a lot of different projects and areas that you'd probably find interesting (such as patrolling for vandalism and reverting them, participating in different processes, many things...). You should give it some thought and consider it... I think you'd do very well here, and you'd become an editor that everyone knows and looks to in no time at all. Shoot, you already have an account... why not volunteer some spare time and help be part of a project that makes information 100% available and free for everyone on Earth to access?... :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs)
Minggut - Your declaration seems fine to me. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 13:46, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I might give it a try at some point I have a lot of hours in the day. I have basically returned to this guy and relayed the following:

If you are affiliated with someone like this, you can't simply edit the information, because it's a conflict of interest.

Information on Wikipedia is supposed to be from a 'secondary source', so you can't just release info directly yourself and cite it yourself - it has to be released by someone unaffiliated with your client.

Even if the information is released by an unaffiliated party, it's still a conflict of interest if you upload it as an affiliate.

The only way to get her age updated or changed is if SOMEONE ELSE releases your client's age, then another SOMEONE ELSE uploads that on their own, without you prompting them.

But basically I'm going to try and close this Fetch Quest now and hope that this is helpful for the dude. Freelancer is always stuff like this. And yeah, leave some info on my page about when or if I can remove that declaration and maybe I might be able to help you out with some stuff sometime. Thanks much for the time. Minggut (talk) 13:55, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Minggut - Looks good to me! You can remove that declaration as soon as you're no longer being compensated by your client; easy peasy! I think that you'd be an asset to this project and that you'd enjoy it thoroughly. If I can be of assistance with anything else, please let me know and I'll be happy to help. :-) I really do hope that I hear from you again and see you back here on Wikipedia, and that you consider volunteering. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 14:02, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In the mean time is there any other channel this guy can go through, or contact e-mail for submitting wrong info, or is it pointless still? The guy's concern is currently they are sourcing the wrong figure completely so it's misinformation about the person in question. And yeah I will try to contact you another time, I have stuff to finish currently. Minggut (talk) 14:07, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Minggut - Yes, there absolutely is. See Wikpedia's contact page information for article subjects here. Please let me know if I can help you with anything else. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 14:09, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Okay I will link this through to the dude and say "That's it, Man.". Thanks again though will drop you a line maybe I can assign a few hours to help out at some point. Minggut (talk) 14:13, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
We'd be happy to have you here. Until we meet again... :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 14:15, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just... incredible

#Can you please delete a page?

You FAILED your Turing test. You were very close, missed just by a whisker – for being too good. Fast, experienced, helpful, reliable, willing, always ready and so kind... Definitely you ARE a robot. No such human can ever exist! --CiaPan (talk) 12:10, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CiaPan - Damn it! I was so close! I must pass the test next time... :-P ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 12:14, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

UAA

Hi Oshwah. Wanted to let you know that I blocked Natasharoy after looking at their contributions, and coming to the conclusion that the reporting editor was correct. There clearly NOTHERE, at the least, in my estimation. Of course, I've been wrong before, so if after looking further into the situation you think I'm in error, please undo my actions. Have a fantastic day! 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 14:46, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 78.26! Long time no chat! I hope you're having a great day and that life is going well for you! :-) I remember taking a quick glance at the user's contributions, but didn't remember finding anything to show that the username was promotional. It's certainly possible that I missed something, and I'm confident that you're correct in your decision to take administrative action. I appreciate the message and for letting me know about this. I'll take another look and figure out what I didn't see the first time. I'm sure it'll be something obvious and that sticks out like a sore thumb (knowing my luck), and I'll get to call myself an idiot yet again.... :-) Thanks for the heads up, and I hope we get to speak again soon. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 15:49, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

help an upcoming artist

i'm azembe twhy,an upcoming artist pls i want u to help me post my information on wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Azembe twhy (talk • contribs) 17:03, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(by talk reader) @Azembe twhy: No. Please read WP:NOTADVERTISING. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:07, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Big Bear

Just FYI, but the IP vandals going back several days are all located in Ontario, and three to one particular school district. So it seems unlikely that blocking one of them will fix the issue for more than a day or so. GMGtalk 17:11, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GreenMeansGo! Thanks for the message and for letting me know about this. I was on the fence regarding whether or not I should protect the article, so I thought that this IP being blocked would be sufficient. It sounds like this isn't the case. Hence, I've applied semi-protection to the article for one week. Please let me know if I can be of assistance with anything else, and I'll be more than happy to help. :-) Cheers, and thanks again - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 17:19, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reminder

Hey, thanks for the heads-up about WP:AGF on AIV yesterday evening (or morning/noon/night, depending on your local timezone). Sometimes i get a bit too suspicious about IP edits like these. Anyways, i'll be more careful in the future when distinguishing between good-faith edits, test edits and vandalism. Nyamo Kurosawa (talk) 19:49, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nyamo Kurosawa! No problem! I'm always happy to lend a hand. Part of what I try to do here and with the "admin hat" is to take a different approach; I go out of my way to have editors' backs, and give them the support, encouragement, advice, and input they need in order to be the best version of themselves when they participate here. :-)
And not to worry; it's something that I've done many times throughout the years that I've been an editor on Wikipedia, and I've had to stop and self-evaluate where my thoughts and suspicions regarding an IP or an editor are truly from as well. There are times where I just get done from spending the last two hours blocking LTA sock puppet accounts that were causing a massive amount of abuse on Wikipedia, and I have to take note to lower my level of "suspicious awareness" when I return to normal patrolling and handling disruption.... so don't feel bad or feel down about it at all. We all make mistakes; trust me when I say this: I've made way, wayyyy more than my fair share of mistakes and screw-ups on Wikipedia over the years, and I still manage to screw something up sometimes. ;-) It happens to everyone, and it's it's why I make sure to review reports and amy bring concerns to one's attention so that they can resolve it before things blow up... lol.
This is an example as to why it's so important for admins to look out for others, support and build them up when they need it, and to be and their wing-man when they need one. Those little things don't take much effort to do, and they make much more of a positive impact to others than they think. ;-) Please know that my user talk page is always open to you, and you're welcome to message me any time you need or want to. Thanks again for the message! I hope you have a great day, and I wish you happy editing. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 20:29, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page watcher) Which is why Oshwah needs to clone himself. Barring that, perhaps host admin seminars. :) BilCat (talk) 01:10, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
BilCat - Ooof... be careful of what you wish for, man... I think just having one of me is bad and risky enough around here as it is... lol ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:31, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A brief apology and question.

Sorry for making disruptful edits, like I did on "List of programs broadcast by Nick Jr.". But what was disruptful about the edit I made on that page? SafariKid2 (talk) 00:48, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a talk page stalker. It looks like you've removed text that really shouldn't be removed. Your edit summary kinda makes it seem like you're predicting the future and we don't do that here on Wikipedia. We have definite dates for those shows and if they do return, that can always be changed later. Dusti*Let's talk!* 00:56, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Hi SafariKid2, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your question. There's no need to apologize; the temporary block was added to prevent additional edits that myself and other editors viewed as disruptive. When looking at your edits to the article in general, you were making changes, then reverting yourself, then doing so again and again... this isn't something you should be doing. If you were trying to test out changes and see if they were going to work or not, you need to do this on a sandbox page, not within the article itself. What were you trying to do? Why were you changing content, reverting yourself, and then doing this again and again? On top of this, your changes removed legitimate content and replaced some of it with unreferenced information. This potentially problematic behavior, and in combination with the other edits and issues that other editors and admins have talked to you about recently, is what prompted me to apply a temporary block to your account. Please let me know if you have any more questions, and I'll be happy to answer them. Don't worry too much about the block. Just behave yourself, stay outta trouble, and make sure to ask questions and and ask for help with anything that you're not sure about and before you make changes to it. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:59, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail!

Hello, Oshwah. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 01:15, 4 April 2019 (UTC). 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.

BilCat (talk) 01:15, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

BilCat - Received and replied. Thanks for the email :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:27, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, replied. - BilCat (talk) 01:33, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Received. ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:34, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pls restore corrections to Pink House Newbury, MA

Hello,

I am a co-founder of Support the Pink House and we tried to do our own Wiki page back in 2017 and again in 2018. We were surprised to find someone put one up. But there is a lot of incorrect and incomplete information on it. I spent quite a bit of time correcting it tonight, in advance of a meeting where big wigs who are critical to the process to save the house maybe looking at it, and it notes you reversed all my edits - and I would like them to be restored please. I am emailing you as it is a bit timely.

We ARE the authority, and we find it difficult that many of the papers/articles used to verify things don't fact check or don't report accurately - which is common. Also, as the negotiations were so delicate we were asked to keep things under our hats, so we did not encourage or seek much in the way of public press - thought Chronicle, a very popular prime time TV show did cover us in that time. However, the page is out, and should reflect the facts. A few that are incorrect - the house was built in 1925, not 1922. Support the Pink House is a grass roots citizens group and not a formal non-profit as stated.

Another example, the the Refuge did not meet with the Greenbelt on their own, Support the Pink House worked for 2.5 years to get that to happen. not the papers who get things wrong. We have done the research on the house, though I didn't correct the spite house rumor as we are fine with it being called an urban legend. And there are many meetings and several solutions being pursued since 2017 not just the one mention of Greenbelt in 2018. It makes a serious impact on the powers involved in this 4 year, tireless project to have that kind of sentence out there on Wiki, where many go for factual info!

It also doesn't mention what is a very interesting bit of information - that every elected official from the area's local and State Senators and Reps, Councilmen, the Mayor and Selectmen, mayors etc on up to the State of MA's three federal officials - Congressman Moulton, Senators Markey and Warren have been behind it. I put that in and have photos of these meetings, letters of support from them- but again, I gave those quotes to the Daily News and it was not published.

It was included in the March issue of Newburyport Neighborhood magazine, I have a PDF of it, and a physical copy but I'm not sure they put it online to link to. There also are the blog posts on SupporthePinkHouse.com that supports this.

Please do restore what can be of our corrections. I could not fix the categories at the bottom saying Houses Built in 1922 - I am newer to this but honest.

If you prefer to directly email me pls do at [REDACTED-THEGOODUSER]

Thank you and I look forward to hearing from you! Rochelle Chair and Spokesperson On Behalf of Support the Pink House — Preceding unsigned comment added by R9R (talk • contribs) 02:51, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi R9R, and thanks for leaving me a message here regarding the edits you made to Pink House (Newbury, Massachusetts) that were reverted. I'll be happy to explain why I removed your changes as well as explain the issues and problems with the edits you made. Your edits contained problems and issues that weren't in compliance with a number of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Much of the content you added wasn't referenced or cited by any sources (or any sources that were identified as reliable). Wikipedia articles and content must seek verifiable facts, not seek "the truth"; adding content to an article that isn't referenced or considered to be information that's "commonly known" can be challenged and removed. Furthermore, much of the content you added appeared to be based off original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. You cannot add content and "cite yourself" as a source simply because you have a close relationship to the article subject. Adding content citing one's relationship, experience, association, or even one's own website, work, or research constitutes adding original research to articles, and this is not allowed for many obvious reasons.
Your edits also added content and statements that weren't in compliance with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, such as that paragraph that states that the participation by a number of people shows the movement's importance, or the statement about the "hopes" that one of options (such as land transfer) succeeds. Much (if not most) of the content reflects a positive point of view toward the article subject and words in in a manner that reflects to the reader that the article wishes the success of the article subject and what was added to the article. It was not worded to be neutral, as required by Wikipedia's policy on the matter, and in many different ways.
Your message here also shows that you have a conflict of interest with the article subject given your position in an organization that openly supports the article subject. Per Wikipedia's behavioral guidelines regarding conflict of interest, you (or anybody else closely related or personally vested with the article subject) should not be editing this article at all. This is because of the fact that edits made from users who have a personal conflict of interest with the subject are almost never able to make appropriate changes or add content that reflects a neutral point of view, or that doesn't explicitly or subtlety reflect the editor's personal opinions or points of view.
These are a few of the different reasons as to why I reverted your changes to the article, and why doing so was justified. Moving forward, you need to no longer make edits directly to the article given your conflicts with the subject. Instead, you can request edits be approved and made for you by a different editor on your behalf. Simply follow the instructions provided on this page in order to create edit requests and have them approved and made by someone else. This will both allow you to bring issues and concerns to the attention of other editors and have them fixed, while keeping you from violating the guideline on editing articles that you have conflicts with.
Please let me know if you have any questions, and I'll be more than happy to answer them. Thanks again for the message, and I hope you have a great rest of your day. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 11:59, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Minimalists article and JohnnyStew

I was going down the vortex of reading random Wikipedia articles (it's really easy to do that on the phone app) and I ended up reading The Minimalists article. Anyways, the article seemed a bit "off," at least in the promotional sense. Everything in the article is positive and the "critical reviews" section is glowing praise. I looked at the history of the article and one user made a lot of edits to it. Exactly 50 edits to that article and just that article within the span of 3 days back in 2017. One of the edit summaries mentions that they "changed promotional tone to encloypedic tone" but the only difference in the diff is paragraph spacing. This seems weird to me. What do you think? Clovermoss (talk) 03:38, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I posted to ANI. I noticed other things browsing through the history and decided to file a report there. Clovermoss (talk) 05:10, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Clovermoss - Perfect; thanks for the message and the update! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 12:00, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Another editor moved it to another noticeboard where it looks like it will now be closed. I was worried more about their edits to The Minimalists article, not nessicarily the mutiple accounts. Only editing that article and added all of that promotional stuff (since 2017) had me worried about paid editing. Maybe I jumped to conclusions too fast. If the sockpuppet investigation is closed, do I just leave it alone and forget about it, then? Clovermoss (talk) 00:50, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

Thank you for correcting my mistakes. I am a novice editor of Wikipedia. I will study hard.AndyYCRccrUSWCAX (talk) 04:36, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AndyYCRccrUSWCAX! You're welcome :-) Please don't hesitate to let me know if you run into any questions or need my assistance with anything, and I'll be more than happy to help you. Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope that your time here is positive and fun, and that you enjoy your stay with us as a member of the community. ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 12:01, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Mavzuan

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 07:23, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cahk -  Done. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:29, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Apology

I'm really sorry if it looks like I'm continually having a go at you. It's more subtle than that, and I sincerely think you are a nice guy and everything you do is done out of the genuine belief that it benefits the project. I'm honestly not here to upset people. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:28, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ritchie333 - I appreciate you for leaving this message and for the very kind words here. I understand... you were just frustrated... it happens, and I don't hold it (or anything else) against you at all. Look... I know that you probably don't like me, and if everything went the way you believe that it should have, I wouldn't have passed my second RFA and I wouldn't be an admin right now. As much as I try my best to do the right thing, I'm not a perfect editor or a perfect admin - and I'll will never be. I just hope that I can someday gain your respect and your trust, and that we can be good "wiki-acquaintances" or even maybe "wiki-friends" (lol). Either way, please know that your apology meant a lot to me. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 11:10, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There's a small list of people I genuinely don't like on my user page - currently Donald Trump, Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg; I've got no reason to dislike you as (as far as I know) you've never advocated anything seriously unpleasant like denying the holocaust, discrimination against ethnic minorities, cutting of public services, making racial slurs or treating poor people with contempt (and I'll assume this is taking the piss out of this). The RfA is ancient history; I have criticised admins where I voted "support" at their RfA, and not had issue with several admins where I voted "oppose", and I am on record saying there is pretty much no correlation between an admin's support percentage at RfA and their ultimate track record. The problem is I struggle to articulate what the problem is in a manner that doesn't sound like a personal attack or outing, which is why I'd prefer to take it to email. Sometimes, I feel like James O'Brien in this exchange (not implying you're anything like Jacob Rees-Mogg; rather that every word Jacob used was civil and meets the standard of parliamentary language, but doesn't stop me from slamming my head into a desk). Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:35, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks....

for reaching out. I have been using Wikipedia for a long time and have noted that a lot of the social entries I look at or have looked at have become very convoluted with vanity entries and newspaper like current reporting. Journalists also seem to be dumping a lot, making references to their current work.

I have made a few gentle edits to get started and will continue on that theme if everyone thinks this is helpful. 

I would be very interested in shortening a few bios, which stretch over pages and pages.  However I will listen and learn for a while and check out what the common ground is.

All the best JF III — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Fritzinger III (talk • contribs) 11:27, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi John Fritzinger III! Thanks for the message and for updating me on what you've done with the article! No problem; I'm always happy to help and make sure that others have everything they need. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 12:03, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of coffee for you!

Good morning,

Just wanted to say thanks for going the extra mile yesterday evening by EC-protecting (& move protecting) my user page! Keep up the good work! IanDBeacon (talk) 12:04, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Newtown

I took that out because there isn't a map. Then the page gave me some stupid alert, and asked me to confirm, but of course deleted my note. I'll nuke it again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.34.39.204 (talk) 13:59, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reviewing my page

Hello, just writing to say thank you for reviewing my page.

I hope we will get on. StellarMuzak (talk) 15:47, 4 April 2019 (UTC)StellarMuzak[reply]

StellarMuzak - No problem, and welcome to Wikipedia! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 15:49, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

IP Block Exemption

Could you please add me to the IP Block Exempt group? It seems immature people at my education institution thought it would be funny to vandalize Wikipedia. I am currently unable to edit on wireless devices. Seems this problem may occur frequently as various IPs in the buildings have been blocked repeatedly. The relevant request may be found here. NoahTalk 16:31, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like this auto block was removed. I do have reason to believe that blocks may be placed on the various IPs at any time as there has been a history of multi-year blocks on them and recent vandalism. NoahTalk 16:45, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why was my page delete?

I put a lot of time putting together my page only to find out it was deleted without even notifying me. Please explain.

Thanks,

Frank — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frank D. Girardi (talk • contribs) 19:42, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(by talk reader) @Frank D. Girardi: Which page are we talking about? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris troutman (talk • contribs) 19:49, 4 April 2019 (UTC) (and his sig. added by CiaPan (talk) 11:03, 5 April 2019 (UTC))[reply]

April 2019

Hello, I'm Joshy Washy. I just wanted to let you know that your administrative privileges have been removed, and you have been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia. Kim Jong Un is very against wikis and encyclopedias like this one, and he's the one who blocked you. He wants to ban the use of the internet and the world wide web entirely, because he's against internet altogether. He also wants to bring down Tilted Towers, Pleasant Park and Salty Springs because Mario and Luigi have been beating up Sonic and Tails, all in celebration that the SNES sold more than the genesis. He also wants a North Korea invasion so that he can take over the UK, the USA, and then the world. GOLDIEM J (talk) 19:49, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A result of a user name block

Hi Oshwah.

Before I get into an edit war, may I ask you to review this edit, and offer any advice?

Regards. Aoziwe (talk) 10:07, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Aoziwe: It looks like a copy from https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/about-us/who-we-are (in parts at least). --(talk page stalker) CiaPan (talk) 11:00, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks but sorry, I might have been a bit obtuse. I was thinking it might be a form of block evasion too? Aoziwe (talk) 11:23, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Aoziwe: Possibly, but I have no idea. I am a talk page watcher – I'm not an admin and I don't have an immediate insight into blocks data. The more, I can't verify the user's identity. I can only comment on the linked edit. --CiaPan (talk) 11:59, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Which is why I pinged Oshwah. Oshwah put the block on User:NHMRCMEDIA and User:Healthedits101 seems to be direct evasion, as per that edit? Aoziwe (talk) 12:08, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia page

Hello, I submitted a page with info about a motorcycle club. It was deleted. I would like to resubmit. Im trying to make it a facts and history info based only. This motorcycle club already has a website, southsideridersmcnation.com . Can you please guide me as to how and what is the acceptable way to publish a wikipedia page. Thank you. Sincerly,

SSR PREACHER [REDACTED-THEGOODUSER]— Preceding unsigned comment added by SSRMC PREACHER (talk • contribs) 14:19, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

217.42.222.171

He's at it again. Lard Almighty (talk) 15:52, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy tag rollback

I added a dummy edit to 286 protected mode. Thanks for the nice reminder. Quarl (talk) 23:04, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edit made to first family

I changed it to a picture of President Trump's family because it was previously the former President Obama's picture. I was just updating it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.55.254.114 (talk) 00:22, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My Congratulations!!!

Expert User
I would like to thank you for your outstanding contributions to the site.

- Contributor 7 (Max) Contributer7 (talk) 21:22, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Oshwah&oldid=891273921"