User talk:Oshwah: Difference between revisions

; Archives
Older
	Year 2007; Year 2008; Year 2009; Year 2010; Year 2011; Year 2012; Year 2013; Year 2014;
Year 2015
	Year 2015 (Jan - Jun); July 2015; August 2015; September 2015; October 2015; November 2015; December 2015;
Year 2016
	January 2016; February 2016; March 2016; April 2016; May 2016; June 2016; July 2016; August 2016; September 2016; October 2016; November 2016; December 2016;
Year 2017
	January 2017; February 2017; March 2017; April 2017; May 2017; June 2017; July 2017; August 2017; September 2017; October 2017; November 2017; December 2017;
Year 2018
	January 2018; February 2018; March 2018; April 2018; May 2018; June 2018; July 2018; August 2018; September 2018; October 2018; November 2018; December 2018;
Year 2019
	January 2019; February 2019; March 2019; April 2019; May 2019; June 2019; July 2019; August 2019; September 2019; October 2019; November 2019; December 2019;
Year 2020
	January 2020; February 2020; March 2020; April 2020; May 2020; June 2020; July 2020; August 2020; September 2020; October 2020; November 2020; December 2020;
Year 2021
	January 2021; February 2021; March 2021; April 2021; May 2021; June 2021; July 2021; August 2021; September 2021; October 2021; November 2021; December 2021;
Year 2022
	January 2022; February 2022; March 2022; April 2022; May 2022; June 2022; July 2022; August 2022; September 2022; October 2022; November 2022; December 2022;
Year 2023
	January 2023; February 2023; March 2023; April 2023; May 2023; June 2023; July 2023; August 2023; September 2023; October 2023; November 2023; December 2023;
Year 2024
	January 2024; February 2024; March 2024; April 2024; May 2024; June 2024; July 2024; August 2024; September 2024; October 2024; November 2024; December 2024;

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 16:42, 14 June 2018

Let's chat

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

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

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

Table of contents

Vivienne Westwood

Hi Oshwah,

I hope you're doing well?

I'm contacting you regarding VW's wikipeda page.

Vivienne's work with charities is one of her biggest pride and her relentless pursuit of a better world is being severely hampered by her Wikipedia page framing her as a tax-avoider.

Is there anyway we can get that content removed?

Thank you G Mehanna (talk) 13:32, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi G Mehanna, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your questions and concerns. I saw that you've made some edits to Vivienne Westwood - most of which removed referenced content that didn't violate policy and contained issues, but one of which that I agreed should have been removed (which was the edit you made here that removed content that was not referenced by any sources). I went through the article just now and I removed any paragraphs from the article that didn't contain any references cited. Based on your edit summaries and your message here, it's obvious that you have a conflict of interest with this article and subject, and are making edits and changes under this person's direction. This behavior is highly discouraged as your edits will draw the article's neutality into question (since you're obviously representing a point of view). I would not make any additional changes to the article, but instead make edit requests so that they can be reviewed and applied by another editor for you if no issues are found. This will keep you in compliance with Wikipedia's behavioral policies and guidelines on personal conflicts of interest and proxy-editing, but also allow you to request changes be made to the article and have them applied. Please follow my advice and navigate to the guide on making those requests (see link above), and follow the instructions there in order to create edit requests and verify that they include what's needed. If you have any questions or concerns, please let me know and I'll be happy to help you. Otherwise, you'll end up only wasting your time, as other editors will see your conflict and your changes will be reverted for this reason. Don't waste your time like that; file edit requests so we can take a look at them and apply them for you. Thanks again for the message and I wish you happy editing. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:45, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Osh - really helpful advice! — Preceding unsigned comment added by G Mehanna (talk • contribs) 13:49, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You bet; always happy to help. Good luck, and happy editing to you! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:50, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Now that I understand the mistake that was made with regards to how editing should work, would you mind telling me how I can delete my revisions from the revision history page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by G Mehanna (talk • contribs) 13:55, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi G Mehanna! All edits that are made to Wikipedia on any page are available and can be accessed by the public; they cannot be deleted. Administrators can hide edit details and log information but only if they meet one of the criteria for redaction here (such as containing copyright violations, threats made toward an editor, or other grossly disruptive or offensive content). Otherwise, we cannot delete or remove edit histories or logs and they are stored permanently and accessible by anyone and for an indefinite duration of time. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks again for the message, and I hope you're having a good day. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:15, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Osh - thanks for yet again another insightful answer! Can we please hide edit details that reference VW as they are my own personal opinions and qualify as copyright violations and libel. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by G Mehanna (talk • contribs) 14:46, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

G Mehanna - I need to know exactly what changes in the edit history you're talking about... can you provide me with the URLs to the revision comparison that contains the content being added? You can read instructions on how to grab what I need by reading this help page. Once I have this, I'll be able to see exactly what you're talking about and take a look. Thanks :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:54, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Osh - here are the links to the revisions I'm mentioning:

All the changes have been undone now so the revisions are irrelevant, which is why I'm hoping we can hide the edit detail from those revisions.

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by G Mehanna (talk • contribs) 15:19, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

G Mehanna - These edits you listed are not eligible for redaction. The content appears to be referenced by reliable sources and in compliance with Wikipedia's biographies of living people policy. You cannot remove content from an article because someone "requests it" or because "they don't like it"; I take Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living people very seriously and I scrutinize edits and content on those articles with a very high level of care and make sure that nobody adds vandalism or blatantly false or contentious information to them. With that said, I understand that you're here in order to change the article to reflect what you (or the article subject) wants, but unless your editing requests provide valid and legitimate reasons as to why the content is in violation of Wikipedia policy - it won't be removed. One of Wikipedia's core principles is that we provide content that's written by neutral contributors, referenced using neutral and reliable sources, and reflects a neutral point of view and with all sides reflected (whether it's "good" or "bad" things). Your heart is in the right place and I know that you mean well, but I need to let you know this since you're new to Wikipedia and don't understand all of the policies and guidelines yet. You'll need to follow-up with edit requests on the article's talk page if you believe that content should be removed and explain why it should be. Otherwise, we're not going to remove content because it "looks bad" and only leave the positive content... neutrality is a two-way street and it means that we add content to articles and focus on verifiability rather than truth. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them. I appreciate your follow-up questions and for providing the information I needed, and I hope that you understand :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:44, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're misunderstanding what I'm asking for. I'm not asking for the redactions themselves to be deleted and for my edits to happen, but rather for the detail of the redactions on the revision history to be hidden. I'm happy for the page to stay as it is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by G Mehanna (talk • contribs) 15:50, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

G Mehanna - Okay, so from what you're saying... you're not requesting anything be changed or removed from the article as it is right now. Your concerns are with some past changes that are viewable in the article's history. Okay, that makes perfect sense to me and that's fine, but the edits you provided from the article's history are not eligible to be redacted. They do not meet the requirements by falling into one of the criterion listed here. All of the content present in these revisions are in compliance with Wikipedia's policy and don't contain content serious enough to warrant redaction. Your reason given, that the edits that contain "details that reference UW" are "your personal opinion and qualify as copyright violations and libel" - make absolutely no sense. I don't think you fully understand what constitutes copyright violations and what constitutes libel... I'm not seeing any of those problems in the diffs at the URLs you listed above. If I'm missing something, you might have to quote what you're referring to specifically so that I can search and find it... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:07, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a second look

at this revert you made. I tagged the file Leecarmack20 uploaded to commons commons:File:Blue falcon 18.jpg ‎(Cross-wiki upload from en.wikipedia.org) for speedy deletion. wbm1058 (talk) 14:56, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

wbm1058 -

Checking... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:59, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

wbm1058 - Good call; I'm glad you messaged me about this and gave me a heads up. Not only were the images tagged and now deleted from Commons, but all of the changes made today to that article were blatant vandalism, which I've completely reverted. Thanks for letting me know about this - I appreciate it very much. All set! :-D ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:03, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I found this because Dynomutt, Dog Wonder landed in Category:Articles with redirect hatnotes needing review.

That one-edit IP that you reverted in spite of their edit summary "Fixed possible slander" could have been the victim, editing from the same office. wbm1058 (talk) 15:08, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

wbm1058 - The removal of the picture showed up on my recent changes feed, and that's how I ran into it. Yeah, I realized that just a bit ago with the IP and their attempts to remove the image... their reversion was correct. Let me know if I can help with anything else and I'll be happy to do so. Thanks again for the heads up - much appreciated ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:12, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No subject

Actually yeah the edit done by me was by a mistake. Sorry to do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aaqib mukadam (talk • contribs) 15:25, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Aaqib mukadam - No big deal; thanks for letting me know. If you need help with anything or if you run into any questions, don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be happy to help. Happy editing ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:46, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	For quite consistently getting the revert before I could today and always being willing to send thanks to fellow editors. RA0808 ^talk _contribs 17:04, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

RA0808! Thanks for the barnstar, man! It means a lot and I really appreciate it. Also, I gor your message in -revdel on IRC and I've taken care of the edit. Thanks for joining and for letting us know about it :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:13, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, thank you so much for dealing with that! RA0808 ^talk _contribs 17:43, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

RA0808 - You bet; always happy to lend a hand ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:44, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alejandra del Moral Vela

I did provide a reliable source, it's an official source from the government itself.--200.76.194.58 (talk) 20:04, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear! I owe you my apologies! I performed the rollback on your edit accidentally instead of the edit I actually intended. I've restored the change you made back to the article and I removed the notice off of your user talk page. Please accept my apologies for the confusion and please let me know if you have any questions or need any help. Thanks for leaving me a message here and for letting me know about this. Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:08, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ow!

I took it on the chin! Jim1138 (talk) 20:45, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

LOL ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:06, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gordon Tracy alteration

I don't particularly know how to make that citation (and I made one on John's page too) as they're observations from watching the series. They concern the characters of John and Gordon seeming to have romantic interests in the show in the form of Captain O'Bannon (John) and Lady Penelope (Gordon). They were more interesting tidbits I noticed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:2800:1620:F84F:938:35CB:EBFE (talk) 21:34, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I took another look at the article and just realized that it's about a fictional character. For some stupid reason, I misread or mixed something up with another, and thought that this article subject was about a real person. Bearing this fact in mind, I'm much much less inclined to ask for a reference to support what you added. I've restored the change you made to the article and removed the notice I left on your talk page. Thanks for leaving me a message on my talk page about this, and I hope you have a great rest of your day. Cheers ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:40, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gordon Tracy alteration

Appreciate the quick response, and the leeway. Thanks man! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.21.121.47 (talk) 22:01, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No problem at all. Welcome to the project! I hope you enjoy your stay here and that you decide to become a long-term editor and member of the community with us! If you need help or assistance with anything, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be happy to lend a hand. Thanks again for the message, and I hope you have a great day. Cheers ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:30, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry

You were quick! I'd only just reverted the edit on ClueBot NG's talk page, went to block them but was beaten to it --5 albert square (talk) 22:20, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 5 albert square! It's good to talk to you again. Thanks! I've been doing it for some time now, and I've been keeping particular eyes out for this and two other LTA users' that I've been repeatedly catching in my "sock net" and blocking ;-). It can get quite complicated and ridiculous, but.... well.... someone's gotta patrol the recent changes and someone's gotta get dirty with sniffing out, locating, and blocking LTA's and sock users ;-). I appreciate your message and your kind words, and I hope you're having an excellent day. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:28, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My IP address changed

I was blocked at school. I had an old IP address of 108.180.194.7 that I liked because the first two digits are anagrams of each other. Would you unblock 108.180.194.7 and block my new IP for 5 days after I request a template change? 154.5.169.5 (talk) 23:10, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK, now you can block me for 5 days. 154.5.169.5 (talk) 23:15, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why... would I block your new IP? That would not only be against policy, but silly and pointless - it wouldn't help you at all. lol ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:16, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Uh, no seriously. Which policy are you–i mean you, not ~~Gilliam~~ Dlohcierkim, talking about? 154.5.169.5 (talk) 23:24, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm referring to a couple of policies and community norms. Unless there's a compelling reason to do so, we don't unblock the IP address of a school while a block is currently in place. I also can't just apply blocks to whomever I want and when I want - meaning that if I were to block you right now, it would be considered an absolutely severe misuse of administrator tools and I potentially could have them removed over the one incident. Because you're on an IP address right now that isn't blocked, why don't you create and use an account instead? This is easily the best solution here, as you'll be able to have a unique username here, and on top of that... you'll be able to edit while at your school by logging into your account. Using an account is the answer to the problem here, and is a win/win for you. Take a look at that guide I liked you to, and give it some consideration ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:32, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Uh, we’re not at school 154.5.169.5 (talk) 00:52, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops

Whoops! This is what happens when I edit too quickly on my mobile. Thanks for reviewing, sorry! HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 23:34, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

HickoryOughtShirt?4 - What exactly am I looking at here? Do you need my help with something? Forgive me if my confusion is over something obvious, but I don't understand what happened and what you're asking about or need me to do for you. Just let me know and I'll be happy to help. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:37, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh no sorry. I accidentally added a welcome template to someone's user page instead of talk page and you reviewed the page so I got a notification about it. That's all. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 23:41, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

HickoryOughtShirt?4 - AHA! I understand now... I totally didn't notice that this was left on the person's user page instead of their user talk page... oh well, shit happens.... ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:44, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tacos

Sorry Oshwah! My friend Katie loves to eat tacos. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.0.198.246 (talk) 23:41, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rebot ,solfware ,apps open source

Sorry to respond only now ,its about 1:38 in South Africa ,Cape Town and thanx again For the help ,I been throw hell and out with devices, I just read throw your notes ,must say ,you no what you talking about is like your part of the program ,well all I can tell you ,I no Zero ,but everyday ,am in a cyber battle ,and from what I just read ,I was really not alone ,using this device ,Is it posse you could help me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sailor ST (talk • contribs) 23:49, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Diff/10000

Hey Oshwah, just to let you know this revision is irrelevant to me right now. I want you to give me a PHP code that access the MySQL database to permanently delete this diff as a database entry from the database, even expunges information from oversighters. 154.5.169.5 (talk) 00:05, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do you own a sledge hammer? There's always the "backup plan"... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:08, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Labrador Retriever Edit

Hey, you undid an edit of mine on the Labrador Retriever Wiki under the guise of "Unexplained Removal". I did remove content however it was content that I had accidentally pasted whilst adding a section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NikolasJordan (talk • contribs) 00:15, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NikolasJordan - Yup, you're right. I didin't see that previous edit, and my reversion stiked both of them - please accept my apologies and thank you for undoing that and fixing the article :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:18, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merchandise Giveaway Nomination - Successful

Hey Oshwah

You have been successfully nominated to receive a free t-shirt from the Wikimedia Foundation through our Merchandise Giveaway program (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Merchandise_giveaways). Congratulations and thank you for your hard work!

Please email us at merchandisegiveawaywikimedia.org and we will send you full details on how to accept your free shirt.

Thanks! Seddon (WMF) (talk) 00:41, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Seddon (WMF) - AWESOME!!! Thank you very much! That's really cool! I'll get in touch with you for sure... I appreciate it :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:43, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Source in "List of Mayors of Gotham City'

Hi Oshwah. You said that I needed a source to add an information to this article. I do not have a source on the internet to add to that page. But I saw what edited at a stage in the game "Batman Arkham Asylum". How can I add this as a source? It is on the own game. Michael md14 (talk) 01:40, 6 June 2018 (UTC)Michael_md14[reply]

Michael md14 - Disregard what I said... that doesn't need a reference. I'm putting it back for you... sorry for removing it and for bothering you. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:15, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kingdom of Sycamore

Block user or delete page? The user keeps removing speedy deletion tags. Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 03:01, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Abelmoschus Esculentus - I just left the user a final warning and restored the CSD tag manuallly. We need to make sure to warn users for behavior (even if somewhat blatant) so that they have a chance to read it and stop. That being said,

Will actively monitor the page for continued disruption. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:05, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Abelmoschus Esculentus - Nevermind; I see that you've already left one earlier... this user is on his final straw and he'll be blocked if he does it again... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:07, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Whelp, that didn't last long..... Oh well, I tried.... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:12, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 04:33, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You Got Mail!

Please check your email. Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 03:19, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thegooduser - Just received and replied. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:21, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Read the reply. Thanks!Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 03:22, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thegooduser - Haven't received it yet, but will do so when I do. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:29, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't respond to the email.Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 03:33, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, well then I guess I'm going gonna get one... thanks jetk :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:33, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) I don't know if I'm ruining the joke (probably I am), but just for the sake of clarity, Read the reply. Thanks! -- read is pronounced red, not reed... Past-tense read. Cap'n Obvious to the rescue again. =) I'll show myself out. byteflush _Talk 00:17, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kate Spade protection

Hi. Can you please unprotect the Kate Spade article? I looked through the page history and I don't see any BLP violations that warrant page protection. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:33, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MZMcBride -

Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:36, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! The article has been quickly re-protected due to a set of trolls, I guess, though. Sigh. --MZMcBride (talk) 15:17, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Here, have a random kitten. :P (It's been a while, though that's my fault not yours. Hope you've been doing well?)

AddWittyNameHere (talk) 03:35, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AddWittyNameHere! Hey man! Good to see you, and thanks for the kitten. Hey, sometime we need to take a break when life happens or life get busy. Welcome back! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:37, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. Slightly over a year absence was a fair bit longer than I'd intended, though. Been back for a few days now, figured I'd say hi. How's the vandal-fighting (and admining, of course) these days--you still as ridiculously fast & equally busy as always?

P.S. No need to ping me, by the way. It's totally not like your user talk is constantly near the top of the most recently edited pages on my watchlist or anything...nah, that'd be silly. (In all honesty: your user talk occasionally outpaces AN+ANI...) AddWittyNameHere (talk) 03:50, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I *think* you may have missed my reply above in the middle of the other edits to your talkpage. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 04:22, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail

Hello, Oshwah. 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 remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 03:44, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thegooduser - Received and replied. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:47, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Richard

I think someone vandalized this article...Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 03:49, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thegooduser - Why do you think this? Looks okay to me... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:50, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ah shoot, I looked at the wrong section that's why (Silly me)Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 03:52, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No worries; it happens to all of us ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:54, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes

Do I need to leave a user warning for every nonconstructive pending change I revert?Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 03:54, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thegooduser - Warn users for disruption regardless if the edit awaits review or if it's automatically accepted. The only difference between a pending edit awaiting review and an accepted edit (or normal edit) is that only logged in users can see the changes live on the article while they awaiting review. Declining the pending changes is the same as reverting the edits. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:58, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Upage

Can you please check my userpage to make sure it doesn't violate the guidelines? (Sorry for bothering you)Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 03:56, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thegooduser - Your user page is fine. I don't see anything wrong... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:58, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Block

Block this IP pls, he keeps adding † to articles next to names --> Special:Contributions/180.190.54.143. Thanks. Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 04:40, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Abelmoschus Esculentus - That doesn't mean that this is vandalism. The user is adding symbols to lists, which will actually help to clarify the data being expressed... Looks good faith to me... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:43, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm then what is the use of the †s? Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 04:45, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Abelmoschus Esculentus - Check out this list article, where both * and † symbols are used in the list to signify that there's more information to read. The cross is also typically used instead of asterisks to do the same thing - it's just a symbol and it's by preference. Let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Cheers ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:48, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen them before, but the articles which the IP added † symbols does not state what † refer to. Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 04:51, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

He just might not have added that part yet. You could always leave a message on their user talk page and ask if they need help ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:52, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

He's already back

As soon as you blocked TheClashTrollStrikesBack (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), the same sock puppeteer showed up at Talk:Suspiria (2018 film) as TwoOneFourNine (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Dark Knight 2149 04:54, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Darkknight2149 - Thanks for letting me know about this. The user is blocked :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:56, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Screw you

Use control C to copy not control X. Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 04:57, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But they're right next to each other! Cut me a break, mannnnn!!! :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:59, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 05:00, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I just type in the formatting manually... (or... I copypasta it). I'm too used to doing it the old-school way... haha ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:01, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lol... I use {{yo|Oshwah}}. You should too. Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 05:02, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No subject

Oh, sorry! I thought she died. Somebody has spreaded it on social media, so I thought that it was true. GoldCoast2 (talk) 09:36, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GoldCoast2 - Thanks for leaving me a message here about the edit you made. You really need to take a moment ans review Wikipedia's policies regarding articles that are biographies of living people. Any content you add or change on these articles require that a reliable source is provided and cited in-line with that content. Failing to do this is violates this policy, which is taken very seriously on Wikipedia.

The deaths of famous people have been successfully hoaxed before and in cases where the "attacker or mastermind" of had control of their online accounts and/or had the ability to convince many people that it was true. This is the reason that we require that you provide sources that are independent of the person, are peer reviewed and scrutinized and that provide their evidence, and are written by people who have no personal conflict of interest with the person. It guarantees that the information we add or update on articles of living people are true. Wikipedia has been the center of internet and media attention in the past because we failed to enforce this policy and it resulted in having contentious, libelous, false, and hoaxed information about a living person added to an article and presented as factual and encyclopedic information... not good (lol). We cannot have this happen.

That being said, don't worry about it... you didn't know about this policy and I know that you're new here. Mistakes are normal and they're expected to happen. Just keep this policy in mind with all of your future edits, learn from this, and don't repeat the problem ;-). Violation of this policy is a big deal - especially if it's done by a user that;s been warned before or has been here long enough to clearly know better. Anyways... thanks for leaving me this message here and I hope you have a great day :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:46, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Suspected Sock

Oshwah, First, thanks for your help on everything recently. Second, I saw you recently blocked SwedenAviator as a sock without going through a full SPI (presumably a sock of Sycamore111). I strongly suspect HM Daniel 111 is in the same boat here, creating nearly identical content on the Kingdom of Sycamore. Is this something I should take to SPI, or is it obvious enough to ask be handled by you, the blocking admin? Thank you in advance for your help! MarginalCost (talk) 11:40, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MarginalCost! Yes, let's go and create an SPI case if this socking is going to be ongoing (which I'd say is pretty certain). If anything, we'll be adding these accounts into the SPI archive to document it. Thanks for creating that SPI case, and please don't hesitate to message me if you run into any questions or need help with doing so. thanks again and cheers ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:43, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I created Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SwedenAviator. I requested CheckUser, though with account creation blocked on both accounts, I don't know if it will do much good. When would one not request a Checkuser in a SPI? Also, I didn't see any instructions about notifying the affected parties, is that right? I appreciate your help in all this! MarginalCost (talk) 14:14, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My edit of Michael Bielický

Dear Oshwah,

there were 29 footnotes added to my edit - how are catalogues and books published by renovated German and international Art institutes from 1988 to 2017 (listed below) classified as a non-reliable source?

In anticipation of Your answer, thank You for Your time and consideration,

MPhilMediaArt (talk) 12:17, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of footnotes

Paul

Heinrich Klotz, Ursula Anna Frohne (Eds). Kunst der Gegenwart (Exhibition on occasion of the 1997 Grand Opening of the ZKM, Centre for Media and Arts in Karlsruhe). Munich, New York, Prestel. 1997. pp. 54–55. ISBN 3791318357.
Susanne Rennert, Stephan von Wiese (Hrsg.). Students of Paik: 1978 – 95, video dreams. Düsseldorf, Kunstmuseum im Ehrenhof. 1996. S. 22ff und S. 132.
MedienOperative (Hrsg.), Micky Kwella, Jörg Himstedt (Rd.). VideoFilmFest ’88 des 18. Internationalen Forums des jungen Films. Berlin, Internationales Forum des jungen Films. 1988. S. 19.
Michael Bielicky – Four Seasons. LIMA website. Retrieved 27. Juni 2017.
MedienOperative (Hrsg.), Micky Kwella, Jörg Himstedt (Rd.). VideoFilmFest ’88 des 18. Internationalen Forums des jungen Films. Berlin, Internationales Forum des jungen Films. 1988. S. 19.
Michael Bielicky – Perpetuum Mobile. LIMA website. Retrieved 27. Juni 2017.
Petra Unnützer (Hg.). 3. Videonale : 11. - 16.9.1988. Bonn, Videonale. 1988. S. 53.
Michael Bielicky - Next Year in Jerusalem. LIMA website. Retrieved 27. Juni 2017.
Dario Ghanai. Videonale 5. Bonn, Videonale. 1992. S.110.
Michael Bielicky - Golem Is Alive. LIMA website. Retrieved 27. Juni 2017.
Karl Gerbel, Peter Weibel (Hrsg.). Die Welt von innen, Endo & Nano (Ars Electronica 92). Linz, Veritas-Verlag. 1992. S. 126 ff.
Jennifer Hansen-Glucklich. Holocaust memory reframed: museums and the challenges of representation. New Brunswick, NJ, Rutgers University Press. 2014. pp. 178-180. ISBN 9780813563237.
Ginette Major (Ed.). Images du futur '91: 31 mai - 22 septembre, cité des arts et des Nouvelles technologies de Montréal. 1991. p. 18.
Axel Klepsch (Hg), Vilém Flusser, Nam June Paik (Autors). Discover European Video: Anthology Film Archives, New York November 17-November 25, 1990. Düsseldorf, 1990. S. 11, 46.
Wendelin Renn (Hg.). "Schirm-Herrschaft" Video Kunst: 27. Juni bis 25. Juli 1993, Städtische Galerie Lovis-Kabinett Villingen-Schwenningen. Villingen-Schwenningen [u.a.], Städtische Galerie [u.a.]. 1993. S. 16.
Freunde der Deutschen Kinemathek e.V. (Ulrich Gregor, Peter B. Schumann) (Hrsg.). 17. Internationales Forum des jungen Films. Berlin, Felgentreff & Goebel. 1987. S. 58.
Christoph Blase (Hg.). 40jahrevideokunst.de - Teil 2. Ostfildern, Hatje Cantz. 2010. S. 86 ff, 411 ff.
Karl Gerbel, Peter Weibel. (Ed.): Exhibition Catalogue: Ars Electronica 95: Mythos Information. Welcome to the Wired World. Springer, Vienna. 1995. pp. 214 ff. ISBN 9783791318691
Davina Jackson. SuperLux, Smart Light Art, Design & Architecture for Cities. Thames & Hudson. 2015. pp. 92 ff. ISBN 9780500343043
Nikolai Molok, Peter Weibel. (Hrsg.) 4th Moscow biennale of contemporary art : 23.09.2011 - 30.10.2011. Moscow, Institute of Contemporary Art. 2011. S. 45 ff.
Hans Belting, Andrea Buddensieg, Peter Weibel (Hrsg.). The global contemporary and the rise of new art worlds. Cambridge, MIT Press. 2013. S. 328 ff.
Michael Bielicky - Garden of Error and Decay. Official Vimeo. Retrieved 27. Juni 2017.
Manfred Schneckenburger (Hg.), Lichtsicht die vierte: Projektions-Biennale Bad Rothenfelde, 27. September 2013 bis 5. Januar 2014. Bönen, Kettler. 2013. S. 28 ff.
Lichtsicht gGmbH (Hrsg.), Lichtsicht die Vierte: Projektions-Biennale Bad Rothenfelde, 29. September 2017 bis 28. Januar 2018. Bönen, Kettler. 2017. S. 22 ff.
Michael Bielicky - Lost Objects. Official Prague National Theatre Site. Retrieved 14. August 2017.
Dimitri Konstantinidis. e.city Prague 2016. Strasbourg, Apollonia. pp. 38-51. ISBN 9782918640059.
Michael Bielicky - Lost. Official Vimeo. Retrieved 27. Juni 2017.
Michael Bielicky - Lost. Official Vimeo. Retrieved 27. Juni 2017.
Hannes Leopoldseder, Christine Schöpf (Eds.). Cyberarts 2000: International Compendium Prix Ars Electronica. Springer. 2000. Pp. 88-89. ISBN 3211834982

MPhilMediaArt - Please disregard; the edit I made was not intentional was was meant for someone else's edit, not yours. I've restored the edits you made back to the article, removed the notice left on your user talk page, and I apologize for the mistake and for the confusion I may have caused. Please let me know if you have any more questions or concerns and I'll be happy to help. Thanks for letting me know about this, and I hope you have a great rest of your day. Cheers :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:22, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~Oshwah~^(talk) - Thank You so much for Your reconsideration and great help. Please have a fantastic time! ^^ MPhilMediaArt —Preceding undated comment added 12:48, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was adding more facts.

Things I added to the page, State Highways in Vermont, are facts and predictions. I found out that I-189 is the only auxiliary Interstate in Vermont. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:3007:2B00:AB00:B91C:95A3:E6D4:484F (talk) 14:03, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Did you see Oshwah's edit summary? Read WP:CS and WP:RS. Thanks. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 14:09, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Hey Oshwah you reverted my edit .This is Kevin Gorman's face on your body Oshwah

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.242.138.63 (talk) 14:48, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Danger High Voltage. Keep Out

Could you please block this obvious sock? (w/ talkpage access disabled). Thanks. 186.91.112.180 (talk) 15:25, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Already blocked. General Ization ^Talk 15:27, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I just saw that as I posted this here. :-) 186.91.112.180 (talk) 15:29, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Page question

Hey Oshwah. Page moving question .I aw Here is Kevin Gorman's face on Oshwah's body . LULZ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.120.34.241 (talk) 17:28, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Zuhayb hussein FDC

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 17:56, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cahk -

Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:58, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nicole van den Hurk edits

I don't understand why you categorized my changes on the Nicole van den Hurk page as "not constructive."

The first two sentences: "Nicole van den Hurk was born on 4 July 1980 in Erkelenz, Germany. Her biological father was married to another woman, and she moved to the Netherlands with her mother and Dutch stepfather at a young age." are grammatically incorrect to a degree that causes ambiguity and confusion.

With no prior reference to a woman who contrasts "another woman," the sentence seems to be saying that Nicole's father was married to a woman other than Nicole.

A smaller concern is that the "...she moved to..." is unclear as well; "she" could be referring to the woman Nicole's father was actually married to, Nicole herself, or the implied mother of Nicole.

My changes were small but removed the ambiguity.

LetsEditThat (talk) 18:50, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. LetsEditThat's edit was made in good faith and so I have removed the warning. Oshwah, I’d just like to remind you to be careful and always check an edit (which I know you do do most of the time) before rollbacking it. Thanks and regards, Linguist^un Eins ^uno (Linguist111) 19:13, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Linguist111 - Thank you for removing the warning, and yes I agree - I dun goof'd that one... :-/ ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:18, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Hi LetsEditThat, and thanks for leaving me a message and for explaining the edit you made. I misread the change and thought that it was yet another editor making a "your mom" edit to an article to disrupt it. This is obviously not the case, and I owe you my apologies for the stupidity on my part. It looks like someone has already removed the notice I left (which they were absolutely correct by doing so), and I'll be happy to restore the change you made if it hasn't already been done. Please forgive my bone headed action to your edit, and please let me know if you have any additional questions or concerns or if I can assist with anything and I'll be more than happy to do so. Thanks for leaving me a message and for letting me know about the edit and what it was actually doing, and I hope you have a great rest of your day :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:17, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, I’ve made similar mistakes in the past. No worries

. Linguist^un Eins ^uno (Linguist111) 19:22, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Oshwah and Linguist111. Thank you for the review and consideration! I appreciate you taking the additional time on this edit. Sorry for what's probably going to be poor formatting on this reply -- I haven't quite learned the structure of these Talk pages. I'll go look for some documentation so I can figure out how to use these correctly. :) Thanks! LetsEditThat (talk) 12:23, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

TinyURL

Why did you undo me? How is it not constructive to change past tense to present for something 10 years old? How is it not constructive to explain what a URL's destination is? 208.95.51.38 (talk) 9:09, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for leaving me a message here about the edit. Oh God damnit... what the hell is going on? I just made some modifications to my confirmation files and I think something causing a revert by me to trigger on your edit.. because I didn't do this on purpose. For the record, your edit makes complete sense and there would be absolutely no reason to interpret your edit as otherwise... I'm sorry for the accidental revert and for the frustration that it caused. I'm going to need to rollback the things I changed, because it might be causing problems... :-/ ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:32, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the response! I'm glad you didn't do this on purpose :^D 208.95.51.38 (talk) 20:05, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, and thank you for bringing it to my attention so that I was aware and could work to help resolve it :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:09, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User Agboolar06

Hi Oshwah, as much as I did the reverts, I think users should be warned that using multiple accounts is against policy before they are blocked. Just saying! Cheers, Mahveotm (talk) 21:10, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mahveotm and thank you for leaving me this message and for expressing your concerns and your honest thoughts with me. My talk page is always open to you and you're welcome to message me any time you need or wish to talk about something. I'll always treat your messages, requests, or your thoughts or opinions with respect and regardless of my personal thoughts or whether or not I agree with them. In this situation, I'd actually be inclined to agree with you in this situation but to an extent. However, taking the edit timestamps, and looking into account logs and other information - it all provides a clear line of events as well as clear intentions. The user knew that what he was doing was disruptive. That being said, I left blocking notices on both accounts which provide instructions for the user to file an unblock request if they wish to. Again, I really appreciate your honest input here; please don't hesitate to let me know if you have any additional questions or concerns and I'll be happy to help and discuss them. I hope you have a great rest of your day and I wish you happy editing ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:12, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming

Hey Oshwah, I see that you blocked Natureium wished he was killed a while ago. I asked at Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple‎ for the username to be changed, but my request was removed. Do you know where I should go for this? Thanks, Natureium (talk) 22:44, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Natureium, it's good to talk to you again! Is there a specific reason why we need to put time and energy into renaming this account? We typically block these accounts and (if the username is grossly threatening, offensive, libelous, or a breach of one's privacy) the logs and relevant revisions and text are redacted... but ff we've done everything right and unless the user decides to appeal their block, abuse their talk page, whatever ... we generally want to move on and avoid allocating any time or energy toward these blocked troll accounts or users. Please let me know what's going on and why, and I'll be happy to help and get it taken care of.

To answer the "why" portion of your question: The big emphasis and reason behind all of this is to understand that WP:DENY goes beyond just ignoring the gouges and stabs that trolls make and to not feed them - but also to the level where we don't give them any more of our time, energy, and emotions than what's required, and that also applies for accounts after they're blocked, too... If that means that we don't put each sock we find on a list or on the LTA page, we IAR some admin policies to invoke WP:DENY so that their edits and "troll stuff" disappear, and we decline renaming some accounts because well... "what's the point?" - we invoke WP:DENY in many aspects and areas and in order to make sure that trolls get as little of our time and energy as possible and that they get close to nothing out of what they're doing...

Let me know what's going on and I'll see what I can do. Cheers :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:08, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If it's going to be a big hassle, don't worry about it. I just got tired of seeing it whenever there's a field my username autocompletes in and wondering what this person is angry at me for. Natureium (talk) 23:14, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Natureium - I see, and this falls under an attack username - so I'm going to redact all of the username logs and that should.... should...... fix that for you. One moment... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:16, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Natureium - Okay, all of the logs are redacted and you shouldn't see any logs at all involving this account. Does that resolve the issue for you? If not, the next step is for me to take it up my personal chain of command... don't worry, I'll get it removed if that's what we gotta do ;-)... just let me know - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:20, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thanks for your help! PS. "Personal chain of command" sounds like you are a one-man military. Natureium (talk) 23:24, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Natureium - Awesome! I'm happy that fixed the problem! Please don't hesitate to let me know if I can do anything else for you, and I'll be happy to help. Until we meet again ;-) ... 23:27, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

/* External links */

Hi this is regarding the external link for Payments bank article Aditya birla payments bank is one of the few banks that got license from RBI and is operational. there are no links referring about it. I was unsure where to add it. can you pls guide me how should I go about including adityabirla payments as part of the payments banks of India? www.aditybirla.bank

best — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sasidharv (talk • contribs) 23:36, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thought that my account was lost!

Hi Oshwah,

This is about your blocking my recent attempt to change my account name. I have managed to find the password of my original account (I thought that my real account password was lost, but it was not lost after all, yay!), so this is not top priority.

It's maybe a long story, and I'm not sure if I need the new account name anyway, but please see the page User:SpectrographUK where I've put in an appeal against the block.

I may only need some explanation of why it should have been blocked after all. The main point of the appeal is to establish that there was no intention to do anything wrong, and to try to understand what types of user names are desireable, for future reference. Createangelos (talk) 02:57, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Createangelos! Thanks for leaving me a message here, and I apologize for the delay responding to you here. You were given a soft block on your other account due to your username, so creating a new account (or in your case here, recovering access to your original account) was the solution and what we were encouraging you to do ;-). Since you've recovered your original account and can log into it now, just start using this account from now on and don't worry about the other one - in fact, treat it as if it doesn't exist. What I'll do for you is go ahead and convert the user and user talk pages on your other account to simply redirect to this one. Then everything will be pointing to one place. "Createangelos" doesn't appear to come back as the name of any organizations, groups, or websites - but if that's what the username is supposed to be, just file a request to have it changed by following the directions listed here and it won't be treated like a big deal at all they'll rename the account for you no problem. You will also want take the opportunity to verify an email address on this account or update it if it's not verified with your current one. Please let me know if you have any questions and I'll be happy to answer them and help you. It's excellent news that you were able to recover your account, and I'm happy you got it back :-). Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:38, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, that is a lot of information! Thanks, and I'm trying to decode it. There is no need to rescue anything from SpectrographUK, the issue is purely emotional/ethical. I hadn't started using it, and my real account Createangelos is safe and recovered. There is currently still an appeal about it after all, a user had just moved my text from the user page to the talk page, and I will most likely discontinue the appeal. The emotional issue is that I identify with the username spectrograph, and it was like a slap in the face to be told something isn't good about it. Even if someone thought it has to do with my website spectrograph.uk, that name I chose also for the same reason. It has to do with a concept of detecting pollution, investigating contamination, things like that. As I mention, if someone thought that the name pre-existing on my website was promotional, it would be promoting something like Wikipedia, because the website is client-side javascript, anyone can download it and keep it forever, there is not an ownership issue. I feel emotionally like someone had challenged me, saying 'what do you think you're doing, you are being selfish.' I no longer need the new username, but having it run into troubles or be considered promotional has affected me in an irrational way. I don't think I see any issue of principle here.

Anyway, I'm currently trying to understand the part of your explanation where you say "file a request to have it changed by following the directions listed here". Are you saying that if I actually wanted to change 'Createangelos' to 'SpectrographUK' I could do it by following those directions? I don't think that I want to do that, but rather I feel the confusing need to respond to whatever bot has challenged me and accused me of being promotional. Sorry if this makes little sense. I don't think I actually want to use SpectrographUK instead of Createangelos, now that I've recovered the account, but can you please try to explain what happened and why the name SpectrographUK was blocked, so that I understand it better? Most likely I will just delete my appeal when I understand things.

Now it looks like the accounts are correctly linked. Ignore my comments, and I'll try to figure out what is taking place. I am just confused on technical matters I think. Createangelos (talk) 09:50, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Createangelos - Meh...there really isn't much to have to understand. I just edited your user and user talk pages on your other account and changed them to point people automatically to your user pages on this account if they were to go and visit your old one. That's really all that I did... ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:08, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Should I or do I need to delete the appeal about 'SpectrographUK'? (another user wrote to me to say he'd moved it to the talk page of SpectrographUK. Is it sitting there causing problems for people and needs to be deleted? )Createangelos (talk) 10:15, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Createangelos - Here's what happened in a nutshell from my perspective: The username you chose for the other account, 'SpectrographUK', comes back as a website domain and what looks to be the name of an organization. This is against Wikipedia's username policy as usernames must represent you as an individual, and can't be a company name or of a group, etc. An admin blocked that account but only applied a soft block, which allows you to create a new account with an appropriate username or get the username changed. You made an unblock request that had a HUGE amount of text that you wrote, and then eventually were able to get logged into your original account. All I did was change the user and user talk pages to point to your main account's pages automatically. Don't worry about that account any more; treat it as if you never created it and just use this account. There's nothing else that you need to worry about with the block or anything... just use this account and go about your normal day as you did before. That's pretty much it - I took care of everything and it's all in the past now :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:28, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio on Jon Mack (actress)

Jon Mack (actress). Page created by a blocked sock of a blocked undisclosed paid editor, recently updated with a copy-vio by Xerox2025, almost certainly another (not yet blocked) sock. Could you please revdel the appropriate revisions (if not outright delete-and-salt the page, that is)? AddWittyNameHere (talk) 01:37, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Investigating... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:40, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AddWittyNameHere - All done. I've reverted the (second) copyvio that same user added and after your removal of the first, rev del'd the revisions needed, and I've warned the user about COPYVIOs. Thanks for letting me know about the problem, and let me know if I can help with anything else. Cheers ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:43, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You hid my revision as well even though it didn't actually contain the copy-vio but eh, no big deal there.

I personally tend to not warn what are really blatant socks of editors absolutely not interested in following Wikipedia's rules--and I'd say an editor managing to, within six minutes of registering, edit promotional copyvio content into an article obscure enough to average <10 views a day that was created by a proven sock of a UDP-editor is about equally subtle as evaders naming their account I'm_[blockeduser]_unblock_me. XD But I suppose in this case, warning them does no harm either--I'm just more used to dealing with trolls/vandals than UDP-farms. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 01:54, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AddWittyNameHere - I fixed the revision you were talking about above and unredacted the revision text; thanks for the heads up ;-). I'll leave warnings for most things, even if I have strong suspicions of sock puppetry and the like. If anything, those warnings can be helpful later if a user manages to get us hooked into an "edge case" where we can't outright justify socking, but they've repeatedly caused other bits of disruption. The warnings both give the user a chance to stop the behavior, and (more importantly) it documents the behavior and the occurrence - this makes applying a block more justifiable later if the user has multiple warnings left and hence multiple chances to stop. Otherwise, it'll look like we just outright blocked the dude and we have diffs or "paperwork" to show that we gave them fair chances to improve. This obviously doesn't apply in cases of LTA behaviors or socking; once I discover a sock puppet ring of accounts, I immediately shut it down ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:09, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense. Like I said, I'm more used to trolls/vandals and similar such cases, where not feeding them is pretty major--plus they tend to be obvious enough there's not much need for documentation on the individual-account level. LTA patterns and such, sure, but not what each separate account did. But yes, I can see how it'd be useful for edge cases and the likes. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 02:15, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Changing my focus a bit

Hi Oshwah, I just wanna let you know that I will try to create articles (list here) and will not be active fighting vandalism. (I may if I'm bored XD) ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 09:04, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Abelmoschus Esculentus - Awesome! I hope you enjoy the changes you've made with how you contribute to the project, that you gain experience and learn well from this area of participation, and that you meet your objectives and achieve your goals and accomplish that you set for yourself. Recent changes patrolling and disruption cleanup will be there should you want to return. The new changes feed and the need for patollers aren't going anywhere soon... there'll be plenty of disruption to go around ;-). I wish you good luck and I wish you happy editing! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:20, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I will do my best! ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 09:29, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Removed content on Armani Page

Hi Oshwah, the removed content were just promotional links of online shops without any meaningful content or resource character. Did you restore them? If so, please remove them. Next time ill add information why I did make a change. Please excuse my mistake. Im still new but keen to contribute. Best, Alex — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexisjst (talk • contribs) 13:17, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

block evasion

see Special:contribs/Eliza-Pancakes L293D (☎ • ✎) 13:42, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

L293D - Oh yeah... no question. Makes my job easy when they do that... lol. User is indef'd. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:44, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that was awsomely quick!!! L293D (☎ • ✎) 13:46, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to indef Special:block/Pancakealize. L293D (☎ • ✎) 14:02, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And Special:Contributions/Basketball_professional too. clearly a sock VOA. L293D (☎ • ✎) 14:07, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

L293D -

Done,

Done, and -

Done! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:16, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ILYA

Hello Oshwah, I have never edited this site before and not yet sure what you have removed? I am the singer of ILYA and so had added links that I felt were important for people to go and hear what we are now doing. Especially on Patreon and in Bandcamp. But I think I had better go and see what you changed first. Or you can tell me what you changed and why? Thank you. Joanna — Preceding unsigned comment added by JojoSwan (talk • contribs) 14:36, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

JojoSwan - Please see Wikipedia's guidelines on conflict of interest. You should avoid adding content that you have personal involvement with or personal conflicts of interest with. If information needs updating on these pages, you should create an edit request instead. This will allow another user to review your proposed changes and make those edits for you (assuming no problems are found). 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 happy editing :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:48, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No subject

Who are you?

What do you know about catalytic converters?

What authority do you have to edit technical info in wiki?

Revision hidden requeston [REDACTED - Oshwah].

I am requesting [[REDACTED - Oshwah] this] revision to be hidden from the public archives as it contains disrupted material. Thanks, Iggy (Swan) 16:28, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Iggy the Swan - I'm not sure if you provided the diff of the correct revision that you actually wanted rev del'd or not... can you check the one that I redacted and let me know? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:37, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that was the correct one. Iggy (Swan) 16:39, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Iggy the Swan - Without going into details (since you already know what was said) - we would normally decline applying redaction to an edit that only said something like that. Heck, I get that told to me at least five times a day by trolls... however, I went ahead and applied it for you nonetheless. Does something like that really bother you that much? Why have this redacted? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:45, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That was something I didn't like to see all the time, plus that latest comment above implies I learn something new every day. Iggy (Swan) 16:48, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Iggy the Swan - No worries, and thanks for letting me know. I don't mind doing it since it was made on your user talk page. I don't think people are going to go up in arms about it if it's something that you find purely disruptive and that you requested it. Just keep that in mind, because you would find many (if not most) admins telling you that the diff you provided doesn't fall under RD3. Oh well... either way, I took care of your request and you're all set. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:54, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just a question, why do you keep redacting the revdel requests? Since the content is redacted, then we can't see it, and anyway, admins can still see the requests as they can see deleted content. L293D (☎ • ✎) 17:02, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

L293D - Because revision deletion requests generally should be emailed or submitted using non-public means. I might not always be fast with performing the actual redaction, and leaving the links and locations available allows users to quickly navigate to and view the revision details before it gets handled. For all I know, the diff might be pointing to a revision with content that really really needs to go and extremely urgently. It happens here on occasion, which is why I treat all rev del requests here as if they were pointing to something to that level of sensitivity and urgency. It's my way of doing every I possibly can in order to keep you (or any editor in this situation) safe and protected, and the potential exposure of the information is as low as possible. TL;DR I DO IT BECAUSE I LOVE YOU... A LOT! :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:14, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mujhideen101

Hi Oshwah,

When you get a chance, could you look into this SPI? I saw that you had warned User:F0tnit for their disruptive edits to Shaheen Asmayee F.C., and after looking at the history of that article as well as Afghan Premier League (which they have edited both articles before), it actually looks like some other accounts with similar looking edits (and usernames) had previously been reverted and blocked as socks of the above master. The two accounts currently listed at the SPI as well as previous socks in the SPI archive history for this case have a habit of marking all of their edits as being "minor" as well as using very similar edit summaries. Thanks. 116.101.111.225 (talk) 16:44, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I can take a look... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:46, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for blocking those accounts. Could you also place a long-term semi protection on Afghan Premier League, similarly to what you did for Shaheen Asmayee F.C.? Thanks again. 119.17.193.5 (talk) 18:32, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure,

Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:34, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

IP

Hi Oshwah, Just seen your comment on AIV,

You will see here the IP has been blocked 4 times within a space of a month and 5 just over that month ... so to file an AN3 report each time this IP returns would be extremely time consuming,
Ofcourse had this been a new IP then I would but when it's the same IP returning week after week or month after month doing the exact same thing it makes life easier if they're reported and blocked instead of the cycle of - Report at AN3 > Wait a few days > Blocked - Doing the latter would also mean more reverting as like today they would return and revert you which again is time consuming so doing it my way makes life a lot sweeter and certainly a simpler :),

Sorry not moaning just wanted to explain :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 17:06, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Davey2010! No worries and no need to apologize... you know that you're welcome here any time and to voice concerns or disagreements openly - you won't hurt my feelings ;-). Ohhh, I see what happened... the IP user just went about their business and continued with their shenanigans after I had warned the user and said that we should wait. Yeah..... looking at this AIV report and from the other side of the glass, I agree that I should have handled it in a more aggressive manner and that all the signs were there indicating this. I appreciate you for leaving me a message here and for voicing your concerns and your honest thoughts... it's very helpful to me to hear feedback from others, and they also help me to see things with clearer eyes and apply these things moving forward. So, thank you... I'll definitely keep this case in mind and will apply this moving forward :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:31, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ping

Hello, Oshwah. 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 remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

- BilCat (talk) 17:38, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I'll check it now... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:46, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

BilCat - Received and taken care of, thank you! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:46, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the prompt response! - BilCat (talk) 17:51, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

BilCat - You bet; always happy to help ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:52, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gina ford article

Hello Oshwah Thanks for checking out my content on https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gina_Ford

You mentioned you deleted th content - is there a copy of it in the history, or did you save a copy before you deleted it? I don't have a copy.

You might not have noticed but I did actually include a citation for both quotes - it was in the body of the text and not in the proper format because the citation function in Wikipedia isn't working for me. I was hoping a nice moderator might help me by putting it into the right format or looking into why the citation tool was not working, rather than just deleting the lot :) I did try to include this in the message before publishing but this field was not allowing me to enter text... Any ideas why? I'm using an iPad, is that bad?

Thanks JarkahJarkhah (talk) 18:01, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jarkhah! I apologize! I see that you did provide sources in your subsequent edits - I've restored the content you added for you. I must've only seen the first edit and didn't see the subsequent two. Please let me know if I can do anything else for you. Again, I sincerely apologize for not noticing this. Thanks for the message and I wish you happy editing :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:08, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Shreya Ghoshal ‎

A suspected sock is persistently doing disruptive editing on Shreya Ghoshal. Initially I have reported him here [1] for writing his own Wikipedia and then here [2] for sock puppetry but he does not rest at all. Kishfan (talk) 08:15, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kishfan! It looks like the page has been protected now - did the reported users get taken care of? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:10, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pamella Bordes

What is going on here? Fireandice423 (talk · contribs) is not talking. Did leave an interesting message in User:Fireandice423/sandbox Jim1138 (talk) 09:34, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fireandice423! You might have to ask Jim1138 or Shellwood directly about why your changes were rolled back. This will result in the answer you're looking for :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:12, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Cpu11.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Cpu11.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:19, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Iran protection

Hey Oshwah, this came up at AN when doing the review of whether Lebanon was under ARBPIA3. ArbCom recently clarified that the Iran-Israel dispute doesn’t automatically fall under ARBPIA, and there was a recent AE that held Iran out of scope because it is not an Arab country (don’t have a link but I can find it if you want to look). I think it makes sense to remove the ECP in light of that ARCA and the current review of country level ECPs of Jordan and Lebanon. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:02, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

TonyBallioni - Ah, good call. Thanks for sharing this - yes, go for it ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:44, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail

Hello, Oshwah. 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 remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 01:18, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thegooduser - Did I respond to your email here? If not, can you resend it? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:45, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

209.52.88.0/24

I always vandalize under the network via tethering, would you block this range for a month? (May to June 2018 warnings). You know, those 2017 and 2016 warnings? These people, who I don't know, got these warnings and are irrelevant to me. However, the relevant warnings were from me. In fact, some, made by me, got declined AfC submission. Check the block log for each IPv4 address in the range. Some blocks are relevant, some are not, and one (or a few extra which I don't know) got declined unblock requests. These people probably got a new IP address. 209.52.88.122 (talk) 20:03, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Please create an account to avoid confusion, Thanks. Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 20:05, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) I'm going to have to disagree with the previous editor, since the comment sounds almost like an order. Creating an account on Wikipedia is optional. It may be beneficial, but is in no way required - IP editors are people, just like those of us who have a registered account.

However, in this specific case, I'm not sure what's your complaint. Draft:Mail_link has been rejected for an obvious reason - it's not an encyclopaedia article. Furthermore, please elaborate on the I always vandalize under the network via tethering thing. It may have been a badly formulated sentence, but I'm curious. byteflush _Talk 05:15, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ByteflushI didn't mean that sentence in a forced way. Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 03:37, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

By the way I didn't "see" the Ip's first sentence when I read it before. ... Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 03:38, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Umm this is quite an interesting confession and request... you "always vandalize under the network via tethering"? I think that you mean that you always see vandalism occurring under this range by others via tethering? Either way, blocks must be used in a preventative measure, and as of the time of this writing I cannot do this, since there isn't active disruption going on from this range. If you're receiving irrelevant warnings under this IP range for disruption that others are causing, creating an account and using it to edit will resolve this issue. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:55, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Possible to work on protected article ("Jair Bolsonaro")?

Hi! Over the past few weeks I've been working on the English Wikipedia article "Jair Bolsonaro" by (slowly) translating sections of the much longer Portuguese article on him. I think you recently made the English article "protected" because of an ongoing edit war between a couple of other users, that I'm not involved in. Is there some way I can continue to work on this article, despite its protected status? I'd like to continue translating the full Portuguese article (I think the original is pretty good - detailed, well-sourced, objective) - and I think it's important a more detailed and comprehensive version exist in English as well.

Flaubert1965 (talk) 23:31, 9 June 2018 (UTC)Flaubert1965[reply]

@Flaubert1965: You can make edit requests on Talk:Jair Bolsonaro. L293D (☎ • ✎) 02:30, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cibolo, TX

I was wondering if I can get your help or advice. I am fairly new to Wikipedia, but have been the major editor for the Cibolo, Texas wikipedia page over the last year or so. I am contacting you as I saw that you edited it and/or protected the Cibolo article on 5 June 2018.

Anyway, I have added lots of great information in various areas and aspects of Cibolo. However, there is one account that keeps deleting what I wrote because it puts her in a bad light. (The account owner, I assume is the former mayor of Cibolo or someone very close to her. I say this as there is other information that one could view as negative, but that does not go away, only the stuff that is written about the former mayor.) I have documented and referenced all my writing with the appropriate sources. That brings me to my issues.

Just recently, user Sro23 performed a "full revert to last clean version prior to disruption" and to me, the novice wikipedia user, sees all the information as gone. Is there an easy way to restore the information, or shall I go back in and retype it all?

Thanks in advance for any insight you can provide!

CiboloBuffalo (talk) 05:18, 10 June 2018 (UTC)CiboloBuffalo[reply]

Hi CiboloBuffalo, and thanks for leaving me a message with your questions and concerns. All revisions and changes made to every page can be viewed by looking at the article's history page - nothing removed is permanently gone and can easily be restored (so you don't need to retype anything). The article was protected due to observing ongoing edit warring and an obvious content dispute between editors - this behavior is disruptive and I needed to put a stop to it. Have you made an edit request to have this content added to the article? This is what you should do if you haven't done so - it will allow another editor to review your proposed changes and add it to the article (assuming no problems are found). If you have a dispute with another editor over the content and this person keeps removing what you're adding, you need to follow Wikipedia's dispute resolution protocol and discuss the changes on the article's talk page with this user. Start a new discussion and make sure to ping that user so (s)he is notified and can participate. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks again for the message and I wish you happy editing :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:01, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Shahed Ali

Mr Osman,

With all respect, I don't think the names of all our family members- our profession whereabouts and including children's and grandchildren's should be on display like this. I have had fraudulent letters from scammers who had been trying to blackmail me after finding some photos of my relatives on Australian Instagram. It took me a while to find out how they connected me with them. Please keep my mother's name and write that we are six siblings- all educated and independent. That should be enough. No names and professions, please I hope you understand. I don't have much connection with my nephews and nieces and I can't be blackmailed for their behavior on the net.

Otherwise, your work is good and I thank you for making the Wiki for my father, I know you meant well, but the world is becoming very small and you have to be careful about our integrity. There are other things on the page which can be improved to make it update. For example, a good photo of Abba and more facts about his parents and education.

My email is <<redacted >>if you would please like to contact me?

Best wishes, Dilruba Z. Ara — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.113.125.166 (talk) 08:42, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) I guess he means this RV. Content later removed. @213.113.125.166:, we prefer to conduct discussions transparently, on wiki. Ironic that you should c/o privacy issues and then post your email. Posting one's email is never a good idea. Offending content was removed. Totally confused by the blackmail remark,-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 10:57, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dlohcierekim is correct (see above) - discussions need to remain on Wikipedia. Dlohcierekim redacted the email address that you added here for your safety and privacy. If you have concerns with privacy, disclosing your contact information is never a good idea. It looks like the content in question has been removed, so I believe your concerns should now be resolved. If you have other questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks for the message and I wish you a good rest of your day. Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:07, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Sandow (rugby league)

Hello there, Oshwah.

I’ve noticed that the Chris Sandow (rugby league) Wikipedia page has come in for somewhat a slight bit of disruptive editing as of late.

Now, I’d love to give the page a complete ‘head to toe’ edit, with everything looking as close to perfect as possible, because at the moment it’s slightly untidy.

But I’m reluctant, like I’ve said it appears to be the target of childish, silly and just plain stupid edits from people, mainly anonymous users that are just trying to be disruptive.

Is there any reasonable cause to ban persistent anonymous users' IP addresses and that of registered users, if they continue to be disruptive?

Thanks a lot,

ScottJohnSexton. ScottJohnSexton (talk) 19:18, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ScottJohnSexton! Thanks for leaving me a message with your questions and concerns. Don't worry about disruptive editing and vandalism by other users. If this happens, revert the disruption and go about your business. If it occurs repeatedly by the same user, report the user to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism and we'll take care of it. Vandalism and other disruption is very easy to undo and revert; don't let yourself think that you can't or shouldn't improve an article and improve Wikipedia just because of the potential for disruption. Your good work is never truly gone and can easily be restored from the article's history page. If you run into any more questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to message me and let me know. I'll be more than happy to help you with anything that you need. I just took a look at the article's history page and it looks like you've been doing a lot of work on the article - excellent! Thanks for helping to improve the article! Your work is very much appreciated! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:17, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please help Mongolian Beef

That user is always ignoring whether he is using which Wikipedia, and he always comments in a mixture of Chinese and English in Chinese Wikipedia, and creates a lot of conflicts. I guess he also makes conflicts here, so please help for always reminding him, many thanks. Sæn mō sà 02:52, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting unreliable sources is not "creating conflicts". And no, I did not "make conflicts" here.--Mongolian Beef (talk) 06:35, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Mongolian Beef: However, you are still banned by a bureaucrat there. You shall look at previous talk and look at the consensus made in zh:Talk:崔永元#关于涉及徐勇凌段落. I don't really think taht you are a good user, maybe I shall use "typical" to describe you. (Of course, I am also typical, and I don't have many edits here, but it cannot represent anything.) Sæn mō sà 07:30, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Oshwah: Please also see the edit summary of Special:diff/839522838, it lacks civilization. Sæn mō sà 07:45, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Said the guy who was blocked multiple times on Chinese Wikipedia for using sockpuppets (the latest being 6 months). I don't know how you can accuse a user with a blank block log being a bad user while having multiple block record yourself. That's more "typical", am I right? :) --Mongolian Beef (talk) 08:33, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mongolian Beef, please note that "Civility is part of Wikipedia's code of conduct and one of its five pillars", from WP:CIVIL, thanks.---Wikaviani (talk) 08:40, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sanmosa - The ban you're talking about - whether or not it's true - has nothing to do with the English Wikipedia. I don't understand what you mean when you say that Mongolian Beef is creating "conflicts", and I see that the ANI discussion you opened about Mongolian Beef was quickly closed. If there's a content dispute or disagreement on the article, you and Mongolian Beef need to discuss this on the article's talk page and follow Wikipedia's dispute resolution protocol. Mongolian Beef, let's keep edit summaries civil and refrain from adding rude or uncivil edit summaries - they're only going to exacerbate the situation and make things worse, not better :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:24, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

your email

i need a wiki page article done. whats your email id — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.32.193.94 (talk) 08:17, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I don't create articles for other users like this and for many reasons. Why not create an account, go through Wikipedia's new user tutorial, and use Wikipedia's articles for creation help page to create the article yourself? :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:28, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just for you....

"The Hair Follicle Award"

If after relentless challenges by editors who just don't appreciate your hairstyle, or how you've managed to keep it all by exercising
unrelenting restraint despite the frustration...you deserve recognition. Your hair must be as thick as the skin on the I didn't hear thats;
obviously the result of healthy hair follicles. Next time an editor finds your hair "object able" - and the likelihood of it happening again
is high as long as you're an admin - drink a cold beer 🍺, eat some dark chocolate 🍪, and consider buying stock in Rogaine.
^{Atsme📞📧} 16:42, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 616: / Line 616: @@
 i need a wiki page article done. whats your email id  <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/207.32.193.94|207.32.193.94]] ([[User talk:207.32.193.94#top|talk]]) 08:17, 14 June 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
 :Sorry, but I don't create articles for other users like this and for many reasons. Why not [[WP:ACCOUNT|create an account]], go through Wikipedia's [[WP:TWA|new user tutorial]], and use Wikipedia's [[WP:AFC|articles for creation]] help page to [[WP:BOLD|create the article yourself]]? :-) [[User:Oshwah|<b><span style="color:#C00000">~Oshwah~</span></b>]]<sup><small><b>[[User_talk:Oshwah|<span style="color:blue">(talk)</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Oshwah|<span style="color:green">(contribs)</span>]]</b></small></sup>  14:28, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
+== Just for you.... ==
+{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
+|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 2px;" | [[File:Pull_hair.jpg|frameless|150px]]
+|style="font-size: large; padding: 2px 2px 0 2px; height: 1.5em;" |<center>'''"The Hair Follicle Award"'''<br/>
+</center>
+|-
+|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" |
+If after relentless challenges by [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&curid=5137507&diff=845855466&oldid=845854123 editors] who just don't appreciate your hairstyle, or how you've managed to keep it all by exercising<br>
+unrelenting restraint despite the frustration...you deserve recognition. Your hair must be as thick as the skin on the [[WP:DIDNTHEARTHAT|''I didn't hear thats'']];<br>
+obviously the result of healthy hair follicles. Next time an editor finds your hair ''"object able"'' - and the likelihood of it happening again<br>
+is high as long as you're an admin - drink a cold beer 🍺, eat some dark chocolate 🍪, and consider buying stock in Rogaine.<br/>
+{{P|grin}} <sup>[[User:Atsme|<span style="text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em,#F4BBFF -0.2em -0.3em 0.6em,#BFFF00 0.8em 0.8em 0.6em;color:#A2006D">Atsme</span>]][[User talk:Atsme |📞]][[Special:EmailUser/Atsme|📧]]</sup> 16:42, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
+|}