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 Mjahangir777 (talk | contribs) at 21:41, 12 April 2019 (→‎Sami Yusuf: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.



Let's chat


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

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


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


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]

(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]
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]
I also want Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal to be DELETED from the top search, and replaced with Nippon Steel. Calvinkulit (talk) 12:27, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Calvinkulit - The search should update automatically after some time has gone by to favor the new title instead of the old one. However, regardless of what's changed automatically - if someone searches for "Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal" and types this into the search box, that result is going to show up since this is what the user or reader is looking for. We can't control the search and what returns or favors as the result; all I can say is that it'll update and there's nothing you need to worry about. Either way, the reader will be redirected to the new page if they click on a result that takes them to a redirect. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 05:12, 10 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]
Hi Azembe twhy. Unfortunately, as stated in the response above, Wikipedia is not a place for advertising or promotion. Articles that are created and added to Wikipedia must meet notability requirements in order for them to be kept. Otherwise, they may be speedily deleted, proposed for deletion, or nominated for a deletion discussion. Articles that either meet a criteria for speedy deletion or are shown by consensus in a deletion discussion to not meet the necessary and required guidelines are deleted. Please review the policies and guidelines that I've linked you to in this response, and let me know if you have any questions. I'll be happy to answer them if you do. Thanks for understanding, and I hope you have a great day. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 05:20, 10 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]
Clovermoss - Either way it closes, if it's found that misuse or abuse of multiple accounts occurred, an admin will take care of that part. Just keep an eye on the SPI and answer any questions that an admin, clerk, or a checkuser might ask you there. If there are edits you find inappropriate in the article, you can of course revert them. Make sure to keep dispute resolution in mind if they object to your reverts, and make sure that you keep from edit warring or any other kind of disruption. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 08:13, 10 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]

Hi IanDBeacon! Thanks for the coffee and for the very kind words you left here! :-) You're very welcome; always willing to lend a hand. If I can do anything else for you, please don't hesitate to let me know, or (recommended) file a request on the appropriate noticeboard. Thanks again, and I hope you have a great rest of your day. Cheers ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 05:26, 10 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]

Hi there! Thanks for the message and for explaining your edit. Sounds good to me; thanks for following up and for letting me know. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 05:27, 10 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]
Hi Hurricane Noah, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your questions and your request. I'll be happy to explain how different blocks can affect innocent editors and show you where to request the IP block exempt user rights. There are two kinds of blocks that can cause collateral damage or accidentally get innocent editors and users caught in their web: Autoblocks, and Hard IP address blocks.
  • Autoblocks are created when a block is set on a user account and the appropriate option is ticked as 'enabled' by the blocking administrator. This option also blocks the IP address that the account was using (as well as any subsequent IP address the account logs into and tries to edit from) when the block was placed. If any other account that is not IP block exempt tries to edit from that autoblocked IP address, that account will also be blocked... and the cycle continues onward from there.
  • Hard IP address blocks are an option that an administrator can enable when placing a block on an IP address or range. Normally, when IP addresses are blocked, this option is disabled which means that anyone who already has an existing Wikipedia account can edit from this IP address without any issues or problems. However, if the option is enabled - the block will also disallow any existing accounts from editing from it (unless they are IP block exempt). This option doesn't block the account like autoblocks do; they simply do not allow the account to edit while they are connected through the IP address or range. As soon as they change networks or internet connections to one that isn't IP hard-blocked, they'll be allowed to edit as usual and without any issues.
Being caught in an autoblock or a hard IP address block does not create a record in your account's block log. As annoying as it can be to get caught in one of these blocks and having done nothing wrong, these blocks are necessary in order to stop the abuse of multiple accounts as well as high-volume amounts of abuse if the block is applied to an open proxy or VPN. To get yourself approved and granted the IP block exempt user flag, you just need to follow the instructions under the green highlighted section, "How to request" under this section of the IP block exemption policy page (where it has you use your main account to contact the Unblock Ticket Request System). They'll have a checkuser verify your IP information, authenticity, etc, and make sure that nothing fishy comes back. Once those checks are done and no issues found, they'll usually have no problem granting the user flag temporarily. Just know that they grant the user flag based on need; it's typically not given out permanently unless you're a well-known user account with a very high level of demonstrated trust, and you constantly run into autoblocks or hard IP address blocks to the point that granting it permanently is the best solution (just so you're aware).
I apologize for the delay responding to your message, by the way... life gets busy sometimes! Please let me know if you have any questions or need help with anything else, and I'll be more than happy to lend a hand. ;-) I hope my response was helpful, and I hope you have a great rest of your day! :-D Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 05:50, 10 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]
Hi Frank D. Girardi, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your questions. Your user page was deleted under U5 of Wikpedia's speedy deletion criteria. In short, the content you added to your user page looked to be intended to advertise, promote, and host links to an organization and other content that was not Wikipedia-related. Please review and make sure that you understand Wikipeidia's policies and guidelines regarding user pages, as well as what they are not to be used for. The guideline page states that user pages are not to be used as a forum, resume, social networking profile, or web host or for purposes unrelated to Wikipedia's goals. Your user page clearly violated these guidelines, which was why your user page was deleted just earlier. Please let me know if you have any questions regarding Wikipedia's policies and guidelines on user pages, of if I can be of assistance with anything else - I'll be more than happy to help you. Thanks for the message, I hope you understand, and I wish you a great day and happy editing. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 06:06, 10 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]

GOLDIEM J - *GASP* - You're really Kim Jong Un in disguise?!! :-P ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 06:08, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
LOL he's coming to your house. I'm doing everything I can to stop him and convince him to give your administrative privileges back. It also doesn't get to me why Mario Vs Sonic would make him wanna bring down Fortnite locations. Maybe they were fighting in those locations, and he wants to do it so they won't have anywhere to fight anymore😂 GOLDIEM J (talk) 15:04, 10 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]
Hi Aoziwe! Thanks for the message and the request. Please excuse my delay responding to your message here... life has been busy for me lately! :-) When looking at the edit you requested that I review, two things stand out that are problematic:
  1. The edit changes the content on the page so that it appears to be worded like an advertising or promotion rather than an encyclopedia article where neutral wording and neutral point of view is the priority. The content has many issues and concerns that don't appear to be in compliance with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy.
  2. As pointed out by CiaPan above, I also find that a significant portion of the content added and changed has been copied directly from the website mentioned. This is by far the most serious issue of the two that I found, as this represents a copyright violation - a policy violation that we take very seriously and will impose sanctions upon editors for violating repeatedly.
My advice would be to paraphrase any text that you feel should be cited from external links and add them completely in your own words. Even close paraphrasing (where you copy and paste text, but change a few key words and phrases to be slightly different) is against policy. Remember to also cite your references in-line with the article text and make sure that you cite from reliable sources. You'll avoid a lot of issues and potential trouble if you do these things. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them. I hope that my response was helpful to you, and I wish you a great day and happy editing! :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 06:19, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. Yep, thanks, I get all that. My main concern was the new username, while no longer the COI organisation name, is still possibly problematic given they are a health organisation and not an individual account, I suggest, and they simply reverted back to what they added under the blocked name. In any case their revert has now been reverted by another editor. And I see that you have revdeled too. Regards. Aoziwe (talk) 12:10, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Aoziwe! Thanks for the response and the additional information regarding your thoughts. Oh yeah, I completely understand where you're coming from and I agree that the edits have issues nonetheless. You did the right thing by saying something and expressing your thoughts. If you see any more issues like this or if I can be of assistance with anything else, please let me know and I'll be happy to lend a hand. Thanks again for the messages, and I hope you have a great rest of your day. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 12:27, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oshwah. Please see User talk:Healthedits101#April 2019 Aoziwe (talk) 11:55, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again, Aoziwe! Thanks for pointing me toward the message you left on the editor's user talk page. I think that your message was well-written and clearly listed and detailed each issue with the user's edits. I also redacted the revision text of the edit the user made per RD1. If the user's edits continue and it becomes apparent that it will keep continuing unless I step in and take direct action, let me know and I'll be happy to take a look. Thank you for the time and diligence you put into this project; it makes a great impact and you're doing excellent work. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 12:09, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oshwah. Sadly yet again. No attempt at all it seems to engage at Talk:National Health and Medical Research Council or at User talk:Healthedits101 or at User talk:Aoziwe. They are subject to a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia License (CC BY) which requires Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, etc. but they have done neither, and then there are still the same other issues. Aoziwe (talk) 15:30, 12 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]

Hi SSRMC PREACHER! I'll be more than happy to help you with your request. :-) First and foremost, Wikipedia's behavioral guidelines on conflict of interest highly discourage users who have a personal conflict of interest with the article subject from editing or even discussing it on Wikipedia. Doing so adds issues to the article, since someone close to the subject edited it. It also makes it nearly impossible for the article to be worded to reflect a neutral point of view. Instead, you can follow the instructions in order to make an requested article about this club for other editors to view and look into creating an article about it. This way, you won't be violating any policies and guidelines by having another editor create the article. Also, if you're being paid or compensated in any way to be on Wikipedia and make these changes, you are required to disclose this information per Wikipedia's Terms of Use. Please follow the instructions listed here in order to properly disclose this information if you're being paid to edit Wikipedia in any way.
Articles that are created and added to Wikipedia must meet notability requirements in order for them to be kept. Otherwise, they may be speedily deleted, proposed for deletion, or nominated for a deletion discussion. Articles that either meet a criteria for speedy deletion or are shown by consensus in a deletion discussion to not meet the necessary and required guidelines are deleted. Please review the policies and guidelines that I've linked you to in this response, and let me know if you have any questions. This is very important to know and understand, and to determine accurately about your article subject and before you spend any effort requesting the creation of an article about this subject, or creating and writing an article about it yourself. You could find many hours of your time ultimately wasted and for absolutely nothing if you don't verify this information first!
If you have any questions, you're welcome to respond here or you're welcome to ask them on my user talk page (click here to go there). Myself, or another admin, will be happy to answer any questions you have and help you. I appreciate your understanding and your cooperation in this matter, and I hope you have a great day. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 06:34, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

217.42.222.171

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

Hi again, Lard Almighty! Sorry for the delay responding to your message here. It looks like this IP address has already been taken care of by another admin. If things continue after the block expires, let me know or (recommended) file a report at AIV. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 06:35, 10 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]

Hi Quarl! No problem! I just wanted to have your back and leave you an off-the-record reminder about it in case you did this on accident. I wouldn't want someone to go running after you with torches and pitchforks if the cause was a simple mistake. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 06:36, 10 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]

(talk page stalker)Thank you for trying to update the image, however your edit only removed imformation without explaining why A 10 fireplane Imform me 14:56, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, and thanks for the message and the explanation regarding your edit here to First Family. As pointed out above, your attempt to update the picture only resulted in the current image being removed from the article. If you need help with images, I recommend that you refer to this guide for information and help. If you have any more questions or need my help with anything else, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be more than happy to lend a hand. :-) Thanks again for the message, and I wish you happy editing! :-D Best regards - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 06:39, 10 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]

Contributer7 - Thank you very much! I really appreciate the message and your very kind words. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 06:40, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A question - troubles with renaming the article

Hi Oshaw,

I hope that I'm posting this question on the right place. We recently had a talk on List of Serbians about renaming the article and the popular vote is in favour, because it is creating a confusion and the list is sort of in conflict with List of people from Serbia. I would like to ask you to help me to rename (List of Serbians) to List of Serbs. Whenever I try to do it the standard way, an error keeps poping up. Should I make a requested move or something else?

Thank you, Mm.srb (talk) 22:59, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(by talk page stalker) Hi, @Mm.srb:! The name List of Serbs you mention above is an existing Wikipedia entry, so you cannot simply move another page (List of Serbians) to it. The destination is a redirect to List of people from Serbia. You would have to delete the redirect first – or have special privileges to make moves over redirects (which you apparently do not have). Anyway the links to the redirect should be carefully checked first and possibly fixed, to make sure they will point at correct contents after the move. --CiaPan (talk) 15:07, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Mm.srb! Thanks for the message regarding your request for assistance. From what I'm gathering from your message above, it sounds like there was a discussion regarding the moving of the page List of Serbians to the new title, List of Serbs? And it closed with a consensus to move the page to the new title? If this is correct, I can perform this move for you no problem. I just need to take a look at the discussion and confirm that it is indeed closed, and that the consensus is clearly in favor of the move. Once I've done this and agree with your findings, I'll perform the move (if not already done by someone else) and let you know when it's done. Stand by... ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 06:43, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Mm.srb - After looking at the discussion you mentioned, there was indeed a consensus to move the list to List of Serbs and I have performed the page moves just moments ago. I also made sure that there were no tangled or double redirects present after the move, and I updated the distinguish template on both pages to point to the other properly. Everything should be good to go! :-) If you spot any issues that I need to fix or take a look at, let me know and I'll be happy to do so. Thanks for the message, and I'm glad that I was able to help you out with the page move. :-D Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 06:59, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you again, you sir are quite a tsar (local slang for a great guy). Do text me if you ever come to Belgrade, you have a beer on me. cheers Mm.srb (talk) 13:19, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Mm.srb - I never say no to a beer that's given to me. ;-) You're welcome; always happy to lend a hand. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 13:46, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merging histories?

I created a draft for an article earlier this week but didn't move it into article space until the subject met the notability guidelines. Someone else ignored the draft and created the article. Can Draft:Jimmy_Schuldt be merged into the history of Jimmy Schuldt? Enigmamsg 04:28, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Enigmaman! Sure, I'll get that done and resolved for you right now. :-) Stand by... ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:00, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Enigmaman - All set. If you need any more history merges done for you, or if other admins are feeling shaky about doing one - you're welcome to let me know and point them in my direction. I've done many of them before, and I'm usually the one whose name comes up when a very complicated or messed up history merge is needed. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:06, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Enigmamsg 15:43, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Enigmaman - You bet ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 15:46, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Contributions/Ggf52

Can you keep an eye of the user? S/he keep adding "Nick Kibler" on Where Are Ü Now as same pattern as Special:Contributions/DC124. 183.171.114.103 (talk) 15:52, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Already blocked. 183.171.114.103 (talk) 16:41, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Cool deal; thanks for the message and the information nonetheless. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:06, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Article still inaccurate

Hi This is with reference to our conversation a few weeks back about the reversion of my edits on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_food#Nutrients.

I note that the page is still inaccurate and my original comments still stand. Ive read the original paper and it is misrepresented on this Wikipedia article. I say this as soneone with a PhD in biochemistry. Please advise how I should proceed?

Best Martin Martingoodson (talk) 07:31, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Martingoodson - Have you expressed your specific concerns to other editors in a discussion on the article's talk page? This is the perfect place to go in order to discuss your concerns and receive input and assistance from other editors about this. Be careful not to modify the article without citing reliable sources and adding references to those sources in-line with the content being changed. If other editors undo or revert your changes, follow Wikipedia's dispute resolution protocol and discuss it on the article's talk page. Be careful not to engage in edit warring or any other kind of disruptive editing, as this behavior will result in being blocked from editing and having the process becoming much more harder for you to argue your side and support updating, not easier. :-) Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Please refer to the pages and guides that I've linked you to here, as they will provide you with the information you need in order to fix any issues present while following Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. :-) Best of luck - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:13, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thankyou! Martingoodson (talk) 07:16, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Martingoodson - You bet. Happy editing! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 08:04, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:Abelmoschus Esculentus

Can I opt him out of media wiki mass message delivery? His talk page is getting full and hard to browse. --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 00:48, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thegooduser - This is something that he needs to request himself if he wishes to no longer receive them on his user talk page. I know and understand that he's retired, but even in these situations we don't touch or modify their user or user talk pages unless they specifically request it. It's out of respect for the user and their wishes. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:08, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Darul Huda Islamic University

Hi, can you check your edit on this article as you have reverted to a version that has slashed the content including removing many references that have been analysed by Huon in the AFD as being reliable sources, this version also contains unreferenced non-neutral assertions that are immediately disproved by the first reference. Also can you look at the contributions of the Malayali Woman on that page and her other contributions as they seem to be pursuing an anti - islamic school agenda (they identify as christian on their user page with no other info) by slashing articles, adding unproven allegations then taking them to AFD while creating an article promoting rival schools in the area so there could be a coi as well as the bias, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 13:27, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Atlantic306! The only edits I made to the article were here to add pending changes protection to the page, and here to add the {{pp-pc}} template (the top icon with the symbol notifying readers and editors of the current protection set). Were you perhaps referring to this edit by MalayaliWoman that reverted your changes (and the changes made by an IP user)? Sure, I'm happy to take a look into MalayaliWoman and his/her contributions and edits if you feel that there are concerns... :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 13:50, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Heres a cookie for being such a good editor and just a nice person in general! Thanks! JDawgGaming06 (talk) 16:15, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi JDawgGaming06! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for the cookie and for the very kind words. I appreciate it greatly, and it means a lot to me. :-) If you have any questions or need any help, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be happy to lend a hand. ;-) Enjoy your time here, and thanks for volunteering! :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 16:21, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ARBPIA extended confirmed protections

Hello Oshwah, can I request that for the articles you make extended-confirmed protected that you also create the edit-notice for that page with {{ARBPIA 1RR editnotice}}? The ones that I just saw protected that do not have the edit-notice are:

If this should be requested elsewhere sorry for bothering, but could you point me to where? Thank you very much, nableezy - 17:51, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nableezy - Good call; thank you. I'll add those right now... :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 17:53, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nableezy -  Done. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 17:58, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! nableezy - 18:00, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nableezy - You bet; thanks again for the reminder to throw those edit notices up. Much appreciated ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 18:01, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Doug Hall protection issue

I see you've blocked the underlying sock puppets and IPs; did you check out the SPI yet? Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 19:15, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Woshiyiweizhongguoren - I haven't... can you link me to it? Thanks :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:16, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Douglaseivindhallgerber. Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 19:17, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Woshiyiweizhongguoren - Ah, yes... I just finished responding to that SPI report and closed it. ;-) Let me know if you have any questions or if I can help with anything else. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:27, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Two things:
  1. Mind going through Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Anti political shills to see what's going on?
  2. Why is your talk page in the "Wikipedia humor" category, hehe?
Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 19:29, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Woshiyiweizhongguoren - Sure, I can take a look in a few moments... just need to get a few high priority Wikipedia tasks finished first, and I'll do that next. :-) Someone added a message above that included the {{Humor}} template, which adds this page to that humor category while it's transcluded. :-) Give me a few minutes and I'll take a look at that SPI. Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:35, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Woshiyiweizhongguoren - I've reviewed the SPI report. Please let me know if you have any questions about my comments or decisions made there, and I'll be happy to answer them. Best - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 20:02, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I need administrative assistance for an issue.

Here. I've reported this three times to AIV, once to SPI, and once to ANI. But everything's stale. Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 19:31, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Woshiyiweizhongguoren - I've responded to the ANI discussion and closed it. Both of the IP users you reported are stale; there's no need to block them unless they continue making disruptive edits and they're reported as it's happening. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:40, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't close yet, the named registered user was reported immediately after I saw it. Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 19:41, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Woshiyiweizhongguoren - I don't understand what you're referring to when you say, "the named registered user was reported immediately after [you] saw it". Can you please elaborate and clarify what this means for me? Thanks :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:57, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I saw the user in Recent Changes creating a talk page without a parent page. And I figured that the user might be the same person as the IPs. Understand now? Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 20:11, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Woshiyiweizhongguoren - Somewhat. I've updated the ANI with a response... ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:13, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
But it's kind of unusual for users to create meaningless talk pages where the corresponding main articles do not exist. This led me to believe that the user was the same person as the IPs. What do you think? Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 21:16, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Woshiyiweizhongguoren - That happens all the time by new user accounts and IP users (unfortunately). That behavior alone (creating meaningless talk pages) isn't enough to assert any kind of sock puppetry abuse between users, unless the words, text, content added, etc are very similar or exactly the same and made within a very short time span. Make sure that you find specific similarities between accounts that can be pointed to with diffs, explained easily and clearly, and aren't common events to see (or see two people doing similar or exactly the same) before you move forward and make any accusations. I think you need to stop what you're doing and read this SPI report guide before you consider making any more accusations or filing any more ANI or SPI reports. Please give it a read, and let me know if you have any questions. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:34, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why are so many of my edits redacted?

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 23:06, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Woshiyiweizhongguoren - Per Wikipedia's oversight policy and the Wikimedia Foundation's access to nonpublic personal data policy that I've signed and are legally bound to comply with, I cannot detail or discuss the circumstances or the reason behind the suppression of those edits. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:12, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. It doesn't have anything to do with my actions, does it? Hopefully I'm not in trouble or anything, am I? Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 23:14, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Woshiyiweizhongguoren - No. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:15, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

JS scripts

Oshwah, I’m not sure whether you have script admin privileges, but I figured I’d ask. I tried to edit my “common.js” page under this new account, but found out there was a new restriction and that now only administrators can edit such pages or create them at the request of the user. This is totally new to me. I’d usually ask Kevin, as he’s the one that shared the original code and we’ve worked together on Wikimedia Tools, but I know he’s busy as of late. If there’s any possibility, could you copy the script from my parent account to this one (common.js would need to be created)? I’m flying a bit blind without it. I suppose I could use X-Tools and other external things to achieve the same effect, but it would be a great boon to just see it as usual. Thanks in advance, whether or not you have the permission necessary. Symmachus Auxiliarus (talk) 00:38, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Symmachus Auxiliarus! I am an interface admin and I'll be happy to help you out. Even though you can't edit the common.js page on your parent account, you should still be able to view the page's source and copy the code from there. Regardless, I've gone ahead and copied the code from your parent account's common.js and pasted it into a new common.js page on your current account here. Are there any other pages that need to be copied? Let me know and I'll be happy to do it for you, if you find that you're not able to do it yourself using "view source". :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:09, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I just noticed when reloading the ANI page, and was happy to see some highlighting on there. And I tried to do so myself, but I wasn't able to create the page. I assumed that was the new norm. Also, since it's been a few years since I created the page on my original account, if there are any scripts that don't work anymore, or more effective ones, let me know. But I'm happy to have what's on there; thank you again for doing that for me. Symmachus Auxiliarus (talk) 02:22, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Symmachus Auxiliarus - You bet; always happy to lend a hand. ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:24, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well done, sir

Hi Oshwah! I just stopped by to say I thought this was an extremely classy gesture. It makes me feel all warm and fuzzy knowing that people are looking out for each other like that. Thank you and well done, sir! Leviv ich 04:57, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Levivich! Thanks for the message and the kind words! I appreciate it a lot. :-) You bet; that's what I'm here to do - have your back and make sure that what needs to be done to protect the privacy, identity, and other information of other editors is done. Cheers, and thanks again! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 04:59, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited

I wasn't finished editing my paragraph that I added so I would greatly appreciate if you wouldn't delete my edit because this is for a class project and I'm trying to add my references. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.116.9.159 (talk) 06:05, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, and thanks for the message. Please read the notices I left on your user talk page here, as they explain the issues with the content you've been trying to add to this article. Please do not continue to make these changes, as doing so is disruptive and will result in being blocked. I don't want to have to do that to you.... :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 06:07, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No subject

thank you for your response — Preceding unsigned comment added by Assadabdulrahman (talk • contribs) 08:30, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Assadabdulrahman - No problem! I'm glad that I was able to assist you with your issue, and that everything is taken care of. :-) Happy editing! ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 08:33, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Unspecified source/license for File

Hi Oshwah

Just following up on the Original question I posed...

I'm having a problem understanding what goes where on Wiki...

In answer to your question about the "pic" - Mr Artus says that the pic is his but was originally taken by a professional photographer...

He got the original photographer to send an email to your Team that deals with photo copyrights as asked, and that's about as far as I have got...

If it helps the pic is available for general use without any restrictions...

Does that answer your question ?

I would really like to get this finished by the addition of the pic as everything else is pretty much there now...

I guess what I am asking is what kind of tag do I need to use with the pic if it is for "general use" and where do I put that tag ??

Navigating Wiki in some places or finding the right place I do find difficult !

Hoping you can help...or point me in the right direction would be greatly appreciated !

many thanks,

Andy

AndycBtn (talk) 08:45, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, AndycBtn! I'm sorry to hear that you're still having some issues and confusion with the image and its license. So long as the owner of the image followed the directions and contacted the appropriate team to verify ownership, and allow Wikipedia to use it within the licenses we require, he/she should hear back with next steps or any questions they'll need to answer. If not response is received within the next few days, send a follow-up message and ask for additional assistance.
Since you're new to Wikipedia, I highly recommend that you go through and complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial in the meantime and while you're awaiting a response from the image submission team. :-) It will provide you with many helpful walkthroughs, guides, interactive lessons, and other information that will be very helpful to you. Most users who do this and complete the tutorial tell me later that it was significantly helpful to them and saved them hours of time and frustration they would've experienced otherwise.
Please let me know if I can answer any more questions that you may have. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 12:21, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Neuronus IBRO&IRUN Neuroscience Forum

Hi, you deleted my edition of Neuronus IBRO & IRUN Neuroscience Forum. I don't understand what kind of source do you need? I am one of the organizators of the conference and you can check the informations you need on our website: http://neuronusforum.pl/. Please change it as soon as it's possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akrzyw (talk • contribs) 13:06, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Akrzyw - There are a few issues with the edits you made to this article. First of all, your edits did not cite any sources that were considered reliable. This is absolutely needed when adding or updating content on Wikipedia that isn't common knowledge to most readers. Another issue is regarding your connection to the article subject. The community will typically not accept changes made to articles from editors who show a clear conflict of interest with the article subject like this. You should not be making any edits or changes to articles where this is a problem, and for many reasons - one of which being that it compromises the aritcle's content and its neutrality, since editors who modify articles in these conflict-areas will add content that reflect a viewpoint that is not neutral, which degrades the overall quality of the article as a whole. Please consider participating in other areas that interest you, but where this is not an issue. Please let me know if you have any questions, and I'll be happy to answer them. Best regards - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:50, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Unspecified source/license for File

Hi Oshwah...

Thanks for getting back so soon...

Re: "So long as the owner of the image followed the directions and contacted the appropriate team to verify ownership, and allow Wikipedia to use it within the licenses we require, he/she should hear back with next steps or any questions they'll need to answer. If not response is received within the next few days, send a follow-up message and ask for additional assistance."

Mr Artus emailed the Photographer & got them to email the "Copyrights team" (I Guess its that team)...I think you call them OTRS ??

We heard back from the Photographer saying that they had done their bit...but Mr Artus has heard nothing since & the photo was uploaded on 28.12.18 !!

However, from my notifications I did get messages advising that I needed to take action to do this, that & the other...unfortunately, I cannot make head or tail or what is being asked of me !!

This is where we are at now...

Also...the following advice/info is on the "photo/pic" page and I am not sure what to do next...

Can you have a look at it please & tell me exactly what I need to do next ?

Also thank you for suggesting to have a read of the "new user tutorial"...but at the moment I have not got time to run through all of that to get to the info I need !

Can you not just tell me what I need to do next to get this finished ? The page is now only waiting on 1 pic !!

This is the advice/info on the "photo/pic" page : __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

An email containing details of the permission for this file has been sent in accordance with OTRS. Note to uploaders: 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.

Note to OTRS volunteers: If the email contains sufficient confirmation of the validity of the license, please replace this template with xxxxxxxxxx and consider moving to Commons. Otherwise, nominate the file for deletion or delete it.

Please be aware that there is currently a 49-day backlog processing messages sent to the permissions-en queue. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Permission (Reusing this file) Evidence: The license agreement will be forwarded to OTRS shortly.

Is the above causing the problem ?? If so we have already got the photographer to email Wiki's OTRS team direct...and not heard anything since !!

Many thanks in advance for your help...

Best,

Andy

AndycBtn (talk) 14:50, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AndycBtn - It sounds like things are in progress and you're waiting on a response from OTRS. This team receives numerous emails, messages, and inquiries every day. Because of this, it may take some time before they'll be able to get to your message and respond. Be patient; someone will get back to you there. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:52, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you and can you permenate protect the page

Hi Thanks for the advice and warning and will be careful as well could you protect Dipika Kakar's page for permanent because I have seen a lot of disruptive edits made by her haters post Bigg Boss. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.137.123.231 (talk) 15:47, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! Due to the edit warring and content dispute that's currently ongoing, I've applied semi-protection to the article for four days. Please discuss the dispute on the article's talk page and work things out with the other editors involved. Follow Wikipedia's dispute resolution protocol and things should work out just fine. :-) Permanent protection at this time wouldn't be appropriate, but the article is temporarily protected in order to stop the disruption and edit warring. Please discuss the matter and keep yourself outta trouble! ;-) I hope you have a great rest of your day, and I wish you happy editing and that the dispute comes to a peaceful and fast resolution and closure. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:59, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sami Yusuf

Fair enough that you lowered the protection of Sami Yusuf, but right after you did it this guy popped out again and resumed his pov-pushing/edit warring [1]. 80% of his edits have been on that page [2]. --HistoryofIran (talk) 16:22, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi HistoryofIran! Thanks for the heads up. That account you mentioned has now been blocked. ;-) Please let me know if I can be of assistance with anything else, or if you run into any more disruptive edits on the article. I'll be more than happy to take a look and help where necessary. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:04, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OK

"I suppose what bothers me the most is I've been here a long time and I would say at least 98% of my actions are beyond reproach, yet I receive only negative feedback if I ever make a mistake."

I just got back and read the thread. It doesn't look like there's anything for me to do now since people have decided they want an ArbCom case. What would you have me do? I edit and check Wikipedia a few times a day. Enigmamsg 18:27, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Enigmaman, and welcome back. *Sigh*... I know... this ANI discussion and ArbCom case is probably quite overwhelming to you right now. I'm truly and sincerely sorry; I didn't participate and respond to the ANI or file the ArbCom case request in order to be at the center of attention regarding the issues or to be the one to point fingers directly at you. I felt that I was a fair and neutral party when it came to filing the request and that I'd have the best capacity and ability to fairly summarize the issue in the statement. You're of course welcome to respond to the ANI, but I honestly think that an ArbCom request is inevitable given the issues that others have uncovered. Please know that my user talk page is always open to you, and you are welcome to message me here any time you need or want to. My door is always open... ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 18:32, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I just don't know what people want me to do. I could type a long paragraph on AN/I but they've made up their minds already. Should I just resign? I've never participated in an ArbCom case (I don't even remember there being a past AN/I case about me. If there was one, it's been many years), so I don't feel that appearing in front of the high court is a productive use of my time or energy. Enigmamsg 18:36, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
And just to follow up, I don't know what the redacted bit is or whatever, but I want to be clear that I didn't OUT anyone or ask anyone to out themselves. I made a bad block and then lifted it when I was asked to do so. Enigmamsg 18:49, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) Go to the case and just calmly explain your side of the story - why you performed the admin actions you did, citing policy when necessary. Nobody's in a mad rush and "I think we need a case" does not mean "He's a rogue admin - desysop him now!" Unfortunately, being able to explain your actions in detail is a core part of being an admin; I don't like being dragged to ANI and asked to explain myself, but it happens, and it's sometimes necessary. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:53, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Enigmaman - As Ritchie333 said above, I think that your first course of action should be to add a statement to the ArbCom request and explain your side of the issue. Either way, you'll want to participate and do this. As Ritchie333 also said above, an ArbCom case request being accepted doesn't automatically mean that you're on the bad side of things; it simply means that an examination and a look into things is warranted. Many times, ArbCom does not enact remedies in the manner that they were "predicted" to enact. If you look at the recent ArbCom case involving GiantSnowman here, the solution was to place restrictions on his use of administrator tools to make sure that he slows down and does the right thing. A case doesn't mean that your admin tools are doomed for removal. Either way things happen on the ArbCom, you'll learn and you'll grow from this. You may not agree right now, but you absolutely will. Let me know what your thoughts are, and if I can be of any help or assistance. I'm happy to mentor and give input and thoughts if you find them to be helpful. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:01, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If it makes you feel better, Enigmaman, here is an ANI thread with a bunch of people kicking the absolute crap out of me. However, I would like to think my conciliatory responses, addressing concerns and acknowledging faults, were a key factor in the thread closing with no action. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've had my ass kicked before many times in the past and for the mistakes I've made on Wikipedia, too. Ritchie333 might have even helped with the kicking of my ass. :-P ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:15, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose what bothers me the most is I've been here a long time and I would say at least 98% of my actions/edits are beyond reproach, yet I receive only negative feedback if I ever make a mistake. Like I said, I'm not perfect and I do my best and it bothers me that this is what I get in return. It's as if I've never done anything positive, judging by the comments. I've made quite a lot of edits and admin actions in the last 10 years and if people did the same digging on other people, they could also find edits/actions they find to be wrong. Enigmamsg 20:39, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, that's life as an admin. However, I don't imagine anyone will be interested in anything that's over a year old, unless it's part of a recurring pattern. Neverthless, I (and several other admins) should not have to explain why casting aspersions about somebody's mental state in a deletion summary is not acceptable admin behaviour. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:48, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you entirely. Enigmamsg 20:52, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I decided to check and the one they're making the biggest issue out of is in fact over a year old and I was asked to explain it. I don't think that's reasonable. Enigmamsg 03:04, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Enigmaman - As Ritchie333 said above, the one-sided feedback that you're describing is part of the admin's curse that comes bounded with the tools and user rights. If you look on my user talk page edit history, it gets trashed and trolled all the time by LTA users and vandals that I've warned and reverted. On top of this, I get trolled, threatened, called really awful and disgusting names, and LTA users try to doxx my personal identity and information almost daily (though their "doxxings" and "outing" of my "personal information" have never been correct). On top of this, when an admin makes a mistake that's noticed by others or perhaps the community, things certainly do blow up in your face about it sometimes - especially if the mistake involves an area, subject matter, or situation that the community gets easily upset over due to past mistakes that come to mind. I've made mistakes as an admin many times in the past; Ritchie333 can certainly vouch for that. ;-) And yes, most of the comments are heated and they're not pretty. What's most important in these situations is not the fact that you made a mistake in the first place, but how you respond, take ownership, handle, fix, resolve, and own up to and apologize for them afterwards. Nobody is perfect; I certainly am far far from it. We don't expect perfection... that would be impossible and just out-right silly to do. It's how you conduct yourself, respond to such mistakes when they're pointed out to you, and how you serve the community that ultimately matters in these situations. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:20, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
And as also said above, admins should behave and set the example for others with their conduct, and never resort to incivility and personal attacks - especially in blocks and admin actions. While there are some situations that many will find understandable, the issues regarding incivility and personal attacks aren't one of them. It's not how admins should ever behave, and you damn well know better than that. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:24, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your statement

I just skimmed it. "recently indefinitely blocking a user account that last edited in 2006 with an unclear reason". You linked to a page protection. The user was never blocked. All I did there was reduce protection from full to semi and remove the bit from the userpage about being an admin as it is my understanding that userpages should not say administrator if the user is not actually an admin. So I don't see what your complaint is, but I'm happy to discuss it. Enigmamsg 19:00, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Enigmaman - Okay, I'll take a look at that right now. I copied that as an example from the ANI, so whatever link was provided is what I used in the statement. Thank you for letting me know about this; I will resolve this right now. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:02, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't even protect the page. I simply lowered protection from 'indefinite full' to 'indefinite semi'. I do not see what the issue is. Enigmamsg 19:09, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Enigmaman - Ah! So that's what "no reason for this" meant. That makes sense; I'll remove it from my statement. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I lowered protection since there was no reason for full protection in the first place. One could argue the page shouldn't be protected at all, but I made it semi protection as a compromise. No one ever said anything to me about that in the first place and that was quite a while ago, and the same applies to the vast majority of the rest of what you raised. Enigmamsg 19:18, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Enigmaman - If that's the case, you'll definitely want to explain this in your ArbCom statement. This will help others (including the committee) to see your side and why you took the actions listed. Let me know if you need help with doing this, and I'll be happy to do so. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:20, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I made a statement there since you asked for me to do so but I again don't know what to say. I can't justify every admin action I've made in my 10 years as admin. When I've been asked to explain something, I believe I've done a pretty good job responding to any issues or questions on my talk page. Anyone can verify this by reviewing my talk history. It's all there and in my archives. I'm not perfect and I'm sure I've made multiple mistakes in my time here, but I'm at a loss for words now. Enigmamsg 19:31, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Enigmaman - It's not about verifying every single admin action you've ever made. It can be as simple as responding to my statement and explaining the blocks and admin actions I listed and why you made them. If you had legit reasons for those actions, say so and explain. Your statement is to give ArbCom your side of the story and respond to concerns and examples given there. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:51, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kalpana Mohan Page

Thank you for your help. I had written Bbb23 & waiting for the response. I understand it is about perception but it is possible to revert changes once it is approved by an admin, no time frame to collapse & again it gets revert by another admin. The changes which were reverted were part of previous editions too including the hyperlink leading to the movie pages. so suddenly what went wrong with it? It is beyond logic. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yashkkaryan (talk • contribs) 20:10, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yashkkaryan - This is something that you should follow up with Bbb23 about, as he's directly involved with the article and the edits there (based off the recent edits and contributions there). He'll be more knowledgeable and able to answer your questions and provide assistance than I will be. Please keep a discussion with him; if you need help nonetheless, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll see what I can do. I'm just trying to point you in the best direction so that you receive the best level of help as possible. Talking to Bbb23 directly will provide you with this. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:31, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tacko Fall

This might be worth pending changes protection given that it seems all the recent edits are vandalism and some of it remained unfixed for a while. See here where I fixed something that had stuck in the article because no one noticed. Enigmamsg 20:18, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Enigmaman -  Done. I've applied pending changes protection to the article for one month. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:28, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:EEng

First of all I would like EEng to know, that with this message I am writing, I am not here to point fingers at EEng, and that I treat EEng with all my respect. The main concern I am addressing in this message, is EEng's descriptions of Donald Trump in his userpage, there are several pictures and descriptions of Donald Trump on his userpage, that I found very offensive, and could be too with other users, now I am not here to cut down EEng or anything, and I actually do appreciate the funny humor on EEng's pages, but I think there are some concerns with the Donald Trump pictures and captions, I know EEng means no harm at all, but I think those pictures and descriptions of Trump have gone 'too far'. This is not meant to discourage EEng from editing, and is not a reflect on EEng's Personality. EEng is an awesome and funny user. Oshwah what do you think should be done? --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 23:39, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lets wait for a response from EEng here, and hear what he has to say about your concerns. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:54, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thegooduser, we had a short discussion on this recently [3] but I still don't know what specifically you find offensive, or why. EEng 01:42, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
EEng (talk · contribs) It was mainly the photo descriptions that I found offensive. --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 02:08, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There are hundreds of images on the page. You need to be be specific. EEng 02:21, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's the ones you showed in the conversation in your talk page, just the one with that says "Shithole in open position" and "ASL" with the finger and the picture of an animal that says "When the Virtual Reality projector is turned off" Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 02:25, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well, since Donald Trump is even more repulsive on the inside than on the outside, introduced the word shithole into the vocabulary of national political discourse, and gives a full-on fuck-you to everything decent and humane in this world, I think they're quite tame, actually. See Carnivalesque (not very good, but gives a sense of what I'm going for). EEng 03:12, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2fa

Does 2fa work by email? --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 23:57, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thegooduser - See this information on the meta 2FA page. It works by having you install a TOTP client and connect it to your 2FA authentication using a QR code. Then it will start generating digits that you'll enter when you log into Wikipedia. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:01, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ygm

check ur email..... --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 00:03, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10-4. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:24, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Is my email screwed up, or did you just not reply yet, having problems with my shitty computer and internet connection. --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 02:33, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I received no email from you. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:36, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AgentKenyZ

I might be a little hasty, but is this a u5?--Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 02:38, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say yes. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:37, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:Thetruchairman

Hello, I reverted the above user's edits here, here, here and here for adding unsourced content. The user then posted this message on my talk page, calling himself 'a Senior DeMolay, Past Master Councillor for DeMolay, a DeMolay Masonic sponsor, a Founder of several new DeMolay Chapters within my jurisdiction, a Master Mason of 18 years, and a Brother of the advanced Masonic Orders'. On his user page he claims to hold dozens upon dozens of obscure 'degrees', 'certificates and certifications' and memberships of organisations. On his talk page he signs his 'welcome' message as 'Raleigh, the Honourable, Th.D, OSF'. Would you consider this user to be a troll? JACKINTHEBOX • TALK 12:18, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JackintheBox! Either way, this user is causing disruption by adding unfererenced content to articles. I'd continue to remove such edits and leave escalating warnings and notices on the users's talk page. If the problematic edits continue to occur despite the warnings, let me know or report the user to AIV or ANI. One way or another, we'll find out if the user is a troll for sure or not depending on how the user behaves and how he/she responds to the warnings and notices. ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 13:56, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:I Hate WikiPeadia new username

The above user (whom you blocked for not meeting username policy) seems to want to change their username to '22whatwhy22'. [4] JACKINTHEBOX • TALK 12:23, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JackintheBox! Thanks for letting me know about the user's unblock request that includes a new username to rename the account to. It looks like it's being handled perfectly by the admins who have made comments underneath the unblock request. They're asking the user, who created an account with the username "I Hate WikiPeadia", what his/her intentions are and where he/she plans to contribute to on Wikipedia, and expressed concerns that the user isn't here to contribute positively to the project given the username. Exactly how I would've handled it. ;-) I'll leave the request in their very capable hands. Thanks again for the message and the heads up; I appreciate it a lot. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 14:01, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ashley Artus

Hi Oshwah. This article was previously deleted per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashley Artus. Since the deleting admin MelanieN is away on vacation, I thought I ask you about because (1) you're an admin and (2) you edited the article to cleanup a copyvio shortly after it was recreated. Is this eligible for WP:G4? I'm just asking before I do a little cleanup on the article's talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:47, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Marchjuly! I just took a look at the deleted revision following the closure of the AFD, and the current article text expands upon the article subject significantly compared to the previous one. Hence, I would say that the article is not eligible for G4 and should be discussed again in another AFD nomination if one is deemed to be necessary. Please let me know if you have any questions or if I can help you with anything else. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 13:51, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for checking. I was just asking because of WP:MCQ#Re: File:Ashley Artus Wiki Profile pic.jpg and noticed the article had been previously deleted after checking the talk page to see if there was some discussion about adding an image to the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:10, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Contributions/2607:fb90:64ea:d696:2049:7450:1f37:2a5a

Thanks for your replies above! The above IP manifestly copied the entire page of https://www.nps.gov/subjects/uspp/jurisdiction-and-authority.htm in this edit to the History section of United States Park Police. They then undid my reversion of that edit, and proceeded to add more content elsewhere in the article, claiming to have 'Added properly sourced content' while just adding bare URLs to the article without using the 'Cite web' template, despite this exchange on my talk page. Should their edits to the article be reverted? JACKINTHEBOX • TALK 14:33, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

They've also copied the entire page of https://www.nps.gov/subjects/uspp/horse-mounted-unit.htm in their latest edit. JACKINTHEBOX • TALK 14:42, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Protecting Wikipedia from political agendas

Hi, I am sorry for disturbing you, but I am caught in a dispute with an editor on a page. Could you, or another administrator colleague of yours come and make a final decision? This is the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_for_Freedom. I believe this editor has an agenda, which can be seen if you check his history, and this is also supported by radical changes he keeps making to the page linked above. In the edit history of the page you can find that, several attempts have been made by using references that were clearly not suited and almost blatant vandalism to support the version they would like to see. Then they admit those references are not correct and try to find others, just to support their already established and unchangeable opinions. Now, after failing and admitting that the first 4 references were not suitable, now they refer to a article which cites a study that does not exist and also refer to a study in dutch where I cannot find a place that supports their claims. I keep asking them, please explain how this supports your edits, and they just keep repeating "reliable sources", "stop editing", "stop removing reliable sources", "find sources that disprove our claims" (without them proving the claim themselves). The last one is especially worrisome since it implies that the defendant is guilty until proven innocent, and it sets a bad example to other editors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hasan342 (talk • contribs) 20:13, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Again about the same issue

Another user named Levivich has started vandalizing. I checked his talk page and it filled with warnings for disruptive edits. This user is far from being bipartisan and openly attacks conservative pages... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hasan342 (talk • contribs) 20:27, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sami Yusuf

Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sami_Yusuf

Dear Oshwah,

As we contacted before, two persons trying to vandalising and damage the page. They are using their nationality racism to change article. They try to add "Iranian" to his nationality and a FAKE name for him on Sami Yusuf page which is absolutely wrong.

It is patently false to call Mr Yusuf "British-Iranian" as he does not hold Iranian citizenship/dual nationality and, for the purpose of clarification he is ethnically Azeri (not Iranian). He only holds British Citizenship based on all following important sources. Also here is the link confirming this in a 2018 Q&A session with Mr Yusuf: https://twitter.com/samiyusuf/status/960207745126453248

Kindly check following links:

Sami Yusuf Biography: https://samiyusufofficial.com/about-sami-yusuf/

Other sources:

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2006/apr/27/1?INTCMP=SRCH https://www.thenational.ae/arts-culture/music/sami-yusuf-if-one-has-a-strong-spiritual-discipline-it-lessens-the-burden-1.813322 https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04gnhvx https://www.wfp.org/news/news-release/sami-yusuf-dedicates-new-song-typhoon-survivors-philippines http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1220754,00.html

And many many other sources that I can provide.

We can send you Mr Yusuf’s passport copy in case the following link is not sufficient: https://twitter.com/samiyusuf/status/960210578043293696

Here are the two accounts that making constant changes for this page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Skywatcher68&action=edit&redlink=1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:HistoryofIran

Could you please disable access these people to this page? or protect the page to not making these changes? Honestly I surprised you block my account instead!

We would sincerely appreciate your prompt action.

Best regards,

Mjahangir 21:41, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Oshwah&oldid=892205485"