User:Oshwah/TalkPageArchives/2015-10

You are currently viewing an archive of Oshwah's user talk page from October 2015. Please do not modify this page.

These discussions are no longer active and were moved here for historical and record-keeping purposes. If you need to respond to a discussion from here, please create a new discussion on my user talk page and with a link to the archived discussion here so I can easily follow, and we'll be able to pick up where we left off no problem.

Were you trying to send me a message? No worries. Just click here to go the correct page.

You seem to have mistakenly reverted all my edits

Dear Oshwah,

It seems to me that you mistakenly reverted all my edits (or at least many of them) because I "recently removed some content from Negative Utilitarianism ... without explaining why."

I agree using edit summary is good in the future when deleting content. The reason I haven't is (a) that I didn't know that function existed, and (b) the page has been under construction from nothing so there has been too many edits to write summaries for. Still, I agree substantial deletions of others' content warrant summaries.

Regarding the deletion you refer to: The content that I deleted already exist in the intro of section https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_Utilitarianism#Versions_of_negative_utilitarianism in a more polished form that fits better with the rest of the text. So the deleted part is redundant.

By the way, I clicked "undo" on your reversion and tried to write an edit summary of why, but I clicked return too soon and I accidentally just undid it without an edit summary. Sorry about that; the edit summary would have been essentially what is in this message.

Best regards

Ekonap (talk) 10:22, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Ekonap. Thanks for leaving me a message and explaining. Go ahead and revert what I restored. If you need me to do this for you, just let me know and I'll be happy to do so. Again, thank you for taking the time to leave me a message. Happy editing :-) ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:30, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

oshwah who are you??? the authorities???

im sorry about the weasels but i checked the internet for cross breeds and found polecat ferret cross breed!

i like weasels

okay at the start i was fooling around but later i put contructive text

Thee Physical

Hi, User:Oshwah. Can you explain why you think my edit is unconstructive? I believe adding Category:2011 albums and Category:Lovepump United albums is appropriate. Additionally, Category:Electronic music and Category:Electronic albums should be removed because Category:Electronic albums by American artists is a subcategory of them. 153.173.15.182 (talk) 10:38, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, talk. Please accept my apologies for the mistake. Feel free to restore what I reverted. ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:48, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Dido correction

An edit was deleted in which the Aeneid was referenced as an "epic poem", and there was a misunderstanding. An epic refers to a long narrative poem, not my opinion on the quality of the poem.

Sorry for the misunderstanding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sryoshida (talk • contribs) 17:10, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Sryoshida - no need to apologize. If anything, the apology should be coming from me, not you. You nailed it; I thought "epic" was referring to the opinionated use of the word, not the manner in which you were trying to use it. Please feel free to restore what I reverted. Thank you for taking the time to message me and let me know about this. It's a pleasure to meet you, and happy editing :-) ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:47, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

More vandalism at Larry Hernandez

User:2607:FB90:686:5BD6:4FC5:4822:9B2C:98A4 has been removing content on the Larry Hernandez page again after you warned them. (Given that this is the ONLY page they edit, well, that's suspicious) I reverted it but you're better equipped to handle the user/problem than I am. 68.156.95.34 (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

It looks like this IP has stopped making edits. Thanks for keeping an eye out and for reporting concerns :-) ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:28, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Someone with the suspiciously similar name of User:2607:FB90:602:1FF5:F587:372C:1395:2058 has made an edit to the same page (and no other activity anywhere), but this edit was seemingly benign so I let it slide. 68.156.95.34 (talk) 03:01, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry

I am very sorry about what I done can you forgive me pretty please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamaldestroyer (talk • contribs) 09:35, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

AN/I

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Specifically, User:Oswah. Amaury (talk) 13:27, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

You came within a hair's breadth of being blocked for violating 3RR on Fairlight CMI. I have removed the dead links and copyvio YouTube link you kept re-inserting, and started to clean up the article using Mark Vail's Vintage Synthesisers, which I know has come under criticism for being not as factually spot-on as more recent sources in a few places, but it's a step in the right direction. Please be more careful in future. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:03, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Ritchie333. I really appreciate you for leaving me this message. The ANI discussion closed before I had a chance to update it again, and I thought I'd be beating a dead horse by re-opening it when it's clear that pretty much everyone has moved on. I got home later that day, sat down, and went over that whole situation from the start. Those links should not have been added back to the article after they were removed, and my reversions to that article should not have happened. The fact that the user has been blocked as a sock, quite frankly, is irrelevant. The removal was good; I did not pay close enough attention to what the edit was trying to accomplish and I let the edit summaries that the user wrote lead me to think that he was a troll. This is why I thought that what I was doing was the right thing. The situation shouldn't have happened, and this a good example of a principle that I've learned that I need to pay closer attention to: Bad or inappropriate edit summaries do not mean that the edit itself, is a bad one. - this is what had inadvertently allowed the situation to be created in the first place, and I will take this into account and pay more closer attention next time. A measure of true maturity and true experience is the ability to re-evaluate your actions, understand what caused things to go wrong, and admit mistakes when they are made and apologize if it's needed. I hope that my response to you has shown this. Please do not hesitate to reach out to me again, or respond if you have any more questions or concerns. It's a pleasure to finally meet you formally, and I'm sure that we'll run into each other again soon - have a great rest of your day, Ritchie333 :-) ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:34, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

SuggestBot

Per discussion. I don't know if it will work if I put it here, you might have to re-insert it so it sees it coming from you; shouldn't take long for recommendations to appear:

HTH,

Samsara 17:36, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Samsara and Oshwah, apologies for not noticing this sooner! Unfortunately, SuggestBot ignored your request because we require the owner of the talk page to have made the edit. It's a precaution against abuse, as the suggestions can be seeded with articles that might not reflect a user's interests. Perhaps the easiest way to get suggestions is to stop by the Teahouse's suggestions page, click the "Get suggestions" button, and follow the instructions. Get in touch if there are questions, I'll do my best to help out. Cheers, Nettrom (talk) 15:02, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Awesome RC patrol work. Sorry I missed your RfA. I'm actually disappointed you didn't get the mop. You really should be an admin IMO. Keep up the good work. Ϫ 05:27, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, OlEnglish. I want to thank you for taking the time to create this barnstar for me and for the kind words. I appreciate it very much. My RfA didn't go exactly as planned, but not to worry! I just need to create and expand some articles and content, and I'll just run again next year when I feel ready to do so. I'll see you out there; until we meet again :-) ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:45, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

thanks

appreciate it oswald Gcwilliams.661 (talk) 23:39, 7 October 2015 (UTC)gcwilliams.661

hey

Heyman123fk (talk) 23:41, 7 October 2015 (UTC) vandals rule from russia with love

Help delete Sia Boss page

I created the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sia_Boss but don't know how to delete it Can you please help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by McJill (talk • contribs) 02:27, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, McJill. This article isn't eligible for deletion under Wikipedia's Speedy Deletion (with the exception of G7) or Proposed Deletion guidelines. Why do you want this article deleted? ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:33, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Because i do not want to be on wikipediaMcJill (talk) 02:42, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

It's my page and I do not want to be on wikipedia at the moment. Any help? McJill (talk) 02:44, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

McJill - If you no longer wish to use your account to contribute to Wikipedia, all you need to do is simply log out and stop using the account. Are there any specific concerns that you have regarding your account? ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:47, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Not my account but the page i and my team created about myselp - I wish to have all off wikipedia and wikimedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sia_Boss , https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sia_Boss.png , https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sia_wikipedia.png and https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sia_in_2012.png Any help? McJill (talk) 02:50, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

McJill - I think that the best thing to do in this situation is to email the Wikipedia Volunteer Response Team at info-en-o@wikimedia.org - they're better equipped to handle your situation and your request than I am. Just describe the situation as you did here: you created this article about yourself, and you want it deleted. They will probably need to verify a few things, but this is best direction to go regarding your request and getting proper assistance. Please let me know if you have any more questions or if you need anything else. Best of luck :-) ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:02, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Well I have done as instructed thank you. waiting to hear from them next. How long is the wait? McJill (talk) 03:41, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi again, McJill. I'm honestly not sure. It obviously depends on the volunteers' workload, the number of issues or tickets that are currently in line, server up-time, many things. I'd imagine that you'll receive a response within 48 hours at the longest, although some situations can cause responses to take longer. ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:54, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

my page

I would like to know why my page is going to be removed? I have been asking for help on wiki but nobody is available to help.. I need to know how I can make a description and add my albums, etc.? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DLi723 (talk • contribs) 07:01, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, DLi723 - Welcome to Wikipedia! The reason that your article was listed for Speedy Deletion is due to this criteria (A7). Under this criteria, articles that are about people, bands, companies, websites, or other subjects that do not explain why the article's subject is important or significant can be nominated. A good page that will help you with creating and expanding your first article is Wikipedia: Your First Article. It's a perfect place for you to look at, and it will provide you will the necessary guidelines regarding the creation of an article. Please let me know if you have any more question. I'll be happy to answer them and assist you further. I may be misreading your message, but it appears that the article that you may be personally involved with the article that you're trying to create (maybe you're a member of the band or somehow personally involved with the band?) - If I am correct, then I highly recommend that you review Wikipedia's behavioral guideline on conflict of interest. Again, welcome to Wikipedia. I hope you enjoy your stay, take time to review our fundamental principals and learn how Wikipedia works, make contributions, and decide to become a long-term contributor here :-) ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:57, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Dariyapur, Nalanda

I want to delete because I have created this page. I saw so many unwanted people has updated this page with wrong information. If wiki allow to edit this page to anyone!! probably anyone can write anything anywhere. Wiki is not allowing me to undo changes!! WHY???

Just delete this page. I don't want to say anything more now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avinash.sir (talk • contribs) 07:06, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Avinash.sir - instead of deleting, let me help you restore the article to a correct version. What exactly is incorrect about the article? Can you explain so that I can provide assistance? ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:09, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Neighborcity.com

I look to Wikipedia for real definitions. Neighborcity is bogas in my opinion. I suggest you look at the compliants against this company and evaluate or add a link to the sites with the complaints. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.218.247.250 (talk) 07:12, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello Shwarma, I was simply trying to show the true colors of our school. That we have a lot of Rest Ram and valency quizzes. If you deem this useless information, I will tell you something very important. we are located in a country that no one knows. So you best believe me when I tell you I have powers out of this world. Thank you for you help and I hope that you take interest into my fantastic points.

Buh Bye :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.36.220.171 (talk) 09:53, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

I tried to make it more... better?

Oshwah, I had edited the said page because it would be better known in this case to be related to a ten year old playing an M rated game. Is there any other way to put it? I meant to contribute to wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.232.25.12 (talk) 10:50, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Oswah

the article claims he was born in St Petersburg and lived there until 11 -if that does not make Cantor Russian nothing else will- he was NOT German despite what that Great Beacon (?) of pop-knowledge Encyclopedia Britannica claims - the impact his Russian-ness had in having him and his work accepted by the German school is a direct cause of his later mental health issues - to deny that is fallacy and sweeps over perhaps the MOST critical aspect of his life - I do not need any source - YOU are my source - to claim he was German is wrong - period- I am a degreed Historian and Mathematician and bristle when I see such ignorant bias to claim him for Germany - he is / was and will always be Russian so call it like it is - not as the historical revisionist want to claim it - had he been any less successful I would most certainly expect German to disown him now as they did then - he is ONLY claimed by Germany because of the enormity of his work and impact it had on modern mathematics - something I in fact disagree with but get it right and PLEASE leave my CORRECT correction ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.92.101.123 (talk) 12:38, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Edgar Snyder & Associates page

Hi Oshwah,

How are you? I hope well. Let me first honestly disclose that I work for the Pittsburgh area law firm, Edgar Snyder & Associates. We have noticed that you previously helped to edit Edgar Snyder's personal wikipedia page, and you have an impressive personal user page.

We believe that the firm warrants its own organization page, as the firm has arguably become as prominent in the Pittsburgh community as Edgar himself. However, we also know that Wikipedia has strict policies against marketing, advertising, puffery, etc while creating pages. This is not something we are seeking -- we are simply seeking an objective page about the firm, the firms' partners and attorneys, practice areas, the firm's involvement, etc.

I have come to you to ask your advice on how to best achieve this. Is it worth me attempting to write a page that meets Wikipedia's guidelines using reliable, third-party sources? Or, do you think we would be more successful to list it as a request, providing sources? Or, are you able to help in any way? I sincerely appreciate any guidance or advice you are able to give -- if you are able/allowed to give any.

Many, many thanks, Oshwah!Mmansmann (talk) 13:00, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Profuse apologies

I'm so sorry, I intend to block this vandal whose edit you reverted and must have click on your username instead. I have of course unblocked you, my sincere apologies. WJBscribe (talk) 13:12, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Aww... That means I have a block log now :-( .... totally joking! No problem! Thanks for the heads up. It's a pleasure to meet you, WJBscribe! Until our paths cross again :-) ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:28, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

With that being said, having a vandal block recently means we have to kick you from ACC. ;-) JK JK. Wear your block with pride, like I do. I've got a block that usually disqualifies me access to ACC entirely. :p—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 14:03, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

HA! Boy am I feeling the love today... What's next? A site ban accidentally imposed on me? :-P ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:17, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

I think more like an accidental sock accusation, a false positive CU result and an indef sock notice. :p—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 15:57, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps I could accidentally give you the autopatrolled right? HighInBC 16:05, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

HighInBC - You're more than welcome to do that. I'm starting the process of consistently performing article creation; it'll eliminate the unnecessary need for others to patrol those pages. I'll leave that up to your judgment (unless you were totally joking, then I'm a bone head and the joke's on me - LOL) ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:03, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

 Done Please take care that the articles are up to standards. Based on what you have created so far I don't think this will be a problem. HighInBC 17:14, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Cool deal. That won't be a problem; I CSD, PROD, and try and keep as active in AFD as I can. Article creation is a lot of work, but creating articles that adhere to policy and are up to par is easy to do. Thanks, HighInBC. ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:30, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

South Leicester RUFC

I was puzzled by the whereabouts of various teams in SSE NATIONAL LEAGUE DIVISION TWO NORTH, among them South Leicester. I immediately noticed that the entry for this team showed them in the wrong division so I changed it. Today they played Caldy and the score was 18-25. Caldy are in SSE NATIONAL LEAGUE DIVISION TWO NORTH...see below from the BBC website, Caldy are 3rd, South Leicester are 10th. On what basis did you change my edit?

SSE National League Division Two North

Hatting this pasted table
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Rank Team Last updated 10 October 2015 at 16:59 1 Sedgley Park 6 5 0 1 232 147 6 26 2 Macclesfield 6 5 0 1 217 128 5 25 3 Caldy 6 5 0 1 159 116 2 22 4 Sandal 6 5 0 1 133 93 2 22 5 Leicester Lions 6 4 1 1 150 106 2 20 6 Chester 6 4 0 2 143 101 4 20 7 Harrogate 6 3 0 3 124 112 4 16 8 Otley 6 3 0 3 118 119 3 15 9 Stourbridge 6 2 1 3 115 101 4 14 10 South Leicester 6 2 0 4 160 195 5 13 11 Sale 6 2 0 4 147 173 3 11 12 Preston Grasshoppers 6 2 0 4 93 131 2 10 13 Huddersfield 6 2 0 4 96 141 1 9 14 Tynedale 6 1 0 5 137 180 5 9 15 Broadstreet 6 1 0 5 133 218 1 5 16 Luctonians 6 1 0 5 99 195 1 5

88.109.100.111 (talk) 20:39, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, 88.109.100.111 - I'm not sure how that managed to happen. I think I might have reverted the wrong article without paying attention. Please accept my apologies; I restored your edits and cleared my message from your talk page. Please let me know if I can do anything else for you. Thanks for leaving me this message and bringing it to my attention.

Shopper pro reversion

I think the site it was copied from is a Wikipedia mirror (see Word). However, the content appears to be irrelevant to the subject, so I left it anyway. Adam9007 (talk) 23:35, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Adam9007 - I'm trying to figure out exactly what article you are pertaining to. If I reverted an edit because I felt that it added content that was in violation of Wikipedia's Copyrights policy, I can certainly take a look. Can you respond with a link to the article or the URL to the change? ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:09, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

@Oshwah:Here Adam9007 (talk) 00:26, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi again, Adam9007. Thanks for responding with the diff URL. For some reason, I was having trouble finding the article. Oh well :-). I took a look at the change that added a bunch of content, and found two sources that the change appeared to copy content straight from. One is [research.omicsgroup.org/index.php/Word this source], which didn't appear to be a direct mirror of Wikipedia until I scrolled down to the bottom of the page just now and saw a reference to a Wikimedia project that was copied and mirrored through. I also saw this source, which does reference the article in Wikipedia directly. I didn't catch that the first source was an exact mirror until I scrolled down to the bottom and saw the reference URL. I appreciate you for pointing this out. If you want to restore the materials, I'd say review it first (just in case), and then go for it if you don't see any problems. Thanks again, and cheers :-) ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:35, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

@Oshwah:I don't see any need to restore or review it because, as I said, the content obviously had nothing to do with the subject (I can only assume it was some sort of test). The article has been prodded on notability grounds and will likely be deleted anyway. Adam9007 (talk) 00:43, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

List of Cyborg 009 Characters

Episode 1 of the 2001 series, 001 said 009 was far more powerful out of all of them due to having years of R/D worked into his design because he is the latest product of the entire team.76.170.205.179 (talk) 00:28, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

the chafford school

Did you go to the chafford school by any chance — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.26.26 (talk) 02:26, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

No Subject

Sorry I am new to Wikipedia and am just trying to figure this all out. Cam someone please explain why my page, Frank_Jackson_(Basketball_Player), is being deleted? I tried talking to the other guy who wants to delete it and it sounds like he's trying to delete it because he can, and for no real reason. Please help me understand. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnny Appleseed 396 (talk • contribs) 05:07, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Johnny Appleseed 396 - Welcome to Wikipedia! Sure, I can definitely explain all of that to you and help you get affiliated with things here. First of all don't take the article deletion personally; you're just not familiar with all of our policies and guidelines yet. You'll get there, and you'll make plenty of mistakes along the way. Don't worry about making them; being bold is something that we encourage here (so long as it's not disruptive, of course). Your article is being listed for deletion under our Articles for Deletion process. Editors will review the article and discuss whether or not that meets our notability and verifiability guidelines. If it doesn't, and everyone agrees that it should be removed per those policies, then it will be deleted. A good place for you to begin is our Five Pillars page. It's the starting place for any new editor if they want to begin learning about our guidelines and policies. I highly recommend that you give the place a visit, and please let me know if you have any more questions. Again, Welcome to Wikipedia. I hope you enjoy your stay and become a long-term editor here. We need more people like you! :-) ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:15, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

So I am still a little confused. Why is my article being deleted? What in my article is wrong? Thanks for the help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnny Appleseed 396 (talk • contribs) 05:19, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Johnny Appleseed 396 - Articles can be nominated for deletion under our articles for deletion process for many different reasons. Instead of explaining, I'll redirect you to the article's deletion discussion page instead. It will show the statement made by the nominator and why the editor nominated the article. Please let me know if you have any more questions. ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:14, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Correct deletion of table on AAGPS NSW Basketball page

Dear Oshwah,

I recently made edits the AAGPS NSW Basketball page. I deleted a table section to combine with the above table as there is no need to separate the two tables. I simply coped the table data and merged it with the one above.

122.106.149.195 (talk) 07:02, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, 122.106.149.195 - Thanks for letting me know. In the future, you'll want to explain this using the edit summary when editing. It will help other editors to understand what you're doing and why. ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:15, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Protection of Page

How we protect our page from editing by other user. Can You help me , I want to secure my page by editingEr. Intekhab Alam (talk) 12:45, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Er. Intekhab Alam. To request an article be protected, you can file a request by visiting Wikipedia's Requests for page protection page. However, you should know that pages are considered for protection only if it meets the criteria set by Wikipedia's page protection guidelines. Saying that you don't like it when other people edit "your" page is not a valid criteria. Please let me know if you have any questions. ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:21, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

No Subject

I agree that the text I edited in the Nicholas Brothers article contained an opinion, but it wasn't my opinion. It was already there, I just edited for smoother prose. I probably should have added a "reference needed" too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.221.18.208 (talk) 17:47, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, 108.221.18.208 - No worries. If you see opinionated text like this in an article, it's better to remove it if it's clear bias or anything not consistent with Wikipedia's policy on maintaining a neutral point of view in an article. Please let me know if you need assistance with anything in the future. ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:21, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

New Art Examiner

I imagined that I was the only one who had this article watchlisted, since the journal seems pretty obscure. So was surprised to see someone revert a deletion of content.[1] If you have time, take a look at the section where the deletion took place. It's pretty bizarre. There seems to be a battle going on between two similarly named publications. I'd be inclined to simply remove all the content related to New Art Examiner Now. TimidGuy (talk) 19:06, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, TimidGuy and thanks for leaving me a message. I took a look at the section you were referring to, and I don't see any changes to the article since my reversion that restored content that was removed without explanation. If you disagree with someone else's content removal or change, feel free to be bold and put it back - but make sure that you don't do this repeatedly if he removes it again. Going back-and-fourth with reverting like that with another editor constitutes an edit war, which will get your account blocked if you engage in edit warring. A standard rule that most editors use in this aspect is the Three-revert rule. But this is a guideline, not a policy; you can still be blocked for edit warring even if you don't break the 3RR guideline. Instead, you'll want to leave a message on the editor's talk page (just like you did on mine), and ask that they discuss their removal on the article's talk page. Make a new talk page section, reference the user, and try and discuss the matter there. That's the proper way to resolve a dispute (as opposed to edit warring - a behavior that isn't allowed). Please let me know if you have any questions or if I can do anything else for you. Happy editing :-) ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:43, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, User:Oshwa. I don't edit war, and don't really have an interest in this article. I was just surprised that anyone else was paying attention to it, and was considering cleaning up the bizarre section under discussion. My suggestion was to remove all mention of the journal titled New Art Examiner Now from the article. It's not clear that either journal is notable, but especially the more recent iteration. In any case, those involved in publishing the two journals probably shouldn't be using the WP page to argue about the connection between them. TimidGuy (talk) 14:26, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Alais Pink Puzz

The last edit was to re-organize the article and correct the grammar ,it did not change any facts. Yet the message I received was about verifying the facts. This is the first article I ever tried to post so I am not familiar with your requirements. I also have not been able to figure out how to post a picture of the album. If you could answer some of these questions for me then maybe I can correct these problems. Thanks Tom Brady--Tombrady1251@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.167.218.15 (talk) 22:55, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

No Subject

I still don't understand what I did. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bryson483 (talk • contribs) 22:04, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Bryson483. Thanks for leaving me a message with your concerns. I'm trying to locate and understand what your message is referring to. Can you provide the article or the URL to the change that you're referring to? I'll be happy to answer any questions and assist you; I just need to know what you're referring to first so that I can help you :-) ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:46, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you

Hey Oshwah, thanks.Just realised that it was wrong and was meant for something else. THX LivOrific — Preceding unsigned comment added by LivOrific (talk • contribs) 08:34, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

THX

thanks for that. i just realised i am wrong. ooooppppss! thx LivOrific LivOrific (talk) 08:38, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

HELLO!

i am new to wikipedia. could you tell me how to see everyone?

purlease! thx LivOrific ℂℕ≠≤ℝℤ⌋${\displaystyle }$ LivOrific (talk) 08:40, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

THX

You helped me a lot. Thank you for changing my very very very wrong mistake.

LivOrific (talk) 08:42, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

No Subject

Oshwah: Just checking after Beetlebrox. At the American Society for Public Administration (ASPA), Health and Human Services, Environment and Natural Resource Administration, and Budget and Finance. In 2016, to Personnel Management and Criminal Justice Sections. 24.59.153.150 (talk) 09:34, 14 October 2015 (UTC)JARacino24.59.153.150 (talk) 09:34, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, 24.59.153.150 - I'm confused; can you provide the article or the URL to the change that you're referring to? ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:48, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Regarding Cleo of Alpha Chi

The new version of the page that I have submitted is substantially better presented and researched than previous instances. I would ask that you check it against Wikipedia's policies to see that it is definitely a legitimate page.

Soakthru (talk) 01:08, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Soakthru. Thanks for leaving me a message regarding this article. I noticed that this article has had two articles for deletion discussions where the last discussion led to a consensus that the article should be deleted, and with the main concerns being its notability and the sources found outside the article's official site. I tagged the article because it doesn't seem to address the issues discussed before. If you disagree, you can leave a message on the article's talk page and discuss your reasons. Administrators will read this page before making a decision to either proceed, or decline the nomination. Please let me know if you have any more questions. I'll be happy to answer them. ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:20, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

No Subject

Go ahead and delete my page i tried! :):) bye! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zombiehead552 (talk • contribs) 01:49, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Mistaken edits

You have made a number of destructive edits because you have assumed bad intent. Please do assume good faith, as you seem so quick to throw irrelevant policies. The Pastafarian Church (talk) 02:01, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, The Pastafarian Church. Thank you for leaving me a message with your concerns. I think you're referring to this edit? If so, I think I was viewing an old revision when I reverted to that article state; I see that I didn't revert what I thought I was. Thanks for fixing that. Please let me know if you have any more questions or concerns. Thanks again for taking the time to leave me a message. ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:37, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

You're all dishonest weirdos on the English wiki : ( WHY??????!?!?!? ~ ~~ The Pastafarian Church (talk) The Pastafarian Church (talk) 02:39, 15 October 2015 (UTC) 02:39, 15 October 2015 (UTC) 02:39, 15 October 2015 (UTC)~

SHOULD be 'I give my greetings to you, the Pastafarian Church'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Pastafarian Church (talk • contribs) 02:41, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Reverting of the edit made to sri sairam engineering college

hey oshwah, i think it was a mistake that you reverted my edit, i wanted to update the details about the college. kindly apply the changes which was done. thankyou

Regarding Progressive enhancement edit

Hi Oshwah,

Indeed I am not familiar with the way Wikipedia is being edited. However what I noticed and deleted was information that was not in any ways shape or form helpful. The information provided via these sentences provides one's statement or arguments and not facts. In addition even if these argument held some truth, they are no longer relevant to the current technological reality of 2015 and are more appropriate to the pre smartphone prevalence era of 2008-2010.

To tell you the truth, for me to go so much out of my way and confort zone in order to delete something from Wikipedia of all places, is a testament of my shock and disbelief that such opinionated texts can exist. I firmly believe that without these texts, the article will not only not loose value but on the contrary will be more in line with the normal wikipedia information articles the users expect to see and read.

I understand that this might not be a basis of a final edit from your end, but I hope it will reach to someone who can create a better version and ultimately help Wikipedia be the place we all know and love.

Best Regards,

Martin Milanov

Digital Marketing Officer

Fair Point GmbH — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.154.199.56 (talk) 07:13, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, 90.154.199.5. You're more than welcome to remove that content. The reason that I reverted your removal is because you did not provide a reason for removing it in the edit summary of your change. As long as you do that, you should be fine. It helps explain to other editors the reason behind your edits, and it will lead to less people getting concerned when they review it. Please let me know if you have any more questions. I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks for leaving me a message, expressing your concerns, and explaining what you were trying to do. ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:17, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Cleo of Alpha Chi

Hi Oshwah. I have declined the speedy deletion of Cleo of Alpha Chi as I thought it was different enough, and had enough additional sources, that CSD G4 doesn't apply. Feel free to take it to AfD again if you want. Sarahj2107 (talk) 08:47, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Sarahj2107. Ohhhh, you know what I did? For some reason, I thought that the article had only two references provided, that they were from the site itself, and the article creation didn't seem to address the issues mentioned in the article's last AfD; I was looking at the list of external links by accident. I hereby smack myself with a trout! You're absolutely right; the article clearly does not qualify for G4 now that I'm looking at the correct section :-) - Thanks for taking the time to leave me this message and for letting me know. Much appreciated. It's a pleasure to meet you, Sarahj2107. Happy editing :-D ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:02, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Oshwah. You have new messages at Ayub407's talk page.
Message added 10:46, 15 October 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ayub407^talk 10:46, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Editing tests

Hello there! I've come across your reversals at Internet of Things, of edits performed by user 59.160.16.225, and would like to note that these are not good faith edits. He/she's been vandalising the article since yesterday; they've been warned thrice. FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 15:24, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

No Subject

Regarding the article titled Henry Hobart Nichols, I wanted to change the title to just Hobart Nichols and tried to move it but couldn't find the move tab so I moved it manually which did not preserve the edit history which is still in the Henry Hobart Nichols article. I'd like to move that also but don't know how. Wish I never started this. Grateful if you can make corrections. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karen Novak, PhD (talk • contribs) 01:23, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Karen Novak, PhD. It's a pleasure to meet you and provide assistance. It looks like what you've done is sufficient enough. You manually created the page on the desired title, moved everything over, then changed the original article into a redirect. It's not the safest or the most optimal way of performing the move you wanted, but it does work. I've marked your creation as patrolled; I don't think there's anything more that you need to do or worry about. If the editing history is a big concern for someone else, they can delete the page you created, revert and move the original page, and then create another redirect. No big deal :-) ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:31, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Reverting edits to SiriusXM Patriot

Hello, I am responding to the reverting of my edit to the SiriusXM Patriot page. You said: "I wanted to let you know that I removed an external link you added to the page SiriusXM Patriot because it seemed inappropriate for an encyclopedia."

My change did not add an external link; instead it linked to the Wikipedia page for the business "Townhall.com" - that is the name of the organization.

My change in full was this:

---

Hourly news updates (aired at the top of each programming hour) is produced and operated by Townhall.com.

---

and this is 100% accurate.

Please reconsider, as I believe you saw the reference to "Townhall.com" and assumed it to be a link to their web page; instead it is a link to the Wikipedia page for the same organization.

Thank you - Steven

Chrissv (talk) 01:32, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Leo Gudas

I was tying to compete his info box and the "played for" section would not appear upon submitting the edits, so I tried deleting the whole info box and re-inserting it. Still no luck. Any help would be appreciated.96.245.85.145 (talk) 05:07, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Never mind

Never mind, I figured it out. Thanks for the response. 96.245.85.145 (talk) 14:45, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Irwin Schiff died

see https://www.facebook.com/FreeIrwin/posts/856634724452199 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.238.8.29 (talk) 02:32, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Eddy Wally meme thing

It shouldn't of been reverted, it should of been edited more, as it IS a thing he did. 95.150.162.33 (talk) 10:59, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

It is right

I go there i know

188.223.255.132 - Adding content to articles that is original research is not allowed. All content must either be attributable or directly attributed to a reliable source. I highly recommend that you click on the blue text references in my response here and review these policies. Please let me know if you have any questions. ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:48, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Dear Oshwah

please respect the page that i started its not for business its for giving information about the great online writer Nani. if you have an objection, then I have a prove. her work first work is the poem "The White Tiger". please review it. please help me in expanding it and making it more larger. please contact me. Unfamouspublishermanager (talk) 13:17, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

No Subject

What happened — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thegoldenenderegg (talk • contribs) 19:38, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I've found it

I have found the source. <ref>http://www.spc.noaa.gov/climo/online/monthly/1510_summary.html</ref> 2602:30A:2E1D:A250:21F8:C8F5:921F:231 (talk) 21:19, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, 2602:30A:2E1D:A250:21F8:C8F5:921F:231 - Awesome! I also saw that you included it in the article as a reference to your change. Thanks for doing that! Please let me know if you have any questions or if I can be of assistance to you. I'll be happy to help! Happy editing :-) ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:25, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

windcheater as important as windbreaker

The term windcheater is commonly used in many parts of the world (India, UK etc) for what is known as windbreaker in USA and Japan. The term windcheater redirects to the windbreaker page as both refers to the same thing. Due to this I think it is important that the term windcheater is mentioned along with term windbreaker in the first line. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.99.13.150 (talk) 21:49, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

It s not inappropriate, if people are looking for education on the ombre hair style people like me want to see pictures from a specialist so they don't walk into a location and get ripped off with something that is supposed to look a different way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JonesLife2015 (talk • contribs) 21:51, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi!This is Ramezan and I amstudy in massage therapy course and sometime I try to use and fine my questions in google, and it referring me to many pages in many resources andmaybe it happened like this and nothing more!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.169.167.240 (talk) 17:59, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Battleground at longevity-related articles

Hi Oshwah,

Thank you for your contributions at the recent longevity-related AfD's, and for taking your time to form a well-reasoned opinion.

Seeing as you're an experienced editor I'd like to ask for you advice about what to do regarding some editors who are involved in the World's Oldest People project. In short, what's happened is this: in the past, there were some issues involving editors with an interest in longevity who had effectively created a "walled garden" - that is, there were articles in the scope of the project full of original research and excessive trivia. This led a number editors to try and oppose this.

Now that's fine, but what seems to have ended up happening is that they've almost gone too far the other way - they're trying to delete articles on the basis that "longevity does not confer notability" - when clearly the amount of press coverage that the world's oldest people typically receive suggests otherwise. I also see WP:BLP1E frequently misquoted as a justification to delete such articles, when longevity clearly isn't one event. And I've seen ridiculous claims that being the oldest living person "isn't a record", even though it's listed in the Guinness Book of RECORDS. I think this discussion here accurately sums up the situation: bad arguments being used to justify the deletion of content (and WP:OWN being violated), and referring to those on the other side of the argument as "longevity fans" or "fanboys", again trying to justify what they're doing what they're doing.

I have an interest in longevity, and while I do want to see original research and trivia removed from longevity-related articles, I don't want to see content unfairly destroyed either. But unfortunately, I feel rather helpless when a group of editors seem more interested in making a point than improving the encylopedia. It's the same people who pop up in AfD's and RFC's all the time, which gives the impression that their opinions are reflective of widespread consensus, when in reality that isn't the case. Is there anything I can do about this?

Thank you for your time. -- Ollie231213 (talk) 00:24, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Feel free to join us but it's been a battleground for probably close to a decade on these articles. As I said, the AFDs swing wildly here so don't let that put you off and I don't take your changes in voting personally at all, it's not an easy issue to decide. This is nowhere as contentious as the fights over fictional characters that we had for years, eventually the consensus was that we shouldn't have articles on individual characters unless the character had separate notability and I feel that's the same basis we should use for these people but that's just me. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:25, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Ollie231213 and Ricky81682. Thanks for leaving me a message. I apologize for the delay returning your messages - I've been very busy. From what I am reading, it looks like some editors involved with the World's Oldest People project created an article, its content was removed due to original research and trivia, and they're now listing a bunch of those articles for deletion in order to prove a point. I do see that the deletions in the past for articles on longevity have been inconsistent. Some have resulted in the article's deletion while others were closed early as "Keep".

Looking at the discussion that Ollie231213 provided, I'm not seeing any ownership issues, and the discussion seems to be staying on-topic and civil - Am I missing something? Can you point me to where you saw the ownership issues? I think that the best option is to remain observant and continue discussing the project so that consensus is reached. If edit warring, ownership issues, or disruption to make a point continues and is clearly evident with diffs and changes, I would take the issue to dispute resolution or perhaps Administrator's Noticeboard/Incidents if your number of attempts to resolve the issues have been unsuccessful and that involving the attention of others looks to be the only option.

I hope that my response helps and points you two in the correct direction. Again, I'm more than happy to assist with identifying problems and pointing you in the correct direction (it's what I'm here for) - please do not hesitate to respond with additional questions or requests for help. I think that this article subject isn't explicitly defined anywhere in our guidelines, and this is an example of articles that fall between the cracks into the "grey area"; I agree that, after reviewing the arguments on both sides, that longevity (provided reliable sources exist that discuss the person other than the his/her death like a birthday at age 114, etc.) is not a single event, but a series of many of them. However, if the death of a person is the only coverage that reliable sources found discuss and cover in-depth about him/her whatsoever, I would understand and perhaps support someone's argument for deleting the article - because while longevity isn't one event, that particular person is only known and made notable for one event - the person's death. ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:33, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

@Oshwah: Thanks for replying. Sorry, I should have been clearer: please see [2] for what I mean about ownership issues. Edits like this, this, and this were made before consensus was reached, and in my opinion, based on a misinterpretation of the succession box guidelines. I understand WP:BOLD but it's not okay to make a large number of changes and THEN start a discussion, because if the consensus differs, then someone has to undo all the edits.

Personally, I think that editing to make a point is the biggest problem here, and the true consensus of the wider community being misrepresented. This AfD is a good example - four of the five "delete" votes came from people involved in the battleground, who typically vote to delete these kind of articles, even when the wider community disagrees. And then, the outcome of this AfD gets cited as a reason to delete a different article, while ignoring all the recent, similar AfD's that were closed as keep.

As you say, this topic is maybe something of a "grey area". Personally, I think that instead of having all of these individual AfD's, a more general discussion needs to take place about whether or not - for example - anyone who was the world's oldest person is automatically notable enough for a standalone article. For example, I believe I'm correcting in saying that consensus exists among Wikipedians that every UK member of parliament is automatically notable enough for an article (just based on their status as an MP alone) and that every golfer on the PGA tour is automatically notable. But if such a discussion takes place, I want to make sure we get plenty of input from uninvolved editors, so that we get an idea of what the wider community thinks, and not just those who are involved in a "battle". -- Ollie231213 (talk) 17:05, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Ollie231213 - Sorry again for the delay responding to your last message. Thanks for keeping me in the loop, and no apologies are needed for the clarification - I appreciate it very much. I suspect that most of these AFD nominations are a result of WP:POINT, but that's really where it ends - suspicion; I can't find the origin that may have caused such a "WP:POINT", if any even exists. Maybe the past AfD's that resulted in deletion? Looking at the URLs that you provided, only one was a diff URL (the other was to an article, and the article's history). This diff shows DerbyCountyinNZ reverting an edit per WP:SBSGUIDE (I've pinged him so that he can help explain, if he wishes to) - but this doesn't constitute WP:OWN issues, or ownership. I may have some suspicions regarding WP:POINT, but I honestly think that this entire issue spans from the fact that the article subject area is a "grey area", and that deletions have spanned from different interpretations of policy. Regarding WP:BOLD - I agree that it's a good thing to ask for input or ask questions before doing something you're not sure about, and I will never discourage anyone from doing that. Doing so, however, is absolutely not required. So long as you don't edit war, 3RR, or cause disruption and you discuss any disputes and come to a consensus, there is absolutely nothing wrong with editing first and asking questions later. I understand (and agree) that the time spent towards undoing other editors' editing mistakes would be reduced if people would simply ask before editing, but it's an indirect consequence of allowing editors to be bold and one that we are willing to accept. ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:21, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Changes to Hillary Clinton Email Controversy page

You reversed changes that made the article more accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.67.185.194 (talk) 22:39, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

User:K.belev

Hi, i'm the user and i want my user page to be deleted as i wont be on wikipedia again, so if you can help me i would be glad. 22:47, 20 October 2015 (UTC) User:K.belev — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.10.112.86 (talk)

/Weak value

that page was a mistake. I intended to edit "Weak value". Please do delete "/Weak value" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yama jlac (talk • contribs) 23:58, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Yama jlac - Done. I've nominated it for deletion under A10. No need to worry; we'll take care of it for you :-) ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:00, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

All taken care of :-) ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:46, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

FAKE COLLECTIONS

Dear sir / Madam ,

Why are u supporting FAKE Collections . Because Rudrammadevi movie failed , even many of the theatres are empty , first day It has gained negative reviews . PLEASE don't support fake collections. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.99.128.239 (talk) 01:59, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

revert

Yes, you made a mistake. Cuba is communist, not socialist.

College of the Ozarks

Dear Oshwah, I have provided solid references for the discrimination controversy. It appears you are reverting for no good reason. If you have a problem with the college's handbook link, please say so. Otherwise the information is solid. Please do your homework before reverting my edits. This college takes in millions in federal grants per year and does so while discriminating against students. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:A601:4C9:8200:445:79A4:5ED8:1ADD (talk) 02:38, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

I thought the last edit I did was constructive.68.101.175.232 (talk) 02:50, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

I thought that the last edit i did was constructive. 68.101.175.232 (talk) 02:54, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Zimbabwe Dollar

I was including a useful tidbit of information that the readers might find interesting. 68.101.175.232 (talk) 02:57, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Dear Sir, Pramod here i create my own biography Page because of i want to publish my all film stories & Hindi & Marathi songs lyrics so please Co-operate

Thanks, Pramod Jadhav — Preceding unsigned comment added by PRAMOD26 (talk • contribs) 04:51, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, PRAMOD26. Welcome to Wikipedia! Unfortunately, this is not how Wikipedia works. You cannot create articles about anything you want :-). The articles you create must meet certain criteria, else it can be deleted per Wikipedia deletion guidelines. I highly recommend that you read Wikipedia:My first article in order to read and understand the aspect of article creation. Please let me know if you have any questions. I'll be happy to answer them and assist you. Again, welcome to Wikipedia. I hope that you enjoy your stay and that you take the time to learn about how it works and decide to stay with us. ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:01, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Your message about Magilla Loans

Hello! Thank you for your note about the Magilla Loans page. I very much appreciate your input. Thanks again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Koula gianulias (talk • contribs) 05:47, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

A favor

Could you please expand Petra Thoren?—Eat me, I'm an azuki (talk · contribs · email) 09:45, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Eat me, I'm an azuki - you got it. I'll perform some research and do my best to expand the article. Do you have any draft content or sandbox pages that I can look at and see what you've done so far? ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:47, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Well would be useful as a source.—Eat me, I'm an azuki (talk · contribs · email) 09:52, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Inappropriate use of Greater India and

Hi Oshwah,

Please do not post nationalistic propaganda which lack proper academic credential. There is no academic term, such as Greater India. India Cultural Sphere is the correct term. "Greater India" implies political control extending beyond mainland India. This is not the case.

Afghan, Tibet and most Philippines were not Indianized in any way.  The map posted is untruthful and offensive to the people of those countries.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.156.102.141 (talk) 10:31, 21 October 2015 (UTC) 

Fück off bǐtch, leave the man alone, he works hard!!!!!!! 95.141.29.39 (talk) 23:37, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

jame collins / the ginger Pele

I just wanted to add an accurate nickname Jack mitten 123 (talk) 11:10, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Surabhi Hande page

I have created this page to inform about a famous actress in Maharashtra , India. A google search for her name will tell you more. ThaneFreedomScholar (talk) 11:28, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Surabhi Hande Page

{{subust : db - notability - notice/Surabhi Hande/header=1}}ThaneFreedomScholar (talk) 11:40, 21 October 2015 (UTC) Oshwah you must be not know about Surabhi Hande. She is an Indian actress.You must search above her in google. ThaneFreedomScholar (talk) 11:40, 21 October 2015 (UTC) ThaneFreedomScholar (talk) 11:40, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

no personal attack, you're wrong. I'm directly responding to a message the user made to me on an edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by XXEmoPunk911Xx (talk • contribs) 15:30, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

?

Hey man well i made a page and i was making it and it was speedly deleted and it would have been good if within this week but i was just working on it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lions654321 (talk • contribs) 22:10, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

No thx Crow2714 (talk) 14:13, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

About Zaavi

Fun Only Zaaviranas (talk) 23:59, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

[[ [[|1212px|thumbnail]] ]]

• 
  Caption1
• 
  Caption2

No Subject

Hi, while I understand reverting some of the changes I made (on the Elite Daily page), I feel that many of my additions were relevant and useful and I would like to restore those changes that did nothing to "take away" from the page as I originally wrote it.

I've restored your content. After reviewing it further, it was made in good faith. I apologize for the mistake. ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:28, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Timothy J Hickey's Changes

Hi Oshwah,

I added the edit to Timothy J Hickey's article saying that he currently teaches computer graphics at Brandeis University. I am currently in the course, which is why I did not include the source. I suppose the correct source would be the Brandeis University's registrar page.

Best, Alison — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.64.140.226 (talk) 01:30, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

With this ever dramatic world and winter coming, here's a cup of tea to alleviate your day! This e-tea's remains have been e-composted SwisterTwister talk 06:21, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, SwisterTwister. Thanks for buying the round of tea! I appreciate the wikilove; I'll make sure to buy us a round of beers when the time comes :-) ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:51, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

No Subject

will you stop deleting my shit.

No Subject

Sir i just made a correction on that kesi yeh yariyan page What should i do to be a editor on wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rishabh mahajan (talk • contribs) 19:26, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

edit war at Asterisk

You restored material [3] at Asterisk. There's currently an edit war among apparent NFL fans regarding this. I'm not sure how an opinion piece regarding an NFL team leads to a better understanding of the subject. Isn't the article better off without this paragraph? Your thoughts appreciated. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 19:43, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, 78.26. Thanks for leaving me a message. I restored the content because the removal wasn't explained. After seeing your message and re-reading it within context of the article, I think that it should definitely be removed. I don't understand what the section involving Tom Brady and the New England Patriots even has to do with in regards to asterisks. If I missed it, please enlighten me :-). Please, feel free to remove that section. This looks to be the result of disruption, possible WP:POINT? ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:49, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

That's what I thought. I've removed it. Thanks! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:20, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Ali kiba

Looks like there is a possible sockpuppetry going on-also check Draft:Ali kiba-made by another user doing the same article even! Wgolf (talk) 20:10, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

As well as Draft:Ali Kiba. Wgolf (talk) 20:11, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Wgolf. An SPI has been created. Please feel free to add any additional evidence to the report. Thanks for keeping so diligent and for volunteering your time to keeping Wikipedia in ship-shape :-) ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:16, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

C-H activation page

The work was done by Andrew Wee. It should be "Wee," not "We." Stop changing it back! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.203.168.100 (talk) 23:12, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Ah, I see now. I've expanded on your changes so that the person's full name (not discussed anywhere else in the article) is mentioned in order to provide context. Sorry for the confusion. ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:18, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

You reverted my edit on "Prostate Massage"

Greetings - My name is Jebuiz y'har. If my calculations are correct, you should be receiving this transmission in the year 2015 AD. It amuses me that you used to calculate your dates in relation to the life of an ancient man. You see, we have a slightly different timescale. But to make things simple, I am writing from the year 49,170 AD. 95.141.29.39 (talk) 23:34, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi

Find me now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.132.62.47 (talk) 23:52, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Kushagra AsaTi

I think The page Kushagra Asati should be included in wikipedia. Because the person started a new company move on but he is not doing any type of advertisement through wikipedia . People are requesting me to know more about him who is he.{Kushagra AsaTi}. So i dont have any disruptive editing also. If u wish you remove the tag of speedy deletion. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.215.135.55 (talk) 03:13, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Regarding article Ajitabh Bose

He is also a renowned film maker.<ref name="indiacafe24">{{cite web|url=http://www.indiacafe24.com/interviews/artists/being-filmy-behind-the-lens-ajitabha-bose/|title=Being Filmy Behind The Lens- Ajitabha Bose; |publisher=indiacafe24.com|accessdate=2014-07-11}}</ref><ref name="Ventures Den">{{cite web|url=http://www.venturesden.com/interview-ajitabh-bose-famous-short-filmmaker-writer/|title=Interview With Ajitabh Bose, a Famous Short Filmmaker And Writer |publisher=venturesden.com|accessdate=2014-01-21}}</ref>

Aries spears

Aries spears has a wife Elisa Larregui and they share 2 children Jordan and Jada — Preceding unsigned comment added by LaRaina09 (talk • contribs) 04:48, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

8 year old boy talkin'

Are you the creator of Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.49.48.212 (talk) 07:18, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Mistaken revert

Hi, I changed the link to the English site for Kewet electric cars to the correct one, but you reverted my change. I think this was a mistake. This is the URL listed currently as their English home page: http://www.elbilnorge.no/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=7&bakgrunn

This URL redirects to the following page, which is in Norwegian: http://www.buddyelectric.no/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=7&bakgrunn=english

Kewet / Buddy's official site in English is here: http://www.buddyelectric.com/

AIV for VIP

In case this is something which needs updating at your end.[4][5] -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 13:12, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, zzuuzz. Umm... weird... I'm not sure how I managed to accidentally do that. I'm on mobile right now; I'll look into this further when I get home. Sorry to burn up your time like that. ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:49, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Harry S. Truman

The source is Wikipedia itself and I clearly provided that link.

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

my edit is true. Please dont delete it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:B8C4:9E60:D1AB:DAF:B281:19DD (talk) 22:57, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Edit about old turkic language

Hello , in the page old turkic language was described as " a dialect of kurdish language " . Thats why I tried to change it . Obviously someone was trying to be funny . Have a good night — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.54.115.169 (talk) 23:32, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

No Subject

Hi Oshwah, I did not delete any content of the Santorini article I have just replaced it into another section, because I thought that there was the place for it. Wikipediauser993 (talk) 00:40, 24 October 2015 (UTC)wikipediauser993

Hi, Wikipediauser993 - Perfect. Thanks for letting me know :-) ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:41, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, regarding the article about virgin boy egss.

Thank you for your extremely prompt responce. wow, that was fast. I tried to read the articles about how to correctly flag an article that needs review. They were definately not helpful. The guy actually cited his own website as a source for what appears to be an obvious prank. Is there a "flag this article" button? or something like a /flag this article/ command?

edit: After reading more wikipedia laws about how to invoke the deletion process, I see that I most definately broke one. Blanking an article is not allowed. I understand how it works a little better now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tothmetres (talk • contribs) 00:51, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

October 2015

Hello, I'm Cubisticmage626. I noticed that you recently removed some content without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I have restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Cubisticmage626 (talk) 01:15, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

No Subject

no

Why

Why did you change my edit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mxkchcbbdbdskxii nxnsen lol (talk • contribs) 01:59, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

No Subject

The page I edited about the tibetan people is true and I want you to change it back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.254.155.23 (talk) 02:01, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

No Subject

Serizawa Yuu role in Noragami Aragoto (2015） as 文巴Ayaha? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LuZhuang (talk • contribs) 21:28, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Jujitsu for you, dickbutt

Walnut — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.79.108.22 (talk) 04:38, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

The 1st Bank of the USA

Hi

I was hesitant to contact you because it seems a waste of time to correct something that simply reverted back into error. But I was entertained at the term you used to describe the reason for the reversal. Indeed, my correction was not neutral.

A National bank cannot be a private company. And vice versa. It isn't neutral to state that the bank was private or national. It is just wrong to state it was private. Even in context with many other errors it still makes no sense. Why do you suppose it was so important to keep such an error on Wiki? A confusion like that.

Could it be because the Federal Reserve system is private?

The National Bank 1793-1812 was chartered for expiration. The investors had no say on that. So the dividends stop and the stock is worthless. The investors knew that their stock would become collector's items. Only of historical value. No dividends. Hamilton should have lived to see that day.

The sinking fund should by then have become the national reserves. But when Washington died Adams and his Congress with Hamilton's approval sold half (%10) of the USA shares because 1) they were going to expire in 1812 and be worthless. 2) Adams was worried about a possible war with France. So Hamilton left Treasury to be Commander of all USA military forces. At that point the bank was ahead of schedule in retiring all USA gold debt.

It is important to understand the difference between gold debt and the operation of a national currency in the sinking fund but it is more important to know that INDEPENDENCE comes from no gold debt. It is good if foreign nations hold our paper. We print that free.

Unfortunately, Jefferson became president and 2 years later Hamilton was murdered by Jefferson's Vice President. I apologize if that is not neutral enough.

The national gold reserves were given to Napoleon for land he had no rightful claim to and could not possibly defend. The last USA stock was sold off and thrown away on war in Africa. USA paper once again was risky business. Supplies in Africa required gold. The primary enemy of the USA provoked war knowing the USA was broke. We lost.

I suppose that is not neutral enough. The capitol building was sacked and burned. A private central bank was the terms of unconditional surrender. That bank is CITI. Old. International really. Private. No more Independence.

The USA Treasury does not need a charter. It is the national Treasury. So in 1812 the national bank should no longer have stock or pay dividends to investors.

That is WHY the 1st bank was chartered. It was the means of building the necessary reserves for a permanent sovereign USA Treasury. There was never an intent to charter a 2nd by Hamilton or Franklin of course who ran the even earlier mint.

Neutrality is conforming to private central banking which is in context a ridiculous notion. Franklin cited the outlawing of colonial scrip as the primary cause of the revolution. Shall we believe that he and Hamilton would let a private central bank dictate USA economic policy? Why would Congress oversee audits if it was private. Why would Hamilton keep Congress informed on all his dealings if they are not representing the owner, the nation?

Follow the money. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.80.212.191 (talk) 08:55, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

ACC

		The Account Creation Barnstar
		It's great to be working along side of you as part of the Account Creator team! Great work and keep it up! Tiggerjay (talk) 03:03, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Tiggerjay! Thanks for the Wikilove! I really appreciate it! I've been really busy this week (hence, my participation has been less than my typical average), but things in the personal/work life look to be simmering down; I'm excited to take some extra time back and spend a good chunk of it on wiki and on the ACC team :-) - It's a pleasure to work beside you, and I'll see you out on the battlefield (and IRC too)! ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:49, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

I have a question...

Hi, so you're a big Wikipedia celebrity, and I aspire to be like you. I am just a cheezy fellow who has aspirations to become a help to tens of millions of people worldwide. I see that sometimes if there is an issue with a page, there is a banner on the top of the page that identifies the error. I would like to know how to make these banners.
Thank you,
Mr.Cheezy (talk) 14:22, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Mr.Cheezy - Welcome to Wikipedia! The banners that you are seeing within some articles are templates. They are created in order to be used (AKA substituted or transcluded) in many other places without the need to create the same template each and every time. To view a list of Template Messages that are available to be used, just visit Wikipedia:Template messages. Make sure that you read the documentation and understand the proper usage of the template before you include it within an article. Being bold is absolutely encouraged here - but if someone removes your change and messages you stating that your edit wasn't correct, make sure to learn from this and take the legitimate advice left by others. Please do not hesitate to message me again (as you already did) if you have any more questions. I'll be happy to answer them and provide you with all of the help that you need. Again, welcome to Wikipedia. I hope that you enjoy your stay and become a long-term contributor here :-) ~Oshwah~ ^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:59, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Okay, I will do that, thanks for the help! :-)

Mr.Cheezy (talk) 20:27, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Matt Gharste

This was not a test. The information that was on this page was incorrect and false. I have updated the page to what it needs to be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:B8E9:A1F0:F43E:C4CA:BFEE:8B2 (talk) 20:07, 31 October 2015 (UTC)