User:Oshwah/TalkPageArchives/2019-05

You are currently viewing an archive of Oshwah's user talk page from May 2019. 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These discussions are no longer active and were moved here for historical and record-keeping purposes.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.

Wikiprojects

Erm... Could you actually just add yourself to one of these and start helping with it? GOLDIEM J (talk) 06:53, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

GOLDIEM J - They don't let me do that anymore... too many bad things happened... took a lot of time to cover up all the evidence. It's just... it's just best left buried under my contribs. Hopefully none of them find their way out... :-P

Also, oh yeah?!! Where are... where are... your... list of Wikiprojects?!! Yeah! LOL ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)}

How sad. By the way who are they? Lol 🤣 Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 08:15, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Masumrezarock100 - Everyone :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:22, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Merge assistance

Hello, an editor moved the article 'History of Israel' to 'History of the Land of Israel' without consulting other editors. It was decided on talk page to revert it, but since a redirect page with the same name was created i'm unable to change it back. How can i delete it or merge it back with the former article. Thanks. Infantom (talk) 09:01, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Infantom! Easy... I'll just delete that redirect and move the article back for you... ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:11, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Infantom -  Done. I've also applied full indefinite move protection so that future moves are only performed by administrators and after discussion and consensus. Please let me know if I can do anything else for you, and I'll be happy to help. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:17, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! Infantom (talk) 09:28, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Infantom - No problem ;-). I left Editor2020 a note on his/her user talk page about this. No big deal; things happen and we move on, and it was a very easy fix. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:32, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

"PowerBook x400 series" merge

I'd recommend merging the articles "PowerBook 1400", "PowerBook 2400c", and "PowerBook 3400c" into one article called "PowerBook x400 series".

This is due to the 1400, 2400c, and 3400c all being very similar to each other.

Please read and merge the three articles together. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael Boy Jordan (talk • contribs) 11:55, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Michael Boy Jordan - Did you manage to see the response I made to your message yesterday? The proper way to have these pages merged or moved is to visit Wikipedia:Requested moves, follow the instructions, and start a discussion where other editors can provide input and responses first. You need to go there to begin this process; simply having me perform these merges could result in causing disruption or confusion for readers ad well as Wikipedia projects. The discussion you start will help to avoid this. If you have any questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. Otherwise, I'll need to direct you to visit the page I linked to you. Thanks :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:00, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

JathoMaiCY /oshwah

I need your help to make my page to grow how do I go about it. JathoMaiCY (talk) 14:02, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi JathoMaiCY! Since you're brand new to Wikipedia, I highly recommend that you go through and complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial before you make any edits or take on any major tasks around here. It will provide you with many helpful walkthroughs, guides, interactive lessons, and other information that will be very helpful to you. Most users who take this advice and complete the tutorial tell me later that it was significantly helpful to them and saved them hours of time and frustration they would've experienced otherwise. Please let me know if you have any questions after going through and completing the tutorial, and I'll be happy to answer them and help you further. Good luck, welcome to Wikipedia, and I wish you happy editing! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:05, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	incredible MatthewCopping1 (talk) 17:13, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi MatthewCopping1! I appreciate the barnstar! I don't do much writing outside of updating guideline pages, creating essays I feel are important, and a few other places... but I appreciate the barnstar nonetheless. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:14, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Qwerp121 )(**&&^^ and an edit they made

Hi Oshwah, coming back to you as you have helped me before :)

I noticed that Qwerp121 )(**&&^^ seems to have created this [1] which seems to be gibberish. I can't seem to nominate it for speedy deletion though, and I cannot even notify the user, as trying to create the talk page it comes up as "The page title or edit you have tried to create has been restricted to administrators at this time." Username may be a violation in that case, but not 100% sure, so hoping you can advise. Many thanks. Agent00x (talk) 18:12, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

scratch that, Writ Keeper was quick off the mark! Agent00x (talk) 18:17, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

I also left a editing test warning (AGF that that's what it was); people should now be able to edit the talk page. The username is weird but doesn't strike me as particularly disruptive; I don't think it's actually an attempt at code injection or anything like that, although it kind of looks like one. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:26, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

I agree with Writ Keeper. Assume good faith to this point, but if they start being disruptive or causing vandalism, their disruption in combination with the concerns outlined here can justify a WP:NOTHERE or similar block. But as things stand at the time of this writing, we should observe, but hold off until he makes the next move. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:30, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

looks like the user got blocked. Agent00x (talk) 18:48, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Heh, can't say I'm surprised; it just wasn't blockable at the time I saw it. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:55, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Socking, edit warring, and ip hopping

Speed limits in the United States needs some ip and confirmed protection. Cards84664 (talk) 18:53, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Cards84664 - Fully protected. It's a clear content dispute, and everyone will now need to discuss it on the article's talk page and work things out. ;-) Thanks! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:57, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

user edit revdel and tpa removal

Hi Oshwah, while you're around :). I think this user needs talk access removed and revdel [2]. Thanks Agent00x (talk) 18:59, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Agent00x -  Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:12, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Reply to Your Questions and Comments, Etc.

Good day and hello again, sir. I am replying to the questions and comments you had for me in your reply to my original message to you regarding the deletion of my Userpage. My Wikipedia username is Thetruchairman. In regards to the user with whom I had the interaction, the username is JACKINTHEBOX. The user had contacted me to inform me that he had reverted or changed my edits to several topics and why. In the message you requested of me (which will be posted below), I thanked him for his input, agreed with him, and elaborated. On only one topic, that of the Order of DeMolay (specifically, how the Chapters are structured, how they are sponsored, as no Chapter can exist without a Masonic Body sponsoring it, and the difference between an "Active DeMolay" and a "Senior DeMolay"), did I have a question, so I asked for the user's opinion in good faith. The only reply received was perceived by me to be somewhat sarcastic, but I disregarded as a possible cultural misunderstanding in use, nuance, and interpretation of the English language being that we're from separate countries. The next I knew, part of our conversation, and the circumstances surrounding it, had been forwarded to you, with the aforementioned references to me as a "troll" made by the user, and my Userpage had been deleted. This is the point I originally contacted you. The statement I made to JACKINTHEBOX and his reply are as follows and in their entirety:

As far as some of your other edits, as you pointed out, they needed source citation (which I just hadn't done yet, honestly) and I agree with your input. As far as my contributions to the DeMolay wiki, I'm not quite sure what to use... what would you suggest? I have first hand knowledge of the specific topic. I myself am 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. As either serving or having served as an officer in both organizations, I know unequivocally what the rules and processes are, but how does one cite sources for an organization that even describes itself as a "societal of secrets", that is not inclined to put out literature for general consumption, and in which so much of its composition is tradition passed down from one Master Mason to another or one Brother the another? Thetruchairman (talk) 11:47, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

I deeply and humbly apologise for my execrable actions, my good Sir! JACKINTHEBOX • TALK 12:41, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

I simply wish to resume my use of Wikipedia, using your suggested input, and prevent further problems with the user JACKINTHEBOX or the reoccurrence of the problem with another user in the future. Thank you so very much for all of your time and help! I look forward to your response, opinion on the matter, and further guidance concerning the above. Respectfully, Dr. Raleigh, Ph.D, Th.D., OFS Thetruchairman (talk) 06:02, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Thetruchairman! Thanks for responding to the original message you left me here at the end of April. I didn't connect all of the dots between each and every discussion until I went back through them just a bit ago. Originally, JackintheBox left a message on my user talk page regarding concerns with your edits and the fact that they didn't cite or reference any reliable sources, and mentioned the message you left on his user talk page (which you quoted above). He concluded the message by asking me whether or not you were a troll (meaning that you were making problematic edits on purpose in order to vandalize or disrupt Wikipedia). I responded by advising him to leave you escalating notes and warnings regarding the unreferenced changes, and that your intentions weren't as relevant; we'd find out eventually anyways. Looking at your message, it appears to have attempted to explain the reason for your edits and seems to be legitimate to me. Whether or not JackintheBox's response and apology was sincere or sarcastic isn't something I could answer or determine with absolute certainty, but I would give JackintheBox the benefit of the doubt and assume that he was being legitimate and apologizing to you (remembering that we do this in situations where we're not sure).

As far as your edits go: You need to cite reliable sources with any information or content that you add to articles that isn't common knowledge. Your first-hand knowledge and your claims of being "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" are irrelevant and cannot be proven or verified at all. We absolutely cannot use the claims that editors give here to validate or assert that their changes are accurate and true. What if I made an edit to an article without any sort of reference to support it, and claimed in my response that they're true because I'm God and the master of the Universe when you asked me about it? Would you believe me? Of course you wouldn't. I'm not giving this example to imply or say that we think you're lying and that you're trying to be deceptive or anything; I'm saying this because my example and what you were doing were essentially the same thing... making claims that we cannot verify or prove at all. The only things that we accept as proof that the content you're adding is valid and true are references and citations to reliable sources. You're welcome to continue and edit Wikipedia; you're not in any kind of trouble... JackintheBox was just originally trying to give you a notice on your user talk page about your edit, advise you about Wikipedia's policies regarding sources, and ask you to review them and take note of this with your edits in the future. So long as you do this, you'll be absolutely fine and you should run into any more issues.

Please let me know if you have any more questions or concerns, and I'll be happy to answer them and help you further. In a nutshell, you don't need to worry about the messages and you can move on. Just remember to cite reliable sources with your edits and you'll be fine. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:43, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Zylonv (talk • contribs) 07:04, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Huggle

Hi,

I've only just upgraded to 3.4.7 and think I've already encountered an annoying bug. I made 2 reverts at Joseph Warren, and both times Huggle refused to send a warning saying their talk page was edited too recently. The last edit to their talk page had been about 18 hours prior! Has this happened to you (or anyone else)? Adam9007 (talk) 22:41, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

And by the way, Huggle also refused to send a warning here and here because it thought they were over 1 day old . Adam9007 (talk) 23:20, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Adam9007, do you have logs? --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 00:12, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

@Thegooduser: I've closed Huggle :(. Does Huggle keep logs? Adam9007 (talk) 00:20, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Adam9007, Not if you did not record them, but for next time you can give us the logs Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 00:25, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Adam9007! I haven't yet installed the latest release (I'm going to be doing that shortly), but according to the commit information on Github regarding this particular release, it looks like version 3.4.7 3.4.8 resolved an issue with updating the time that a user had last received a warning - which involves exactly what you're observing. What you're seeing with the new version may not be an issue, but actually a fix. Have you tried disabling the "[d]on't ask for any confirmation - if an edit was too old, or user received a message recently, just skip the warning" option located under the 'warnings' tab? I would leave the other two confirmation options above it enabled (unless those start to become annoying as well), but I would see if disabling this option resolves the issue you're seeing. I currently have these options enabled so that I don't accidentally warn a user for the same thing on the same page under less than a minute, or for an old edit or something (though I wouldn't know why a very old edit would suddenly show up on Huggle's queue.... ? When does this actually happen? Something tells me that it does and has happened before and was an issue that was resolved with this option becoming available, but I can't think of it right now...), but I'll install the new version, observe, and see what happens... Thanks for the message and for letting me know about what you're seeing. Keep me posted, and let me know what disabling that option does for you. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:53, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

@Oshwah and Thegooduser: 3.4.7 didn't last long; there's now 3.4.8! I'll see if that works any better. Adam9007 (talk) 15:28, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Adam9007 - Ah, excellent! I was actually incorrect in my response above... There were two releases over the last two days: 3.4.7 fixed the labels of the buttons in the window where you request page protection within Huggle. 3.4.8 resolves the issue I described in my last response above. I mixed the two up when I looked at the release changes, and thought that 3.4.7 was the version that fixed the last talk page time data (the version you installed). Nope - it was 3.4.8. Let me know if this version resolves your issue. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:51, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Funny; I was just going to ask if 3.4.8 reverted to the old behaviour. This warning was sent despite the previous one having been sent just seconds prior . Adam9007 (talk) 15:52, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Noooooooooooooo! 'Fri May 3 17:45:51 2019 Not sending warning to 158.222.94.130 for their edit to Presidency of John F. Kennedy on enwiki because it's older than 1 day' . Haven't yet encountered the other issue though. Adam9007 (talk) 16:48, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Adam9007 - Again, disabling that option I talked about above should fix that. Have you tried unticking that option? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:51, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Damn, I've just closed Huggle . It seems to be a bit quiet at the moment anyway, so I'll try that later. Adam9007 (talk) 16:53, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Adam9007 - No worries. Let me know whenever you change that option and if it fixes your issue. Cheers ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:56, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

I just tried to reproduce the issue, but there seems to be even less in the way of vandalism going on than before (unless Huggle's gone blind? :)) Looks like I'll have to try another time. Adam9007 (talk) 00:00, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Adam9007 - Hmm... interesting. Well, keep an eye on it and let me know if shenanigans return. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:16, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

I haven't got the 'too recent' issue yet, but I've just encountered the 'older than 1 day' issue with this ('Sun May 5 20:55:09 2019 Not sending warning to 92.233.85.167 for their edit to Scottish Parliament on enwiki because it's older than 1 day'). I'll turn that option off and see if it helps. Adam9007 (talk) 19:58, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Adam9007 - Cool deal; thanks for the update and for letting me know. Let me know how it goes ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:07, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

I got a prompt with this revert, saying that their talk page was edited too recently. I said no. Adam9007 (talk) 20:27, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Adam9007 - Looks like the user had just edited, and was given a warning for, their changes to Laurence Shanet - which was three minutes prior. I'd really like to know what the threshold is set to on Huggle before it will just leave a warning without bugging you about it.... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:31, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Apparently, it's in the config somewhere, if I'm reading this correctly. Adam9007 (talk) 21:59, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Review Acrticle

Hello Oshwah, I recently created a draft article of Saint Solomon High School. I request you to please review it for moving further. Thankyou Have a nice day Chinar (Message | Contribs) 03:34, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

@Chinar Tree: I think you need add to more information. Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 04:37, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Chinar Tree - There's a process that already exists if you're ready to submit a draft article for review by a member of the articles for creation team. The instructions are located here. If you have any questions or need any additional help, please don't hesitate to let me know. :-) Good luck with your submission and happy editing! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:59, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks to both.Chinar (Message | Contribs) 09:09, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Chinar Tree - No problem! Good luck! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:43, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of Concetta K. Antico

Please restore this page you arbitrailly deleted Concetta K. Antico I just created it. It is factual,verifiable,violates nothing and has scientific and historical significance. Concetta K.Antico — Preceding unsigned comment added by Concetta K. Antico (talk • contribs) 12:42, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Concetta K. Antico, and welcome to Wikipedia! The 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 and/or promote yourself - things that were 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. This was why your user page was deleted.

Since you're brand new to Wikipedia, I highly recommend that you go through and complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial before you make any edits or take on any major tasks around here. It will provide you with many helpful walkthroughs, guides, interactive lessons, and other information that will be very helpful to you. Most users who take this advice and complete the tutorial tell me later that it was significantly helpful to them and saved them hours of time and frustration they would've experienced otherwise.

Please let me know if you have any questions regarding Wikipedia's policies and guidelines on user pages, and I'll be happy to answer them. I hope you have a great day and I wish you happy editing. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:13, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Need expert to write my page

Oshwah how do I find an expert who will write and restore my original wiki page that was well documented with media and university research sources Concetta Antico I am of sincere historical, scientific and artistic significance. Can you do this? Please take a moment to see my significance by googling me. Where do I go to hire an expert to assist with this? Are you able to find my original page archived somewhere:(( it was more than valid Concetta K. Antico (talk) 13:24, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Concetta K. Antico - Please see Wikipedia's content guideline on autobiographies. In a nutshell: Creating or editing an article about yourself is behavior that's highly frowned upon and will usually result in such creations or edits being deleted for this reason. If you're a notable person and meet the items listed in the requirements (which is needed for articles on Wikipedia), someone else will undoubtedly create an article and write one about you. You can add yourself to the list of requested articles if you wish, but it should ultimately be uninvolved editors of the community who will write an article about you. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:02, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

mail

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

please — Preceding unsigned comment added by Concetta K. Antico (talk • contribs) 14:08, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Responded. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:53, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

ACC tool

Is the tool not working? Reserve button is timing out, won't reserve. All check buttons working fine, also tried to force break an unexplained long hold, Force Break working, but the "Are you sure" button is also timing out. - FlightTime (open channel) 16:18, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

FlightTime - It's doing the same thing for me as well... I'll let someone know in the ACC channel on IRC. Thanks for the heads up! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:21, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks :) - FlightTime (open channel) 16:22, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

FlightTime - You bet ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:29, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Working now (at least the forced break did :P )  :) - FlightTime (open channel) 18:08, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

FlightTime - Great! Thanks for the update! Let me know if things go bonkers again, and I'll make sure to relay it to the people who can take a look. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:28, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Multiple accounts

Hi Oshwah. Much like created accounts, is known for Believe (Cher album) ([3] [4] [5] [6]) and Can't Get You Out of My Head ([7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15]), which has being a genre warrior.

• Fritzydowner687 (talk · contribs)
• Bugintome36 (talk · contribs)
• Evedentlyuser (talk · contribs)
• Everworthsless728299 (talk · contribs)
• Websterevergreen39 (talk · contribs)
• Everworths9393 (talk · contribs)
• Everworths284390 (talk · contribs)
• Everworths4673 (talk · contribs)
• Everworthless453 (talk · contribs)
• Everworthless593 (talk · contribs)
• Everworthless56733 (talk · contribs)

Most accounts named begins with "Everworth" and "Everworthless". 2402:1980:8256:581F:70DC:DF0F:D7E6:F839 (talk) 16:55, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for the message! I've created a sockpuppet investigation report for this user, and I'm handling this now. If you have any questions or concerns, please don't hesitate to let me know. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:41, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 special circular

Administrators must secure their accounts The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised. Use strong, unique passwords for your Wikipedia account and associated email Change your password now if your Wikipedia account password or email password is reused on another website, exposed, or weak Enable two-factor authentication now for improved security

View additional information

Why have I received this message? All administrators are receiving it. What prompted you to send this message? Recently, several Wikipedia admin accounts were compromised. The admin accounts were desysopped on an emergency basis. In the past, the Committee often resysopped admin accounts as a matter of course once the admin was back in control of their account. The committee has updated its guidelines. Admins may now be required to undergo a fresh Request for Adminship (RfA) after losing control of their account. What do I need to do? Only to follow the instructions in this message. Check that your password is unique (not reused across sites). Check that your password is strong (not simple or guessable). Enable Two-factor authentication (2FA), if you can, to create a second hurdle for attackers. How can I find out more about two-factor authentication (2FA)? You can find out more about 2FA at m:2FA.

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:40, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Cameron11598. I'm glad I was able to help you with the SQL query so that you could get this sent out. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:23, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Requesting a favour

Hi Oshwah,

Could I ask you to reach out to TheUnbeholden? He or she is a relatively inexperienced editor who has made many rapid-fire edits over the past few weeks—things like undiscussed page moves, creating and populating new categories, and adding lots of see also links and stub templates somewhat haphazardly. He or she has also been adding text that's unreliably sourced or seems like personal opinion: like here, here, or here. I don't want to haul him off to ANI or anything, but I think his editing is becoming a bit disruptive. Cheers, gnu57 22:32, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Genericusername57! Have you tried reaching out to this user directly and expressing your concerns in a custom message? I'm happy to talk to the user if you'd like, but anyone is allowed to reach out and talk to other users about issues, problems, or concerns that they're finding with their edits and behavior. This doesn't require an admin or someone special to do. ;-) Let me know. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:35, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Above and beyond

You're not fixing that manually, are you?! There's like 1000 admins. You should use (or find someone who can use) AWB. Still, you're a better man than I. I considered fixing others' pages for about 0.03 seconds, and then said "meh". --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:04, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Floquenbeam - I just started using AWB, but it would be nice if it would just save them all without me having to click on each one... lol ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:09, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Duh. Good grief. I just saw the AWB tag on your contribs, not sure why I didn't notice before since I was specifically wondering if you were using AWB. Sorry, dumb question on my part. Can't help with the clicks, never used it myself. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:15, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Floquenbeam - LOL... no problem. This is my first time ever using it... ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:17, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Small tags for mass message

I see that you are adding missing "small" tags - do you want me to do a bot run and fix them all? It'll avoid the "you have new messages" alert. Task has already been approved - see Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/DannyS712 bot 8 --DannyS712 (talk) 23:05, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) with @Floquenbeam --DannyS712 (talk) 23:05, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

DannyS712 - Yes, please. Do it. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:06, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

@Oshwah: Before I unleash the bot, just want to confirm that [16], [17], [18], and [19] are the intended edits. --DannyS712 (talk) 23:13, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

DannyS712 - You are go for launch. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:14, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

 Doing... now --DannyS712 (talk) 23:17, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Can I suggest that you not continue doing it manually, so that people don't get the "you have new messages" twice? --DannyS712 (talk) 23:20, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

DannyS712 - I've already cut the program. You're in the driver seat now... ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:20, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Oh, sorry, I kept seeing more of your edits on my watchlist (confession: serial talk page stalker). Anyway, it should be resolved soon. In the future though, can I suggest excluding bots and system users from the list? (AnomieBOT, MusikBot, Cyberbot, and the abuse filter don't need the alerts imo) --DannyS712 (talk) 23:23, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

DannyS712 - Oh, that wasn't me who sent the original message out to everyone. I did write and give him the SQL query to pull a list of all admins, but he said that he didn't use it. Anyways, yes I would agree with you that bots wouldn't need a notification like this. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:26, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

 Done 917 edits made, glad I could be of service :) --DannyS712 (talk) 00:46, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

DannyS712 - Thanks for your help! That missing tag would've caused a lot of frustration on user talk pages with admins who aren't familiar with opening and closing tags. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:48, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

There is another one - see Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular) --DannyS712 (talk) 21:14, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

@Joe Roe: -.- you cool with @DannyS712: running another bot task to fix this latest issue? (@GorillaWarfare, KrakatoaKatie, BU Rob13, and AGK: (all who have been active on clerks-l today) --Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 21:19, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

@DannyS712: Speaking with Rob off wiki theres no need to fix as <small> and </small> tags don't carry through headers. (they do but this shouldn't realistically cause issues?) --Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 21:24, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

@Cameron11598: umm, see the bottom of Special:Permalink/895522565 --DannyS712 (talk) 21:27, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

@DannyS712: That's because of this edit undoing your original bot edit. Not the new small tag close. That won't cause any problems on most pages. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 21:31, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I saw that that is why, but my point was that small tags do work across headings (I edit conflicted with the correction above). Regardless, I'm just trying to help, so if you don't want the edits thats fine. --DannyS712 (talk) 21:33, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

I do appreciate the offer and willingness to help. You are correct they go through headings; I had thought they didn't until I tested in my sandbox. That was my bad. I don't see the edits as being a good idea here. The extra small tag close will only affect editors who have a small tag open on their entire user talk because they like the aesthetic of smaller text. We'd be making 1,100+ edits to fix maybe a couple pages. Not ideal. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 21:37, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

You've Got Mail

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Zylonv (talk • contribs) 00:27, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Zylonv - Received and responded. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:29, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

help

I've left a query at help desk, can you help? --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 00:36, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Thegooduser - Sure. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:46, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

I am still confused. --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 00:50, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

I'm not sure exactly what you're looking to do. Are you just trying to display a resized image without any borders? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:50, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Trying it make it look like the main page's in the News picture/Did you Know Picture. --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 00:52, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Just use the {{main page image}} template to do it. See Template:Main page image for the documentation and how to use it. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:59, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

If all goes well at TheWikiWizard, in the next 6 months or so, Do you think it would be a good idea to do a meta-"Wikimedia" wide TheWikiWizard on Meta Wiki? Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 01:16, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Thegooduser - That's up to you. Just don't bite off more than you can chew... ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:17, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

And how can I create a (Redacted) channel? Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 01:18, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

It's easy to do, but channels you create will have two pound symbols preceding the name (so, (Redacted), for example). Freenode only creates channels with only one symbol for organizations, etc. Look at this page and the links it provides for tutorials. Good tutorials that are in-depth will mostly be off-wiki and on freenode's website. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:21, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Created it. I now need a cloak. Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 01:43, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Gotta apply for one. See Wikipedia:IRC/Cloaks. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:47, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

I applied for one, but I didn't select a project. Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 01:55, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Might want to do that. lol ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:57, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

I can't, the o-ath page was separate page and I realized I forgot to select a project, after I closed the page. Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 01:59, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

I see. Just contact someone from that cloaks page and explain what happened. They can help to fix that for you. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:08, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

I don't want my WikiWizard Irc anymore, how can I delete it??? Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 02:13, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

If you didn't register the channel or anything like that, just leave the channel and that's it. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:13, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

I registered it already. Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 02:16, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Freenode policy is that they expire in 60 days if you don't rejoin the channel again. So just leave the channel and you're good. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:18, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

My Damn Ip showed, someone might hack my ip if i don't delete the channel. Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 02:20, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

If you didn't register it or add it to any lists or modes within your channel, there's no IP information there. You're fine. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:21, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

It's registered, what should I do now? Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 02:23, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Like I said: Just leave the channel and it'll all just expire... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:30, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Yes, but if someone joins, they will see my IP address, and they might hack me Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 02:32, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

I don't think anybody is going to do what. What would make them randomly join a channel with that exact name? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:33, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Because they want to hack my IP. Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 02:34, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

I don't think anyone is going to go after you. Here's the link to the freenode policy page for more information. You just need to leave the channel; none of your IP information will be listed unless you entered it into the channel explicitly to add it to a list or mode, which I highly doubt that you did. You can always ask for help in the #wikipedia-en channel, as well. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:39, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

@Thegooduser: How to get TheWikiWizard newspaper? Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 11:15, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Masumrezarock100 here Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 20:08, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 02:53, 4 May 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 02:53, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Acknowledged. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:57, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Duplicate shared IP notice

Hey Oshwah, Is there any way to prevent Twinkle from adding another shared IP notice, if already one present there? Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 16:07, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Masumrezarock100! As far as I know, there isn't a way to do that and it's either enabled and left underneath each warning you leave for anonymous user, or disabled and not left at all. I have the option enabled in my settings, though I will confess that there are times where the notice can get in the way and sometimes appear too "automated" (if you know what I mean). You could discuss your thoughts and perhaps propose that an option be developed to limit how many times it's left. Try visiting Twinkle's general discussion page. Please let me know if I can answer any more questions and I'll be happy to do so. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:14, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining. Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 16:18, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Masumrezarock100 - No problem! If you need me for anything else, you know where to find me. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:20, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Could you please block this person... User:86.151.69.189

hi, could you please block this person...User:86.151.69.189

They are persistently disrupting the page: Scottish premiership table.

Everytime I edit the table, they are constantly undoing the edit.

I have put a request in for page protection, but they keep blocking it out with so nobody can see it.

Could you sort this please.

Thank you.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by L1amw90 (talk • contribs) 16:49, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi L1amw90! I've blocked the IP user and added temporary semi-protection to the template. Please let me know if you see any more disruption or if I can do anything else for you. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:58, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Reported for Edit Warring (re. User:86.151.69.189)

Hi Oshwah. This point follows the one raised by L1amw90.

Unfortunately, I appear to have been reported for edit warring (a concept I was not previously aware of) with the user you have just blocked for disruptive editing (User:86.151.69.189). Here is the link... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Celticbhoy97_reported_by_User:CleverChris69_(Result:_)

To add to this, I was reported by an account which has subsequently been blocked for being an impersonator (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/CleverChris68). It may be that the '2018–19 Scottish Premiership' page also requires some protection, perhaps similar to the league table, although I am not entirely familiar with Wikipedia policy.

Can you give me any advice on how to resolve this situation? Like most contributors, I only have an interest in constructive editing and providing accuracy where I can.

Best wishes Celticbhoy97 (talk) 17:15, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Celticbhoy97! I've removed the report from the noticeboard and taken the appropriate actions necessary against the IP user, and I don't think you have anything to worry about. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:18, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Oshwah. I really appreciate your help. :-) Celticbhoy97 (talk) 17:21, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Celticbhoy97 - No problem! Happy editing! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:51, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Cameron11598 - Unacceptable. :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:04, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

-.- --Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 18:32, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

83.218.162.80

Hi Oshwah. You just blocked 86.151.69.189 but now 83.218.162.80 is exhibiting the same behaviour. See Teemu Pukki. S0091 (talk) 21:26, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

YouTube links for some reason appeared with this post but I did not link them. ?? S0091 (talk) 21:30, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi S0091! Okay, I'll go take a look right now. The YouTube links were from someone else's message they left above. They cited them as references, which means that they get listed on the bottom of the page. Your message here was just a coincidence; it had nothing to do with your message or anything you did. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:57, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

You've Got Mail

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by [REDACTED - Oshwah]

Are you sure you emailed him? You need an account to email him. Or did you just copy-paste the template? Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 06:54, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

I echo the response above; only registered accounts can use Special:EmailUser. If this message was left by someone who accidentally did so while logged out, please let me know by emailing me and I'll redact and suppress the IP info from here. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:43, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Did you receive any email? Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 13:09, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Masumrezarock100 - Nope, no emails from anybody when the IP user left this message... Not sure what the deal is. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:41, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Thought so. Guess it is a misuse of ygm template. Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 13:46, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Not sure, but whatever the intent was - it didn't involve sending me an email (obviously, since it's an anonymous user)... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:56, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Es204L

Es204L is back to adding unsourced content again.... sigh... Noah^Talk 03:40, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Hurricane Noah - I've left this user a final warning on their user talk page and set clear expectations. Keep an eye on this user and their edits, and let me know if you see any more violations of policy by this user. Thanks for the message and the continued updates. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:03, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

He just changed a whole bunch of stats on Pacific hurricane without citing a source. He had already done the same to the Atlantic counterpart the other day. Both articles do need sources, but changing an unsourced figure without a source is still wrong. Noah^Talk 13:14, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

I apologize for not seeing that you followed up here. If this is a continued issue that's current, let me know and I'll be happy to help. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:20, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you

Hello, thank you for your help with the IP address removal.Venicescapes (talk) 10:29, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

No subject

Hey Oshwah, can you help me defend Draft:Chipflake? If sure thing, that would be great.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Duchyii (talk • contribs) 14:22, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

And the message that was immediately send was by editor Duchyii! Thanks if you want to support! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Duchyii (talk • contribs) 14:24, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't realize. Oh well. Chip is gonna be mad anyway.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Duchyii (talk • contribs) 14:33, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Duchyii - If the draft page you created is tagged for speedy deletion and you disagree with it, you need to follow the instructions and contest the deletion by adding a discussion to the draft article's talk page. Also, that text you added to the draft article where you yell at Allweneedisloveandpeace for tagging it... that needs to be removed, and very quickly.... Incivility or personal attacks of any kind of toward other editors are absolutely not gonna fly here, and you'll be blocked in short order if it doesn't get removed and if that behavior is repeated again... Thanks :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:41, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

I'm very sorry. Its just, people nowadays. I am so terribly sorry for everything I've done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Duchyii (talk • contribs) 14:45, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

And by the way ill give you a little poison champagne. Here it is: [[20]] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Duchyii (talk • contribs) 14:48, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Duchyii - I understand... just be respectful and civil toward others with your future messages on Wikipedia, and you won't be in any trouble. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:51, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

By the way, I have a chat room so that people can talk about anything they want, or it can be a little bunker where people that got in trouble go to hide.

That sure didn't last long. Whatever it was. Indeffed. - BilCat (talk) 17:57, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Hey Oshwah,I think you messed up the closing. All closing tag contain "/" not "\". Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 16:43, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Masumrezarock100 - HA! Thanks for catching that. I tend to do that once in awhile... the cause of my stupidity is unknown and there is no cure. :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:02, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 20:14, 5 May 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 20:14, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Acknowledged. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:14, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Have 3 beers ! (Don't get drunk, okay?) Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 20:56, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Thegooduser - OOOOH! Three beers! Thanks, man! Won't get drunk, but this is a damn good start. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:00, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Enigmaman closed

An arbitration case regarding Enigmaman has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedy has been enacted:

Enigmaman (talk · contribs) is desysopped for repeated misuse of administrative tools and the administrative logs, inadequate communication, and generally failing to meet community expectations and responsibilities of administrators as outlined in WP:ADMINACCT. He may regain the administrative tools at any time via a successful request for adminship.

For the Arbitration Committee, – bradv🍁 13:19, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Enigmaman closed

Thanks for the heads up, Bradv. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:19, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Need Help for Koch Tribe

@Oshwah: Hello sir, I would like to inform you that Koch tribe is aboriginal tribe of India. And Rajbanshi is basically either very different people or section of Koch people who use Rajbongshi title. But Koch Tribe information is completed deleted from internet so that Rajbongshi can convert Koch history into Rajbongshi history. Kindly reopen this page . Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PerfectingNEI (talk • contribs) 15:59, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi PerfectingNEI! I'm confused... what article are we talking about exactly? Can you provide a diff or a link to it so I can take a look? Thanks :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:46, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

@Oshwah: This " https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Koch_people&redirect=no " is the page for Aboriginal Tribe . This page is being redirected to different page Rajbongshi people . Koch is genuine tribe but Rajbongshi is mixed identity. Rajbongshi are trying to hide the Koch people. Thank you PerfectingNEI (talk) 08:29, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

PerfectingNEI - The best way to get this matter resolved is to file a requested move. This will be considered a potentially controversial move (which requires discussion and input), not a technical move - so make sure that you follow the correct instructions (the link I provided you will navigate you to the correct place) and explain the reason that the article should be moved to the title you've chosen. Be as specific as possible, and provide reliable sources if necessary. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Good luck with your request and I wish you happy editing! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:35, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Battle of the Hairs WikiLove

Our own unique battle, eh?

Hello Oshwah. How are you? Recently I summoned you to the idea lab Village Pump. Had a little unique idea that could only work between us, So I quickly made it on Photoshop while I still had access to it at my high school before I graduate next month and I have no more Photoshop access. It's crummy and poorly put together, but it'll work. Still genius of me though. :) This is intended as humor only to promote Wikilove. I've even added it to WikiProject Oshwah, even though I was late for the April Fools Day joke. Hehe DrewieStewie (talk) 16:25, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

DrewieStewie - HA! That's funny. Not sure how the Village Pump is going to react to such a submission - especially since April Fools' Day has already just elapsed. They might tell you that the idea lab isn't the proper place for that. Might just be something you'll want to keep in your back pocket until next April. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:49, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Haha, I wasn't saying I was going to take this there, I just simply made a passing reference to our recent correspondence at the idea lab. But yeah, I'll keep this in my back pocket until then. Hehe DrewieStewie (talk) 00:04, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

DrewieStewie - Ah! Okay, that makes much more sense. Thanks for clarifying and I apologize for the confusion. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:07, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

No worries, although you did give me poor advice in regards to a back pocket, considering that I am wearing my Adidas sweats right now (as also depicted on my picture). I'll just keep it strictly on project space until then. Anyways lets get back to work on the encyclopedia, and take care brotha. Feel free to contact me if you need any queries regarding site matters, if you would like to donate some of your famous hair to me, or rub my head for good luck, or alternatively whack my head with a wet trout. Take care ;) DrewieStewie (talk) 00:15, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

DrewieStewie - LOL. Awesome; same to you as well! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:20, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

You've Got Mail

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Zylonv (talk • contribs) 00:35, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Received and replied. Thanks! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:50, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.TheSandDoctor ^Talk 05:53, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

TheSandDoctor - Received and replied. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:50, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 22:09, 8 May 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

BilCat (talk) 22:09, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

BilCat - Received and replied. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:51, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, and replied. - BilCat (talk) 00:12, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Acknowledged. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:24, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		Hope I'm not dragging this out, but this is the last thing I wanted to do before I get to other responsibilities like PCR or AFD. I could have given you any other barnstar, but I think this is the most appropriate based on why. You always bring positivity and humor onto Wikipedia, and always handle people in the most respectful, kindest way, even when doing mentally difficult tasks such as blocking, declining unblock requests, and Arbcom. While people including us are primarily here to build an encyclopedia, you always welcome humor and kindness, because you believe there is always room for that here as long as good things and encyclopedia advancement are getting done. You are very understanding and empathetic to other viewpoints even if you disagree with them, and you always understand morals of both yourself and others. Even if you have to spend large amounts of time off Wikipedia occasionally, you always make sure to catch up on what you have missed and respond accordingly to situations. You aren't judgmental towards other Wikipedians and are respectful and always see them for the good they are now even if they had a bad past or did bad things despite being net positives, such as with Enigaman's Arbcom case, and me. (If you read my userpage, I got blocked at the age of 9 and later evaded with this account for many years, eventually confessing and being blocked until I managed to gain consensus for an unblock, later earning Pending Changes Reviewer rights. I think you would have backed me throughout the whole process if you were present on my situation, given the circumstances and explanations.) Thanks for being arguably one of if not the best, most qualified administrator on here, and have an amazing day :) DrewieStewie (talk) 00:55, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi DrewieStewie! I appreciate this barnstar and the very kind words very much. I'm happy to see that my outlook on things, how I respond to others and help them, and what I try to do on Wikipedia makes at least some impact on somebody out there... I don't hold grudges or judge others on Wikipedia for their mistakes and their past because most of them have already been drug through the ANI pit of despair and been given an earful by other editors... they're not putting themselves out there and asking for help because they're looking to get chewed out some more... they're trying to do their best to resolve the matter, make things right, and move on. Thanks again for the barnstar! I appreciate it very much, and it means a lot to me. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:10, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

User talk:International Journal of Tamil Language and Literary Studies

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 07:21, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Cahk -  Done. Thanks for the heads up. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:23, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

full protection gaming

Hi, I don't have a problem with the full protection you put on here, but don't you think that for a user involved in an edit war (against established users) to make a total revert of other users [21] (2:56) then go running to requests for protection less than a minute later [22] (2:57) to ask for full protection is a quintessential example of WP:GAMEing? This was an obvious and cynical attempt to get the page protected to "his version" and is part of a long standing pattern of similar behavior.Volunteer Marek (talk) 12:50, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Volunteer Marek, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your concerns about gaming the system and the user involved in the dispute. I didn't notice that Icewhiz had reverted the article and then made the protection request. However, I will say that I saw the request, looked at the article's edit history, confirmed that a dispute was ongoing, and applied full protection from there. I didn't factor who made the last edit, who made the protection request, or anything involving the current revision's content or "which one was better" before applying protection to the article. I do this purposefully to leave it down to "the luck of the draw", so that no person or side gains an advantage over the other. It just happened that I was the one who responded to the protection request and at the time that I did; it just as easily could've been handled by another admin at a different time and after another editor modified the article. Did Icewhiz purposefully do what he/she did in order to game the system? I'm not sure. However, the factors involved with how I handle requests and apply protection to articles leaves a lot less room for someone's plan to go as intended if that's what they were attempting to do. ;-) Please let me know if you have any more questions or concerns, and I'll be happy to discuss them further with you. I appreciate the message and I'm happy that you expressed your concerns over what you observed. Like I said, I didn't notice or take that into account, and it's good that you said something. If anything, some good food for thought that I should evaluate looking into or taking into account with future requests. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:03, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't have a problem with your action, it was appropriate. I do have a problem with this kind of cynical approach to disputes, as exemplified by Icewhiz. Volunteer Marek (talk) 21:17, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Volunteer Marek - And I completely understand that for sure... Hell, I'd be a bit frustrated too if I saw that going on. Like I said, I try and do my best to not let things such as who last edited the page, what the revision text is, who filed the protection request, and other irrelevant matters factor into my decision to protect the article and when it's done. The only thing I do care about is whether or not the current revision violates any serious policies. If it contains any copyright violations, BLP violations, threats or harassment, or other serious policy violations - then I'm forced to either remove that content or revert it to the most recent revision that doesn't contain those issues. Other than that, I try to keep things to "the luck of the draw" as much as possible in order to be fair and neutral to everyone involved and to avoid giving any image to others that I'm playing favorites. If you have any further questions or concerns, please let me know and I'll be happy to address them with you. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:23, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

consistency please re: LittleBizzy deletion page

Please either ban everyone from commenting, or ban nobody. If banning everyone though, the deletion thread should be cancelled altogether, since it was submitted in bad faith. Our competitors are trying to delete our company's Wikipedia page to "hurt" our SEO, and instead of allowing us to comment, you ban us, and then delete our comment on our company's own deletion thread? If a company is not allowed to comment after we saw the notice, than who else is supposed to tell you the corruption here? Do you realize that [REDACTED - Oshwah], and abusing their Wikipedia standing? Also taking payments for Wikipedia edits for their SEO clients? How is any of this okay with Wikipedia policies (its not) or U.S. laws on FCC endorsements and fraud (its not). Please reinstate our comment, or at least in edited form (below).

[REDACTED - Oshwah]

Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/LittleBizzy&action=history

"Most importantly: Remember that I'm here to help you. I will treat you with respect no matter what - you have my promise" ... hope so, though you did ban our team member's new account. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gooper42 (talk • contribs) 15:40, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, no... That's not going to happen. The discussion will proceed as planned and hopefully without any further interference or disruption. Creating multiple accounts in order to evade blocks and continue the harassment, disruption, and unfounded accusations you've been making is a serious violation of policy. The reason that you're continuing to cause disruption to the article's deletion discussion is because you have a personal conflict of interest with the company and because you're opposed to the deletion of the article. Instead of taking just five minutes to review Wikipedia's headers and information, their policies on notability, and the guidelines we use when determining whether or not an article should be kept or deleted, you resort to repeatedly disrupting the article and the deletion discussion, and making accusations that are completely unfounded and without a shred of evidence. Sorry, but people who've already "made up their minds" as far as what they want to believe is happening, and who absolutely refuse to stop, listen, and try and work with us peacefully, let us explain, and try and resolve the matter in an adult-like manner are people that most editors won't waste their time with at all. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:28, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Need Help

Hello sir , This user https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Aranya suddenly remove everything from Bodo people and Now his page don't exist. Kindly block this type of user from Bodo people page. Thanks. PerfectingNEI (talk) 17:47, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi PerfectingNEI! It looks like the user reverted changes to Bodo people because they believed that unreferenced content was added to it - take a look at their edit summary that was included with that edit. Have you reached out and talked to the user directly and expressed your concerns? We should assume good faith on their part, try and reach out, and work with them to identify and address their concerns, or educate them with what they might have mistranslated or read incorrectly. We don't jump straight to blocks or things of that nature unless we've exhausted other methods to try and help or warn the user first, and the user continues to cause issues repeatedly. Please try and talk to the user directly and help him/her to work things out and address their concerns. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:55, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Sir , His page don't exist now. He is deleting blindly. Some people said, British era books citation can't be used . So, I added modern books citation. And recent journal citation. But That guy suddenly removed everything . Now his page don't exist to give me any reply. I think he is fake user. Whose purpose is to remove someone's content and then delete own page. PerfectingNEI (talk) 18:00, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

PerfectingNEI - What page are you referring to that no longer exists? Can you provide me a link to where it was before so I can track it down? Also, I do not consider this to be an assumption of good faith on your part, nor do I consider this an appropriate attempt to reach out to Aranya in a kind and respectful manner to discuss your concerns and offer assistance... Can we maybe try again and this time with a civil message? Please provide me the link to the page that you say no longer exists so that I can take a look. Thanks :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:07, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

I mean User page don't exist. I think he is fake editor. PerfectingNEI (talk) 19:43, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Sir, Can you please reopen this page https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Koch_people&redirect=no and Keep watch so that দিব্য_দত্ত can't redirect this page to Rajbongshi people page. Thank you. PerfectingNEI (talk) 19:47, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

PerfectingNEI - Having a userpage doesn't assert whether or not an editor is legit, nor does it mean that the user is "real" or "fake", or that they intend on making malicious or disruptive edits. No accounts are required to create or add anything to their user page. In fact, there are administrators who don't have a user page at all. It's simply up to the user's choice or preference if they wish to create one. Also, the user দিব্য_দত্ত edited this redirect already and pointed it to the Rajbongshi people article back in March (see diff). I'm not sure what the problem is with the change, but this is a matter that might need a discussion if the redirect is incorrect. I'd reach out directly to the user (be respectful and assume good faith this time...) and talk to them about the redirect and why you believe it to be incorrect. If anything, you can start a discussion on the article's talk page to involve more editors and receive more input. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:55, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Your Userpages

Do you give me permission to fix all your other userpages? Some links don't work. --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 22:07, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Thegooduser - Like which ones? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:08, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

On other Wikimedia Projects, The link to your en-wiki userpage does not work, I've fixed like 5 of them, wanted to know it it's okay before I go anymore. --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 22:15, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Thegooduser - Which ones? Can you link me to them? The template that's pulled from meta should work fine and navigate users without any problems... There might be some pages I just need to list for deletion so that it'll pull from meta instead of what I added locally back in the day... lol ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:19, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Apparent vanity edits

Hi Oshwah, could you look at this edit, and several others from yesterday and today? Looks like someone trying to add themself or a friend to the list article. It's just a nuisance at this point, but I'm not sure the best way to handle it. I'm pretty certain the person being added is not notable by any stretch, but of course it's not up to me to prove they're not notable. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 22:58, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi BilCat! Yup, I agree - just someone trying to add a friend or something to the list. Just remove the edits and leave notes on the user's talk page that notable people with Wikipedia articles should be added to these lists. If it keeps happening repeatedly and won't stop and after a final warning, let me know and I'll take a look. But yeah, just remove and let them know. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:00, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Will do, thanks. - BilCat (talk) 00:36, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

BilCat - No problem. You know where to find me if you need anything else... ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:47, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 23:15, 11 May 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

BilCat (talk) 23:15, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

BilCat - Handled. Thank you for the email! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:02, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, replied. - BilCat (talk) 00:35, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

BilCat - HA oops... thanks, and fixed. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:46, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

No worries. Thanks again. - BilCat (talk) 00:57, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

No problem ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:40, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Watchlist question

Is there a simple way to block specific users or bots from showing up on my watchlist? There's a bot that's editing a lot right now I'd like to ignore, User:Cydebot, but I still want to see other bots. (I do have bots hidden right now, but I'd like to re-enable them.) Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 04:56, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi BilCat! The closest way to filter your watchlist like this is to set it to exclude all bot edits from showing up. I don't believe that you can filter out specific editors or users from appearing, but that wouldn't be a bad thing to propose as an enhancement idea to have developed and implemented in the future. :-) If the bot makes edits that adds a certain tag, you can filter that out as well, but it doesn't look like this is the case. If you have any more questions, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. Cheers ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:14, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, I've been filtering out all bot edits. Cydebot has been doing a slew of category changes that just fill up my watchlist, and I don't care about most categories in the first place. I'll think about making a suggestion somewhere. Thanks for answering. - BilCat (talk) 05:18, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

BilCat - Always happy to help! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:21, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

@BilCat: (Just casually joining in out of the blue.) There isn't a proper option to filter a certain user's edits out of your watchlist (as of yet), so I think you might want to use a user script; I think I can make one, if you want me to. —RainFall 05:52, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

RainFall - A script that will do that? Really? Naturally, I'm intrigued.... ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:57, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Scripts can do everything (except taking me out for a coffee)... lol. Give me a minute or two. —RainFall 06:00, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

RainFall - Well if you find a way to develop a script to deliver you coffee, please do hook me up... lol ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:01, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Yes, thanks, RainFall! That's what I was hoping to hear. And I'm quite disappointed Oshwah didn't know about it already. :) - BilCat (talk) 06:03, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Well, when it comes to being a disappointment..... I don't... disappoint? LOL ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:08, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

var watchlist_filter_username = "User:Cydebot";
if (mw.config.get("wgCanonicalSpecialPageName") === "Watchlist") {
  mw.hook('wikipage.content').add(function() {
    $("a.mw-userlink[href$='/wiki/" + watchlist_filter_username + "']").parents("li.mw-changeslist-edit").hide();
  });
}

@BilCat: Here you go. Append this in your common.js file. —RainFall 06:08, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Oh wow. Very simple and to the point. I like it. I've created, modified, and messed with a lot of scripts... but I admit that I haven't touched very many when it comes to filtering one's watchlist or similar list page.... Thanks for the code, RainFall! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:10, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Yes thanks. It works! - BilCat (talk) 06:16, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Awesome! That's excellent news! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:19, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

That content-replacing IP you blocked...

Now they're cursing at you on their talk page. BTW, it looks like they've had a history of talk page abuse; I doubt that it's going to stop. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 05:25, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

LightandDark2000 - Delightful! lol.... I'll head on over there and switch that off. ;-) Thanks! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:27, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

A thank you.

Thank you for being on wikipeda for a while, reviewing. And thank you for reviewing my profile. And thank you for having crazy hair. Arian Niknam (talk) 10:53, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Arian Niknam - HA! No problem. ;-) Welcome to Wikipedia! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:57, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

My behaviour

Hello Oshwah, I know this probably isn't a place to ask this. But seeing you are more friendly than others I'm asking you this. Is my behaviour in this diff is like harassment? This editor declined some of the requests on WT:AFC/Participants (actually I watch that page) even though he isn't an admin. His behavior was also aggressive. So I warned him. Sometimes later he reverted my edit on his talk page. I get that talk page owners are permitted to to remove any messages from their talk page. But he didn't provide a reason in the edit summary. Then someone placed a harrasment general template on my talk page. I don't get which part of my message was like a harrasment. Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 13:16, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Masumrezarock100! This is a perfect place to ask this kind of question. My user talk page is open to anyone and about anything. :-) I'm not 100% sure what the policies, culture, norms, etiquette, etc are on this page and whether or not non-administrator or non-AFC reviewer comments are okay there. The instructions on the top of the page do state that user should "refrain from closing requests if you are not an administrator", but this is just in regards to closing requests, not commenting them. Do you know for 100% sure whether or not non-administrators or non-AFC participants should be adding comments on this page? Where did you verify this?

The reason I'm asking these questions is because part of your message to Winged Blades of Godric stated that he wasn't supposed to comment on this page because he wasn't an administrator. If that's true, then you were perfectly fine to bring this up to him. However, if you're unsure or if it's not true - you shouldn't obviously state this to him, since... well... you're not providing information that's accurate (lol). The other part of your message bring up concerns with Winged Blades of Godric's comments and your belief that they're too harsh and that he's biting newcomers as a result. If these concerns are legitimate, you should definitely reach out to the user directly and express them to him (as you did earlier). However, the statement that you ended your point with that said, "Don't be like a wikivampire" probably rubbed him the wrong way and was probably translated as you calling him one in a serious way. I'm not sure if you added this statement as a joke, or if you were saying this to make a point, but I'm almost certain that he took the statement negatively. When attempting to talk to another editor about their behaviors and your concerns about them, you definitely want to avoid making statements that will rub them the wrong way or that they'll interpret negatively.

Were you harassing Winged Blades of Godric by leaving the message you did? No... Of course you weren't. I'm not sure why Serial Number 54129 left you that warning on your user talk page about harassment, but hopefully he'll respond here and explain. Who knows, maybe I missed something... :-) Just don't take Winged Blades of Godric's removal of your message personally... If you feel concerned regarding Winged Blades of Godric's comments and that they're harsh and biting newcomers, you should start a discussion on the appropriate noticeboard to express them and get input from others about it.

I hope that my response answered all of your questions and gave you the input and feedback that you were looking for. If you have any more questions, please don't hesitate to ask and I'll be happy to answer them and help you further. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:20, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

@Oshwah: because it was a completely unhelpful message, and Masumrezarock100's hand-wringing here does not detract from the fact that he chose to hang onto an admin's coat-tails and take advantage by leaving a snide and wholly unnecessary message. WBoG had already been bollocked by Lourdes in various theatres and Masumrezarock100 took advantage of that; that's little more than a form of WP:GRAVEDANCING. If an admin gives one robust advice it is patronising at best and at worse harassment to jump on the same bandwagon: the admin does not need anyone's help.

Masumrezarock100 can rest assured that, if they continue such behaviour, Masumrezarock100 will find themselves justifying themselves at a noticeboard. If you missed anything, it was Masumrezarock100 accusing WBoG of acting like an admin when they were indulging in precisely the same behaviour. Thanks for the ping all the same. ——SerialNumber54129 14:32, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Serial Number 54129 - I appreciate your response and honest input here. It sounds like there's a lot more to this situation than I originally was made aware of. I took a look at Masumrezarock100's message he pointed me to and didn't go much farther from there. I got the impression that his message stood behind legitimate thoughts and concerns, but the words he used could've definitely been improved (as I explained in detail above). I stated my input and thoughts given what I saw and read, and I left it at that (which was probably mistake number one on my part)... I'm obviously not aware of any grave dancing or what happened in those regards, so I'll go take another circle around this and read what I missed initially. Again, I appreciate your response and input. It was very helpful, as I obviously wasn't aware of major details involved with the situation as a whole. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:38, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

I'll clarify and be slightly more nuanced myself. Gravedancing is too strong a word and likewise, noticeboards would probably be an over-reaction; all that we have here, perhaps, is a very keen new editor approaching things as they believe they should be approached rather than how wiki-etiquette dictates the rest of us do so. Basically, re-bollocking people when they've already been bollocked is probably the worst dispute resolution process possible  :) ——SerialNumber54129 15:05, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Serial Number 54129 - Again, I appreciate your detailed response and your thoughts regarding this manner. I think that this is what happened as well. I'm not sure if Masumrezarock100 was aware of what happened between WBoG and Lourdes, or if his message was made purposefully following what happened, but there were a few things that could've been improved. Masumrezarock100 is a new editor, and we should do our best to educate new editors positively and help them to understand their mistakes - even the really bad ones. I'm not stating ot implying that Masumrezarock100 made any "bad mistakes"; I was simply stating this in general and for all new editors here. I remember making many mistakes when I was new to Wikipedia and as I was learning the ropes... very stupid and idiotic ones, too... I wouldn't be here today if I had been chased away by users who wanted to chastise and bury me six feet under with bitey messages, scolding, discouragement, and put-downs. This is why I try my upmost very best to pay that forward to others. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:22, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

I swear I didn't know what happened between Lourdes and WBoG. I just saw his comments and warned him. Regarding the"wikivampire" thing, I meant it as a joke(I have recently came to know that WikiVampires bite new users.) I assumed that non-administrators shouldn't review requests and comment on them as two admins previously had warned me about this on my talk page. Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 16:00, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Masumrezarock100 - Don't worry about it. ;-) Your message was just coincidentally left at a very bad time, and that's why you received such stern replies in response to it. Just take the input and feedback that I gave you originally, and you'll do fine with your future messages. All it takes is practice, mentoring and feedback from others, and understanding; you'll become a well-trained and strong verbal communicator as you continue to edit and contribute here. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:10, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Ok. If you say so. Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 16:16, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Masumrezarock100 - I haven't led you astray with my advice and help so far, have I? ;-) I've had this happen to me many times before - you just happen to leave a message or bring something up without knowing that you've opened a big can of worms. They're mistakes, and sometimes mistakes are over things you couldn't foresee. It happens... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:37, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Re: our previous communication - please review my newly edited Wikipedia page, John Michael Cummings - thank you!

Hi, Oshwah,

Happy Mother's Day!

We last communicated on April 30th about potential "conflict of interest" on my Wikipedia page, "John Michael Cummings."

Because I am the subject of the page, I have not edited the page since April 30th, as strongly advised.

This morning, I pulled up my page and discovered, with delight, that it's been nicely edited to your suggestions - thank you so much! If someone else made the edits - I thank him or her.

Appropriately, the photos of my books have been removed, as they may be misconstrued as promotional, which violates Wikipedia's polices. Unlike a few weeks ago, I now understand this reasoning.

Under "Short stories and essays," line spacing has been doubled and most internal links removed, lessening details, as requested. P.S. I have researched other writers' Wikipedia pages and found selective lists of works are allowed to support biographical information. This list of published short stories and essays on my page is also very selective and not comprehensive.

Given these changes, will you please remove:

This article is an autobiography or has been extensively edited by the subject or by someone connected to the subject. It may need editing to conform to Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. There may be relevant discussion on the talk page. (April 2019) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

This section may contain an excessive amount of intricate detail that may interest only a particular audience. Please help by spinning off or relocating any relevant information, and removing excessive detail that may be against Wikipedia's inclusion policy. (April 2019) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

I thank you very much for your help.

Warmly,

John Michael Cummings — Preceding unsigned comment added by LankyKeller (talk • contribs)

Hello LankyKeller and welcome to Wikipedia! We are not permitted to remove maintenance tags unless the issue gets resolved. See WP:Maintenance tags for more information. Thanks. Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 13:49, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi LankyKeller! Welcome to Wikipedia! As Masumrezarock100 said, we need to leave maintenance tags present on Wikipedia articles until the issue they're referring to gets resolved - then they can be removed (usually by the editor who fixed it). Please allow these templates to remain until the issues are fixed. This way, visitors and editors have the opportunity to read the issues quickly and (hopefully) help to resolve them. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to let me know. I'll be happy to answer them if you do. Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:25, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

I am currently working with this guy as he has WP:COI and can't edit his article himself. I hope that this issue gets resolved. Masum Reza^📞 06:39, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Masumrezarock100 - Awesome! Thanks for working with the user and for helping to educate him. I'm sure he's in extremely good hands with you, but don't hesitate to let me know if I can be of assistance with anything. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:18, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Some Important tasks for you.

Please note no Ping is required who you reply. 1. I used to own the ip who asked you why a message on CaradhrasAiguo's talk page was spam. Since then, he said I'm no longer welcome con his talk page at all. Please semi it so I don't think about editing it again. (Please do so ASAP) 2. After a 1 month block on that ip for related stuff that ended very recently (but I changed IPs half way through), I decided there's no point in doing the behaviour that might make others post on my talkpage telling me to stop it or that I'm blocked. Please help me I doing so. The behaviours I'm referring to include: Edit warring (a large issue at the World Chess Championship 2018 article when the match was on - check the page history there, reinstating messages on others talk pages and general discussions on article talk pages (at the same time an issue on the talk page for the aforementioned article) and lying about not understanding perma links when in fact I posted one thinking it was a diff only, the user to whom I 'lied' is the same one whose talk page I want you to semi protect (frankly that's what's left of what I want to say to him). These tasks are rather important to me so please answer all my posts on this thread assuming good faith towards me, knowing I no longer wish to repeat these behaviours. Thank you.211.26.200.179 (talk) 13:20, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Instead of allowing yourself to be affected by the side effects of editing anonymously (such as your IP address changing where you can't control it), why not just create an account? Using an account has many benefits, including the fact that you wouldn't be affected in this way anymore. If you're currently not under any kind of blocks, this is what I recommend that you do in order to resolve your concerns. Being an admin doesn't mean that I get to go around and protect, delete, hide, or change anything I want and for any reason I want. There are policies and guidelines regarding each administrative action - including page protection. I'm not fully understanding each situation that you're listing here, but from what I'm reading - your situations don't justify the use of administrative action in any way. Otherwise, I'd be violating policy by doing so. If you want to make life easier for yourself, create an account and use it to edit moving forward. Otherwise, you're going to run into various issues and drawbacks that come with editing anonymously, and there isn't much that can be done outside of the usual process. Please let me know if you have any questions regarding the creation and use of an account, and I'll be happy to answer them. :-) Happy editing and well wishes to you. Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:31, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Other way around. If I was an account I wouldn't request protection because there are registered accounts posting on the page. Speaking of my behaviour I really wanted someone who was comfortable assuming more good faith than the user's contributions say. You being an admin is a coincidence but it's a really easy choice to go with. Besides, admins seem to have more tools than others to deal with the request I posted above.211.26.200.179 (talk) 21:49, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Hello. Are you there? Can you please work out the dispute privately with him such that I can't look at the discussion? I want to, at any time, be able to post on his talk page without him deleting the message and telling me to sod off or making me unwelcome.211.26.200.179 (talk) 10:37, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

I apologize for the very delayed response to your question. I had to take some time away from Wikipedia in order to take care of some very important life events and obligations. I'm just now getting back to Wikipedia and responding to messages, requests, emails, etc. I'm unsure of exactly what you're asking for. I'm going to need diffs and links to the exact locations you're referring to, and what you feel needs to be done. This will help me to understand much better. As I said earlier: If you're having issues with any blocks that are affecting you that you didn't contribute to, you should create an account. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:33, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Most edits made by an IP in November 2018 were probably me in the article or its talk page. You may see edit summaries about how some sort of framework (unless you need clarification from me, I'd rather keep the exact information private) or general discussion on talk pages. Then the user whom I mentioned at the start made me unwelcome on his talk page for the above issues and lying about not understanding permalinks (I can't convince him but I'm absolutely sure I didn't understand). I could, but may no longer prepared to face the subsequent consequences of what may happen next (the user a few times used a very rude British term to keep me of his talk page and could happen again) if I post there again. Furthermore, if Editor B is an unconstructive wikipedian, I don't understand why if Editor A knows this, they would (or could or should) make Editor B no longer welcome on their talk pages. As this discussion is almost always going to be archived next time an archive happens, please make sure this thread doesn't go if the discussion isn't complete. BTW: 1.

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Your notice on Anna Frodesiak's talk page 211.26.200.179 (talk) 12:07, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

. 2. I've got a joke for you: When someone goes to edit your page they see some notices for all types of wikipedians by experience level, with an image used in the user warning templates for vandalism. Here's a table summary of what the notices would look like (no offence):

Number	The image used	For whom it's intended
1.	Information icon with blue background	New Wikipedia users
2.	Information icon with orange background	Regular/moderately experienced users
3.	Nuvola apps important	Users well on their way to being an admin or recently got that status
4.	The Stop2 png file	Medium to (very) long time admins
5 (or 4im).	Stop2 png file, too	Jimbo Wales

211.26.200.179 (talk) 12:07, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the barnstar! I appreciate it very much, and I'm sure that Anna Frodesiak does too. :-) HA! No, I don't get offended by things... humorous things like the table summary you added are in good taste and are completely fine. ;-) The user that you're referring to that made you "unwelcome" on their talk page and called you a "very rude British term" - who are we talking about exactly? It's hard to track down exactly what edits you made to the World Chess Championship 2018 article and its talk page because it appears that your IP address changes (or at least changed at the time) very frequently. Your contributions under your current IP address here only go back as far as May 12 (14 days ago), and the contributions pulled from the CIDR range of your current IP address network here don't show any changes to the article or its talk page at all... this makes it extremely difficult for me to find exactly what we're referring to and know for sure that it's you. If you create and use an account when you make any and all edits to Wikipedia moving forward, this problem is avoided entirely, because your account is what is tied and connected to each edit, not the current IP address you happen to have assigned to you or be using. This is why I keep bringing this up to you and telling you about the benefits of using an account. ;-) I'm not sure if you told me exactly why you don't use an account, but is there a reason that you're not doing so? Anything that I might be able to help answer or resolve? Let me know and I'll be happy to help. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:33, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

There are so many diffs that it's best not to post them here and you to find them manually. That user is CaradhrasAiguo and the British term he used (commented out) is . Finally please don't ask me about accounts. If I want to edit as an IP I can. The only way I would be forced to have an account to edit is if others on this IP or any my previous one (I don't think there are or were such people vandalise this site and get such IP's blocked. Then I would need an account (I'm not interested in one. Wikipedia isn't one of my main interests anyay). In November 2018, my IP was 211.27.126.189. That's the IP whose edits I want you to review on the specified article and its talk page as well as the user talk page of the user I mentioned earlier on in this thread/message.211.26.200.179 (talk) 12:42, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

I'm not continuously mentioning accounts in order to force or coerce you into creating and using one. Please accept my apologies if you felt otherwise, or if my continued mentioning of using an account brought you any kind of annoyance or frustration. That was never my intent, nor would it ever be. :-) It's ultimately your choice if you wish to register and use an account to edit Wikipedia, and you don't have to create and use an account if you have no desire to do so. Editing as an IP user is just fine, and I treat and respect you exactly the same as if you were a registered account. Apart from the advantages and benefits of using an account, and the disadvantages that occur when editing as an anonymous IP user, all editors are equal here; there are no levels of different "status", "authority", "priority", importance", "rights", etc between any editors on Wikipedia or any other Wikimedia Foundation Project, and anyone that tells you differently is wrong and doesn't understand our founding principles. :-) Thanks for sharing the IP address that you used during that time period, and for confirming the user who you felt treated you improperly and with incivility. Since we're talking about edits to the article, the article's talk page, and CaradhrasAiguo's user talk page that were made back in November 2018, there isn't anything I can do about it now, nor is there any action that I could possibly take against CaradhrasAiguo for any edits that were made so far back and in the past. All I can do is agree and say, "you're right, the incivility wasn't okay and you shouldn't have been treated that way", and ask you to report any repeated or egregious incivility to an admin or noticeboard during the time that it's actively occurring and in progress (or was recently made - within the last 12-24 hours depending on how severe it is) so that something can be done then. Other than that, I'm not sure exactly what you expect that I can do... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:59, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

I just want to stop being unconstructive for which I nee help to do and, however rare that may be, be welcome on the user's talk page whenever I need to talk to him. Maybe you can privately email him so this thread doesn't turn stressful if the 2 of us happen to be talking to each other. The rude term was used in Late March 2019, not November 2018 without prior warning that I was unwelcome. He thinks that I was(n't) trying to damage the article structure, had (term commented out in case it's rude) on its talk page not long after and for similar matters lying about not understanding permalinks (I need to but can't convince him I wasn't lying).211.26.200.179 (talk) 13:07, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

If you were editing the article, discussing issues or disputes on the article's talk page, and attempting to communicate with CaradhrasAiguo in good faith, then you were not editing unconstructively nor were you vandalizing the project. Unconstructive editing refers to purposefully, intentionally, or maliciously editing Wikipedia to cause harm, violate policy, cause hardship upon a discussion, or make a process more difficult for others. It is different from disruptive editing, though the words "unconstructive" and "disruptive" can be used interchangeably in general depending on the context. Good faith edits can be disruptive, even though they were done completely on accident or if that wasn't your intent at all. I've accidentally saved edits in the past that messed up pages, screwed up articles, and therefore disrupted things until I ran back and rolled the changes back. Disruption happens, and there's nothing to worry about if you do so accidentally. Just learn from the mistakes when people leave you notices or feedback about them, move on, and treat them as positive learning experiences. So long as the mistakes or issues don't continue despite repeated notices or warnings about them, no administrator is going to go after you and take action against you for legitimate mistakes. If CaradhrasAiguo was telling you that you were vandalizing Wikipedia, editing nonconstructively, or otherwise treating you like a malicious user who was trying to intentionally cause harm, and nobody else did that to you as well - then the user was using incorrect terms and/or was just being rude. In any case, I'd move on completely from what happened back in November 2018, forget about it, and take what positive learning you could get from it, and apply it accordingly. You definitely don't seem like a vandal user, a troll, or someone whose intent on behaving maliciously... don't let the incivility or rudeness of one user and in the past ruin your confidence or your positive experience on Wikipedia and drag you down. If you do something wrong, someone will tell you. Just use your common sense, and don't be afraid to ask questions if you have any. Please let me know if I can help you with anything else and I'll be happy to do so. Otherwise, just move on, don't look back, and don't worry so much! ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:32, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

In “your situations don't justify the user of administrative action” high above the word “user” should probably read “use”. :) CiaPan (talk) 13:23, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

CiaPan - HA! I'm a bone head... Good call. Fixed; thanks for pointing that out. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:31, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

I was edit warring on the article, though. I feel like both parties (including me) were enforcing the version they thought was better for reasons that they thought we're too obvious t need discussion. To give you a better idea of what it was, I wanted(and the other party didn't want blank subsections for each game of the chess match (blank as those games were back then future.211.26.200.179 (talk) 13:46, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

References

My new articles!

I'd recommend you'd check out my new articles! They are Luna (visual style) and Classic (theme) and both redirect to the XP vis. styles page! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael Boy Jordan (talk • contribs) 13:43, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Michael Boy Jordan - Awesome! Once I get a few high priority tasks completed and handled, I'll swing by and take a look at them. :-) Thanks for the message and for letting me know about it! Keep up the great work. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:33, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

@Oshwah: Not awesome! Not articles! This is the user I reported to you and others to be blocked, for spamming nonsense and junk WP:COMPETENCE WP:NOTHERE. Especially meaninglessly generic redirects like these. Bro, he just called a spammed redirect an "article", and you just explosively complimented this junk sight-unseen. — Smuckola(talk) 23:20, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Smuckola - Oh dear... Thanks for letting me know. I talk to so many people here and I receive so many requests from different users on Wikipedia that I can't always remember who I'm talking to some of the time. Is this user still causing issues? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:37, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Dude what's this?

Hahaha Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 16:51, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Masumrezarock100 - Ohhh boyyyy. Yes... That's a blog that I was the primary subject of. One of the... eh, I'd say small handful of blogs or press coverage about Wikipedia that I've been mentioned in. Good times, I guess.... lol ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:55, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

It's interesting to me that most of these sites devoted to examining Wikipedia are not on Wikis that allow open editing. :) - BilCat (talk) 18:53, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

They're just blogs ain't they; not many of them do. Still, if anyone's interested, that particular specimen is run by our "very own"—drum roll—User:A Den Jentyl Ettien Avel Dysklyver.([23]). ——SerialNumber54129 19:08, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

It's easy to throw stones when you're in a walled environment. That's not a mark of bravery. I also note that user is globally banned on all Wikimedia projects. - BilCat (talk) 19:56, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

World Wiki Ltd even has articles of incorporation. The link to it is quite long, but if you scroll to the bottom of the page, you can download it. "Free download NEWINC Certificate of incorporation filed on: 27th, December 2017" Enigma^msg 20:33, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

I know of the user who started World Wiki and all that. We would talk on IRC in the #wikipedia-en ^connect channel frequently. However, due to feedback and messages I received from others, I ended up having to put my foot down and ask that user (and the others who were participants) to stop promoting the site and discussing it in the channel. It just became too much. :-/ I still like those users though. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:45, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

User:Beyard508

In regard to this edit to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Young India Party, was it correct to strike User:Beyard508's recommendation? Even if they are a sock puppet, they don't appear to be a sock puppet of anyone else who was participating in that same AfD. I don't see anything in WP:SOCK that would indicate that their recommendation had to be struck. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 17:58, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Metropolitan90 - You bring up a good thought and a very good point. I admit that I haven't thought about this in quite awhile... but I thought that we always struck out any votes of users who were engaging in sock puppetry by principle so that they aren't awarded in any way for their deceptive attempts. You're right; I usually only strike out duplicate votes by accounts that have been confirmed to be sock puppets of one another, but I also thought that we did this as well... You're more than welcome to undo the strike that I placed on the comment if you feel that it should be allowed to stand, and I apologize if I'm incorrect with my thoughts and if what I did wasn't at all part of the norm of AFD and votes by sock puppet users. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:20, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Also on this topic, I had noticed Beyard's extremely suspicious activity as well when they participated in an AfD discussion I had started, but was unsure how to report the incident as it wasn't clear to me that they were necessarily sockpuppeting. Based on the information available to me, at the time, I just knew that they had created a new account and then voted "delete per nom" in 10 different AfDs. What was it that led to Beyard actually getting caught, and how should I go about reporting similar instances in the future? _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:23, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Rosguill! Great questions! I'm not sure exactly what led to the user being found out that they were engaging in sock puppetry, but there's usually a case in Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations that will detail the evidence and what was observed. If there isn't an SPI report (such as in this situation), the block log or the edits that the user made will likely give great clues. Most "average-skilled" sock puppet users (people who just want to vandalize, or people who want to try and push the same edits or votes to pursue a POV or agenda) will edit the same article or page and withing a narrow time frame between the "other user". You could also ask the blocking administrator for information as well. :-)

In general, if you see activity that you feel isn't right or feel is suspicious, but can't put a finger on it as to exactly what may be going on, I'd just create a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard and express your exact thoughts and feelings there. Don't make accusations or assumptions; else, you might be seen as grasping at straws and then trying to report someone based on bad thought. Just say that you're noticing [these edits] by [this certain user], and that you feel that something isn't right or that it's suspicious to you, but you can't put an exact finger on it. Just ask for someone to take a look and let you know what they think. Worst case scenario, it turns out to be nothing and your discussion is answered and closed... or it turns out that your suspicions and thoughts were correct and the user is a sock puppet, LTA, or is causing abuse or disruption that you didn't see... I guess it depends on what your outlook on "worst case scenario" is. ;-) Please let me know if I can answer any more questions for you, and I'll be happy to do so. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:41, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

• Thanks. I asked the blocking admin for clarification as to the block of Beyard508, which may shed some more light on the situation. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:55, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Metropolitan90 - Perfect; keep me in the loop and let me know what happens. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:02, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Apologies

I'm sorry for what i've done earlier, i was forgot to put a search pages of the aircraft when i was editing. I will never vandalize anything again. And i will absent for 3 months. Mr Toff57 (talk) 19:09, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Mr Toff57 - No worries; if you need help or want to learn how to contribute positively to the project, take a look at the new user tutorial. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:38, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Moscow parade

<Redacted> off, the aviation part was cancelled due to foggy weather i was there. --213.208.157.36 (talk) 19:27, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

I'm surprised you didn't catch this (at least, it seems that way, since you left it here). I took the liberty of redacting the attack. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 09:03, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

LightandDark2000 - I typically don't redact attacks or messages like that on my user talk page. If anything, it shows the user that I read and react to them, and it encourages them to just do it more. WP:DENY is a great thing to do, and for many reasons. I appreciate you for doing it, though! ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:40, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

User sock threats

See Special:Contributions/Henrymcwwehan. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 20:20, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

BilCat - Oh yeah.... harassment and threats out the wazoo. User blocked. ;-) Thanks for the report! If you see any more, let me know and I'll be happy to take a look. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:26, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm certainly not "disappointed" with your quick response. :) - BilCat (talk) 20:29, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

HAHA! I'm glad to hear that. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:55, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Important Notice

You seem to be involved in a hair war. Please note that hair-warring is a serious offense on Wikipedia and can lead to a 24 hour block, or even worse, an infinite block with no email or talk page access. You may find the discussion listed at WP:AN/Hair. Your comments and questions are welcome there, Please make yourself familiar with the guidelines listed there on that page for commenting. If you want to reduce your block, you have three options

• Don't cut your hair, if you do you will be blocked for a period of infinity,
• You may not email other users about advice,
• You may not touch the ArbCorm noticeboards if this case is listed there

If you are found to be hairwarring your admin rights will be taken away and you may not go through an RFA on any Wikimedia Project for 6 years, because your username OSHWAH is 6 letters long and each letter is 1 year. If found evading your block or hairwarring on another Wikimedia Project, a steward will lock your account. Please note that you are Welcome at this time to edit any page on Wikipedia that you have not been involved with a hair-war. You have 24 hours to respond to this message and the comments at the hair-warring noticeboard, before ArbCorm will block you for 12 hours, We treat cases like this very seriously and most likely even if you are not blocked, your admin rights will be removed Thank You. --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 21:27, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

You say three options, but you don't seem to be giving him any options!! Enigma^msg 22:38, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Enigmaman - Right?!! I think I lose no matter which "choice" I take... :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:40, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Hair War Blocked. Your account has now been indefinitely blocked because you have engaged and escalted the warning that was given to you with Enigmanam. This is a hair warring block enforced by ArbCorm (and I'm sure SQL could unblock you because he probably doesn't have crazy hair, but he would be blocked for doing so.) Enigmanam has also been blocked for 24.0 hours for engaging in this conversation. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked you should read The Guide to appealing blocks, then copy and paste this template {{unblock|ArbCorm Block|Reason=Your reason here}}, Or you may do so through UTRS, please note once unblocked, your admin rights will be taken away and given to Jimbo Wales so he can have two mops to do two times the blocks and tasks on Wikipedia. If you want your admin rights back, you have 2 options;

1. After a unblock you must comply to The Standard Offer,
2. or, you may edit the Simple English Wikipedia after you have been unblocked, then after 6 years we will consider if you can start an RFA.

If you think you have been blocked in error, or if this block is unclear, please refer to Help:I have been blocked for more information. This block has been approved by your hair, and God is not a sockpuppet. Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 23:43, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Wrong! People in my situation are actually eligible for the special offer. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:44, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

I have called God and he will lock your account. Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 01:02, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Special haircut for Oshwah , the only way to end the war . Kpgjhpjm

@Thegooduser: This was all because of my Battle of the Hairs, huh. Does all of this apply to my bald ass too? LOL DrewieStewie (talk) 16:31, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Dudes seriously hair war! Leave the guy alone. Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 16:52, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

"This block has been approved by your hair". Talk about being hoisted with his own petard. Enigma^msg 23:41, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Thegooduser You also should be blocked for engaging in the conversation as do I ! . Kpgjhpjm 05:33, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Uh oh, looks like that my Battle of the Hairs was interpreted as hair warring rather than WikiLove. Looks like a rangeblock needs to be issued to all parties involved here, including myself, Oshwah, Thegooduser, Enigmaman, Masumrezarock100, and Kpjhpjm, with Oshwah and I getting rhe most severe penalties? Wouldn't be too bad though, I put myself through worse when I was nine. ;) DrewieStewie (talk) 07:58, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

I hope someone can part their way through this hairy situation. I've combed my head and couldn't come up with anything. Ravensfire (talk) 19:17, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

@Ravensfire: Same here, with my alopecia I still can't comb my bald head around how I started this and how it's my fault. Bad news, however: Youve been added to the hair war rangeblock list by commenting on this thread. LOL ;) DrewieStewie (talk) 20:51, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

In all seriousness though, this will be a great start for an Oshwah userspace regarding humorous talk page shenanigans (that I mentioned below on Kpgjhpjm's barnstar thread should he decide to be on board with such an idea. DrewieStewie (talk) 20:53, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

DrewieStewie, Um, You startred this?..... You will be banned from Wikipedia! Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 20:21, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

@Thegooduser: Aw hell nah you wildin XDDD *files Mediation Committee case* DrewieStewie (talk) 20:30, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

DrewieStewie Mean while while you are blocked, I get to ride the Oshwah Airlines for free! I get first class, where I get 5 star service and I get a lock of Oshwah's crazy hair to keep, and Oshwah is the pilot of the plane. Free Osh-Fi (Wi-Fi) so I can Edit Wikipedia. A Oshwah Airlines ticket is $24,000 for first class. Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 21:03, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

@Thegooduser: How you get it for free? Lol but damn thats expensive DrewieStewie (talk) 21:52, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

DrewieStewie Because I didn't hair war, SQL gave me a free ticket as a co-owner of Oshwah Airlines, I get to ride the Boeing 747-8, you can get a first class ticket for twice the price since you hair warred, lol Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 01:56, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Vandal requires attention

Can you please deal with this guy: Toopytood? He's definitely not here to contribute. Actually, that's just putting it lightly. I'm thinking that it's probably an LTA or a troll, given the behavior. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 09:03, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

LightandDark2000 -  Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:04, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Question

Oshwah, are you going to be online for the next hour or so? I have an issue I need to discuss with you. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 17:35, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi BilCat! Yup, I'll be around. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:38, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I'm putting together the email now, and I hope to have it sent soon. Will notify once sent. - BilCat (talk) 17:40, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

BilCat - Sounds good; I'll await your notification that it's sent, so that I can read it. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:41, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Sent. Thanks again. - BilCat (talk) 17:55, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

BilCat - Always happy to help! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:08, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Replied. - BilCat (talk) 18:52, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

BilCat - Alright, give me a few and I'll take a look at it. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:03, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Take your time. The reply isn't time-sensitive. :) - BilCat (talk) 19:06, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

BilCat - Replied. Let me know if I can help with anything :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:00, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks and replied. - BilCat (talk) 21:08, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

BilCat - I apologize for the very delayed response to your question. I had to take some time away from Wikipedia in order to take care of some very important life events and obligations. I'm just now getting back to Wikipedia and responding to messages, requests, emails, etc. I'll be checking and responding to emails soon; if your response contains a request that's still pending my action, I will get it done as soon as possible. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:51, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

No worries. It's all been settled satisfactorily. Check my last email for the details. - BilCat (talk) 01:59, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

BilCat - 10-4. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:00, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Edits to Tyler Ward

Hello! I just wanted to let you know that I'm really not sure who's doing the editing on the Tyler Ward page--I've never even heard of the guy. This isn't a public network so I'm very confused, but if it continues happening feel free to keep edit blocking the IP--I'll live while I figure out who's freeloading on my Wi-fi :P Thanks! --65.128.38.114 (talk) 18:36, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi there! Nothing you need to worry about. :-) IP addresses change from user-to-user over time, and the edits you're referring to were made over two years ago. They're definitely not things that I'd go after you over today... ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:41, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 07:57, 14 May 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

BilCat (talk) 07:57, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

BilCat - Acknowledged. Will check it today. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:13, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Editing 2019 Baltimore Orioles season (section)

I'm trying to edit the Orioles game log because they are playing a doubleheader to makeup the game they were supposed to play Monday, May 13 but was cancelled due to inclement weather. How should I go about doing this?Astros1962 (talk) 21:56, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Astros1962: Oshwah seems to be offline today so I'll try to answer your question. One suggestion would be to look at previous season articles and see how the situation was handled there. Another would be to ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball, as they have probably dealt with this issue in the past. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 22:12, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Astros1962 - What BilCat said above are great ideas. Also, make sure that you provide reliable sources to support the content you're adding. Happy editing! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:15, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	This has to be the most humorous page on Wikipedia. Kpgjhpjm 05:43, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Kpgjhpjm - HA! It definitely is sometimes! Thanks for the barnstar! :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:16, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Oshwah, sorta like how you and others have pages for awards such as beers and barnstars, maybe you need to create some userspace dedicated to humorous postings on your talk page. At this point, its safe to say that because of factors like your kindness, humor stemming from your hair and actions, and skilled admin abilities, you essentially have became a cult of personality on Wikipedia and could even become Jimbo's successor when it comes to the spotlight and prominence. I'm even willing to dig into the archives for humorous content to add to that userspace. :D DrewieStewie (talk) 08:18, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) See the section “Important Notice” for an example. Invalid^OS (talk) 16:47, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

DrewieStewie - HA! Thanks a funny and interesting thought. Also, I appreciate the kind words. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:02, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Having an article on Wikipedia

Hello, my name is ben salim. Im a kenyan aged 22 and a high school graduate. Due to financial problems, i haven't been able to join college and my hope on becoming a computer guru is slowly fading out. But i thank God i hv a talent in music.

Im always amazed by how quickly Wikipedia gives information or tell about whoever i.e an artist is. Lyk for instance, just type ' young thug ' and their it comes on Wikipedia.

As an upcoming artist, i have been visiting cybercafé for help with how to get your information, background and much about an artist on Wikipedia but to no avail. They dont know how to post an article on Wikipedia.

But i didn't give up. I took it to myself. Using my nokia lumia phone, i created Wikipedia account under user ' Tariq Krait ' and wrote an article. But today i got a message from you that you deleted the article.

please help me. I want my personal life, musical journey be on Wikipedia so that anyone, a family or a friend or probably a fan can google my name and read about me on Wikipedia.

thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Tariq Krait (talk • contribs) 06:45, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

WP:Notability and WP:Bio and WP:GNG. WP:RS. WP:Not a facebook or linked in page., especially here. See Garage band. because wikipedia isn't currently interested.

WP:User page for guidance as to what is and is not acceptable.

Sorry, but Not yet.

But we look forward to your contributing as a WP:Editor. Cheers.7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:17, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Tariq. Thank you for your interest in Wikipedia. Unfortunately we can only have articles about musicians when they are well known, people that have achieved notable success, people that newspapers have written about. That's what the links say in the above note. So I'm afraid you are not ready to have a Wikipedia article just now. Wikipedia is not a social media site like Facebook; it is an international encyclopedia. There are many other places on the internet where you can write about yourself and your music. I wish you luck with your career. -- MelanieN (talk) 16:00, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

P.S. I see that you created this article twice. And it was immediately deleted both times. Please don't create it again. -- MelanieN (talk) 16:04, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Tariq Krait! Thank you for leaving me a message here with your thoughts and your questions. As MelanieN said above, Wikipedia isn't a place for anyone to simply create an article or even a user page about themselves. Wikipedia only creates articles for subjects that meet our notability requirements, and there are guidelines regarding what is and isn't appropriate for user pages, as well as other requirements regarding user page creation. User pages must be primarily focused on Wikipedia-related matters and by users who have contributed significantly to other pages and places as well; user pages that are created by an account with their first and only edits to Wikipedia will usually be removed. User pages are also not to be used for the purpose of advertising or promotion (this includes advertising or promoting yourself or other people in any way, especially with user pages that look like a resume). I'm sorry if the deletion brought you disappointment or frustration, but Wikipedia is not the right place for what you're trying to do. There's plenty of social media websites that are for this purpose. If you have any questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks again for the message and I wish you a great day. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:24, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Block Needed

can you block https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/175.158.217.33 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/175.158.216.218 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/175.158.217.215 for ban evasion? The Original user is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/175.158.218.178. I don't know how I would file this at AIV so I am just asking here. Could you tell me how I would file it at AIV in the future? Thanks! LakesideMiners^{My Talk Page} 15:10, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

LakesideMiners - Looks like this has been taken care of. Thanks for letting me know about it! :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:15, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

You've Got Mail

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Zylonv (talk • contribs) 12:10, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Zylonv - Will be checking and responding to emails tonight; my apologies for the delay getting back to you. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:29, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Revisit a block

Hello, User:Kingant1016]] might need another look, still zero sourcing. It hasn't reached the point it did with gravano but no sourcing anywhere to be found. Recent examples include [[24]. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 13:52, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Hell in a Bucket! Thanks for leaving me a message here with your concerns about this user. I apologize for the delay responding; I had to take some time away from Wikipedia in order to take care of some very important life events and obligations and I'm just now getting back to Wikipedia and responding to messages, requests, emails, etc. Is this user still an issue that I need to take a look at? Let me know. ;-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:32, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 08:54, 20 May 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

BilCat (talk) 08:54, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

BilCat - Will be checking and responding to emails tonight; my apologies for the delay getting back to you. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:32, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

French range block

Hi Oshwah, following up on this issue, the disruption has continued from the French IPv6 range. Short story: unsourced genre additions, genre bloat, genre warring and POV content. Examples:

• Here adding unsourced "action" before "romantic comedy"
• Here adding "action" to change genre to "action comedy", also added this problematic content: "with mixed to negative reviews from critics and it was recorded as a flop at the box office." The "mixed-to-___" phrasing is shunned by multiple WikiProjects (film, TV, video games) and obviously "flop" is not proper tone for an encyclopedia.
• In the very next edit at that article they change action comedy to action drama. Clearly they are confused. Also, we don't need to say "action drama" since most action films are dramas. Bloat.

77Survivor has been dealing with this issue for a while now. The prior 36 hour block didn't seem to do the trick. Is there any way you could please look into the feasibility of a longer range block? Here are some of the recent IPs:

• 2A01:E35:8A13:2F70:96C:6554:8276:446F (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 2A01:E35:8A13:2F70:4D76:6087:F8F6:E770 (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 2A01:E35:8A13:2F70:541E:3613:B84E:4EC (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:37, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Oshwah, I'm the one dealing with the IP and it's back with a new one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2A01:E35:8A13:2F70:40D0:6785:9900:327A.

This IP just undid every single vandalism I undid on the same pages vandalized by the above mentioned IPs and they all seem to be coming from one range. Now, the user has gone too far in the disruptive zone. Please look into the matter and do the needful. Thanks. (77Survivor (talk) 18:24, 21 May 2019 (UTC))

Hi Cyphoidbomb and 77Survivor! I apologize for the extreme delay responding to your messages here. I had to take some time away from Wikipedia in order to take care of some very important life events and obligations, and I'm just now getting back to Wikipedia and responding to messages, requests, emails, etc. :-) I'll take a look at the IPv6 range and make sure that no shenanigans are still ongoing. If they are, I'll apply a range block. ;-) Let me know if I can do anything else for you both and I'll be happy to do so. Cheers ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:35, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Cyphoidbomb, 77Survivor - Can you both do me a favor and take a look at the range's contributions and let me know if there's still ongoing vandalism or problematic edits that require me to examine it again and apply a longer block? There's a lot of edits that come from this range. I did a quick spot check on a few edits and didn't see anything alarming. I just want to make sure that there's ongoing issues for certain before I consider any administrative action. Let me know what you find. Thanks :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:40, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Oshwah Hey man, sorry for the delay, I just noticed your ping. I still see the same stuff, typically unsourced genres like this and this and this. Redundant addition of "action drama", here and here where most action films are dramas. here. Introduction of widely shunned "mixed to ___" phrasing here, which also is an unsourced opinion. This grammar change doesn't make sense: "Starring Prabhas and Shriya Saran played the lead roles..." It's just widespread ignorant editing and there's no way to communicate with this person. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:01, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

And more promotional "blockbuster" crap here, which I guess they didn't technically add, but they didn't technically remove for unsourced NPOV issues. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:29, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Cyphoidbomb! Thanks for responding and for letting me know. I went ahead and applied a 72 hour block to 2A01:E35:8A13:2F70::/64. The range is adding a lot of edits, so I want to make sure that I keep any collateral damage low. If it continues after the block expires, let me know and I'll do some more digging. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:10, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks O. @77Survivor: If you see more of these, would you please mention them to Oshwah and provide some examples of the same problematic content, from a few IPs if possible. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:59, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Cyphoidbomb - No problem; always happy to help! ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:19, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Whew. When I read the name of this thread I was afraid that I wouldn't be able to get a croissant for breakfast tomorrow :-) MarnetteD|Talk 03:56, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Your breakfast is safe for now, MarnetteD... :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:59, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

@Oshwah: The IP is causing more such edits. I have grown tired of reverting the vandalized edits. Please impose some serious restrictions otherwise we might just keep doing it forever. Here's the new IP: [25] (77Survivor (talk) 06:58, 12 June 2019 (UTC))

77Survivor - I just applied a block to the IPv6 /64 range again - this time for one week. Let me know if things continue after this block expires. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:01, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi!

Hi Oshwah! Hope all is well; I thought I’d let you know I plan to update Huggle tomorrow afternoon and return to my counter-vandalism work, just like in the old days. :-) I’ve also just been appointed as President of one of the societies I regularly attend at uni (it is closely linked to the career I’d like to pursue later on), so I’m pretty chuffed with that 😀

Thank you so much for the message you left me recently, I greatly appreciate it and cannot wait to get back into the swing of things around here! All the best, Patient Zero^talk 23:59, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Patient Zero! You're welcome, and thanks for leaving me a response here! It's great to hear from you! I'm happy to hear that you're happy and that life is treating you well, and I'm also happy to hear that you'll be returning to Wikipedia soon. It'll be great to have you back! Keep in touch, and let me know if I can help you with anything Wikipedia-wise. I'll be happy to do so if you do. :-) Until we speak again... ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:44, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

No worries! It’s good to be back :) I will do - thank you very much! Best, Patient Zero^talk 11:42, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

It's good to have you back, Patient Zero! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:46, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Recently Deleted Categories

Hey there - A few days ago you deleted two categories -- Category:Genocides and ethnic violence perpetrated by fascist regimes and Category:Persecution of ethnic groups by communist regimes -- citing only "G5" as the reason, rather than pursuant to CFD decisions. This came to my attention because I noticed a red-linked parent category on Category:The Holocaust, which I proceeded to remove. However, I then discovered that the deleted category had not been removed from any of the other subcats or articles -- and further, that you had also deleted another category created by the same editor, again citing only "G5".

Here's the problem: Both of the categories were created before the editor was blocked. And furthermore, according to the rules spelled out below, they should not have been deleted in any event:

G5. Creations by banned or blocked users

This applies to pages created by banned or blocked users in violation of their ban or block, and that have no substantial edits by others. G5 should not be applied to transcluded templates or to categories that may be useful or suitable for merging.

It seems to me that you made a fairly serious mistake -- which can, however, be easily rectified by simply reversing both of these deletions. (Far better than having to take it to Deletion Review.) Fortunately, you neglected to complete the deletions by removing the categories from all of the contents (as would normally be done) -- which simplifies things tremendously!

Please be kind enough to ping me when you reply. Thanks! Regards, Anomalous+0 (talk) 02:32, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Anomalous+0! I've restored the two categories in question. Please let me know if I can do anything else for you. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:41, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your very expeditious response, Oshwah. Seriously, that was fast! Thanks for restoring those cats. Do you know if there were any other categories that you deleted by the same editor? Anomalous+0 (talk) 08:09, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Anomalous+0 - I believe those were the only ones... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:20, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Anomalous+0 - My previous response above was not correct. There were four other categories created by the same user that I deleted. They were Category:Genocides in East Asia, Category:Genocides and pogroms in South Asia, Category:Perpetrators of crimes against humanity, and Category:Genocides in West Asia. I apologize for the incorrect response I provided to you previously (above), and I apologize for the delay following up with you here and letting you know. I had to take some time away from Wikipedia in order to take care of some very important life events and obligations, and I'm just now getting back to Wikipedia and responding to messages, requests, emails, etc. If these categories I deleted should be restored, let me know and I'll be happy to do so. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:55, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your further reply/update, Oshwah. I kinda figured there were others. At this point they're pretty much empty, so not much point in restoring them. Thanks again, Anomalous+0 (talk) 10:59, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Anomalous+0 - Okay, I'll leave those categories as-is then. You're welcome, and again... I apologize for the delayed response and for taking so long to follow up with you and let you know that there were other categories. Please don't hesitate to let me know if I can do anything else for you, and I'll be happy to help. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:50, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Minor request

Hey, Oshwah,

I hope you are well. I have a minor request. Could you add a table of contents (I think it is {{toc}}) to your page? You get SO much traffic here that I am a talk page stalker when I'm around to see what's up. A TOC would make it easier to find discussions. Thanks! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:12, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Liz, it looks like the table of contents is collapsed in a small pale yellow box just below the welcome banner (and before the first section). Hope this helps. Alpha3031 (t • c) 03:38, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Liz! Alpha3031 is correct; there is a table of contents located on the top of my user talk page - it's just collapsed. The contents list frequently grows to a length that's very long as more messages and requests come in, and the long table of contents list apparently started causing random issues and "wonkiness" to some users (according to the frequent messages I'd get). To avoid the trouble and the potential frustration, I just have it collapsed by default so that nobody runs into any issues and those who use it can continue to do so... they just need to expand it first is all. Cheers :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:04, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Gotcha. Thanks, Alpha3031 and Oshwah. I come across a lot of user talk pages with 300+ posts/discussions. So many long-term editors don't archive their user talk pages and leave years and years of messages on their main talk page. That's not the problem here, you are just very accessible and lots of editors come here to ask questions. I guess you can't help it if you're popular! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:51, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

About Wikipedia:WikiProject Oshwah

Hi Oshwah. Just came across this while on speedy deletion patrol. You OK with this? PS: Hair are your aerials. Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 10:20, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Shirt58: I can't see a speedy tag, but it was a WP:APRIL thing eh  :) ——SerialNumber54129 10:45, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Yeah, probably needs deleting, or at least full protection, as it seems to be turning into a social page, much like a certain section of this talk page above. :) - BilCat (talk) 20:35, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

@Shirt58: If there's any issue with keeping it, please move it to my userspace. I'd hate for my hard work to go to waste :P . EclipseDude (Chase Totality) 05:41, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Shirt58 - LOL. It's fine; I don't care. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:43, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Something is really wrong on the page

Why can I see the talk page with many many revisions deleted and the timestamps are wrong?211.26.200.179 (talk) 13:08, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Nothing is wrong. Oshwah deleted these revisions to remove information per Wikipedia:Revision deletion, more than likely to protect someone's privacy. This is something administrators, including Oshwah, have the ability to do when necessary. - BilCat (talk) 17:21, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

I think a mistake was made somewhere during the rev-deletions because most of the affected edits are certainly innocuous. Enigma^msg 23:05, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

The edits are not rev-deleted, they've been suppressed. All edits that contain the content from the original edit through to when Oshwah removed it need to be suppressed in order to ensure there are no revisions contain the oversightable material.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:10, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification, Ponyo. I stand corrected. - BilCat (talk) 23:44, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Sorry for the delayed response to this. Ponyo is correct; a revision that was added a week or two ago had to be suppressed along with any revision proceeding it that contained the information. I wasn't able to remove and execute the suppression until later (which will involve many revisions due to the activity level of this page). This is why so many revisions are inaccessible. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:14, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Nomination

Are you OK with me nominating you for bureaucratship? Invalid^OS (talk) 18:10, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @InvalidOS: Oshwah is only on sporadically right now, so I looked in his talk page archives to see if he's been asked this before. I found User:Oshwah/TalkPageArchives/2018-08#POV warriors at Caucher Birkar. See the last three posts in that section. Personally, I think he'd make a great bureaucrat! - BilCat (talk) 22:14, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

I appreciate the nomination consideration, but I think I'd be considered too new of an admin to the community, and I highly doubt that I'd pass. I think, in a few years however, I'd consider accepting a nomination. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:08, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

We know WP:OSHWAH would be in your corner, and it may be half of Wikipedia by the time you're nominated. :) - BilCat (talk) 06:05, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

You’re welcome. Honestly, it’s mostly because of the Enigmaman case. It seems like you would know who should have a user right revoked. Invalid^OS (talk) 17:01, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Bureaucrats do not revoke admin rights except in a few situations. A)If directed to do so by ArbCom B)If inactive C)If user requests it themselves. Their primary role as it relates to sysops is to evaluate consensus at RfA. Enigma^msg 17:24, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

That is true. Invalid^OS (talk) 15:01, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

DrewieStewie - Enigmaman is correct with his response above. While bureaucrats have the technical ability to grant and revoke the administrator user rights from an account, they do not get to do this freely and whenever they want to... lol. :-) They only get to revoke the administrator user rights during situations outlined here (basically the situations Enigmaman listed in his response above). There was even a somewhat-recent arbitration case here where bureaucrat and his/her use of the tools were involved and a topic of discussion. An administrator had blocked another administrator due to disruption, and the blocked admin was repeatedly unblocking himself - which was a big no-no and absolutely against policy to do at the time (this has since been fixed by the Wikimedia software and unblocking yourself no longer possible to do if issued by someone else). A bureaucrat was actively witnessing this event, saw that the admin was repeatedly unblocking himself against policy, and revoked his administrator user rights. Whether or not the situation was a clear abuse of administrator power and enough for a bureaucrat to step in and revoke the user's admin rights is still up for debate, but the reason the bureaucrat became a topic of discussion in the arbitration case was because he/she revoked administrator rights from an account outside of the acceptable list of situations defined in the bureaucrat policy. The bureaucrat did not end up being the subject of any kind of remedy or sanctions by the arbitration committee in that case, but he/she was in a position where they definitely could have been. In short, revoking an admin's user rights - even in situations where the need to do so seems very clear to a bureaucrat - can get you into a very deep hole of trouble if it turns out that the use of the tools was inappropriate or the result of a bad judgment call. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:33, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Honestly, @Oshwah: given your rights, computer knowledge, level of trust, Wikipedia record, resourcefulness, kindness, and handling of serious situations like with the Enigmaman case, I think you'd have heavy support for Bureaucratship. I would definitely support, time isnt always much of a factor. You seem ready to pass. :) Honestly, regardless of sooner or later, I would love to be the nominator, I think I can write a great nomination paragraph. :) My only concern would be finding a time where you'd be active and responding to the RFB. DrewieStewie (talk) 03:54, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

I'd support, providing you'd get a haircut and wear a suit. Dusti^{*Let's talk!*} 04:35, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Remember what happened to Samson once Delilah had cut his hair. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 10:05, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

LOL. Do I want to ask? ... :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:16, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

DrewieStewie - I appreciate your very kind words and I'm sure that I'd make a great bureaucrat if given the opportunity. However, that's up to the community more-so than myself (obviously... lol). I think that I should wait for some time to pass before I consider accepting such a nomination. Like I said previously: I haven't been an administrator for very long (only about three years), which can be a reason for someone to oppose. I also don't participate heavily in bot-related areas as much as I should be, which would be a cause for concern to others, since that lowers my potential argument regarding the need for the tools. I do participate heavily in administrative areas internally, which would be a big plus - I'd be quite involved with determining consensus with RFA closures and in crat chat discussions regarding RFAs that are in the discretionary zone. Overall, if I were to want any RFB to succeed in the future, the best thing I can do for myself (and those who would support me) is to wait and revisit the possibility down the line after I've gained more essential demonstrable experience in key areas. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:30, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Wonderful observation! Great points, lets let some time pass. Keep doing what you do great and geep gaining experience, you can only go up from here, which you're already at a high point :) DrewieStewie (talk) 04:01, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

DrewieStewie - Sounds like a good plan. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:14, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Looks like this is going to wait a little while. I hope to see you become a bureaucrat at some point. Invalid^OS (talk) 11:13, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

InvalidOS - Someday, I'll consider it if the idea is presented to me down the road... I'm not in any kind of rush at all. :-) I mean, in the end... it just allows me to grant and revoke a few extra user rights from user accounts that I couldn't modify before (on a technical standpoint). It's not like I can't contribute and help around here with the user rights I already have... lol ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:56, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

User:Josephbernardlim

I just wanted to drop by and let you know that [[User:|Josephbernardlim]] has continued to make unsourced contributions after your warning. Many of them seem to be focused on Asian languages, particularly Filipino. I'm not aware of whether this distinction is controversial, but it seems like something to keep an eye on. I'm not sure that they deserve to be blocked, but they have received a final warning from you, so I wanted to at least bring it to your attention. StudiesWorld (talk) 21:12, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi StudiesWorld! Okay, I'll keep an eye on things. Thanks for letting me know. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:07, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Revdel

Is it okay to request Revdel for Teahouse revisions? You see this page was vandalised by an IP many times earlier today. They've left offensive words in edit summaries. Sincerely, Masum Reza^📞 09:17, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Masumrezarock100! Sure! So long as the revisions meet the criteria for redaction, they most certainly can be reported! Just email them to me; we don't want to make reports publicly. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:06, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is Rev-del.
Message added 06:13, 26 May 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

I am worried about edit summary. One looks like promotional and offensive. Masum Reza^📞 06:13, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Masumrezarock100 - Will be checking and responding to my Wikipedia emails soon. I'll make sure that your concerns are handled. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:05, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

I sent those diffs to you because of edit summary vandalism. Is it okay for me to request Revdel for revisions that aren't grossy or offensive but violates edit summary guidelines? I was concerned about the edit summary not the edit. Masum Reza^📞 07:49, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Masumrezarock100! You're more than welcome to report revisions that I should take a look at if the edit summaries violate policy. Just make sure that you indicate this in the talk page message so that I know that you're just trying to report an issue. Messages that just report issues with edits or summaries can just be left here and don't need to be emailed to me - unless they meet the criteria for redaction and need to be rev del'd. Don't request rev del for edits or summaries if you know they don't meet the criteria - that just wastes everyone's time and that's just silly... lol. If you're uncertain as to whether or not something meets the criteria for redaction, don't hesitate to email it to me and let me know that you're not sure so that I can take a look and let you know. I'd much rather you email me revisions that you're not 100% sure needs rev del and wind up being incorrect, than for you to feel like you can't email me and ask about a revision you're not certain about (for one reason or another) and to find out later that it did and have us miss something that should've been removed. This also goes for edits that might require suppression as well. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:58, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

NYC vandal back at it again

This IP needs a block per the weeks of edit warring on R179 (New York City Subway car) and various other subway train articles. Cards84664 (talk) 02:34, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Brought up at ANI instead since you're away, no worries. Cards84664 (talk) 21:31, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Cards84664! Oh dear; that IP user is definitely causing a lot of disruption... thanks for leaving me a message about it and for taking it to ANI. I apologize for the extreme delay getting back to you here. I had to take some time away from Wikipedia in order to take care of some very important life events and obligations, and I'm just now getting back to Wikipedia and responding to messages, requests, emails, etc. I just took a look at the IP user, and it's currently still blocked from editing due to disruption that was made today. Wonderful..... lol. If more shenanigans continue after the user is unblocked, let me know and I'll be happy to take care of the matter - or file another report at ANI if I happen to be away or offline. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:08, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Request for oversight

I was doing some work in this sockpuppet investigation, and I received a personal attack on my talk page from User:Zaggy 3centi, who is most likely a troll. The edit was soon reverted, but then that edit was reverted, and then that was reverted, and there were 2 more reversions after that. I would like for these edits to be redacted. Invalid^OS (talk) 13:58, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @InvalidOS: To request oversight, please see WP:RFO or email the oversight team here. Interstellarity T 🌟 18:53, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

pinged from IRC @InvalidOS: I don't see anything that meets any of the criteria for oversight or revision deletion. The former is generally for libelous material or personal information, while the latter is generally for Grossly insulting, degrading, or offensive material... not "ordinary" incivility, personal attacks or conduct accusations. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 19:10, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. Invalid^OS (talk) 19:54, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi InvalidOS! I apologize for the delay responding to your request here. I had to take some time away from Wikipedia in order to take care of some very important life events and obligations, and I'm just now getting back to Wikipedia and responding to messages, requests, emails, etc. :-)

The user was definitely making stupid edits to your user talk page, but (as said above by Amorymeltzer), we only use revision deletion (or 'RD') to redact content if it meets the criteria for being "grossly insulting, degrading, or offensive material" and not "'ordinary' incivility, personal attacks or conduct accusations" (RD2), or for being "purely disruptive material" (which is RD3). RD3 is meant for "allegations, harassment, grossly inappropriate threats or attacks, browser-crashing or malicious HTML or CSS, shock pages, phishing pages, known virus proliferating pages, and links to web pages that disparage or threaten some person or entity and serve no other valid purpose". It cannot be used for "mere spam links". In a nutshell: RD2 is used for grossly insulting or inappropriate edits (such as racist stuff, racial or demoralizing slurs, anything that would seriously offend), and RD3 is used for disruptive material. Threats, bad external links, page breaking code, and other bad stuff is under RD3.

You asked for "oversight" in your original message above. Asking for "oversight" is different than asking for revdel. Oversight AKA suppression refers to setting revisions or logs to a level of deletion where it's hidden from the vast majority of Wikipedia users, including administrators. There's a completely separate criteria regarding when Oversight can be used and an edit suppressed rather than revdel'd. The main use of suppression is to hide edits or logs that disclose a Wikipedia user's "non-public personal information, such as phone numbers, home addresses, workplaces or identities of pseudonymous or anonymous individuals who have not made their identity public. This includes hiding the IP data of editors who accidentally logged out and thus inadvertently revealed their own IP addresses, and hiding the IP data of editors without an account on request. Suppression is a tool of first resort in removing this information." I just wanted to make sure that you were aware of the two different levels of removal, since you requested oversight but were really only needing to request revdel. :-)

Please let me know if you have any questions about anything I explained above and I'll be more than happy to answer them. If you run into any edits that require revdel or suppression in the future, please don't hesitate to let me know - even if you're not completely sure but feel like you should report and ask. I'd much rather you report a revision to me that you're not 100% certain should be removed and be incorrect than to not report the revision at all and wind up being correct and having us miss one. ;-) Just make sure to email them to me instead of reporting them to my user talk page - where everything is public and where just shy of 1000 people actively watch it for changes and would see the report right away if they were monitoring their watchlist. This avoids the Streisand effect, which is what we want to do as much as possible. ;-) Thanks again for the message! I hope you have a great day and I wish you happy editing. :-D ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:33, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing that up. I’ll be sure to make the distinction in the future, and request revdel when it is actually needed. Invalid^OS (talk) 11:03, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

InvalidOS - No problem; always happy to help and explain. :-) The distinction and accidentally saying "oversight" instead of "revdel" is not a big deal; it doesn't take very long at all for an experienced user, admin, and oversighter to figure out exactly what you were trying to ask for. ;-) I figured that I'd take the opportunity and go over both policies and guidelines with you so that any confusion is resolved and any questions answered. Like I said, please don't hesitate to email me to report revisions that need revdel or oversight, and please don't hesitate to email me revisions that you think meets the criteria but aren't 100% certain (just indicate so in the email, along with which criterion you think it meets and why), and I'll be happy to take a look and help you out. It takes some time to fully understand what the revdel criteria means with the phrases "grossly insulting, degrading, or offensive material", or "purely disruptive material" (I know that it took some time for me to understand it fully), but you'll get the hang of it no problem... all it takes is a few examples on both sides of where each line is drawn. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:59, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

User talk:Aliftoursandtravels

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 08:46, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) did it. Also I've changed to a hard block. Bishonen | talk 09:02, 30 May 2019 (UTC).

Bishonen - Thank you for handling this while I was offline, and Cahk - Thank you for reporting this. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:35, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Rfa

Can you nominate Cabayi for adminship as he is a very experienced editor.223.223.143.11 (talk) 14:40, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for leaving me a message here with your request. Unfortunately, your request has many issues and problems. Aside from the many issues I see with your request, I'll first respond by pointing out that you haven't even reached out to Cabayi and asked what his/her wishes are... If Cabayi wishes to become an administrator, you should talk to that user directly first. Since you didn't do this, you don't know if Cabayi even wants to become an administrator. He/she might have absolutely no desire to do so, but you're jumping the gun and asking me to nominate them. :-) I think you understand why that might be an issue. ;-) Regarding the other issues with your request, I think that should respond by setting some expectations for you first. :-) I think there might be a lack of understanding on your part regarding the administrator toolset, what it actually entails, as well as a lack of understanding with the process and usual requirements that the community looks for before they offer their support for a candidate. So, without further to do, I'll explain this for you:

The administrator user right is a senior-level toolset that's only given to highly experienced editors who can demonstrate many years' worth of and consistent above-proficiency with policy knowledge, judgment, community trust, the administrator policy and the appropriate use of tools, and other requirements the community deems relevant to examine before giving their support. It is not a user right that's given to new, novice, or even well-established editors on Wikipedia. To give you a good idea and perspective: I've been an editor since the beginning of 2007 (12 years), and I've only been an admin since August 2016 (less than 3 years) - meaning that I was an editor on Wikipedia for just shy of 10 years before I was considered for the tool. You (and perhaps Cabayi) should refer to this guide, as well as this guide for more information about how users become administrators, the process, the various requirements, and (in a nutshell) how difficult it is in order to become one. Most requests by users to become administrators fail, even requests by users with years of good experience. There are many good editors and contributors on Wikipedia who will never become administrators (for various reasons), and there are many requirements before even being considered for the role or even having a request taken seriously.

That being said, administrators on Wikipedia are volunteer users who are given (literally) just a few extra buttons... maybe like 10 extra buttons total in order to carry out advanced actions that, for obvious reasons, can't be given out to everybody. That's the only difference between a Wikipedia editor and a Wikipedia editor who is also an administrator. Administrators have to follow all of the same policies, guidelines, rules, and norms that non-admins have to, and they have absolutely no "authority" above other users or accounts, nor do they have any kind of access to hidden "special things" like any exemptions from certain policies or rules, more rights or "status" above other users, or the entitlement to edit articles and content above anyone else. In case my previous statements weren't clear enough, I'll say it like this: Apart from the very few extra buttons that administrators have access to in order to carry out those few additional actions and tasks they have access to, administrators are completely 100% equal and are exactly the same as any other user on Wikipedia (even unregistered and anonymous IP users) in regards to everything else... "authority", "status", importance, Wikipedia policies and their obligation to follow all of them, and the right to make edits and changes to articles and content. They don't get to make up rules when they want, block whoever they want, protect whatever pages they want, or do whatever they want. Their responsibilities are to carry out the tasks that the community has allowed and outlined in the appropriate policies and guidelines, and only in situations that are deemed necessary and acceptable as outlined in those policies. Administrator responsibilities, the proper use of the tools, the obligation to obey and follow all Wikipedia policies, and maintaining a high level of community trust and community confidence - are all conditions to keeping the administrator user rights. Administrators who are found to be consistently or egregiously violating policies and/or have clearly lost the trust and confidence of the community will usually have their tools removed.

I hope that my response helped to set some expectations and explain the administrator toolset to you, as well as the process that users must go through in order to become an administrator, and why asking a random user to nominate someone for the administrator user rights when you have no edits or experience (as you did in your original message above) probably won't be taken seriously or with consideration if you ask others like this. If you have any questions regarding my response or anything I explained above, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a great day and happy editing. :-D ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:47, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Hide edit summary

Please also hide [[REDACTED - Oshwah] this]. Thanks! ^{Babymissfortune} 13:55, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Babymissfortune! I think you added this request while I was in the middle of taking care of the matter. Is the content you requested to be removed now gone? Or is it still present and needs my attention? Let me know. :-) Thanks - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:08, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

It's okay now. Writ Keeper has removed it. Thank you! ^{Babymissfortune} 14:29, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Babymissfortune - Cool deal; thanks for letting me know. No problem! Always happy to lend a hand! Cheers ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:49, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Overlinking by IP hopper

Hi Oshwah, could you take a look at these IPs: Special:Contributions/140.213.1.27, Special:Contributions/140.213.1.34, and Special:Contributions/140.213.0.222? There have been others in this range this week too, and maybe last week. The IP is adding unnecessary links with the summary "Add cites", but the IPs change so much I doubt they'll ever see a message. Do you have any thoughts on how to deal with this situation? - BilCat (talk) 17:28, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi BilCat! I took a look at the WHOIS information for this IP, and the contributions for the network CIDR range here show that many IP edits are occurring like this today. Is it just an issue with over-linking? Or are there also other problems with the edits from this range? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:43, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

BilCat - It looks like some of the edits by this range may not be doing exactly what the edit summaries say they're doing. Look at this edit... it's summarized as "add cities", but the content changes aren't adding anything like that... How many other edits are like this, I wonder? ... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:46, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for looking at this. Yes, they are adding links, not "cites", but some of their other edits are either optional or unnecessary. I don't know how, or am unable, to look at edits across ranges, so I only know of the few IPs I've seen recently. I know there have been more in the past couple of weeks, but I don't remember what articles were involved, though they were primarily aviation-related. I was afraid that this was probably an active range where range blocks would be problematic. (Yet another reason I'm pro mandatory registration, but that's my soapbox, not yours :) )

BilCat - Taking a look at the contributions of ranges is very easy to do. You just paste the CIDR range into the "User" input text field in the Special:Contributions page and you're all set - it'll load the contributions for that range and show the individual IP address that made each edit. The contributions page (like other pages) has a limit of /16 for IPv4 addresses and /32 for IPv6 addresses; any CIDR range that's wider is too large due to being too many IPs to pull and it won't do it. For example, the three IP addresses you listed here are under the CIDR range of 140.213.0.0/16 (found by looking up the WHOIS for one of the IPs). Just go to Special:Contributions/140.213.0.0/16 and you'll see all edits from that range. If, for another example, you try to go to Special:Contributions/140.213.0.0/15 (instead of /16), it will tell you that you've exceeded the maximum range and that what you've entered is too wide (too many IPs to look up). This kind of range lookup used to only be available through a script or gadget, but the MediaWiki Software has been updated since then and this ability is now built-in to Special:Contributions natively. Take a look and let me know if you have any questions. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:43, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. I've only been on Wikipedia for 14 years, so I'm still.learning ;) I took a brief look at that range, and most of the edits to aviation topics are the problematic ones. - BilCat (talk) 18:59, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Also, what is CIDR in plain English? (The article isn't.) :) - BilCat (talk) 19:02, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

BilCat - Ahhh... CIDR notation... :-) For me to be able to explain CIDR notation, I'll need to go over a couple of other IP-related things with you, but lets start with IPv4. If you find that you understand it and would like to learn about CIDR and IPv6, let me know and I can go over it with you. Without further to do, here's an overview of CIDR notation in IPv4 addresses:

Let's take a look at a typical IPv4 address that you'd normally see in someone's house given to a computer by the owner's router: 192.168.1.2... There are four numbers between three decimals. Cool... pretty easy. The integers or numbers are just a shorthand way of stating the actual IP address that computers and networking devices read, which is actually in binary (0's and 1's). So, the actual IP address of 192.168.1.2 is 11000000.10101000.00000001.00000011. You'll see that each block is exactly eight bits long (a maximum of 255 as a decimal number is possible in each block), and there are four blocks of numbers, totaling 32 bits for an IPv4 address. That's the total length of an IPv4 address; they're always 32 bits long. Cool. That's easy... no big deal, no slight of hand. No tricks. ;-)

Let's say that we want to block all IP addresses that begin with 192.168.1, meaning that we don't care if the last number block is a 0, 12, 201, or 114, ...we want to block all IP addresses with 192.168.1.XXX or 11000000.10101000.00000001.XXXXXXXX. The CIDR notation for this would be 192.168.1.0/24. The 24 means to take the left-most 24 bits on the IP address you provide (which is 192.168.1), and make those constant... and then wildcard the rest of them (which is the last 8 bits on the right side of the IP). You effectively say, "don't wildcard these left-most 24 bits, but wildcard the rest of them". Now, all IP addresses that are 192.168.1.XXX are blocked.

Need to make it wider? Let's block 192.168.XXX.XXX! That adds 8 more bits to the group that I want to wildcard and subtracts 8 from the CIDR notation (what I don't want to wildcard). So, the IP address I would add to block would be 192.168.0.0/16 (make sure that you change the portion that you want to wildcard to be 0's, like with 192.168.0.0). This of course gets more complicated if you need to block, say, a /23, or a /20, or if you need to start in the middle of a number block (such as blocking IPs starting at 192.168.1.100 for example). Effectively, you're just shifting the number of bits that you want to wildcard as well as the IP address you enter before the CIDR notation at the end.

That's really all there is to it! I hope this basic overview gives you a good explanation and understanding of CIDR notation. There are many users out there that might explain this differently or even call some of the statements I'm saying incorrect, but this is the best way to explain what CIDR notation is and how it works to someone that has a very basic understanding of IP addresses and networks. Let me know if you have any questions and I'll be happy to answer them. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:30, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. It'll take me awhile to "digest" all that, but eventually I'll absorb it. :) - BilCat (talk) 19:45, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

BilCat - No problem; always happy to help. ;-) Regarding what to do with the IP range that you messaged me about and reported, I think that if some (but not all) of the edits are problematic but seem to be made in good faith, we should file a discussion at ANI and get input regarding the best way to handle this. I wouldn't want to block an entire range if a good portion of the edits from it are legitimate and okay. Thoughts? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:48, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Here's another one: Special:Contributions/140.213.48.125. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 03:30, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

BilCat - Have you filed an ANI report as recommended earlier? Let me know when you've done this and I'll add some information to it. I think this is a matter where we need to gather some input and thoughts here, and verify for sure that all of the edits by this range are problematic. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:48, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Mail

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Zylonv (talk • contribs) 21:08, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Zylonv - Received and responded. I need more information. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:13, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

YGM

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Please forgive me if I'm creating too many. Does the notification work if I simply reply to an existing one? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zylonv (talk • contribs) 23:07, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Zylonv! If you're talking about the notification on Wikipedia, I receive one as soon as you leave any kind of message here. If you're simply responding to an email thread where you notified me before (such as above), you can just add a reply to that discussion and let me know that you replied. No need to create a new section with another new email notification template. ;-) If, however, you send me an email to start a new chain or thread, feel free to hit me with another "you got mail" message. Really, none of this actually matters and it's not a big deal... you're not going to make me angry or leave me shaking my fist in the air because you left a "you got mail" template instead of just a reply... ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:58, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks; I sent another email in as well. Zylonv (talk) 05:29, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Zylonv - Acknowledged. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:34, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

I've added the relevant details. It's no problem, I know you've been busy lately. Zylonv (talk) 19:43, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Cool deal. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:13, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for looking into it. I just have a few follow-up questions, which I have put in a reply. Zylonv (talk) 03:31, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

No problem. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:03, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. I had one more question though, which I put in the reply. Zylonv (talk) 03:44, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

I also added another reply in response to yours asking for clarification on one of the topics we covered. Thanks . Zylonv (talk) 19:12, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Okay, I'll take a look tonight or first thing tomorrow morning. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:33, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Understood. While I haven't gotten the reply yet and I believe you did say there might be one a few hours ago, thanks a lot for getting back to me :) Zylonv (talk) 18:09, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Also, I added a reply with a question on the original topic we discussed. Hope you don't mind me changing the subject when you haven't had the time to answer the other few yet. Zylonv (talk) 16:21, 22 June 2019 (UTC)