User:Oshwah/TalkPageArchives/2020-11

You are currently viewing an archive of Oshwah's user talk page from November 2020. 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These discussions are no longer active and were moved here for historical and record-keeping purposes.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.

Plz

All this changing URL and API off my phone. I know my ex put it on here when she was trakking me to take a shit man. I got 2 girls stalking now. Cock blocking my texts my calls I’ve probably missed out on girls and money. I’m not trying to get anybody in trouble I’m a outlaw with good heart myself but all this GIF crap is old and I’m getting mad bc I feel like there winning. Plz get all this off — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.223.1.21 (talk) 20:12, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Umm... not exactly sure what you're asking me here. I can only help you with Wikipedia-related matters. Is there something I can help you involving the Wikipedia project? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:38, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Congrats on new checkusership! WesternAtlanticCentral (talk) 20:19, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi WesternAtlanticCentral! Thank you for the barnstar and for the congratulations! It means a lot to me and I appreciate it very much. :-) I'm happy to be able to serve the community as a checkuser, and I promise that I won't let you down! ;-) I hope you have a great weekend and I wish you happy editing. Cheers! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:37, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

The User

User in question: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:194.81.78.4 /// I have just had to warn this guy to not make false edits as he made an edit to the page on William Russell, changing his name to Big Willy. As I was in the process of undoing this, he removed it himself but even so, I have let him know not to do this and I am informing you. edit: I know the last time action was used on him was in 2016 and by you which is why I am here on your page. Damien Swann (talk) 11:32, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Damien Swann! Thanks for leaving me a message here and for letting me know. It looks like this school IP range has already been blocked, so we don't have anything to worry about now. In the future, if the user has been warned enough times, you can report them here to have an administrator block them or take other appropriate action. Please let me know if you have any questions, and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks again, and I hope you have a great weekend! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:44, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Armenia/Azerbaijan Sanctions

Hey Oswhah, thanks for protecting Dashalty. The sanctions authorisation I was referring to there was from WP:ARBAA2, where an amendment was passed that authorised standard discretionary sanctions; sorry, I should have probably said ARBAA2, not just ARBAA. Best wishes, Blablubbs ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:15, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Blablubbs! Ah, that makes sense! Thanks for letting me know. the "ARBAA" part of your link rang a bell, but when I couldn't find anything, I just went with the normal policy. The article would've been protected anyways. :-) Thanks again, and I hope you have a great weekend! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:34, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Hey!

First i wanted to thank u for protecting and being interested on Miley articles. I wanted to asked you if you could do soemrhing about it. The user gagaluv1 was actually asked to stop ny old users and almost blocked if you see it on her talk page, but she hasnt been blocked het. She obisbly doesnt wanna participate as she disnt listen to my collegues warn about warring and violent language but she kept going on and if you see the desception edit said "deal with it". Can u roll back and leave the edit bu lk95 where it was consensed by everyone as you see. She is adding songs that were included on other albums too after rhey were originally eeleased and that soace is for songs that wwere not availble on her own albums berore. So it makes thenimpression that that songs were not only included on her albums before. Thank you.--Night Crawling (talk) 12:32, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Night Crawling. I'm sorry to hear that this is going on. I'll definitely look into this. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:10, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Night Crawling, Gagaluv1 - So what's going on at the Miley Cyrus discography article? Why is it that I had to fully protect the article over this dispute? You both know that you could've been blocked for edit warring, ya know... Can you help me to understand what's going on so that I can help you two work things out? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:14, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

She is adding songs that were released BEFORE on her own lbums. That section is for songs quch are not xeom HER albums. Many users already suportes this. The article is misleading — Preceding unsigned comment added by Night Crawling (talk • contribs) 21:26, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Also, for more proof, she was the one asding this songs. Theyve never been there since 2017 wich they there "released". In the meantime please i would like if you could use the last revision by lK95. As it was the original version. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Night Crawling (talk • contribs) 21:30, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Night Crawling - Unfortunately, I cannot do that. That would be against my responsibility of acting as a neutral, impartial third-party, and as an uninvolved administrator. Once I fully protect an article, I cannot edit it unless current revision contains any serious violations of Wikipedia policy - such as copyright violations, BLP violations, threats or harassment, serious vandalism, or other such matters. If any are present, let me know and I'll either remove that content or revert the article to the most recent revision that doesn't contain those issues. Other than that, I can't let things such as who last edited the page, what the revision text is, who filed the protection request, or any other irrelevant matters factor into my decision to protect the article and when I do so. I have 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 portraying any sort of image to other users that I'm being biased or playing favorites. I hope that you understand. If you have any further questions or concerns, please let me know and I'll be happy to address them with you. :-) I will await Gagaluv1's response here so that I can assist you both. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:41, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Ok thank you i will do it if i can onve the protection is over. We cant let a aingle user decide what we include and qhat not, the consus qas alwayd there until this uswr came in. Love xx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Night Crawler (talk • contribs) 21:44, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

I will always be restauring the original version before her edits since it was like that until she came in. I hope she can understand that she has to use the talk page and wait for consensus to change things. Cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by Night Crawling (talk • contribs) 21:47, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Night Crawling - No, you really shouldn't do that... The reason that the article is fully protected is to systematically "nudge" you both over to the article's talk page so that you both can work things out properly and edit collaboratively. This isn't a "cooling down" period where you just wait it out and then resume exactly what you're doing once the protection expires. You will be blocked if you go straight back to the article and continue edit warring, and so will Gagaluv1 if he/she does that, too. You have both been given warnings for edit warring on this article, and other than the full protection being placed to put the brakes on your actions, that will be the last warning you two will receive. Having the attitude that you "will always be restauring [sic] the original version before her edits" is the exact opposite of which you should be having, and is exactly what is going to get you blocked. Have you read through Wikipedia's guidelines on dispute resolution? If not, you really should do that. It's ultimately up to the both of you how things are going to wind up. I really hope that things go positively and that we don't have to go to the next step. One way or another, the disruption will stop - whether it be that you two work things out, walk away and focus on something else, or end up being blocked. Please, I beg you, choose the easy and the right way that will end the disruption. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:00, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

I completly agree w you. But the version that should be kept is the one that was consensed and not the one he wanted? Thats what im saying. Its not like i want my esit to prevail. Its the all time page edit rhat didnt incluse that rhat way. I hope u understand ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Night Crawling (talk • contribs) 22:17, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello, thank you Oshwah for getting involved. I would first like to apologize for my behavior, it was childish to keep reverting and I am sorry for not taking it to the talk page for discussion. However, I do not understand the vitriolic response from Night Crawling, who seems to be almost offended by these songs' inclusion in the page and I have no idea why. The jist of the situation is that I added two Miley Cyrus releases, Spotify Singles and Spotify Singles - Holiday, to the extended play section. Night Crawling disagreed with these release's inclusion as they are only 2-song releases, which according to the extended play article, does not meet the definition. I would say that rule is not always true, as Drake's Scary Hours is called an EP despite being two songs, but I accept the disagreement. I then went on to add the songs to the "Other appearances" section, to which Night Crawling also objected and I don't know why. These are four officially recorded and released songs and I don't see any reason why they shouldn't be included on the article. Again, I apologize to all involved for being a part of this dispute and I hope we can find a peaceful way to resolve it. (Oh and by the way my pronouns are they/them. Not anyone's fault because I don't have them listed but I figured I'd say since there seemed to be some confusion.) Best, Gagaluv1 (talk) 04:04, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Sorry GagaLuv1 for using qrong pronoms. The thing is that these songs are not "other" appareances since they apoñpwares first on her own albums. People when they will look there they qill go. Oh bad mood was never included in her albums and is originally by these Spotify Session. False. Qhy dis no one add fhem since 2017? Thats the reason. I hope everyrhing goes ok now! Love xx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Night Crawling (talk • contribs) 13:21, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

I'll be honest, with all of these typos it's very hard to understand what you're saying. Are you saying that it's weird that these songs weren't added in 2017? I don't know, I guess no one cared to put them in the Miley Cyrus Discography article, but they clearly are real songs, and have been listed at the Spotify Singles article for a while nowGagaluv1 (talk) 17:26, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

These songs were released before on er own albums. This songs dont belong here. Period the section album appearances are for songs that were released on others people album. Thats why they dont belong here. Never said they arent official. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Night Crawling (talk • contribs) 18:16, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

I Think you may be confused. These weren't compilations of old songs, they were new recordings never appearing on other releases. Of the four songs between the two releases, only one is a Miley song and again, it's a new version. This argument doesn't make sense.Gagaluv1 (talk) 00:07, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

This is my last message towards you, the new versiona of songs arent considered different songs, and that section is not to include every miley song, its for songs on others peoples albums, thats why Right Qhwre I Bwlong isnt there. Know how discography pages work and stop obsessing over things, its weird. Every 5 edits u are reverting that edit, get a hobbie. they dont belong there and never will thats why more users never accepeted your edit or added them before. Keep doing what ur doing and you know what will happen, as other admins have told you before. Bye — Preceding unsigned comment added by Night Crawling (talk • contribs) 12:08, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Oshwah will you weigh in on this? I have a feeling Night Crawling is not capable of making a compromise.Gagaluv1 (talk) 16:03, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Night Crawling - Your last message above to Gagaluv1 telling them to "know how discography pages work and stop obsessing over things" and to "get a hobbie [sic]" was completely unacceptable. Your remarks constitute personal attacks, which is against Wikipedia's policy on civility, as well as item #4 of Wikipedia's five founding principles. I advised you earlier in this discussion that your attitude in regards to your intent on reverting Gagaluv1's edits regardless of the consequence was extremely concerning to me, and I warned you that continuing to edit war on this article and continue what you were doing would result in being blocked, and informed you that you've been given a final warning with all of this and that no more warnings would be forthcoming. I also told you that Wikipedia has a guideline on how to properly resolve disputes, and I advised you to read and understand these guidelines and follow them. In my observation, Gagaluv1 has willingly participated in this discussion when I asked them to, though he/she was under no obligation to do so. He/She has been civil, responded to your comments with legitimate explanations, questions, and concerns, and has done their best to work with you. You have not offered any explanation to your disagreement; no specific guidelines (such as from Wikipedia's manual of style or other places), no links to discussions or previously-established consensus that defines what an "extended play" is. The only thing that Gagaluv1 could offer is a link to the article itself, which is not a guideline, but an article. Although I do credit you for participating in this discussion as well, I don't feel that you've offered any explanation for your actions outside of incivility, and "that's the way it is". That's not fair on Gagaluv1 for you to do that. As Gagaluv1 stated briefly above, I don't believe that you're willing to work with him/her, and I believe that you lack proper explanation and rationale for your actions taken on the article. That's disappointing... I feel that you could be a great editor if you'd allow yourself to have an open mind and work well with others. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:35, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

I apologize if i ofended anyone, i said that i tried ti explain to he se and he she didnt listened; thats why i responded that way; OFC i Will colaboraré, the advice i told him ver was ti prevent her him for being blocked becwuse other editors Aldo reverter and warneed him ver, BEST ir luck ti everyone, lots of LOVE and thabk u Oswah for helping us! Xoxo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Night Crawling (talk • contribs) 13:19, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Gagaluv1 - I'm almost starting to feel like we're getting trolled here... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:24, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Gagaluv1! I apologize for the delay responding here and providing input. No worries; we've all gotten sucked into the "edit warring" cycle (including myself). Don't worry about what you did and don't dwell in the past; let's look ahead to the future. :-) If anything, you've learned from this and you'll be a better and more experienced editor moving forward. One cannot truly grow without making mistakes. I would know; I'm not here and with all of the experience, community respect, and knowledge because I'm 100% perfect as a member of the community. Many admins and editors will vouch for me when I say that I've made more than my fair share of mistakes here. ;-) It's your actions (such as being willing to participate here, apologize, and acknowledge your mistakes) that speak louder than anything else, and I appreciate that very much. I fixed some indentation issues above; I'm going to go back, read the responses between you two above, and I'll chime in under your request for my input. Thanks again! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:15, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Joe Biden

Thanks for the lock - but when will you allow rollbackers and pending changes reviewers? Tvoz/talk 20:05, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Admins have both rollback and a CRASH badge. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 20:08, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

This should not be fully protected. There are just too many problems with the article in its current state. If extended confirmed editors are vandalizing the page, then they should be blocked, not make the article limited to admins. —Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 20:09, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

The issue is that multiple EC editors are, and there are signs that at least some of them are compromised. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 20:11, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

That's correct, and we've had more than one report of this happening that we're actively investigating. I understand everyone's frustration; it's certainly been quite an election and this is a big moment in history. However, above all else, I have to do what's best for the project and the integrity of the article and the Encyclopedia and keep that as a first priority... Even if it means that I become the brunt of any negative feedback that comes my way. It's the curse that comes with the responsibility. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:52, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Oshwah. I'm glad it's your name on the protection, and not mine ;) Accordingly, could you please reinstate indef move protection when you get a chance. Thanks. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 20:14, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Zzuuzz -  Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:48, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

• Look, Oshwah, I like you and I'm glad you're willing to take the brunt etc etc. But indefinite full protection is completely inappropriate. There are plenty of eyes on the article and problematic edits have lasted, like, 90 seconds. If it's possible to combine Pending Changes with EC (though I'm guessing not) that might make sense here, but if not then only EC is justified. I don't see the vandalism or edit warring that would justify full protection -- just good-faith edits which happen to be mistaken. Check out WP:PREEMPTIVE again. EEng 11:46, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi EEng! I appreciate your honest feedback with how this was handled. I would never discourage you from coming to me and telling me how you feel about how I handled certain situations with the user of administrator tools, and I thank you for doing so. :-)

The reason I applied indefinite full protection wasn't to protect the article FOREVER, but to do so without a timer, so that lowering the protection could be discussed and implemented when the time was felt to be right. This eventually happened from the discussion that was later held at WP:AN, and I don't object to it at all. I originally applied full protection to the article for six hours due to the vandalism that was occurring and given the recent events that unfolded... I'm sure you understand that. ;-) I lowered the protection to ECP, but was questioned about this shortly and reminded that many extended-confirmed users were edit warring (or preparing to do so). We also had some extended-confirmed accounts that we believed to be compromised that engaged in serious disruption of this (and other similar) articles as well. Remember, too, that discretionary sanctions exist both for BLP articles (or "articles with biographical content relating to living or recently deceased people"... I think you get it lol), as well as post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. This gives administrators loosened restrictions and the ability to take the proper actions needed to ensure a positive and collaborative editing environment.

Now, I'm not throwing these policies and guidelines at you in order to say that I'm right and that you are wrong. I'm simply telling you what was going through my mind at the time. I was faced with a decision, and I went with what I felt would best protect the article and the project at that moment. I was questioned for lowering the protection, and I was obviously questioned for raising it back up. I guess I can't truly win in these situations. :-) I hope that my response helped to explain why I did what I did. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask them. I hope you're doing well, EEng, and I wish you a great day and happy editing. Oh, and to answer your (question?), yes it is possible to combine extended-confirmed protection (or any protection, for that matter) with pending changes protection, though the only reason you'd do so is if you'd have, say, semi-protection expire sooner than pending-changes protection, in which the pending-changes protection would take over after that protection expires. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:59, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your most thorough explanation, and I trust you remain well also. I don't understand your final comment, however. Seems to me if you combine ECP with PCP, you'd have the effect of PCP (i.e. changes are hidden from most readers until they're reviewed) but also only EC editors can edit at all. Anyway, I've since realized that PCP is really practical only for articles with very light editing traffic. EEng 07:26, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

EEng - Oh, sure, I can explain further: In the situation you mentioned above (ECP with PCP), you'd be right in a practical sense. Combining extended-confirmed protection and pending changes protection would be impractical, but it's technically possible ("technically possible" meaning that you can actually set protection that way and the MediaWiki Software won't stop you from doing so). If they expired at the same time, pending changes protection would be useless. The only effect that you'd see is extended-confirmed protection. It's only practical if a protection that restricted editing at all (like semi protection) was going to expire sooner than the pending changes protection expiration you'd set. This way, when semi expired, pending changes protection would take over, and allow editing but hide changes until they were reviewed. The only situations where I've set both PCP and another protection together was with semi protection. I'd set PCP to expire, say, in one month. Then I'd set semi to expire in a few days or a week. Then, the restriction would "lower" after semi expired, and when PCP would take over. I've been good, but busy... Work has kept me quite busy. Hope you're doing well. Stay healthy... these times are certainly quite crazy! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:38, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

I still don't get it. If ECP and PCP are both in force at a given moment, why is it that pending changes protection would be useless ... only effect that you'd see is extended-confirmed protection? Why wouldn't you get the effect of both? EEng 08:40, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

EEng - Because non-confirmed users and anonymous users would be restricted from editing the page in the first place with the extended-confirmed protection being applied. Hence there'd be no point in implementing PCP unless ECP was set to expire sooner. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:46, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Oops, I forgot that PCP only "hides" the edits of unconfirmed editors. Odd that I let that slip my mind, since I did the table at Template:Protection_table. EEng 08:56, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

EEng - No worries; it happens to the best of us. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:06, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

I wouldn't know. EEng 09:14, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Recent edits

New here - why does the article title "Political positions of Joe Biden" now land on your recent edit rather than land in the main article page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:7CDF:24FD:85F7:E2C9:BFE3:428C (talk) 20:11, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

CRASH will be by soon. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 20:19, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi there! I'm not sure what you mean exactly. Can you elaborate or provide a link? I thought at first you might have meant that your changes have become "pending" instead of live on the page (due to pending changes protection), but the page logs show that it's only been semi-protected. Any additional information you can add will help me to answer your question. :-) Thanks - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:57, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

No subject

He buddy let me know how can i make a Wikipedia page that fan be publicly seen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jagpreet singh virdi (talk • contribs) 21:39, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Jagpreet singh virdi! Before creating your first article, I highly recommend that you go through and complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial first. It will provide you with many important walkthroughs, guides, interactive lessons, and other information that will familiarize you with our policies and guidelines, how Wikipedia works, how to navigate around the site, and how to find important locations and pages. 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. Should you wish to proceed anyways, there's an easy tutorial that will guide you. You can find it here. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them and help. :-) Welcome to Wikipedia! I'm glad that you decided to join us! :-D ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:45, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Joe Biden

Why are you lowering the protection on this article today of all days? Have you looked over the talk page? There are many editors contesting that he won the election and is the President-elect. It seems like today, of all days, you would maintain protection on this article. This article will be subject to disruption for the foreseeable future. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:56, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Liz - The article was fully protected due to vandalism by compromised extended confirmed account. I felt that the vandalism has passed and hence the reason for protecting it was no longer necessary. If you feel that it should remain fully protected due to possible edit warring, I can restore it. Shall I do so? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:59, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Liz - I went ahead and restored full protection with an updated reason. Quite frankly, I agree with you. I'm just trying to be thorough. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:01, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

I'll admit I didn't see the previous discussions on this issue (above this comment). Sorry to add to your burden of placing the protection. I've found that edit suggestions on talk pages of protected articles can show you what edits editors would make if they could do it on their own. And, right now, there are a lot of people that can't accept reality. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:06, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Liz - No worries! It's the right thing to do for the article and the encyclopedia. If it means that I take heat for it, oh well. That's the burden and the curse that comes with holding the mop. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:05, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

One thing I can do to possibly help is to temporarily remove the WP:1RR restriction from the article, leaving just the BRD restriction. That would free up our regular editors to revert unhelpful content without worrying about using up their 1 daily revert against the massive number of less-helpful edits, but it would still prohibit drive-by accounts from immediately reinstating their changes when those changes are undone. (FYI this isn't an idea I just came up with, I've been thinking about this for some time now especially in the context of articles about recent events.) ~Awilley (talk) 15:44, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 02:39, 8 November 2020 (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) 02:39, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

BilCat - Received and replied. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:53, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Protection request

Hi, I believe it is time to re-protect the List of films impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. There have been multiple persistent edits by unregistered users in the past few days with un-sourced content and/or removal of content without any reasoning. Please help. Thanks. •Shawnqual• 📚 • 💭 07:40, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Shawnqual! I've added pending-changes protection to this article for one month. If things continue after it expires, let me know. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:04, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

About Joe Biden

Can you make the protection maybe expire on 15 January 2021? Or probably drop it to semiprotection I am kind of opposed to "indefinite" full-protection as it stops legit contributors from making good-faith edits. Sure there are DS imposed on the page, but I think indefinite full protection is a bit too much as it prevents most direct good-faith edits ever. Aasim (talk) 12:51, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Or better remove protection altogether, so that way we can tell the truth about Biden without ponces reverting and calling it vandalism! Spacewise (talk) 12:54, 8 November 2020 (UTC) — Spacewise (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Hi Awesome Aasim - There's a discussion on AN regarding the protection of these articles where you can participate and voice your concerns. I've already expressed there that I'll be happy to update the protection to what's decided. I suggest participating there. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:35, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

AN

Sorry to drag you into drama, but I've started an WP:AN thread about the protection on the Joe Biden page. I think you did the right thing here, my hope is this discussion determines what an appropriate length of time of protection is, or some alternatives. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 22:45, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

CaptainEek - No biggie. :-) Just let me know what's decided and I can change it. I'll keep my name on the protection; no need to drag other admins into the mud. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:33, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

A quick look at an edit

Would you please take a look at this edit? I don't know if it should stick around in the edit history. Thanks. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 04:49, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi BlackcurrantTea! It doesn't appear to fall into the threshold of being a serious BLP violation, so I'll go ahead and hold off. In the future, if you see anything that you feel might need rev del, you'll want to email them to me instead of posting them here publicly for anyone to read. Over 1000 editors have my user talk page on their watchlist - this means that they're notified as soon as anyone makes an edit to this page. If you post these kinds of requests here, you will trigger the Streisand effect (I'm sure you've heard of it), as editors will quickly run over and look at the content before it becomes restricted for them to see. No big deal; just keep this in mind for next time. :-) If you need anything else, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be happy to take a look. :-D Have a great day, and happy editing! Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:11, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. If I thought it was a definite case for revdel, I would have emailed. Since it's an orphan article with low page views, and the edit was, well, not at all nice, but as you say, not over the threshold, and it had already been there for over a day, I posted here. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 05:23, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

BlackcurrantTea - No worries, I understand and I don't fault you at all. Yeah, even in cases where you're not even sure, just go ahead and email them to me. "Better safe than sorry" is how I feel with these kinds of reports. ;-) I've had many editors report possible rev del issues here where they felt doubtful but figured they're report anyways. Well, they ended up being revisions that ABSOLUTELY 100% NEEDED REV DEL... lol. I look at the page views for the article the next day, and as I expected, a big jump was recorded just because the user reported the revision here publicly. I help many editors here, and as a consequence, these kinds of things happen. ;-) Anyways, as I said above, please don't hesitate to let me know if you see any more issues - I'll be happy to take a look. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:53, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Dougal Dankworth

is requesting unblocking at UTRS appeal #37014. As he is globally locked, his only avenue of appeal is UTRS. I read Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ajax Coleman/Archive, and your logic would be difficult to refute. Could you opine at the UTRS? The only route I see to unblocking would be to shuttle his requests between UTRS and WP:AN. And I don't think that would succeed. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 09:18, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Oh, never mind. 331dot gave them/him short shrift.09:24, 10 November 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deepfriedokra (talk • contribs) 09:24, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Deepfriedokra - Cool deal; glad it's been taken care of. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:20, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

About the removal of Randeep Rai project Hero Gayab Mode ON

I removed that because Hero Gayab Mode On Trailer has released its appearing Abishek Nigam — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.134.141.83 (talk • contribs) 15:22, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for letting me know. If my revert was made in error, please accept my apologies and feel free to restore your changes. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:32, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Warner Media and more

You said to let you know if you missed blocking anyone.[1]. You missed this one. The entire /16 has been quiet this month except for that one edit on the 9th so perhaps you didn't "miss" him after all. I did not check the entire /12[2] but obviously that's too big to block. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 16:55, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Davidwr! Thanks for the message and for letting me know. For now, let's just keep an eye on this IP. If things go crazy, let me know and I'll be happy to take a look. I wouldn't put much time into that range. A /12 on an IPv4 is absolutely massive... It's wider than the maximum range that we can block in one action. Again, if you see any craziness, let me know. :-) Thanks again for the FYI. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:11, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Thankfulness
	I am giving you this because I think you are very thankful for all the work you’ve done on Wikipedia for the past thirteen years. Cupper52 (talk) 17:55, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Cupper52! Thank you for the barnstar! You're absolutely correct - I'm extremely thankful to be part of this community over the 13+ years that I've been an editor here. It's been great to work with other people, come to resolutions to complex issues and problems, and keep Wikipedia clean of disruption. I appreciate the time that you took to write this to me, and I hope you have a great day! Happy editing! :-D ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:42, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

User:Broadway Blackthorn1234 Page Deletion

So I'm new here, forgive me if I screwed something up big-time, but I want to know why my page was deleted? I tried to look into the reason the page was deleted when I saw the message, but it was confusing. Can you explain it to me like I'm an idiot [mainly because I am, but also because a lot of things are confusing for me sometimes]? Broadway Blackthorn1234 (talk) 21:37, 10 November 2020 (UTC)Broadway Blackthorn1234

Hi Broadway Blackthorn1234! Welcome to Wikipedia! Your userpage was deleted because it consisted of content that was not primarily Wikipedia-focused. It appeared as if you were either writing about yourself or about someone else that you know. See this section of Wikipedia's policy on user pages for more information. If you have any questions or if you need help with anything, please let me know and I will be more than happy to do so. :-) You're not in trouble or anything - don't worry. We just have these rules in place to keep user pages on-focus and appropriate, and make sure that any disruption, spam, advertising, or other disallowed content on user pages are taken care of. Cheers! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:55, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, that helped so much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Broadway Blackthorn1234 (talk • contribs) 22:04, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Broadway Blackthorn1234 - You bet. Please let me know if you have any more questions, and I'll be happy to answer them. Welcome to Wikipedia! I'm glad to have you here with us! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:07, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Shawntheshipper

Hi. I think you forgot to block and tag User:Tayzarswifsson as another sockpuppet. Also, should User:Shawntheshipper have his block extended to indefinite for continues sockpuppetry?4thfile4thrank {talk} :? 00:47, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi 4thfile4thrank! Nope, I left that account unblocked because I concluded that it was likely this user, not confirmed. ;-) It's definitely going to be a sock, but I can't say so with enough certainty given the technical evidence I obtained. Yes, I would say that extending the block to an indefinite block wouldn't be a bad idea. :-) Please let me know if you have any more questions, and I'll be happy to answer them. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:37, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

@Oshwah: Can his block be extended to indef please? It hasn't been done yet. It is clear Shawntheshipper has continued to sock after being blocked for it. 4thfile4thrank {talk} :? 01:55, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

4thfile4thrank - Sure, though the IP is already autoblocked. It won't make a difference whether I extend the block now or someone else does it while closing the SPI thread. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:01, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

4thfile4thrank -  Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:02, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

How to respond to an edit like this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vasyl_Lomachenko&curid=14538175&diff=988102685&oldid=986396164&diffmode=source 4thfile4thrank {talk} :? 02:40, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

4thfile4thrank - I'd revert it stating that the edit wasn't necessary. Wikipedia is not a place to update website statuses and uptime. I've gone ahead and reverted the edit for you here. Please let me know if I can help you with anything else. I'll be more than happy to do so. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:43, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

@4thfile4thrank:(talk page stalker)Since there is a claim of malware, I replaced the link with {{cite web|url=http://www.boxing-scoop.com/show_boxer.php?boxer_ID=8586|title=Vasyl Lomachenko's amateur boxing record|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20180925104414/http://www.boxing-scoop.com/show_boxer.php?boxer_ID=8586|archivedate=2018-09-25|url-status=unfit}}. This gives a usable link without giving the possibly-contaminated one. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 02:56, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Davidwr - Perfect! Thanks for doing that! :-D ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:58, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

		The Oversighter's Barnstar
		Thanks for being around so much to hide stuff --DannyS712 (talk) 07:08, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

DannyS712! Thank you for the barnstar! I really appreciate it! And you're very welcome! I appreciate all of the reports you send my way, and I'm always happy to take care of them! :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:11, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Chills (YouTuber)

@Oshwah: Hi, could you help me fill in the references on Chills (YouTuber). They look weird! --SoothingRelaxation (talk) 18:49, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi SoothingRelaxation! Sure, I'll be happy to help! Have you used the {{cite web}} template before? This is what is commonly used for citing sources that point to web pages. You just put the template between the ref tags, and you're set to go! It's use is documented here, but in a nutshell, this is how you use it:

For references with author credit

<ref>{{cite web |url= |title= |last= |first= |date= |website= |publisher= |access-date= |quote=}}</ref>

For references without author credit

<ref>{{cite web |url= |title= |author=<!--Not stated--> |date= |website= |publisher= |access-date= |quote=}}</ref>

You just fill in the information after the equal signs. You can remove the pieces that you don't have information for. Here's an example:

Example

The code you actually add to the article in order to reference a source (this one, I just picked Microsoft's homepage to make it easy for you to read): <ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.microsoft.com|title=Microsoft Homepage|last=Gates|first=Bill|date=November 11, 2020|publisher=[[Microsoft]] |access-date=January 1, 2019}}</ref> The output in the references section at the bottom of the article will look like this: Gates, Bill (November 11, 2020). "Microsoft Homepage". Microsoft. Retrieved January 1, 2019.

Please let me know if you have any more questions or need help with anything else. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:46, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi.

As you can see, the user gagaluv1 has another edit warring going on. As i told you, he seems to have a fixation with all of my edits and he was the one trolling you telling you he learned a lesson. I don't know why you felt like I was the "bad child" here. Because if i was i wouldn't be writing you this to understad the situation. I don't know what to do with this user, it's so frustating and you thinking i was the bad one was dissapointing. I hope this clears up the confussion. thank u in advance!--Night Crawling (talk) 22:12, 11 November 2020 (UTC) Also, the protteciton on the article is open and as you could see i didn't even went to do any changes to what caused an edit warring because i listened to you. B<PS, eing so nice to him made her thinking he has now a privilage to edit what he wants because he knows you can block people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Night Crawling (talk • contribs) 22:13, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Night Crawling - Your viewpoint and attitude with this whole dispute (as you expressed in the discussion above) is why I may have left you feeling this way. It's never my intention to do so, but you need to look at things in my shoes: If you were trying to help settle a dispute between two individuals, how would you feel in this situation? If User A's attitude was apologetic and the user expressed willingness to work with the other user and actually tried to do so, and if User B's attitude was made clear when they stated that they would revert User A's edits no matter the cost, then made personal attacks toward User A for no good reason when that user was trying to work with User B peacefully, who would you feel is in the right? Who would you feel more compelled to help? User A? Or User B?

Also, please know that we don't grant "immunity" just because a user is the one who reports an issue. Per this section of Wikipedia's essay on not shooting yourself in the foot, all users in a discussion can be scrutinized, and can be blocked and sanctioned - even the reporting user. I've asked Gagaluv1 to start a discussion on the articl'es talk page. Please participate and work with Gagaluv1 when he/she does so. Thank you - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:34, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Redirects cleanup request

Hi, Oshwah, I haven't talked to you for a long time. I see you do not let your mop idle. I hope you're doing well and all yours are well, too.

Today I come to ask you for help with deciding about unnecessary redirects. I made a little mistake when handling the request at WP:VP/T:

Special:PermanentLink/988225332#Talk page archiving problem

As a result, I left unnecessary redirects behind me:

• Talk:John O. Brennan/Archive 1
• Talk:John O. Brennan (CIA officer)/Archive 1

both pointing at Talk:John Brennan (CIA officer)/Archive 1.
Do you think they are OK, or should I mark them to {{db}}? And which speedy deletion criterion would apply here?

Best regards, and happy editing! --CiaPan (talk) 22:37, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi CiaPan! It's good to talk to you again! I hope things are going well for you, and that you're staying safe in these crazy times. ;-) I'm in an area where COVID impact is low, but cases are still on the rise as winter hits full-swing here. Nah, I don't see anything wrong with those redirects. I think you can just leave them without worry that anything is going to happen. There isn't a speedy deletion criterion that this would fall into; you'd have to list them at the redirects for discussion noticeboard. In the worse case scenario, I can just kill em, but I don't think it's necessary. Let me know if I can help you with anything else, and I'll be happy to do so. :-) Glad to hear that you're doing well. Stay safe and be well! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:59, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

OK, so I think I'll leave them as they are. IMHO they are useless, but they certainly don't make any harm. Thank you for your extensive reply. --CiaPan (talk) 01:33, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

P.S. It's not that good with Covid-19 here – there's above a half million cases total (WHO map says it's almost 594 thousands, Johns Hopkins Univ map gives a number of 619) and about 8500 deaths. But I hope everything is going to end well. Keep warm and keep smiling! CiaPan (talk) 01:33, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

CiaPan - Dang! Keep safe! That's a lot of cases! You bet; and I certainly will! :-D ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:48, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Shawntheshipper

Should his talk page access be revoked for this? 4thfile4thrank {talk} :? 23:07, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

4thfile4thrank - Nah, just let the user vent. If he/she is really that upset because they were caught abusing multiple accounts, and if he/she is really leaving, then I'm not that concerned. The user is just being a diva. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:51, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

?

Check Miley Cyrus discocgraphy talk page and see gagaluv1 violent message. He literally called me damaged. But then i supose i am the bad guy here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Night Crawling (talk • contribs) 00:21, 12 November 2020 (UTC) I told him he was an obssesive person and that is not n isult. being damaged is. he literally just called me that in fornt of everybody at the talk apge

"What is your damage" is another way of saying "What is your problem". It's not calling you damaged in any way - and I would think twice before complaining to an administrator about an article you're edit-warring on. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 00:25, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AMiley_Cyrus_discography&type=revision&diff=988245069&oldid=988244547 Check this. He told me to stop or he will block me like he has that right. That goes against wikipedia guidelines. he is not an admn Sorry, but I know that damaged is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Night Crawling (talk • contribs) 00:28, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

That diff shows him basically retracting that threat. And even if he didn't, you're still edit-warring on that page. Administrators can and will block for it, and don't care who has the higher ground (on the grounds that neither party does). While he's not an admin, Oshwah is, and you're honestly not helping your case a whit. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 00:31, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your advice. I know Oshwah. Thats why i talked to him as a college. tahnk u. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Night Crawling (talk • contribs) 00:51, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Night Crawling - Gagaluv1 has pinged you in a discussion on the article's talk page. You should know, since you provided a diff from that discussion above. I personally wouldn't have chosen the word "damage" in the sentence he wrote, but I agree with Jéské Couriano that he probably meant to say, "What is your problem?". While he removed the threat of you being blocked and replaced it with other words, he didn't do anything wrong. He didn't that that he was going to block you, he stated that you would be blocked if it continues, which is true - continued edit warring will lead to being blocked. Can you please respond to Gagaluv1 on the talk page and work with him peacefully? If there's a reason that the song shouldn't be labeled as a single, please provide a link to the relevant policy, guideline, or consensus that explains this. You have yet to do so. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:25, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Suggestion

Hey there, I've been watching the horrifying edit warring on Miley Cyrus discography and never intented to get in there until that situation stoped. I keep seeing the same 2 users Night Crawling and Gagaluv1 both after talking with you they seem both as equally non interesed on stoping the war. The page right now is a mess. All of the edits there are from them. I've seen the discussion and yet there is one user that he is not very good grammaly and other is good at explaining I don't think there is a bad one there. They should be globally blocked forever or the discography page will be now a low class article since nobody even cares to edit there. All edits should be restored before both users started warring. Thank you and nice to meet you and keep up with the good work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OMG4323 (talk • contribs) 01:02, 12 November 2020 (UTC) I decided to do the rollback before both users started a war, but I am in no position to talk with them or take actions. It's up to admins, now. Greetings.--OMG4323 (talk) 01:07, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi OMG4323! Thank you for the message and for expressing your thoughts and opinions. These users are far from being blocked indefinitely. I believe that they're both good contributors who are a net-positive to the project; they're just conflicting with one another over a dispute is all. They've both been clearly warned that continued edit warring would result in being blocked. I've just responded to the discussion above and asked Night Crawling to participate in the discussion on the article's talk page. If he reverts your edit or if any reverts between them continue, I'll be partially-blocking that user from the article for an extended period of time for edit warring. You're absolutely right; their dispute has been quite disruptive and has left the article history a mess. Don't worry though - I'm keeping an eye on thing, and I assure you that it will stop one way or another. It's up to them as far as how it will be stopped. Either they'll work things out, choose to step away and come back sometime down the road, or they'll continue violating policy and be blocked for doing so. Either way, it's not going to continue. ;-) Please let me know if you have any more questions or concerns, and I'll be happy to talk to you about them. :-) Thanks again, be safe, and be well! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:32, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Khalil Berro

Hi Oshwah. Since you were the admin that dealt with this SPI, perhaps you could take a look at Talk:Khalil Berro because another SPA has showed up who might be a WP:DUCK. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:25, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Marchjuly! Sure, I'll take a look at it today. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:05, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Khalil Berro

User:Wikicat202 looks like another sock. Should I add it to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Khalil Berro or open a new one? DuncanHill (talk) 15:36, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

DuncanHill - Let's just open a new one. Add your evidence and I'll take a look at it. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:39, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, just off out to the shops, will address on return. DuncanHill (talk) 17:40, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Looks like I was beaten to it! DuncanHill (talk) 19:08, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

DuncanHill - Oh well, at least it was taken care of. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:57, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look Oshwah. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:49, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Marchjuly - You bet; always happy to lend a hand. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:00, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

New User:Khalil Berro sock

It's Wikicat202.Best, GPL93 (talk) 17:40, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Apologies. My dumb ass just noticed what was literally immediately above this message. GPL93 (talk) 17:42, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

GPL93 - HA! No worries; I do that all the time. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:05, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Just checking in

Hello Oshwah,
Just checking in to see how you are doing. I've been busy with real life and have not been editing much. I would like to know how everything is going with you during these difficult times. Interstellarity (talk) 18:41, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Interstellarity! How've you been?!! It's always good to talk to you! Things have been busy for me, but I have no true complaints. COVID cases are rising everywhere, but I'm lucky to be living in a place where the infection rate is relatively low. Yeah, no kidding... I mean, I never truely imagined that we'd be having to wear masks and stay away from one another, but on the other hand, I'm not crazy surprised either. There are many fictional movies and books that depict times like this, where people are wearing hazmat suits when they go out, or having to outside in the morning to scoop frozen oxygen from the sidewalk and throw it in the fire so that they could breathe... Old innocent me thought this would never happen. Boy was I wrong! How are you doing? Are you in a relatively safe location? How's life been for you? What have you been up to? :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:19, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

I am doing well as well. I live in Massachusetts which is not a red state although some of the towns are red. I feel pretty safe despite all the COVID craziness. Life has been running very smoothly for me and I have no concerns on or off Wikipedia. Like you, I never thought an event like this would shake the world so much that we have to adjust our daily routine. I'm glad you are doing OK and hope that a vaccine comes out very soon. I'd be interested to know what you think the future of COVID and the world is going to look like in the coming months and years. Best, Interstellarity (talk) 00:08, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Interstellarity - I'm glad to hear that your life is running smoothy despite the craziness these days. Mine has been mostly running smoothly as well. :-) Well, that question really comes in two parts if you think about it: How long is COVID itself going to impact us in the future? And how will society and daily life will be impacted before things return to normal? Honestly, my thoughts regarding both questions depend on whether or this virus is going to mutate and whether or not we're going to have to keep playing "catch up" as far as vaccines and mutations go. If it mutates every year like the cold does, this virus (and hence how we're impacted as a global society) will be with us for a very long time. If it doesn't mutate and if we get a vaccine out that is widely available to be administered, I think that it'll still be a few years until things fully return to what they were in 2019. Either way, depending on whether or not this virus mutates and how soon we get a vaccine out the door before it does will gauge how long it'll stay with us... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:41, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

I know. Even if a vaccine is out to the general public, it could be years before things get back to normal again because any vaccine that comes out to the general public can cause more harm than good if it is not properly tested. I hope that we can all take care of ourselves and hope that things will get better again. Interstellarity (talk) 13:28, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Interstellarity - Many people (IMO) need to take this more seriously than they do - at least from what I've observed in my country (which is the United States). We'd curb this virus significantly if people would follow the recommendations of the CDC and the WHO. It's going to take more than just a vaccine to end this virus... There are obviously people out there who are against vaccines in general (which I think is absolutely ridiculous), and others who straight-up think that this COVID outbreak is fake or a conspiracy. Wat?!! Okay then... When this is all said and done and when the virus is completely stopped, I just hope that we learn from this globally and that we implement much better policies and safeguards for the next time this should happen again... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:33, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

I strongly agree with you. I think if everyone followed the rules, our country wouldn't even be in the top 10 countries with the most cases. I feel it is important to follow the rules to make it easier for scientists to create a vaccine that will provide immunity to the virus. Some people think the country's leader has something to do with it. It's not the leader's fault people are not following the rules. All they can do is enforce the rules. Interstellarity (talk) 15:54, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Interstellarity - Nobody is truly an expert with this situation. I take all news and advice with a grain of salt. Either we're going to stomp this thing when the vaccine comes out, or things are going to stick with us for some time... I guess only time will tell... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:30, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

It was nice talking to you!! :-) I wish you all the best with regards to COVID-19 and your life. Interstellarity (talk) 12:37, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

ANI request

Hi Oshwah, was hoping that you could take a look at the issue I've put at the bottom of ANI. The user has continued the behavior I posted about, and this has been sitting at the bottom of ANI for several hours now. Cheers. Etzedek24 ^{(I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record)} 02:11, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Etzedek24! Thanks for the message. Drmies has just indefinitely blocked the user. :-) Please let me know if you have any questions or if I can help you with anything else. I'll be more than happy to lend a hand with anything you need. :-) Thanks again for the message, and I hope you have a great day! Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:29, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Paul Sinha page

Hi Oshwah, someone is persistently vandalizing Paul Sinha's page. The person keeps claiming he is dead. I work with Paul and all of this is rubbish but as Paul has a public profile this is getting noticed and it is distressing for some people reading about it as it keeps coming up in google searches and google hasn't updated the page to reflect that Paul didn't die on 10th November 2020. Having said that, the vandal has been very active in the last hour and keeps posting that Paul is dead and I keep having to undo it. The poster has now been personally abusive to me. I saw that you protected Paul's page this week, I don't know if I'm able to do that or if someone with more privileges can. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SallyCarter (talk • contribs) 11:15, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)(Non-administrator comment) Hi SallyCarter. Only an administrator can protect a page as explained in Wikipedia:Protection policy, but non-administrators can request protection at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. In this case, however, an another administrator has already blocked the IP that was making those edits; so, I don't think page protection will be necessary unless the disruption of the page starts up again.

For reference, normally a connection to the subject of an article like you've described above means that you'd be considered to have a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest to anything written about Sinha on any Wikipedia page and thus it would be best for you to avoid directly editing any content about him as much as possible. However, it was obvious that the IP was being disruptive and adding content that was a violation of Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons policy; so, if another editor shows up again and starts to try and add the same content, then feel free to remove it per WP:COIADVICE and WP:BLPREMOVE; just make sure to leave an neutrally worded edit summary explaining why. If the other editor keeps re-adding it, then seek administrator assistance asap. Moreover, if an editor is leaving offensive edit summaries like this IP was, also seek administrator assistance asap. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:49, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Marchjuly - Thanks for explaining the process and for helping the user while I was offline. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:30, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi SallyCarter! I've added semi protection to the article for one week. If any more issues arise during the protection, please let me know and I'll be happ to take a look. ;-) Thanks for the message, and I hope you have a great weekend! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:28, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

User:Deathismetal14

Hi Oshwah. Better363783 (talk · contribs) is possibly a sock, compared [3] to others.[4] 115.164.172.252 (talk) 17:29, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

It's certainly possible. Have you filed a report at the Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations noticeboard? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:31, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Spooky's Jumpscare Mansion

Hi, could you lend me a hand by filling in the references for me? Plus, I think you should check this game out, it's kinda cool! --SoothingRelaxation (talk) 21:51, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Uh, there are still 14 more references to fill in. :D --SoothingRelaxation (talk) 22:05, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

SoothingRelaxation - Okay, I've gone through and I've moved all of the references into {{cite web}} templates for you. And don't worry, I wasn't skipping any. I just edit them in chunks in case someone else edits the article while I am. It minimizes issues with having to manually fix edit conflicts. ;-) Let me know if I can do anything else for you, and I'll be happy to help. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:27, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

The Wikipedia article is not yet available on Google search results. Usually, you'd type in a certain subject and you'd see it being displayed on the right-hand side with a link to Wikipedia. Could you help with that? --SoothingRelaxation (talk) 22:30, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @SoothingRelaxation: Wikipedia articles are not indexed by search engines for 90 days or until they have been reviewed, whichever is the shorter period. Eagleash (talk) 23:28, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

SoothingRelaxation - Eagleash is correct. This is a Wikipedia indexing rule that's put into place on the back-end. This is to make sure that violations such as hoaxes, vandalism, libelous articles, copyright violations, threats of harm, or other bad-faith article creations don't have a chance to get indexed by search engines before they're found and removed. Just be patient; it'll be indexed once the requirements are met. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:36, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

IPBE

Hi, would you willing to grant me an IP block exemption? I've made a request through UTRS but it expired with no reply. In WP:IPBE it is said I can contact checkuser directly. Ping me on reply. Enjoyer of World^💬 22:43, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Enjoyer of World! I haven't granted IP block exemption as a checkuser before, so I'd like to read up on this before I move to do so. Why are you requesting the user right? Are you currently being affected by a hard-IP address or range block? Or are you forced to use a proxy or Tor network in order to edit? Are you able to file another request at UTRS? This would be the best place to go so that it can be reviewed by users who are experienced with the process of checking and granting the user right. Please let me know if you have any questions, or if you can provide any additional information or context to me about your request (you're welcome to email those details to me if you're not comfortable sharing them here). I'll likely refer you to the UTRS regardless, but I can at least give you some input and guidance. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:03, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Yes, an IP address that I usually use (but not that I currently use) is hard blocked. I'm hesitant to file another request at UTRS if the outcome will be the same. Enjoyer of World^💬 23:09, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Let's try creating another UTRS request. I know that you're hesitant with doing so and I'm sorry that the previous one closed without a response; I'm not sure why this happened. I'll look into the process for CheckUsers and how they check and grant IPBE as well; I should probably know and understand this process anyways. :-) Are you okay with that? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:15, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Uh, okay. Thanks for your help. Enjoyer of World^💬 23:30, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, Enjoyer of World... I know that this isn't the result you wanted, but I don't want to jump into situations that I'm not familiar with and mess something up - especially when it involves the use of CheckUser tools. CheckUser is a very advanced user right that's only given to exceedingly few users and after meeting strict requirements and after a lot of vetting and examination by ArbCom and the community. I'm not about to use those tools in a situation that I'm not familiar with yet, and possibly get myself into hot water. That wouldn't be good at all for me - especially when I've only been a checkuser for about a month now. :-) File another UTRS request, and I'll see if I can't have someone look at it. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:44, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

It's okay. Apparently the blocked IP that I mentioned is an open proxy. I have emailed the checkuser OTRS team instead to explain why I need to use said IP. Enjoyer of World^💬 00:07, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Enjoyer of World - Ah, perfect. That should hopefully go a lot better for you. Keep me posted! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:19, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		I wanted to say thanks since you have done a couple of niceties for me (rollback, pending changes review) when I didn't ask for it (or even know to ask for it). I really appreciate it. It feels good to be part of a team working on this site. LizardJr8 (talk) 01:16, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi LizardJr8! Thank you for the barnstar and for the kind words. I appreciate it a lot! When I see users doing good things on Wikipedia and in the areas where they'd make good use of the tools - if they would qualify for the user rights if I were to ask them to request them in RFPP, I just give it to them. Why waste their time? :-) Thanks again for the kind message. You're doing well here, and I'm extremely pleased to see that you've put the rollback user rights to good use! Keep up the great work, and please don't hesitate to message me if you need anything at all. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:47, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Michael's Meanies Copyrights

Hello Oshwah,

I'm Paul Carroll father of Michael Carroll he created "The Meanies" stress toys given to children with cancer, Michael passed away in 2014 and his Meanies are still being sent to hospitals, as for the copyright concerns, I created all this artwork it is not copyrighted by any other organization, please let me know what I need to do to rectify this concern

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:MichaelsMeanies/sandbox

Thanks Paul Carroll MichaelsMeanies (talk) 02:24, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

See WP:Donating copyrighted content. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 02:27, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi MichaelsMeanies! Thanks for leaving me a message here with your questions. I'll be happy to answer them and help you. :-) A significant amount of text that you added to your sandbox page was copied straight from an external source word-for-word, which is a copyright violation - a policy violation that Wikipedia takes very seriously. This is why I removed the content that was in violation, hid the revisions, and warned you about this on your user talk page. Jéské Couriano pointed out above that you can donate copyrighted works by following the link provided in his response above.

Another issue that you should be aware of is the fact that you have a conflict of interest with what you're writing about. Creating pages and articles on subjects where you have a direct or personal conflict of interest with is highly discouraged behavior, and will likely result in your attempts to create an article on this being removed due to the conflict. I highly encourage you to write about subjects that interest you, but where you don't have this conflict of interest. This will make sure that all content on Wikipedia is written neutrally and written with the highest quality content possible. Please let me know if you have any more questions, and I'll be happy to answer them. :-) Thanks for the message, and I wish you well. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:33, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @MichaelsMeanies: First, let me say I am sorry for your loss, and I am very happy your son and others have turned this into something positive. I found the organization's web site and saw, unsurprisingly, that the large-city children's hospital nearest me uses them.

Now, back to all things Wikipedia: You should request to change your username. Usernames such as yours which are easily confused with organization names or which suggest they might be "handed off" to someone else in the future to "represent" an organization are not allowed. A name like Paul of Michaels Meanies would probably work. See Wikipedia:Username policy for instructions to request a username change. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 02:48, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

That username would definitely work. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:57, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Revoke talk page access

Should User:JustinBoy1267 have his talk page access revoked for making legal threats? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JustinBoy1267&oldid=988932834 4thfile4thrank {talk} :? 03:08, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

4thfile4thrank -  Done. The user is abusing their talk page access regardless of their intent. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:10, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Follow-up question

Hey Osh, sorry for the follow-up question, but re: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AjKa180, when you say Likely, do you mean the new accounts likely to each other, or likely to the Vijayclicker93 batch? Or both? Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:13, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Cyphoidbomb! Sorry for not including any details. I'll make sure to be more specific with my findings in the future. I went and expanded the SPI report with more information. I based my findings in context with being socks of one another as well as socks of the master (as a whole). Please let me know if you have any more questions, or if there is anything else I can clarify. I'll be happy to help! :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:26, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Can you please delete this page?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Jangdigo 4thfile4thrank {talk} :? 17:48, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

4thfile4thrank -  Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:59, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thanks for sorting the vandalism out SallyCarter (talk) 20:32, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi SallyCarter! Thank you for the barnstar! It means a lot to me and I appreciate the time you took to leave me this. You bet; I'm always happy to help cut down attempts at vandalism and disruptive editing wherever I can. If you need anything, let me know, and I'll be more than happy to lend a hand. ;-) Thanks again! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:41, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Can Shawntheshipper's SPI be reviewed?

It has been a long time since a checkuser has come there, and it has been pending on request checkuser for a long time. There are 8 socks on hold and it is very confusing what the case is about. It needs cleanup. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Shawntheshipper 4thfile4thrank {talk} :? 23:46, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi 4thfile4thrank! No worries; one of us will take a look. I'll be available to look at it tonight when I get home (if someone else hasn't already beat me to it by then). :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:49, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Louis Khoury

why are you removing my edits on Louis Khoury the information is factual i have grown up with him and he knows me so please add it back on their — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.158.21.100 (talk • contribs) 03:52, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi there! I'm not sure what you're referring to. I never reverted any changes you made to that article... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:03, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

You should see this.

A vandal thinks you're holy. [5]. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 15:38, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Destroyeraa - HA! That's funny. :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:29, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Vandal came back. This was too funny I had to make a page about it. User:Destroyeraa/FunnyVandal. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 17:04, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Destroyeraa: Love the matching talk page - "WikiProject Tropical cyclones" - hmm, I'm not sure which is harder to interpret, that or your typical end-times religious literature. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 17:19, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

@Davidwr: I didn't even notice the talk page! Lol! ~ Destroyeraa🌀 18:47, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Want to make it more funny? Do the "straight-up, by the book" attribution thing and put a filled-out, accurate {{copied}} on the talk page. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 18:50, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

I can't wait for the sequels: Oshwah as Buddha and Mohammed. BilCat (talk) 19:16, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Suspecting COI & undisclosed PAID, how to proceed?

FYI

 – The talk continues at the User:Moonythedwarf's talk page in the thread User talk:Moonythedwarf/Archives/2020/November#Suspecting COI & undisclosed PAID. --CiaPan (talk) 11:12, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

I noticed a new user account, editing articles which are closely related to its name. Additionally, the account name can be read as suggesting a shared use.

I suppose someone more experienced (and possibly with an access to some verification tools) could look at the case – but I have no clear idea how and where I should report it. I'll appreciate any hints regarding further steps I can take. --CiaPan (talk) 22:59, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

CiaPan, Hi! It's probably long delt with by now, but feel free to ping me or another UPE/spam handling editor if you need something handled in the future. —moonythedwarf (Braden N.) 19:41, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

So now it actually is dealt with (thanks again!), but it wasn't when I wrote the request above. --CiaPan (talk) 22:04, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

CiaPan - Cool, thanks for letting me know! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:08, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

You bet, I always love to keep others informed! CiaPan (talk) 23:05, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you.

In 2016, you deleted my page Hacker.io. I'd like to say, thank you! At that time, I thought that the deletion was unjustified, but now that I am addicted to Wikipedia, I deeply regret ever creating a page that was not only written about something that I made up one day, but literally written in the first person, let alone about a Scratch game whose Gamejolt release had two followers. I do believe that A7 applied in that moment. Thank you, yet again! JJP...MASTER!_{[talk to] JJP... master?} 17:39, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi JJPMaster! No worries! We were all new at one point in time, including myself. I've had articles that I created get deleted, too. It was disappointing for me, but I learned from it and I grew in my experience. Don't consider it a failure; consider it a success. You've learned and you've come out of it better than when you went in. :-) I appreciate the message and the very kind words, and I hope you have a great weekend! Please let me know if you have any questions or if you need any help, and I'll be happy to lend a hand. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:13, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Created a sockpuppet category

I have created Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of AbdulRehman sattar after your edits at User:Ahmad Muhammad Aftab & User:Bilal majid 123. Please let me know if I did it wrong.--CiaPan (talk) 13:23, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

CiaPan - I don't think you did anything, at least not that I see. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:14, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Sahure Picture

Hi Oshwah, It appears that the picture accompanying the Feature Article today (Sahure) has been replaced with your user image.

Patr2016 (talk) 19:39, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Patr2016 the edits have been reverted along with the IP being blocked. -- LuK3 (Talk) 19:43, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

LOL wat? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:28, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

IP that's just been blocked calling you Jesus

See edits on Ascension of Jesus, Wikipedia:Requests for page protection and Wikipedia:Edit filter/Requested. Just thought you might want to see those edits, no idea why they mentioned you. Best wishes, Pahunkat (talk) 17:34, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Pahunkat - I guess it might be the long hair? Other than that, I have no idea... lol :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:29, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

For being very nice to others

Carthago814 (talk) 19:57, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the kitten, Carthago814! And thank you for the kind words. Civility and kindness goes a long way... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:15, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sahil9610

Since my knowledge of Global Wikipedia interaction is zero I don't know who to approach this: Please see this RFD on Simple Wikipedia. Two of the recently blocked sockpuppet accounts are there !voting Keep for this article, with the help of a few SPAs that are likely meat puppets (at a minimum). It's obviously tied to the widespread Sahnil Bhatnagar self-promotion issue here on EnWiki, but being cross-wiki I don't have any idea how to approach notifying the correct people to look into it. Do you have time to assist, or can you point me in the right direction? Thank you. | Uncle Milty | talk | 00:27, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Someone there noticed, and it's been taken care of. | Uncle Milty | talk | 22:43, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Uncle Milty RFD closed as delete and socks blocked following CheckUser on SEWP つがる Talk to つがる:) 🍁 21:55, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Request

I created two doppelgänger accounts-HurrricaneTracker495 and HurricaneTracker496. Can you please block them with account creation disabled, autoblock disabled, email disabled, cannot edit own talk page due to no reason for it to edit. Autoblock disabled so I can edit. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 23:48, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

HurricaneTracker495 -  Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:31, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Difficulty logging in

Hi Oshwah,

I am experiencing difficulties logging in. I have no idea why but I keep getting a message that my User name doesn't exist. How do I resolve this?

Thanks

Paul 2A02:C7D:3BA:3600:AC1C:6185:4867:BA05 (talk) 12:36, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Apparently the account is User:Schlechterwolf (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs).
It doesn't seem blocked: Special:Log/block/User:Schlechterwolf.
The most recent contribution was in Talk:Human foamy virus. --CiaPan (talk) 14:17, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

CiaPan - How do you know that this is his username? Just curious as to how you found out. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:46, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I can't speak for CiaPan, but I knew because of this. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 01:54, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Osh! Davidwr guessed it right. As your TP-stalker I have your TP in my watchlist, and as a high-traffic one it often appears among most recently edited, close the top of the list. And I just happened to see it at the very top with a big red light of 10KB deletion. Before reverting I looked at the diff and found out it was a self-revert by author, so I stopped for a moment and took a look at the IP-editor's contributions. There were (and still are) just two actions, an addition to your talkpage and a self-partial-revert. So I refrained from reverting and replied instead, based on reading the mentioned diff and some search on topics and quotation given in it. --CiaPan (talk) 11:48, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

PS. I'm going to e-mail you soon with some further notes on this topic. --CiaPan (talk)

CiaPan - Ah, thanks for letting me know! I appreciate it! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:17, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Naturist Society

Naturist Society - I had made some edits on the page and now the page is being held. I am a naturist who was just looking to update some information that is on the Naturist Society website and in the Nude & Natural magazine. I also contacted Nicky Hoffman, publisher/co-owner of N magazine for permission to update the cover photo. You can reach out to her at [REDACTED - Oshwah] to confirm permission to the image. We as naturists are only trying to give current information to those that are interested in become naturists. Can you please put the page back out for people to see? Thank you a concerned naturist! CaretakerofN (talk) 15:13, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Just a naturist...? See also:

• above: #Suspecting COI & undisclosed PAID, how to proceed?
• and its follow-up at User talk:Moonythedwarf/Archives/2020/November#Suspecting COI & undisclosed PAID

CiaPan (talk) 15:19, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

@CaretakerofN: Please be aware Wikipedia is not interested at all what you (as an idividual, as an activist, as an amploee, as a society member, as a religious movement leader, as a company owner or anyone) are trying to tell others about you (as an individual, as an organization, as a movement, as a company, etc.). Wikipedia is not for promotion – and telling about yourself IS a promotion. Please kindly see our rules at WP:What Wikipedia is not as an extension to more fundamental WP:Notability and WP:Verifiability. Without knowing the rules defined in those policies (and following them) you have little chance your additions to the articles will be accepted. The more you're editing in a clear WP:Conflict of interest position, which is strongly discouraged here. --CiaPan (talk) 16:29, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi CaretakerofN! Thanks for the message. As CiaPan stated above, it seems like you have a personal conflict of interest with the articles that you're trying to edit. Editing articles that you have a conflict of interest with is high discouraged and will likely lead to that content being removed. Keep this in mind when you go to make any edits to articles here. It's better if you contribute to subjects that you're interested in, but where you do not have a conflict of interest with. This assures that all content is written to reflect a neutral point of view. If the owner of the copyrighted works wishes to donate that work to Wikipedia and allow us to use it in the article, they can do so by following the directions here and contact the foundation. Please let me know if you have any more questions, and I'll be happy to answer them and help you further. Thanks again for the message! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:21, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

What?

You've left a warning message about vandalism on my page. Can you please tell me what you think I've vandalized?! MeegsC (talk) 17:29, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

@MeegsC: THe edit was made by User:UserOshwash, seemingly trying to impersonate @Oshwah:. Opalzukor (talk) 17:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Opalzukor. I'd just figured that out and was coming back to delete my comment. MeegsC (talk) 17:34, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi MeegsC! I'm sorry to see that you were warned by someone trying to impersonate me. You'll unfortunately find that this happens a lot to me. I guess you can call it a "curse" that comes alongside with being a part of the community... :-/ Nonetheless, I'm happy to see that you figured this out and that you disregarded the message. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:24, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

No worries! Vandals can definitely be a downer here. :P MeegsC (talk) 22:31, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Random warning

Hello. I got a random "final warning" for vandalism from you, which was reverted by another user on my talk page. Was that a mistake? — CuriousGolden (T·C) 17:38, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Oh, I read the previous discussion here and apparently it was someone impersonating you. Sorry. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 17:39, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

No worries, CuriousGolden. Apparently a lot of people were warned by this user... I'm sorry that it happened to you... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:25, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Impersonation attempt

​A few minutes ago, a user by the name of UserOshwash (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) started putting level 4im user warnings on the talk pages of seemingly random users (including me [6]), using your signature. This issue has since been resolved, however I wished to make you aware of the situation. Thank you for your time. Opalzukor (talk) 17:39, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Opalzukor! Thanks for letting me know. This isn't the first time that it's happened, and it won't be the last. I'm sorry to see that it happened to you, and I'm glad that you disregarded the "warning". :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:26, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

UAK block evasion

Can you please place a rangeblock on 181.161.160.0/19 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · block user · block log)? This appears to be his newest (and current) range. All the edits since mid-November have been exclusively from this LTA. Without a rangeblock, the abuse is just going to accelerate and worsen, given this LTA's past behavior. A CU on the range should reveal the full extent of the recent socking (I expect multiple accounts to turn up in a CU). I would suggest starting with 1-3 months. Thanks. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 21:14, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

It would be best for a hardblock, to show how much sockpuppetry occured. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 03:01, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

LightandDark2000 - Hey, sorry for the delay responding to your request. It looks like this range is now blocked for three months, so we're all set! If you need anything else, please don't hesitate to let me know. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:27, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Can you please run a quick CheckUser to check sleepers?

This guy has vandalised Vice President of the United States with over 10 socks in 24 hours. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Ppoopoow2333. Best regards, 4thfile4thrank {talk} :? 23:34, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi 4thfile4thrank! *sigh*... Lovely.... It looks like the matter has been handled, but please don't hesitate to let me know if the issues continue. I'll be happy to take a look and see what's going on... :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:29, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Khilieexodia17

Hi Oshwah. Would you take a look at the SPI? 115.164.89.121 (talk) 17:47, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

 Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:41, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

A new sock(?) of User:Dangled10

Hi Oshwah,

Thanks for taking care of this yesterday. However, I fear they have struck again. I updated the SPI page with another CU request. Hopefully this puts a stop to the disruptive editing, had to check to make sure I wasn't 3RRing... Etzedek24 ^{(I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record)} 18:02, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Etzedek24! Thanks for letting me know. I'll make sure that someone (if not myself) takes a look at it. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:26, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Edit conflict in need of a quick resolution

Hi Oshwah, there is currently a larger edit conflict going on which has turned into sort of a frenzy and a smaller current conflict. Thepharoa17 is accusing Konli17 of being a sock and is serially reverting his edits with an edit summary only referring on him being a sock and not on content. I've seen you are one of the Sockpuppet investigation clerks and this Sockpuppet investigation needs some attention urgently as if not, it wouldn't be of service to the project. I would like to see some calmness again in the area.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 14:47, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Paradise Chronicle! Okay, one of us will take a look. Thanks for letting me know. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:03, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Problem is solved. The editor is blocked.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 00:04, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Paradise Chronicle - Awesome! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:10, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Greetings

	Hope and Safe
	~ Happy Holidays ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 15:03, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Mitchellhobbs - Thank you for the wishes! Wishing you a fun, safe, and healthy holidays as well! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:01, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Sorry you are being pestered

Sorry you are having to endure constant pestering by the guy borrowing your user page picture.

But on a humorous note, if you really are this guy can you give all of these guys a new one of these so they will "go and sin no more." davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 15:55, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi davidwr! HA! Oh well... You have to stand back and laugh at that kind of stuff. Otherwise, you'll just drive yourself crazy and become one of those "stick up their bum" administrators. No thanks - I'd rather be a respected member of the community instead. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:03, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Well, you don't have to be crazy to edit Wikipedia, but I find it helps. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 00:43, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) If you weren't already crazy when you first joined Wikipedia, you will be before too long! BilCat (talk) 01:00, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

BilCat - HA! True in some ways. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:33, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

I see you got bit by the same redirect-didn't-go-where-I-thought bug that frequently bites me

Too often I forget that WP:DONATE goes to the "where to send your money" page not to the Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials page. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 00:38, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Davidwr - Aww damnit, good call!  Fixed! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:05, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Glory (Britney Spears album)

Hi Oshwah, I have a question. So recently Britney Spears’ album Glory was just reissued with a new single called Mood Ring, I made an edit stating that per Template:Infobox album states “The Singles from Oshwah/TalkPageArchives/2020-11 template may be used as a miscellaneous addition to the infobox providing concise information about songs on the album that were released as singles during the marketing and promotion of the album.” So since the new single was released during the reissue and not the initial release of Glory isn’t it correct to have it be stated as a single under the reissue? Hopefully you’ll be able to see how I had it. Another user removed it, I immediately wrote a message on their talk page 3 days ago but it seems they are ignoring me since they have now been continuously editing. Hope all is well during the holidays!

Thanks! Pillowdelight (talk) 01:35, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Pillowdelight! Thanks for the message and for the holiday wishes! I hope you're doing well and that you're keeping safe this holiday season. :-) I'm not an expert when it comes to Wikipedia consensus and the specifics with songs, singles, albums, and infoboxes. I did recently help mediate two users who were edit warring over an issue with singles and albums, but I didn't weigh in on who was right or who was wrong (since, lol, I had no clue and it really wasn't relevant). I would think that you're correct; you would add the single under the re-issue album, since that album was released with the single - however, don't quote me on this. ;-) Who was it that reverted your edit? What did they state in the edit summary? Have they offered you any explanation at all as to why they reverted it? I can leave a message alongside yours asking the user to explain why they reverted their edit. They should be communicating with you over this, and they should be open to discussing it with you. Let me know. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:40, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Promotional articles in mainspace

Hi, I remember you helped me a few months back (I believe August), and you mentioned I can reach out in case I have any questions, so I hope you don't mind if I take you up on your offer. I flagged these two articles Symbol (blockchain) and NEM (cryptocurrency) but an editor keeps on removing the tags. Based on the edits, it makes me wonder whether the accounts could be related hence I initiated this [[7]]. I understand it takes awhile for the review and that's fine. I was wondering whether what's the best course of action with the articles? I don't want to engage in edit war with this editor, so I would appreciate your advice. Thanks in advance. --WomenProj (talk) 15:55, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hi, WomenProj. I hope Oshwah replies to you, but since he hasn't edited in four days, I'll just mention that anybody is allowed to remove a PROD template, and it must not then be restored, as you did here and here. See WP:PROD. Please leave the articles the way the way they are now that サンドマン has reverted your restorations of the PRODs. Or else you can take the articles to WP:AfD, if you like. If you do that, the principle is the opposite: nobody's allowed to remove an AFD template from an article. Bishonen | tålk 17:15, 1 November 2021 (UTC).

@Bishonen: Thank you for your insight. Good to know about the difference. --WomenProj (talk) 17:24, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi WomenProj! I apologize for the delay responding to your message and your questions here. Bishonen did an excellent job with her response to you above; if you have any more questions or need help with anything else, please don't hesitate to let me know. I'll be more than happy to lend you a hand. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:30, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

DeWitte court drama

Apparently I (we?) missed some court drama that RWP posted back in Aug. Bond hearing excerpt:

Prosecutor: You understand that obviously there's a lot of charges and if convicted you could spend the rest of your natural life in prison... you understand that, right?

Jeremy DeWitte: Yes sir.

Prosecutor: Is it your intention to come to court?

Jeremy DeWitte: Yes sir.

YouTube snip. Holy shit! El_C 15:26, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

El_C - That guy is a psychopath! I'm clicking on this now! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:28, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

I really think he might be looking at doing some very serious time, many years if not decades. Though I only got through less than half of that ~3-hour recoding, the reactions of the judge to some of the videos the prosecutor played to the court were very telling, I thought. She seemed genuinely shocked at his gross disregard to safety and his many other abuses. As she should be. That is the expected normal human reaction. I believe the trial judge will be someone else, though my sense is that that is of no moment. El_C 08:24, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

El C - That guy has been overdue for jail-time for years. Let's just play the "what-if game" and say, okay, somehow he manages to be acquitted of all counts involving the impersonation of law enforcement officers. All of those videos contain an absolute treasure cove of evidence that clearly show him violating numerous traffic and safety laws, on top of a pile of other laws - for years. If things go the way that I hope that they'll go, he's looking at 5+ years in jail at a minimum, on top of having his business shut down, a lifetime ban from any kind of commercial or business driving, and at least 10+ years of supervised probation after his release. Someone like him absolutely cannot be allowed to be given any kind of power or privileges that can be used to assert authority over other individuals. The years that he has used his funeral procession business as an excuse to do the things that he did clearly shows that, if he were given any kind of that power or privilege, he would absolutely abuse it. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:09, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

And remember that he's already a registered sex offender (convicted of sexual battery of a minor), I think for life. One disturbing angle that I wonder to what extent will be explored in the trial, is the years in which police officers were instructed by higher ups not to engage him unless it involved "capital crimes" (!). All while he was committing multiple multiple felonies. Like, what the...? If there is even a trial, that is. He may just cop a plea on advice of counsel, though knowing Jeremy's ego, he may well choose the gauntlet. Which I sincerely hope he does. El_C 11:34, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Either way, I think his freedom of abuse is likely going to be shut down - one way or another. One can only get away with what he's gotten away with for so long... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:00, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Been a Minute

Oshwah! It's been awhile, I'm trying to get back into things. Saw your name pop up following up with the mop on some of my point-outs. Hope you're well! RegistryKey^(RegEdit) 04:43, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi RegistryKey! Welcome back! I hope you're doing well! :-) I've been busy lately with a lot of work and life stuff, but I'm definitely still around. Let me know if I can answer any questions or help you with anything, and I'll be more than happy to do so. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:24, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

LTA

see MrTesticle's edits. Lopbunny69 (talk) 14:29, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi Lopbunny69! I think you were referring to McTesticle instead of MrTesticle. ;-) Thanks for letting me know about this; I've changed the block to a more appropriate level. If you see any more shenanigans from this LTA and from other accounts, please let me know and I'll be happy to squash them with the mop. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:34, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

No subject

so how do I learn how to edit — Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.112.176.209 (talk) 09:16, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! Welcome to Wikipedia! There are plenty of resources that you should definitely refer to in order to understand how things work around here, and how to edit, contribute, and become a key member of the project. :-) To start with basics... there's really no secret. If you see something on an article that you can fix and improve, be bold! Don't hesitate! Click the edit button, make the changes that you feel will fix the issue or improve the article, add an edit summary, and click on Publish changes - it's that easy! As you become more comfortable and familiar with the basic tools and how to do things, you'll want to grow from there. I highly suggest reading through Wikipedia's introduction page. There's also this tutorial that I really like. It will walk you through all the basics - how to navigate around the website, how to find important pages, documentation, help, and other great resources, as well as how to get involved and start contributing with us. Give those pages a read-though, and please let me know if you run into any questions. I'll be more than happy to answer them and help you. :-) Again, welcome to Wikipedia! I'm glad that you've decided to join us! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:25, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

No subject

Hi Oshwah my name is ezinne I just log in to Wikipedia, so I will like to know more about editing I feel like it is a hard process 🧐🧐🤯 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agha ezinne (talk • contribs) 10:47, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi Agha ezinne! Welcome to Wikipedia! I'll respond by stating the same thing that I said to someone who said the same thing just a bit ago... :-) There are plenty of resources that you should definitely refer to in order to understand how things work around here, and how to edit, contribute, and become a key member of the project. :-) To start with basics... there's really no secret. If you see something on an article that you can fix and improve, be bold! Don't hesitate! Click the edit button, make the changes that you feel will fix the issue or improve the article, add an edit summary, and click on Publish changes - it's that easy! As you become more comfortable and familiar with the basic tools and how to do things, you'll want to grow from there. I highly suggest reading through Wikipedia's introduction page. There's also this tutorial that I really like. It will walk you through all the basics - how to navigate around the website, how to find important pages, documentation, help, and other great resources, as well as how to get involved and start contributing with us. Give those pages a read-though, and please let me know if you run into any questions. I'll be more than happy to answer them and help you. :-) Again, welcome to Wikipedia! I'm glad that you've decided to join us! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:58, 13 November 2021 (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. Doug Weller talk 13:34, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Doug Weller - Acknowledged. Stand by; I'm checking my email now... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:02, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

IP with disruptive editing

Greetings Oswah, hope everything is well due to continuous disruptive editing recently the Vuk Karadžić page was protected but it did not stopped with it. This "new" IP Special:Contributions/93.138.19.195 started their edit warring on that page with the same behaviour on Mate Parlov page posting unsourced material. Can something be done. Thank you. User:Theonewithreason (talk) 13. November 2021 (UTC)

I just wrote the truth, that someone doesn’t like it, it’s his thing. I didn't put anything on the Mate Parlov page without the source, I just restored the previous state.and stop inventing that I am adding material without a source The editor of Vanjagenije added something that is not written in the source, you won't say that.93.138.19.195 (talk) 14:09, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi Theonewithreason! Whelp, it looks like you weren't the only one who had issues with this user's disruption. The IP is already blocked by someone else, so we should be all set and good to go. ;-) Please let me know if I can lend a hand with anything else, and I'll be more than happy to do so. :-) Happy Saturday! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:03, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Oswah and I really appreciate your kind words. Have a nice weekend. User:Theonewithreason (talk) 13. November 2021 (UTC)

You bet, Theonewithreason; always happy to help! Happy editing! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:49, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

unblocking Webby-Master-SD

• Webby-Master-SD (talk · contribs)

I don't think continuing this discussion on WMS's talk page is helping them. Hope you don't mind me bringing it here instead. I'd just like to spell out where I'm at.

• I blocked for a promotional username.
• I stated my discomfort with the requested username as it appears to me to cling to the WP:SPA & WP:COI connotations of their previous username, and requested they choose another name. I neither accepted nor declined the unblock request.
• You renamed them, and, I can't emphasize this enough, I'm 100% OK with that.
• You didn't unblock them. I don't understand why, if you're content with the new username, you would not do so.
• The conversation since seems to imply that I should unblock because you're content with the new username. In good conscience I don't feel I should use the tools based on your judgement. I'm 100% OK with you seeing it differently and unblocking, but that's your decision, not mine. I hope you can empathise with that position.

Thanks for the reminder about roofing. I've been waiting 6 weeks for a guy to come and fix some slipped slates on my roof. Time to give him a call. Be well, Cabayi (talk) 14:11, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Cabayi - Ohhhh, shit.... I'm such a moron! I totally forgot to unblock the damn account. Thank you, thank you, thank you for letting me know! It probably doesn't mean much now (*Oshwah rolls his eyes at himself*...), but I just went ahead and unblocked them. Damn it! Wow... my stupidity still manages to amaze me sometimes... *sigh*...

Anyways, I'm glad that you responded and that you detailed your discomfort with the account's requested username. I guess I didn't feel that the account's previous username was relevant with what the user requested his/her new username to be, just because it was different enough and appeared generic enough to me. However, I completely 100% understand that you would feel differently. If I created an account with the username "I will kill Billy Bob", then requested my username to be changed to "Billy Bob lives at 123 Easy Street", any somewhat-kind-of-decent-sometimes-but-meh administrator would of course take a slight issue with that one... lol ;-) I guess there's just that line between "what was" and "what will be" that I'll need to think about and maybe define a bit better with my future judgments and decisions when it comes to this situation.

I greatly appreciate you for bringing your thoughts and concerns to me. You (as well any other editor on Wikipedia) are always welcome to come to me with any issues and concerns that you may have regarding my decisions and use of admin tools. Be honest and be frank; it won't hurt my feelings and I'm not going to go postal at you because you're willing to hold others accountable. If anything, we'll have a great discussion and we'll learn a few things and apply them moving forward. There's nothing ever wrong with doing that! ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:57, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Doh! That is of course the simpler explanation. Take it as an indication of my esteem that "Oshwah forgot" wasn't on my list of possible scenarios. Cabayi (talk) 15:16, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Cabayi - Hey, I'll take that as a compliment! It didn't cross your mind that Oshwah was actually a bumbling idiot and just didn't... you know... do the one thing that he was actually supposed to do! Heh, well, as you now know... those cards need to be on the table when it comes to me. Leave no stone unturned! ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:44, 13 November 2021 (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. Doug Weller talk 14:30, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Doug Weller - Received and replied. It's good to talk to you, as always... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:01, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps another sock

Hi Oshwah, thanks for all your work in tracking down socks related to EWAdams. I have met him at conferences and know him via social media, but at this point I honestly don't know which of the accounts are his, and which might be from people responding to his off-wiki canvassing (which is how I heard about things, myself). In any case, SPA Bmaryott (talk · contribs) just popped up and made a suspicious edit, so I wanted to let you know.[8] No other edits, no userpage, but very specific edit summary. I'm an admin but have never done much with SPI, so if I should be reporting this in some other way, please let me know, thanks. --Elonka 22:45, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi Elonka! I hope you're having a good weekend! Thanks for the message and for reporting your concerns regarding this user account to me. I took a quick search through your contributions, and I noticed that you haven't edited an SPI page in quite some time. It doesn't look like you've created an SPI report before (but I could very well be incorrect). Nonetheless, can you file an SPI report regarding your concerns with this user account? All you need to do is click here, go to the collapsed box labeled "How to open an investigation", click on [show], enter the username of the sockmaster into the text field, and click on "submit". From there, you'll fill in the parameters, detail all of your evidence (be as in-depth as you can), and then save the page. Filing an SPI report will help me to facilitate this, as well as have an official case and request on record. Are you able to do that for me? Let me know when you've done so; in the meantime, I'll take a look at the account's contributions and see what I can't uncover. ;-) Thanks again for the message - I'm more than happy to lend a hand! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:09, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Actually, User:Elonka (talk · contribs) I work at Digipen Institute of Technology, where we teach people to make games so this is actually relevant to my professional interests. If you feel like actually verifying I'm not him (and that I'm not an article of clothing), feel free to contact the school and ask for me in the I.T. department. The edit was a link from his name there, to this article here so I'm curious why that's considered "suspicious" as that IS what links are supposed to be for. As for "sock", I'm assuming you're referring to it being a "first edit" and not "having an account that's over a decade old but hadn't been used." I'm also very curious where the animosity to him is coming from. --User:bmaryott 23:42, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Bmaryott - I think you meant to ping Elonka in your response here - you acidentally pinged User:User:Elonka (the account with the username "User:Elonka"), which doesn't exist. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:02, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

User recent edits query

Hi Oshwah. I have an odd feeling about this editor's content deletion of recent. WellCare article, Micheal Neidorff, etc. You blocked some sock puppet incidents. Might you have a look? I don't want to delete/revert the seemingly unwarranted edits -- really removal of material -- without another opinion. User is SrunzeecTheGOBLIN.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/SrunzeecTheGOBLIN

Best Wishes. -- (Bob) Wikiklrsc (talk) 04:26, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi Wikiklrsc! Thanks for leaving me a message here with your concerns regarding this user and their edits and behavior. It looks like Blablubbs beat me to investigating this user, as he has already blocked this account for sock puppetry. Looking at the user's contributions, I can definitely see why you messaged me with your concerns. If you see any more users that you believe to be the same person as this account (or if you see any others), please let me know and I'll be happy to look into the matter. Thanks again for the message, and I hope you have a great rest of your day. :-) Happy editing! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:43, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your kind attention, Oshwah. Bests. (Bob) Wikiklrsc (talk) 18:55, 18 November 2021 (UTC)~

Wikiklrsc - You bet! Always happy to help! If you need anything else, don't be a stranger - hit me up and I'll be happy to lend a hand. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:40, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Article for deletion help

Hi Oshwah! I hope your day is going well! I wanted to reach out for some guidance in an article for deletion page I created for 2016 Shepherd Rams football team. It's my first time nominating a page for deletion, and I want to make sure I handled it correctly. A page was created for this football team (a school I graduated from ten years ago,) but the page itself doesn't seem worthy of a standalone article, due to references being from only one publication, and the team didn't get to their National Championship game. (The team DID make it to that particular Nat'l Champ game the year prior, with no article for that season.) Given that it's a division II team, I figured the page could be redirected to Shepherd Rams. I'm sorry to burden you, but you've been very helpful to me in the past and I just want to make sure I followed instructions correctly. Thank you so much! Spf121188 (talk) 16:05, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi Spf121188! I hope you're doing well! Thanks for leaving me a message here with your questions and your request for some input and advice regarding the article that you nominated for deletion - the 2016 Shepherd Rams football team article. In this specific situation and if I were to be asked to participate in the deletion discussion for this article, I would refer to WP:NSPORTS (specifically, this section on teams and clubs). In this section, the guideline correctly points out that, while there are no general guidelines regarding the presumed notability of sports teams and clubs, the article (as with any article on Wikipedia) needs to meet Wikipedia's general notability guidelines.

If you navigate to Wikipedia's guidelines on notability, you'll see a blue table of links on the right-side of the page. It contains a list of subject-specific notability guidelines that should be referenced if an article falls into one of those. That little table, right there, is an excellent "pocket-book" to have on your belt. It's small, convenient, lists all of the subject-specific notability guidelines that may apply to various articles that are nominated (including the one that I just referenced above), and is exactly what I reference and look to frequently when I need to assess the notability of an article subject. In summary, when assessing the notability of an article subject, if the subject falls into one of those subject-specific guidelines listed in that table, refer to that guideline page for how to make a determination. Otherwise, in cases where the article subject doesn't fall into a subject-specific notability guideline, refer to the general notability guidelines instead.

While we're on the subject of AFD and notability, I think that it's also important to point out a common misconception that many users will often find themselves gravitating towards in one way or another. It's extremely important for not just the editors who create, write, and expand articles and content, but also the editors who nominate articles for deletion and participate in AFD discussions, to understand: Discussions at AFD, as well as the guidelines regarding the notability of an article subject, do not take the quality of the article itself into account when asserting the notability of the article subject and ultimately deciding whether it should be kept or deleted (whether it be the article's content, its references, how well things are written, how long it is, etc). The notability of an article subject is determined by evaluating the availability of secondary reliable sources that provide primary coverage on the article subject that can be researched and found (either on the internet, in print media, or other forms of publishing).

Think of it like this: If, for example, the Barrack Obama or Abraham Lincoln articles were only a few paragraphs long and didn't provide many or very good references or sources, these articles would be kept if I were to nominate them for a discussion at AFD. That's because, well, they're notable people... :-) It's quite easy to go onto Google and type those names in - you're going to find numerous sources that are reliable and show that these people are notable. We don't delete articles under the AFD process just because they're not long enough, don't have great content, or don't have enough sources cited. The articles just need to be expanded and improved is all. :-) On the other hand: I could have an extensively-written article about some random Joe person, but if they're not notable, the article subject won't be determined to be notable in an AFD discussion. Why? Because there obviously won't be any secondary reliable sources online or elsewhere that would establish Mr. Random Joe Person as a notable article subject, per Wikipedia's notability guidelines. The quality of the article I wrote about Random Joe could be significantly above-average when it comes to content, but in the end, it won't matter. :-)

Whatever ends up happening at the AFD discussion, I hope that it goes well, that it reaches a well-argued consensus, and comes to a good conclusion and close. Please let me know if you have any more questions, or if I can provide you with any more guidance, input, or information that you need. I'll be more than happy to help you. :-) Good luck, man! I hope that my response has provided you with a lot of good information, and that you received the help and guidance that you were looking for. Best wishes - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:27, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your input and advice! I'm still making my way through all of the resources available, of which there are MANY, which is great! Looking back, I may have jumped the gun on the AfD article in this particular case, but everyone who has provided insight on the topic has also been helping me understand the process and what to look for. I hope you don't mind my inquiring for help now and then, as you have been incredibly helpful in pointing me in the right direction and providing the proper resources for a particular matter. Just trying to find my niche in contributing to the project, and I can't thank you enough for all of your help! Spf121188 (talk) 13:49, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Spf121188 - You're very welcome! Don't beat yourself up for feeling like you may have jumped the gun nominating the article for AFD. This was the first time that you've nominated an article for a deletion discussion at AFD. Nobody should expect someone who's brand new to that process to be perfect with their relevant guidelines. We all make mistakes, and we learn best when we have the ability to make them - if you're not making mistakes, then you're doing something wrong! ;-) Sure, no problem! Don't be a stranger; I'm absolutely available and happy to help you if you run into any more questions or need input and guidance on anything else. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:45, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

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

You reverted my link http://www.fiberglassics.com/library/index.php?title=Starcraft

This link provides a tremendous amount of information regarding the specifications of the older Starcraft boats. Frankly, I have yet to find a link that provides as much information regarding the older boat specifications as http://www.fiberglassics.com/library/index.php?title=Starcraft The information is not available on the Starcraft website.

The link should be left as an external link for those who know and understand the significance of the information.

To incorporate the information into the Wikipedia article would make the article 10x larger and be subject to possible transposition errors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohawk82 (talk • contribs) 18:02, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Mohawk82 - I didn't feel like the link was necessary for the article. Why is it needed? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:10, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Block of User:Ruthaylett

Hi Oshwah, in regarding your block of Ruthaylett (talk · contribs), as you may recall, this was done because she had run afoul of meatpuppetry at an AfD. She had responded to a social media request by the now blocked user EWAdams (talk · contribs), who had been canvassing off-wiki.

I'd like to confirm that Ruth is indeed a separate person who I have communicated with, and counseled on Wikipedia's policies. She understands what happened now, and has promised not to engage in this type of behavior again. Would you be willing to consider an unblock? Thanks, --Elonka 21:49, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi Oshwah, it looks like you've been gone for a few days, so I've gone ahead and also posted an unblock request at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Requesting unblock of Ruthaylett, FYI --Elonka 05:07, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi Elonka! I left a message on your user talk page (diff) to thank you for doing the right thing. :-) I appreciate it very much and I hope you have a great weekend. :-D ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:57, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi Oshwah! No need to apologize, I think the block was exactly the right thing to do at the time, as Ruthaylett was definitely acting as a meatpuppet, participating within a half-hour of the other account, and especially after such a long period of inactivity. The block was justified. In any case, all is sorted now. Have a great holiday season! --Elonka 13:56, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi Elonka! Thanks for responding! I hope you also have a great and safe holiday season. Be well. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:20, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:14, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MaxMind

Trying to propose an article to be deleted here, but I can't edit the page because I'm not autoconfirmed. What do I do? 209.52.88.151 (talk) 02:17, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Also wondering how illegal usernames are dealt with. As in, usernames that are specifically created to leak another person's real-life privacy. 209.52.88.151 (talk) 02:37, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

As Wikipedia is not a government, usernames are not "illegal", but are against policy. You may report usernames that are against the username policy to WP:UAA. You may post a request at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion that someone else complete the AFD nomination process for you. 331dot (talk) 08:10, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

@331dot: Doesn't Wikipedia keep an Akashic record? So even if such username gets changed, the old username will be logged? Even oversight doesn't deletion information from the database, right? Have there ever been cases of such problematic usernames violating WP:PRIVACY? If so, how are they dealt with? 209.52.88.228 (talk) 16:43, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Usernames that violate privacy are oversighted and should be reported to an oversighter directly(this is described at WP:UAA). Oversighting it conceals it from view by everyone except other oversighters(even admins cannot see them) but it is not technically removed from the database. Username changes are logged; if a user wants to avoid this, they should just create a new account and abandon the old one. 331dot (talk) 16:56, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

331dot - Thank you for responding and for helping this user while I was offline. Much appreciated! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:11, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Conundrum

I am dealing with an editor Jannizzero1 on battle of Fornovo and an IP[9] decided to vandalize multiple articles that I just happen to edit. However, Materialscientist blocked them. That IP geolocates to Italy, just like the other IPs that have posted on Talk:Battle of Fornovo.

Granted they(SPI) will not connect an IP to a name account, should I even file an SPI? User:Jannizzero1's comments do have striking similarities to the comments made by IPs that have posted PAs on Talk:Battle of Fornovo. Your thoughts? --Kansas Bear (talk) 12:57, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi Kansas Bear! Sorry for the delay responding to your message. You can file an SPI, just don't request a checkuser. We can still investigate and take action based off of behavioral evidence - remember to keep that in mind. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:04, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

The issue has been addressed, somewhat. The SPI vs IPs and not requesting a checkuser is good to know. Thanks for that information, I will keep it in mind for the future. --Kansas Bear (talk) 02:30, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Centralised generation

An article that you have been involved in editing—Centralised generation—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:32, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi Chidgk1! Thanks for the notice - I'll go check it out. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:06, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Page protection

Hi Oshwah, can you protect this page "Upin & Ipin" for 2 weeks, to prevent excessive disruptive editing.

Thank you! --180.244.164.139 (talk) 02:13, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your request! I took a look at the article's edit history, and it looks like any disruption that may have been ongoing has stopped. Because of this, I'm going to hold off on adding any page protection to the article. If you find that disruption picks back up and continues, feel free to file a page protection request by clicking here. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:15, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

YGM

Hi Oshwah - hope all is well! Just letting you know I've sent you an email. Take care, Patient Zero^talk 04:21, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi Patient Zero! No problem - I'll give it a read tonight and get back to you. Sorry for the delay responding. Work has picked up for the holiday season, so I'm swamped... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:16, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi! Not a problem whatsoever - things sound rather busy, there’s no rush! :-) Patient Zero^talk 03:33, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi Patient Zero! I just wanted to let you know that I've responded to your email. I apologize for the delay with replying, and I hope that you still find it helpful. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:50, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Problematic editor

Hi Oshwah, I have been watching a few articles and reverting most edits by 46.252.45.7 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) The anon said it is inappropriate to call women by their first name or by "she". The anon is changing names in articles of women who are known mononymously to their surname. Often removes "mononymously known as ...". The anon has been at it on and off for awhile, their IP hasn't changed since at least March. Focus seems primarily on three articles. Diff of their edits:

• Gisela (singer) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • 20 November 2021
  • 8 November 2021 ES: Her name is Gisela Lladó Cánovas, referring to a woman by her first name is sexist. Also, overusing she instead of Lladó, is sexist too.
  • 8 October 2021
• IJustine (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • 20 November 2021
  • 8 November 2021
  • 7 November 2021
• María Gabriela de Faría (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • 15 April 2021
  • 29 March 2021 Removes known as María Gabriela de Faría
  • 7-8 March 2021 Adds known as María Gabriela de Faría
• I left a number of warnings as well as mentioning COMMONNAME on their talk page.
• Interesting edit to my talk page:
  • My talk page: Stop Editing My Posts, You Are A Deceiver Who Writes With Small Mongol Church Letters. You Are A Deceiver. You Are A Skllavic Agent.. The anon removed it after I mentioned NPA on their talk page.
    

I have been reverting per wp:COMMONNAME and WP:SURNAME. Is that OK? Any suggestions?

Is the username "Skllavic Agent" available? Maybe I should request a username change? Cheers Adakiko (talk) 11:06, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi Adakiko! That's an.... interesting... agenda that this user is going off on, editing articles like that and removing important information. My suggestion? Ignore their spats made toward you, revert their edits, and report the user for blocking if it continues. You've informed the user about WP:COMMONNAME; they know that further edits like that are disruptive. They obviously have read your messages and warnings due to the... very polite response (lol) they left on your user talk page. You seem like you're doing the right thing. You reached out to them about WP:COMMONNAME and tried to talk to them, they gave you the middle finger and kept at it - that's disruptive and I would've blocked them had I seen this currently happening. Let me know if you have any more questions or need anything else - I'll be more than happy to lend a hand. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:24, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your time, Oshwah! I'll use your suggestions. Cheers Adakiko (talk) 05:53, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Adakiko - You're welcome! Happy to help! :-D ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:57, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

He's back. AIV report added! Cheers Adakiko (talk) 08:59, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Three months! Adakiko (talk) 10:35, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Adakiko - Hey, there you go! BOOM, handled! ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:41, 5 December 2021 (UTC)