I see you edited the history of the Solae and add ons. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_solae

do one create another page or add on to the Five solae if there has been a book about The Sola 12? which added 7 extra on top of the 5. https://www.amazon.com/Sola-12-Biblical-Unwrapped-Exfasciantur-ebook/dp/B098PCHHB6 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.233.205.83 (talk) 10:42, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your question. Hmm... I don't see that I've edited this article before, but maybe you saw that I did something else. :-) The best place to ask your question would be on the article's talk page here. This way, other editors who are actively involved in the article's development and expansion can answer your question and help you. I'd go there in order to find the answer that you're looking for. If you have any more questions or need assistance with anything else, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be happy to help you. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:38, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello,

For a multitude of reasons that I don't want to go into detail here, I am planning to retire from Wikipedia soon, so please revoke my rollback and pending changes reviewer rights in the case that my account gets compromised while I am gone.

Regards, Goose^(Talk!) 16:05, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

 Done. I'm sorry to hear that you're leaving. I hope that you someday return, but if you don't, I wish you well and I wish you the best of luck with your future endeavors. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:40, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Howdy! Kindly take a look at this (no time here at my new "day job" to "curate" a set of diffs or format this more succinctly, but this ought to be enough to give you the picture, and in my view it's too shady to defer):

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Claudia_Romina_Fern%C3%A1ndez_De_Santacruz&diff=prev&oldid=1036343477

Hope you're well! - Julietdeltalima (talk) 17:43, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Julietdeltalima! Please accept my apologies for the delay responding to your message here. I just moved into a new place and was without an internet connection for a week until the ISP could come out and install it. I also got busy with all of the tasks involved with moving all of my stuff... As you can imagine, I just didn't have time for Wikipedia while all of that was going on. :-) The text on that user talk page left by TOBIAS2009 is concerning... At first, it sounds like the user created another account (which is fine to do), and used their new account to edit their old one. However, I then saw this diff, where the user adds, The owner of this account withdrew, and then TOBIAS9002 acquired the rights to this account and then transferred the rights to TOBIAS2009. Does this read to you like Claudia Romina Fernández De Santacruz and TOBIAS2009 are two different people, and that Claudia Romina Fernández De Santacruz shared their account password or credentials and TOBIAS2009 has access to it? If this is the case, that's a big no-no. However, I want to give the benefit of the doubt and assume that they're probably the same person. This situation isn't enough for me to use any of my advanced tools to verify, either. Not unless sock puppetry and disruption is occurring. What were your thoughts and concerns regarding this? What made you decide to bring it to my attention? I'm curious to hear what your thoughts and concerns were... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:49, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Celestina007 (talk) 22:55, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Celestina007 - Received and replied. :-) Sorry that it took so long for me to get to it; I was busy with moving all of my stuff to a new place, and I was without an internet connection for about a week before the ISP came out and installed it. Let me know if I can be of assistance with anything else, and I'll be happy to help. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:50, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Man you are far too polite. Thanks, you pointed me in the right direction ands that precisely what I needed. Celestina007 (talk) 01:57, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Celestina007 - I appreciate the kind words, and I'm happy that I was able to help you out. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:50, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

You've apparently got some markup on your page that breaks Reply Tool. See this thread. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:13, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

I've noticed this as well, but to be clear, it doesn't really bother me. I spent years editing the old fashioned way, and it's not too much trouble to do it here. I have to do it any time I want any text or markup after my signature in any case. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 14:53, 4 August 2021 (UTC) (knowwhatImean?)

RoySmith, MPants at work - I'm 99% sure that what you're talking about (the markup that breaks the Reply Tool) is here. You'll see a div style tag with no closing tag. It's there in order to color the user talk page background that light shade of blue. However, if I were to add a closing tag anywhere, new messages would go underneath it and the background color would stop at those messages. Unless there's a footer to pages that I'm not aware of, I just decided to leave the tag unclosed, even though it's wayyyy against best practice. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:54, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

I'm going to (respectfully) push back on that. Users have great latitude to format their talk pages as they please, but that latitude should only go as far as not breaking things. Given a choice between having a pretty blue background and having Reply Tool work, I'd say having Reply Tool work is what's more important. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:05, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

PS, although I'm not an expert at it, Page-specific style sheets seems like the right solution here. That seems like the kind of thing an interface admin should know about :-) -- RoySmith (talk) 13:09, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

I don't think TemplateStyles will work; it's intended to provide styles for specific elements within the page, not the entire page itself. The best I could come up with is this, which is...not as visually appealing. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 13:39, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for trying, Writ Keeper! I appreciate it a lot. :-) I created User:Oshwah/talkstyle.css and implemented the .css here. The problem is that I'm back to the original issue that I started at, which is that I don't have a closing </div> tag at the bottom of my user talk page to end the background color style. I wish I could just add it to a footer or something... There has got to be a way to do this... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:48, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Reply tool will work if you put the opening div directly on this page rather than transcluding it from a talk header subpage (and whether you use TemplateStyles or not is irrelevant). * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:21, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Pppery - Oh, that's definitely good to know! I just implemented that change so that the div style is on this page and not transcluded from a subpage. RoySmith, does the reply tool work now that I've done this? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:42, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) If this posts, it works for me! BilCat (talk) 23:24, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

BilCat - Excellent! Issue resolved! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:24, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Yup, thanks. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:28, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Oshwah,

I hate to add more questions to your busy, busy talk page but I have a question about a SPI case, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BrillLyle. You closed it in July but no check was done to see if there were sockpuppets that needed to be blocked despite pretty good evidence being presented. I was brought into the matter today because I just protected the article that the accused editors have continued to vandalize, by user accounts and by IP accounts. Despite you closing the case, I think it's been reopened and I thought you might want to review it to see if action needed to be taken. Thank you! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:28, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

I looked farther up this page and see that you just did a move (which are always arduous in my experience) and may not have a reliable internet connection. The targeted page is now protected so this is less urgent but this case has lingered on for a few weeks so if you could get to it when you do have a regular connection, that would be awesome. Thanks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:34, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Liz - Good news! I'm now on my new internet connection! Gigabit speed, no data caps, and it's all to myself! ;-) I'm a bit busy with moving and other life things, but I'm definitely trying to keep caught up with all of my Wikipedia messages. Hang tight; if you need something urgently, let me know. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:24, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Liz! I apologize for taking so long to respond and answer your original question. Looking back at the SPI, I can honestly say that I'm not sure why I didn't run a check despite there being solid evidence enough to run one. Some users will probably find this to be disappointing news, but I've decided to step away from SPI as a checkuser and instead focus my role back toward patrolling recent changes and putting a stop to LTA activity and abuse on the project. I found myself to be using the tools much too quickly and it resulted in concerns being expressed by editors and members of the Arbitration Committee. I don't want there to be any tension, concerns, or trust issues when it comes to my ability to possess and use the tools - hence the reason behind my decision to take a step back from SPI. I need to slow down and focus in an area that I know that I can use the tools appropriately and to help put a stop to abuse, sock puppetry, and bad-faith disruption on Wikipedia. I'll of course be around as I usually am; I'm just changing my role and how I'll be focusing my time with the project. :-) Please let me know if I can answer any more questions, and I'll be more than happy to help! :-) I hope you're doing well, Liz! Keep in touch! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:58, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Well, this is a surprising. I think you are a great Checkuser and very responsive to inquiries. But from my experience here at Wikipedia, it seems like being a Checkuser can result in an admin spending all of their time on SPI matters to the exclusion of other online activities and, I'm guessing, that might affect ones attitude about other editors. I've wandered into the SPI world just a few times and it is its own little universe. think spending most of ones time on ANY one activity on the project can lead to burnout so I'm glad to hear that you'll be spending time on a variety of activities that you find rewarding. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:29, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Liz - I appreciate the very kind words. Perhaps someday I'll be back in SPI, but right now I need to make sure that I put forth quality over quantity, and that I slow down and that I don't find myself in any hot water with the community, or with the Arbitration Committee. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:37, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

hey man,

just wondering if you can run a CheckUser on User:Jena Fi. some of the erratic spelling makes me want to think they are an account of someone else, but they also could be an old person living in the australian wilderness who just doesn't care.

i've never seen "listen" spelled as "liston" multiple times. i don't have any evidence that this would be a sockpuppet but at least would like a confirmation the originating IP is from OZ. if it's from canada (ottawa), it is probably wally's secret sock he tucked away for moments where he knows he's close to getting permablocked. thanks 198.53.108.48 (talk) 01:19, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message regarding your request and your concerns. Based off the information you provided to me here, I cannot run the checkuser tool on Jena Fi. You've provided concerns that there may be disruption going on - especially in regards to adding miss-spellings to Wikipedia. However, this does not show any kind of evidence of sock puppetry. For someone to run a check on an account, there must be sufficient evidence showing that two or more accounts are likely controlled and in use by the same person. What other account do you believe that Jena Fi is a sock puppet of? Based on what evidence? This information is absolutely required and must be clearly provided and with diffs and proof to demonstrate sock puppetry concerns before checkuser can be run. If you have concerns regarding sock puppetry, you should file a report at SPI. Someone will review your report and take the appropriate actions necessary (if applicable). Please let me know if I can be of assistance with anything else, and I'll be more than happy to help. :-) Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a great rest of your day. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:03, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

I don't know if it is possible or if it will be acceptable to ask this, but I was wondering if you could handle a RevDel request on edits made by the sockpuppets of Agt2008fan. While they were on-and-off with using socks to disrupt wikipedia on select articles, their behaviour with these worsened in recent months since late 2020. If it is possible, per WP:RVDL, can you handle doing a RevDel on all edits they made with socks, both for the edits themselves and the edit summaries? I think some of their sock's edit summaries in various places and their edits might fall under the criteria for "Purely disruptive material". GUtt01 (talk) 08:59, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi GUtt01! I apologize for the delay responding to your message here. I just moved into a new place, and I was without an internet connection for a week until the ISP could come out and install it. I'm still in the process of unboxing my stuff and organizing everything... moving sucks. ;-) Sure, I'll be happy to help. To make things easier, could you email me any diffs that you found that you believe should be rev del'd? I'll be happy to take a look at them and take things from there. I always ask that users with revision deletion requests email me instead of messaging me here where it's public. As of the time of this writing, 1156 editors have this page on their watchlist. When content that's likely about to be rev del'd gets posted here, the Streisand effect takes place, as users will rush over to view the content before it becomes hidden from them to see. Let me know if this is something you can do for me. :-) Thanks - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:12, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Dear Oshwah, I'm sorry if my minor edit from The Unkabogable Praybeyt Benjamin didn't suit you well. Note that you didn't made any mistakes from your reply. (I'm also very sorry for this late reply.) I don't really know what else to include. [[1]] -~123AGVYT23~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123AGVYT23 (talk • contribs) 06:34, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi 123AGVYT23! Welcome to Wikipedia! Don't worry too much about the edit you made that I reverted. You used the adjective "surprisingly", which can be seen as taking a point of view. On Wikipedia, we strive to word all content to reflect a neutral point of view in every article. I had concerns regarding your edit and this policy, which is why I reverted it.

Since you're brand new to Wikipedia, I highly recommend that you go through Wikipedia's getting started page and that you complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial before you make any edits or take on any major tasks around here. It will provide you with many 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. If you run into any questions, or if you need help with anything, let me know and I'll be more than happy to lend a hand. :-) Thanks again for the message, I welcome you to Wikipedia, and I hope you enjoy your stay and that you become a long-term contributor with us! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:16, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Could you please delete the revisions here, including all of the ones between those two? They contain unattributed copyright violations. The individual in question has been indefinitely blocked for persistently adding in content without attribution. Noah^Talk 14:32, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) done. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:57, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Vanamonde93 - Thanks for taking care of that for me. :-) Hurricane Noah - If you run into any more edits that require rev del, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be happy to help. Just make sure that you email these requests to me rather than leaving them in messages here where it's completely public. At the time of this writing, there are 1156 editors who have this page on their watchlist. Leaving rev del requests here publicly will trigger the Streisand effect, as people will quickly rush over to view the content before it becomes hidden from them to see. It's not a big deal; just keep that in mind for next time. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:19, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello there i have the link to the PCC II overhaul program of june 2021 http://friendsofphiladelphiatrolleys.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/The-Streamliner-Spring-2021.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.227.208.45 (talk) 02:55, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message regarding your edit to the SEPTA PCC II article. Thanks for providing this reference. Just make sure that it qualifies as being reliable source that is secondary and independent of the article subject. If it is, feel free to add the content back that I reverted. I would advise, however, that you cite this as your reference if you do so. :-) Thanks again, and I hope you have a great rest of your day. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:16, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello! I have a quick question, maybe this isn’t the place to ask, but I felt compelled. Someone reported me as a possible sockpuppet, and this is the first time I’ve been put forth before, so I wasn’t sure what to do. I made a few edits in good faith, that I thought were helpful but it must have mirrored another profile. I already commented on the case page, but I just recently started making edits, so it’s just a coincidence. I’m sorry to burden you with this, but I assume that as long as I haven’t violated any policy in regards to this, I’ll be cleared at some point? Thank you again for your help! Spf121188 (talk) 09:41, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Spf121188! Thanks for leaving me a message here with your concerns. As long as you're not using more than one account to edit Wikipedia, or using more than one account in a way that is abusive to the project or against policy, or purposefully editing Wikipedia while logged out in order to be disruptive or abuse the project - you have nothing to worry about. :-) I see that an SPI report has been filed; just let it play out. If you are asked any questions in that report, you're encouraged to answer them and cooperate if you can. You'll be found not to be a sock puppet, and nothing bad will happen to you if that is indeed the case. It's very rare for innocent users to be blocked at SPI for being a sock puppet when they're actually not. There are a number of good measures and investigations that take place at SPI in order to assure that 1) users who do engage in sock puppetry and abuse are handled properly and with all of their sock puppet accounts blocked, and 2) users who are innocent, or where sufficient evidence is not provided, are not blocked. Please let me know if you have any further questions or concerns, and I'll be more than happy to answer them and help you further. Worry not! If you're innocent, you'll be found to be innocent. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:11, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your help, that makes me feel much better. I’ve had this account for a while because I frequent Wikipedia often, but just recently started editing, so I’ll try to use as many resources as I can for help, and talk pages.

Thank you again! Spf121188 (talk) 10:19, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Spf121188 - You bet; I'm always happy to help! If you need anything else, please don't hesitate to let me know. My user talk page is always open to you, and you're welcome to message me any time you need or want to. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:26, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

The 7th Marquess of Sligo ought to have his own page. Why is this not so? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a02:c7d:467f:ce00:c94e:fc32:7ae0:8d85 (talk) 14:09, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for the message. I respect your opinion, and I encourage you to discuss this on the article's talk page here. Please don't insert your thoughts and opinions within the article itself. Discussions and thoughts should be added to the talk page. You can access any talk page by clicking on the "Talk" tab at the top of the page. Please let me know if you have any questions about this, and I'll be happy to answer them and help you. :-) You can also view a help page on how talk pages work by clicking here. Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:12, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Could you please inform me as to why the seventh Marquess of Sligo (1898-1941) doesn’t have his own page like his predecessors and successors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a02:c7d:467f:ce00:358c:8774:9857:cd3 (talk) 14:31, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure. It might just be that the article hasn't been written yet. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:40, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Isn’t that unusual considering all of his predecessors and all of his successors for the title have their own page? Do you have any idea as to why this is the case? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a02:c7d:467f:ce00:358c:8774:9857:cd3 (talk) 15:03, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Unusual? I've seen much more unusual things on Wikipedia than that. ;-) I would probably just say that the reason is that we just haven't written it yet. Remember that Wikipedia is a continuously-growing project... There are tons of articles that should have their own page that we have yet to sit down and write. All in good time, though... If you add a discussion to the article's talk page with a suggestion that we write an article on this, I'm sure that other users will respond and discuss it with you. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:08, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

@2a02:c7d:467f:ce00:358c:8774:9857:cd3:, @2a02:c7d:467f:ce00:c94e:fc32:7ae0:8d85:, @Oshwah: I created a stub at Ulick de Burgh Browne, 7th Marquess of Sligo. Perhaps someone will be able to expand it. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 12:59, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Oshwah,

I made an edit in the last hour to an article about Mack Bolan, and you removed it because I didn't state a source. I am new to wikipedia and this was my first edit, so I apologise for this. The information I added was that there was a five-part comic book mini-series published in 2008 by IDW Publishing titled "Don Pendleton's The Executioner" - my source is a physical copy of the comic I have in my collection. I have uploaded a photo in this message so that you can see it and approve the source. If this is not a reliable source, please can you advise me as to what counts as a reliable source for this? Would posting the photo on the page help?

File:Front cover of Don Pendleton's The Executioner, Issue 4.jpg

File:Indicia for "Don Pendleton's The Executioner" Issue -4.jpg

Many thanks, Lucas (ShaggyRogersMadeMeDoIt) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShaggyRogersMadeMeDoIt (talk • contribs) 14:42, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi ShaggyRogersMadeMeDoIt! Welcome to Wikipedia! You just need to cite a source that's reliable is all. Just perform a search online using a search engine. You should be able to find a reputable source that you can reference. Since you're brand new to Wikipedia, I highly recommend that you go through Wikipedia's getting started page and that you complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial before you make any edits or take on any major tasks around here. It will provide you with many 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. Please let me know if you have any questions or need any more assistance, and I'll be more than happy to help you. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:56, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there. Just cleaning up a bit. A couple references were removed. Reference 17 was removed because it didn't reference the previous statement. Reference 19 was removed because it was a dead link from 2012 and not really necessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.142.144.2 (talk) 15:43, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for leaving me a message and for letting me know. In the future, you want to briefly describe the changes you make with each edit using the edit summary. It lets you explain what you did and why, so that other editors can review it and understand what you're doing. When you don't add an edit summary, it can cause confusion (like what happened here). ;-) Thanks again for letting me know, and please don't hesitate to let me know if I can be of any assistance with anything. I'll be more than happy to help. :-) I hope you have a great day, and I wish you happy editing. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:04, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi They attack Saeed Ganji's page Limit page editing to one week Amiir.masterr (talk) 15:55, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Amiir.masterr! Thanks for the message and for letting me know about this. I don't believe that I was the user who reverted your edit, if that is the reason for your message to me. I appreciate you for fixing the inaccurate information. :-) At this time, I've added pending changes protection to the article for two weeks. This should help put a stop to future vandalism that might occur there. Please let me know if I can be of any assistance to you, and I'll be more than happy to help. :-) Thanks again, and I hope you have a great rest of your day. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:24, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I apologize for my limited understanding of wikipedia. Please correct me if you believe that I am wrong.

However, I do have some mounting concern regarding a user named 'Warshy', with a series of Ad Hominem statements which have delved into Anti-Semitism. Please advise what I should do. I am very happy to take directives on this issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HerbiePocket (talk • contribs) 18:07, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi HerbiePocket, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your concerns. What exactly is the issue regarding Warshy? Where are you seeing these statements? Can you provide me with diffs that show exactly where these statements are being added? Have you talked to Warshy directly about your concerns? I understand that you have issue with some statements that were made; I just need more information and links to where you're seeing these statements before I can try and help. :-) Thanks - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:13, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

I have reverted two edits that this user had made on the Davidic line page. Other than that I never made any comments *whatsoever* anywhere on WP about this user. Thank you, warshy ^(¥¥) 18:32, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Warshy - Ahh, thank you for the response and for the context. Okay, so this is over a content-related matter - got it. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:45, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) User:Oshwah No, it is not about an edit. I believe I was accused of being " Jewish religious fundamentalist sock-puppet" on the Talk:Davidic line page. I am unclear on exactly what this means, but as a matter of 'ad hominem tu quoque' its a serious issue, and I can see that this has been an issue for this user in the past. I have responded to the edit in question. Although, given the nature of my own academic career, I am caught a little off-guard by the course nature of all of this. Please advise as best you can. Thank you kindly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HerbiePocket (talk • contribs) 18:41, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Warshy - I do see that you commented here and asked, "Why is he and the other Jewish religious fundamentalist sock-puppet removing them?". This accusation of sock puppetry (as I brought up to you earlier on your user talk page) can be seen as uncivil. If you believe that sock puppetry is occurring, it only makes things more difficult when you make accusations like that. Instead, you should file a report at SPI so that it can be investigated. Also, you described a user and the "sock puppet" as being a "Jewish religious fundamentalist". This is not ideal; you're commenting about other users instead of commenting about the edits and the issue at-hand. What exactly is going on here regarding the dispute and possible sock puppetry? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:54, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Warshy, HerbiePocket - You both are teetering on the line of edit warring on the Davidic line article. You're both reverting one another in a back-and-forth fashion instead of discussing the dispute on the article's talk page. I've fully protected the article for the next few days so that you both have the opportunity to sort things out properly. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:59, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

This is all just a complete misunderstanding of my off-the-cuff and ill-advised comments there about the other IP editor, not about this one. This editor seems to come from a religious POV, but my comments where not about him in any way, shape or form. This should clarify this current misunderstanding? Thank you, warshy ^(¥¥) 19:02, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Warshy! It wouldn't hurt to apologize and clarify. It sounds like HerbiePocket thought that you were talking about them - if that's not the case, then I'd do my best to apologize and make sure that he knows that. It's always good to be civil and work peacefully with other editors whenever possible. If that means that you clear up misunderstandings with the user that were unintentionally caused, definitely do that. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:06, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Oshwah. He has addressed me directly in the talk page there, and I have replied. I am not edit-warring at all, I just reverted edits I disagreed with, and I have explained my reasons. We can continue to discuss issues over there, if there is a need. Thank you, warshy ^(¥¥) 19:12, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

You're welcome, Warshy! I protected the article in order to stop the potential edit warring from progressing and turning into a disruptive matter. It'll expire in a few days; just work things on on the article's talk page with this user, come to a consensus, and take things from there when the protection expires. If you both agree together that the dispute has been completely worked out, let me know, and I can remove the protection from the article. This requires you both to tell me and confirm that the dispute has been resolved, though. ;-) Just let me know... Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:17, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

I completely disagree with his later edits there, and I believe they are of poor editorial quality and they deprecate the encyclopedic/editorial quality of the page rahter than improve it. But I won't revert anymore, and I won't do anything about it for the time being, until matters with this new user get stabilized on WP. As far as I am concerned you can keep the protection log there as long as you see fit. Thank you, warshy ^(¥¥) 19:24, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Warshy - The current revision as it is right now isn't a favored revision or any of that sort. It was simply what the article's current state was when I imposed the temporary full protection. I can't change it in order to favor a certain revision unless all participants in the dispute agree that it should be changed. Else, I'd be favoring one editor over another, and I have to be the neutral level-headed party here. :-) Like I said, work things out with HerbiePocket, and if agreements are reached, let me know. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:28, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello again Oshwah. What do you think about this? Thank you, warshy ^(¥¥) 21:20, 11 August 2021 (UTC) (I think that if it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, then it is indeed a duck... :<) )

Hi Warshy! Hmm... definitely interesting. I'm going to have to keep a watch on this SPI case and see what develops. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:38, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Your article has a lot of misinformation regarding the alphabet.

And also, I’m sure you’re aware if you know what the language is, but it’s seriously incredibly disrespectful to make information about the language so public considering the community that created the language is trying to keep it out of the spotlight.

I’m politely requesting that you take the article down.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:2c7:400:1120:cc62:2aa0:a204:4537 (talk) 03:37, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message here regarding the Tutnese article. :-) The edit I made to it here restored content back because it had become so badly vandalized that I had to go two weeks back in the history to restore order there. I semi-protected the article in order to stop the persistent abuse there as well. If there are issues with the article that need to be fixed, you're welcome to file an edit request on the article's talk page here and request other users to make changes on your behalf and fix any problems. As of right now, however, editing on the article is restricted due to the extensive vandalism and disruption that I ran into while patrolling. Also, despite what people may think, administrators do not control content and have the ability to simply delete articles because they feel like they should be deleted. There are policies and guidelines that are set by the community that mandate what articles should be deleted, as well as why. I simply cannot "take down" an article because someone feels that it's inaccurate. That's not how things work here. :-) Please let me know if you have any questions, and I'll be happy to answer them and help you further. Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a great day and happy editing. Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:49, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

whyd you revert my edit specifically? wabbits are an obvious nod to elmer fudd also damn you're reeally fast might have to give points for that one — Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.124.56.237 (talk) 10:41, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) hi! unless there are reliable sources that state so, we cannot say that it is a looney tunes reference as it would be original research (and it may be a coincidence, not a deliberate reference). happy editing! (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.)   melecie   t 10:47, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Any edits like this one are related to Wikipedia:WikiProject on open proxies/Requests#Arbitrary break (and the longer section above) and can just be blocked (and added to the list of proxies if you feel so inclined). FDW777 (talk) 10:42, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi FDW777! Thanks for letting me know about that. I started to put two and two together when I noticed a bunch of different IP addresses reverting the change back, or adding it to other articles. Good times... Hopefully the disruption will stop soon. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:40, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

201.207.239.132 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) is their latest, if you'd like to oblige please? FDW777 (talk) 12:15, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

FDW777 -  Done. Let me know if you run into any more, and I'll be happy to take care of them. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:18, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. Since there's a new IP already edit warring, semi-protection of Talk:List of top international rankings by country might be a good idea too. FDW777 (talk) 12:19, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

FDW777 -  Done. Semi-protected for a few hours. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:21, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. If someone could just follow my contributions blocking IPs and semi-protecting articles it'd probably save lots of paperwork... FDW777 (talk) 12:25, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

FDW777 - I just implemented an edit filter to put a stop to the disruption. Unless they change their method of writing, you should notice the edits stop soon. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:37, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

To date they've used three types of disruption. They started out changing Derry to Londonderry, then they added reverting random edits made by me, then they started their "Please note: any reference to a city named "Derry" is incorrect" crusade. So while an edit filter is appreciated, I have little doubt they'll find some other method of trolling. FDW777 (talk) 12:40, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

FDW777 - I added both city names and a few other key words to the edit filter. I'll have to remove the changes later, as they'll without a doubt cause false positives. For now, I'm leaving the changes I made there for a few hours in order to tire them out. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:42, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

58.69.117.72 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log).... FDW777 (talk) 12:55, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

FDW777 - Blocked. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:57, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

And back as 45.4.132.84 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). FDW777 (talk) 13:02, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

FDW777 - Poof! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:03, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Wow, these IP addresses seem to have a real problem with understanding what's the jist of this Londonderry place. We should all know which version is indeed correct, but it looks like this editing has stopped at this moment. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 14:14, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Iggy the Swan - People can sure be persistent... especially when they have so much time on their hands and nothing productive to do. :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:18, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Having a look at the link at the top of this section, there are indeed plenty of IP's messing around. I have a few watchlist pages which links Derry as their birthplace so I know which one's right. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 14:21, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Would you believe the current disruption started all because they couldn't use their preferred term at Seagate Technology? All this trouble because of a single article that covers the city in a single sentence... FDW777 (talk) 15:11, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi, i see my changes have not been updated. Which part of my changes need citations? I added a citation to the recipe I referred to.Wikiswa23 (talk) 11:23, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Wikiswa23! The edit I meant to revert was this one, which appeared to be unreferenced and based off of original research. I restored your previous edit with the recipe and the reference. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:39, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Oshwah, I need help with how to rectify the problem you have found in the article I have edited. It's for an assignment that due tomorrow and I'm a new Wikipedian. I am not well versed in these Wikipedia Streets. PLease. Help. Asap ~~Wikiswa~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiswa23 (talk • contribs) 11:41, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

I don't know what anything means at this point. I'm following instructions and guidelines from Bobby Shabangu, who is a veteran Wikipedian. But thank you for your help. Can I ask for further help, I'm about to write a new article and can you see if I meet all requirements of Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiswa23 (talk • contribs) 11:46, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Wikiswa23 - I'll be more than happy to help you. :-) Don't feel overwhelmed! There are a lot of policies and guidelines to learn, and it'll take some time before you become proficient with all of Wikipedia's basic policies. We expect you to make mistakes and we don't expect you to know everything from the start. :-) Since you're brand new to Wikipedia, I highly recommend that you go through Wikipedia's getting started page and that you complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial before you make any edits or take on any major tasks around here. It will provide you with many 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. Let me know how I can assist you with the article you wish to write, and I'll be happy to do so. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:58, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

I have taken your advice and it has given me psychological air. Thank you. I have created a new page/article. how do I get you to review it on my behalf? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiswa23 (talk • contribs) 13:32, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Wikiswa23 - You're welcome! I'm happy that my advice and information has been helpful to you. :-) Where is the page that you created? Is this it? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:39, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

You may know this or not, depending on where you live, I always believe what IP addresses say are wrong and you and I are right. I don't know much about this place though. Paul Brown43 (talk) 11:28, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

@Paul Brown43: see #Definitely not an improvement above. The IP in question can be reverted on sight, the administrators seem to be keeping up well with blocks and page protections right now as well. FDW777 (talk) 11:30, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Yeah you're right, I didn't realise this is already in discussion. Paul Brown43 (talk) 11:33, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

WP:DERRY defines the MoS for this. Acroterion (talk) 11:34, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi, regarding the reversion of the edit of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dmitry_Zapolskiy – while he was not convicted of fraud by the court and fled the country, there are detailed testimonials by many users of the leprosorium.ru website of the fraud, linked in the citations. The current state of his wiki page is achievement stuffing without any citations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.208.235.111 (talk) 11:47, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! I reverted your edits to the Dmitry Zapolskiy article because of a number of concerns. I didn't understand your reason for removing the content, and I'm concerned that the reference you provided isn't considered reliable. This article is of a subject who has recently died and therefore still falls under the BLP policy guidelines. We need to make sure that any content we add is referenced by a reliable source. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:54, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Why you removed external link i am added to Static web page. It is Informative Source about static website. Am did anything wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miasmith123 (talk • contribs) 12:54, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Miasmith123! Thanks for leaving me a message here regarding your edit to the Static web page article. You'll want to review and understand Wikipedia's guidelines on external links. There are appropriate places to add them, and there are places where it's not appropriate. There are also external links that are considered inappropriate for inclusion into an article. The reason I reverted your edit was because I didn't feel that the external link you added was appropriate. Since you're brand new to Wikipedia, I highly recommend that you go through Wikipedia's getting started page and that you complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial before you make any edits or take on any major tasks around here. It will provide you with many 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. Please let me know if you have any questions, and I'll be happy to answer them. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:06, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, This user, Nessasducklips, has engaged in harassment of other users who have tagged warnings on their talk page, including me, for blatant vandalism, and they have at least 5 warnings of varying levels and 3 final warnings. I don't know whether to report this to the admin noticeboard, or to you. She said this on my talk page while I was trying to answer another user's question.

(Redacted) You can check her and my talk page for evidence. Cheers, Midknight1342 (talk) 15:06, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

WP:AIV would have also been appropriate, since that's more than enough of that. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 15:23, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Midknight1342! Thanks for leaving me a message here with your concerns regarding this user. If they continue to make uncivil comments and personal attacks, or if they engage in any more disruption, you can report them to AIV, or you can let me know and I'll be happy to step in and take care of the matter. :-) Thanks for the message, and I wish you a great day and happy editing. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:14, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

...and that is all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:8080:a800:9888:897b:6fc9:1b79:e03a (talk) 16:08, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

I don't understand why that means that you should change the content in the article in the way that you did. Am I missing something? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:12, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello,

I believe it was a mistake to remove "white supremacist" from the list of descriptions of Albert Pike. On his Wikipedia page, there are several quotes attributed to him where he said whites were the only fit race to rule. It is not unprecedented to use the word "white supremacist" in a bio description. Please see the following two bios:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lionel_Terry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GypsyCrusader

Both bios use the word "white supremacist". I don't understand why it would not apply in Albert Pike's case as well.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.213.251.161 (talk) 17:32, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message with your thoughts and concerns. The reason that I removed "white supremacist" from the article as an adjective describing the article subject is because I believe that it doesn't comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. It's perfectly fine to say that the article subject has been "regarded as a white suppremacist by [others]" and provide references to support that, but when we directly refer to the article subject as a white supremacist as the article content was doing, it's us who now is saying that. That adds a point a view to the article that we've written, and that causes the content to become degraded from being neutrally worded. This was the reason that I reverted your change. Please let me know if you have any questions about Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, and I'll be happy to answer them. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:19, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

FYI, the first known usage of the word "supremacist" was in 1896, five years after Albert Pike died. See merriam-webster.com/dictionary/supremacist. ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 04:18, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Greetings hope everything is well, there is this IP user who broke 4 RR rule in the last 24 h posting unsourced material, [[2]] they were reverted by several editors by now [[3]] and warned several times on their talk page, can something be done regarding that. Thank you. Theonewithreason (talk) 12.August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Theonewithreason! I hope that you're doing well! :-) I've applied a partial-block on the IP user from being able to edit the article for one week. This should put a stop to the edit warring and encourage them to discuss the dispute on the article's talk page. If you need anything else, please let me know and I'll be happy to help. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:21, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, is it possible maybe to semi protect the page ? And also thank you for your quick response. Theonewithreason (talk) 12.August 2021 (UTC)

Theonewithreason - You're quite welcome! :-) I don't see a need to semi-protect the article at this time. The issue involved an edit war and where only one IP user was causing the repeated reverting. The partial-block should resolve this matter. However, if you notice that repeated disruption starts to occur on the article, or if the edit war continues despite the fact that the IP user is partially-blocked, let me know and I'll be happy to take another look and take care of the matter. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:29, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

That's your opinion that it wasn't "constructive" (because you didn't like it). I figured a male would revert my edit...as it is written, the section portrays women as EXISTING as extensions of males, not as autonomous actors. This is probably far too complicated for you to understand. I do not need to experiment by using the sandbox, but thanks for belittling my work anyway. Of course, you are right that you think you're right, because of course you are right. Pfft. It's not my fault that you are bth sexist and arrogant (you deleted my edit without enough time to even consider it, wthin a minute after it was posted - it rubbed you the wrong way, then sent me a cheerful note telling me to go play in the sandbox) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slowe4333 (talk • contribs) 18:04, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Slowe4333, and thanks for leaving me a message on my user talk page here regarding your edit to the Demian article. Let's try and remain calm, okay? :-) The reason that I reverted your edit to the article was because I initially believed the change to be non-constructive. When patrolling recent changes and cleaning up vandalism and disruption from Wikipedia articles, I often find that users will add opposite content (such as the word "not") to an article in order to be disruptive. For example, "Kenny did [not] become the third person to win the race." The article's content originally stated that "Women play a vital role in the Jungian interpretation of Demian." Your change modified it, without citing any references or reliable sources, to now say that "Women do not play a vital role, but rather are used as feminine symbols, in the Jungian interpretation of Demian." Please accept my sincere apologies if my initial thoughts were incorrect, but this modification rang as suspicious to me, which is why I reverted the change that you made and left a message on your user talk page regarding the edit.

I apologize if my response to your edit frustrated you or upset you in any way. It's never my intention to anger other users when I patrol Wikipedia's recent changes feed for vandalism, disruption, and abuse. However, I must remind you that one of Wikipedia's founding principles is that we interact with one another in a civil and respectful way, and that we do not engage in making personal attacks toward other editors. I'm not offended by the message that you left for me here; I understand that you were upset and I completely get how hard it can be at times to keep cool when tempers flare. However, many other editors would've taken issue with the message that you left had you left it for them instead of me, and you'd likely find yourself in some hot water over it if they became offended by the nature and demeanor of your message. Please keep this in mind, and please do your best to remain civil, calm, and respectful toward other editors, and that you assume good faith with other editors when their intention is not 100% unambiguous.

I see that you've restored the edit you made back to the article. I don't see an issue with you doing this, and I again apologize for the frustration and for the confusion that my edit may have caused. If you have any questions, further concerns, or if I can be of any assistance to you, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be more than happy to help you. :-) Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a great day and happy editing. Welcome to Wikipedia! :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:05, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

okay, understood. I am going to further edit my edit, though. The current grammatical sentence structure (as I wrote it) makes the sentence meaning obscure. Slowe4333 (talk) 20:27, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Slowe4333 - Go for it! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:08, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi - I am brand new at Wikipedia editing and messaging. As best I can tell, you left me a message about reverting a change and 2nd message had no content and the wiki page seems unchanged. Was that just a change of mind that I can ignore or did you actually fix something. Once I figure out how to add references, I can add them for some of what I added to the page. Thanks...GrannyBass GrannyBass (talk) 18:27, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi GrannyBass! You can disregard my revert and the message that I left and removed from your user talk page. The revert that I made to your changes was done accidentally, and I went back and restored the changes you made. I apologize for the confusion that I may have caused you. :-) Please let me know if you have any questions or further concerns, and I'll be happy to help you. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:31, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! I was cleaning the article as there were many parts of the article are unsourced. WomenProj (talk) 19:47, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi WomenProj! Thanks for leaving me a message here and for letting me know. :-) I just didn't understand what your edit summary meant, and the content removal was quite extensive. That's what caused me to revert your edit. Please accept my apologies for the confusion, and please feel free to restore the changes you were making to the article. :-) If you have any questions or need help with anything, please let me know and I'll be happy to lend a hand. I hope you have a great day, and I wish you happy editing! :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:50, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

No it's all good. I had to self-revert too because by the looks of it, I might just need to tag the entire section for citation needed. --WomenProj (talk) 19:53, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

WomenProj - No worries. :-) As you gain more experience and grow as an editor and contributor here, you'll undoubtedly learn good strategies and methods for improving articles. :-) Like I said, if I can be of any kind of assistance, don't be a stranger. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:55, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Okay, so there's a redundant sentence in the Toy Collection section (perhaps when I got reverted or when I self-reverted), I don't want to remove it as I might get flagged again. haha --WomenProj (talk) 20:01, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

WomenProj - Don't be afraid to make edits that improve articles and content on Wikipedia. Wikipedia policy encourages all users to be bold, and not be afraid of any politics or what-not; if your edit will make the article, the content, or even something small better than what it was before - ignore the politics and the red tape. Make the change! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:17, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Oshwah!

Sorry I'm not directly replying to your revision of my recent edit. I tried really hard to find it on your talk page but couldn't. So I guess my first question is, how do you reply to an edit? I feel like I'm missing something.

Second, can you explain what was wrong with the edit I made on Health In Brunei? It was my first edit and it was on a page that was auto recommended to me. I was attempting to make the headline more clear. Just want to understand the issue so I don't do it again.

Thank you! Andierenae (talk) 19:48, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Andierenae, and thanks for leaving me a message here regarding your edit to the Health In Brunei article. To answer your questions and help you: there's no such thing as "replying to an edit" on the article itself. The correct manner in which you discuss article changes with other editors is to use the article's talk page, or message them directly with your concerns (just like you did here). Just make sure that you leave edit summaries with each of the changes you make to articles. This is where you quickly explain the changes you made and why, so that other editors will understand when they review your changes. :-)

The reason that I reverted your edit to the Health In Brunei article was because you modified a section header from just stating "Obesity" to instead state "High obesity rate". When it comes to Wikipedia content, we need to be extra careful and make sure that we're reflecting a neutral point of view wherever possible and as much as possible. I felt that by changing the section header to state "High obesity rate", we were inferring that conclusion when it's up to the reader to review the content, data, and information and come to that conclusion themselves. :-) This is why I reverted your changes and left a message on your user talk page regarding Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy.

Please let me know if you have any more questions, or if you need any kind of assistance on Wikipedia. I'll be more than happy to help you. :-) Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a great day and happy editing. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:07, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello,

I made an edit to the page for the Bollywood movie Jaanam to reflect that it was released in 1993 and not 1992. (Source: https://boxofficeindia.com/movie.php?movieid=3340).

I'm not sure why this edit was reverted back twice. If you'd like me to link the source above I'd be happy to.

Thank you.

2601:144:C281:6710:DCAE:6DE2:A561:8FE5 (talk) 19:58, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for leaving me a message regarding your edits to the Jaanam article. Yes, that would be perfect! So long as you cite that reference in-line somewhere with your changes, that'll work great and you'll be good to go. Thanks for letting me know about the reference and your edits, and I hope you have a great rest of your day. :-) Happy editing! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:00, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Celestina007 (talk) 21:43, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Celestina007 - Received and replied. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:49, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

You have been changing shershaah reviews 3 times now, you take negative reviews only, why? The real fact is that it got a massive fabulous response from the audience!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.66.131.1 (talk) 23:09, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

I don't understand why you might have reverted both of my changes, the first of which was to fix an incorrect formatting in Wikipedia. the other we can discuss. Dan88888 (talk) 23:54, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Dan88888! Thanks for leaving me a message here regarding your edit to the Loperamide article. I'll start off by apologizing to you... I didn't mean for my edit to revert both of your changes to the article. Your other edit fixing the closing ref tag was obviously constructive, however it was implemented incorrectly and actually made the tag malformed. :-) Regarding your other edit, however... I apologize for my assumption that the edit was vandalism. You have to understand, though... That kind of content being added to an article, and without any reliable source or reference cited, is likely going to be flagged as suspicious. :-) Feel free to restore the content back to the article. I advise you to locate and cite a reliable source in-line with the content if you decide to add it back. It definitely needs a reference. :-) Please let me know if you have any questions or further concerns, and I'll be happy to answer them and help you. I hope you have a great rest of your day, and I wish you happy editing. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:00, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. I do understand the second change was debatable. I've found a good reference, and will repost closer in line to that source. Dan88888 (talk) 00:12, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Dan88888 - Excellent! Thanks for doing that, and I hope you keep up the great work here! If you ever run into any questions or need assistance with anything, don't hesitate to let me know. I'll be more than happy to lend a hand. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:29, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Ah sorry there Oshwah - I didn't notice the time on your warning here. They hadn't made an edit since that point, so no objections if you'd prefer to unblock and give them a chance as it looks like you were doing before I steamrollered in there? ~TNT (she/they • talk) 00:58, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi TheresNoTime! No apologies are needed. They were clearly a vandal-only account; I wasn't planning on granting any special treatment to the user, and you pretty much did what I was going to be doing after they added disruption again. I won't be crying over it. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:04, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

	The Original Barnstar
	i like your hardwork and your cool profile —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 01:04, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Sakura emad! Thank you for taking the time to leave me this barnstar! It means a lot to me, and I appreciate it very much. :-) I'm glad that you enjoy my contributions and my user page. If you ever run into any questions or need assistance with anything, please don't hesitate to let me know. I'll be more than happy to help you! :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:06, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

i am honoured 🥰 thank you for caring about My Barnstar it means alot to me too. —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 01:08, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Sakura emad - Gratitude is a selfless act, my fiend. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:11, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

it seems like my edit conflicts with your edit Please undo my edit if you think i made a mistake and i am right about it, thanks regards. —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 01:06, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi again, Sakura emad! Ahh... I see what happened. No big deal; it's already been resolved by another editor with their revert to the IP user. :-) Keep in touch, and I hope to see you around on the battlefield! :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:10, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

let's Protect wikipedia ^_^, and make it better world for others, thank you again for caring. —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 01:11, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Sakura emad - On top of that, let's also make Wikipedia a fun and great place to contribute to and be a member of the community with. :-) Thank you for being apart of this community and for the care and time that you give to it. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:16, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

I Did Make a mistake but it's Ok. 98.186.54.177 (talk) 01:28, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Mistakes happen, and it's not a big deal. :-) If you need help with anything, let me know and I'll be happy to lend a hand. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:29, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Hey Oshwah Are You looking Foward To the 2021 NFL season and Are you looking foward to watching the Big Game Super Bowl LVI On NBC I am are you. 98.186.54.177 (talk) 03:48, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

YOU BET I AM!!!! :-D ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:49, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

The verb 'Cat' does not translates to english speaking as such, then Cat as an animal is not a real term for good, for better understanding please find real verbs that express what the category really mean. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2804:29c4:1ba:e900:e931:d96e:a3a6:1228 (talk) 01:57, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message and for letting me know about this. :-) Please feel free to restore the edits you made to the article, and I apologize for any confusion that my revert may have caused upon you. I hope that you have a great day, and I wish you happy editing. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:56, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

hello so i can't say anything more to this IP am i wrong by reverting their edit? if not please let me know thanks —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 02:09, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Sakura emad! Looking at the edits and contributions by this IP user, they seem to be simply modifying the contents of the list on the List of nearest terrestrial exoplanet candidates page in an effort to try and improve or expand it. I don't see any obvious vandalism or disruption in their edits that stick out to me. When in situations where you're not sure if the user is engaging in good faith or bad faith edits, it's always best to assume good faith. If anything, you can simply ask them about their edits if you have questions and discuss it with them. :-) As you grow and gain more experience with patrolling recent changes and reverting vandalism, you'll be able to more easily identify good edits that look complex, and you'll be able to easily be able to reach out to edits about questionable edits and ask them about it in a positive way. :-) Keep up the great work, and please let me know if I can answer any more questions for you or provide you with any more help. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:17, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello - Had entered the death information on Tawny Kitaen from memory as am a baseball writer / historian -Do not have any ready reference - However you can check that yourself by looking on her Wikipedia page and many other web news areas - Should you not wish to do so it is not all that important as she is most unworthy and was only wrapping their terrible marriage disaster - Thank You. 70.27.20.183 (talk) 04:02, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for leaving me a message here regarding your edit to the Chuck Finley article. The reason that I reverted your addition of the content there was because it did not reference or cite any kind of reliable source. I understand that you're saying that this is referenced elsewhere on Wikipedia and in another article. However, content like this should absolutely reference a source due to the nature of what it's saying and regardless of where it's located. I'm of course willing to help you find a reliable source if you need help with locating one. :-) Just remember that policy states here that the onus and the responsibility to provide references and sources lies on the user who adds content to Wikipedia, not the one who expresses concerns and removes it. Please let me know if you need my assistance, and I'll be happy to help you. :-) Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a great day and happy editing. Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:05, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello Oshwah — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.93.8.46 (talk) 05:20, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! Welcome to Wikipedia! Sure, I'll be happy to help you. Have you seen our getting started page yet? It'll help you with how to get started and help us to improve Wikipedia. If you have any questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them and help you. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:25, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Please block these IP users IP:124.106.226.215, IP:58.69.105.139 and IP:58.69.105.140 and all other IPs connected to them (as per WP:SHARE.) They all make disruptive edits with the same behavior and same comments. And please also block that IP:120.29.76.223 too, it's connected to IP:120.29.78.93 (per WP:SHARE) who is range-blocked until August 19, 2021. Scroll deep down to their contributions, the Two 120.29 IPs usually edit at MOR Entertainment and It's Showtime (Philippine TV program) pages. Thanks! -136.158.42.180 (talk) 06:45, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! I need more information before I can do anything. What exactly are these IP users doing that's disruptive? Where at? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:59, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

1.) For the past few months, the IP Ranges of "124.106.226.215", "58.69.105.139" and "58.69.105.140" are active at The Broken Marriage Vow, Marry Me, Marry You, He's Into Her, Darna (2021 TV series) and other Philippine TV series articles. An example of those IPs is their persistent, disruptive reverting at The Broken Marriage Vow page. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

2.) I have seen most of the IP Sock Ranges of "120.29" (76 & 78) in making disruptive vandalism edits. So far we have "120.29.78.194", "120.29.78.93" (who was globally blocked for 6 days and 23 hours until 19 August 2021), "120.29.76.223" (the most active), and most recently a new IP "120.29.76.194" (sock active since 18 August 2021). All those IP socks are usually very active at MOR Entertainment, Kapamilya Channel, It's Showtime (Philippine TV program), and all other articles and pages related to ABS-CBN. They are also active at trying to disruptively protecting the pages of The First and True Home of Asianovelas (protected until 20 August 2021), Asianovela Channel (protected until 21 August 2021), and probably GMA The Heart of Asia. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

I suspect that there's going to have more new sockpuppets connected to all the IPs that I mentioned above (as per WP:SHARE rule), and hopefully someone will take actions against them. -136.158.42.180 (talk) 04:22, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Please delete your recent edit of tutnese on wikipedia. it’s a sacred and important language to african americans by african americans, and by publishing this page you’ve exposed it to those who wish to just create drama. Let us just have this one thing without someone messing it up. 2601:2C5:C680:89F0:99B6:5D13:EEC2:70CF (talk) 07:19, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Why are you putting a "sacred and important" language onto a website that receives massive amounts of exposure and is consistently in Alexa's top 20-visited websites in the world? —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 07:26, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! Sorry, but due to recent vandalism and disruption on the article, I reverted the article to the last known good state and applied semi-protection to it in order to stop future disruption to it. I am not going to modify the article or delete any content unless it constitutes a serious violation of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines (copyright violation, BLP violation, libelous content, harassment or threats, etc). If you have any issues with the article's content, please feel free to create an edit request. A user will review it and will make the appropriate changes for you (assuming no issues are found with your request). If you have any questions or additional concerns, please let me know and I'll be happy to help you further. Thanks for the message, and I wish you happy editing! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:03, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

hello Dear @Oshwah,how are you today, hope you have a great time, i need your help again, the actions i performed i think they needs to be reviewed because if i did it wrong i must write an apology letter to the editor, in nutshell > Operation Warp Speed Article, Added Information = [1], Editor_Explain = [2] [3] Still Reverted? = [3], Editing Warring = Yes, Editor warned? = Yes, what do you think should i write an apology? —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 12:49, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Sakura emad! Happy Friday! :-) I took a look at the edits on this article by the IPv6 user, and I don't find anything wrong with adding this to the article's content. I would've left the edit alone and let it be. If you read the article's content in the body, it's clear that it was a dual partnership started by the Trump administration. You two did revert one another in a back-and-forth fashion; I don't see anything wrong with writing a message to the user and apologizing. In general: when in doubt, it never hurts to reach out to the user directly to discuss the edit. If you think you might've done something wrong and if you owe the user an apology for the mess, definitely offer them one. You'll be doing the right thing and acting as the bigger person by doing so. Just make sure that you don't find yourself reverting back-and-forth with an editor over content like that. It can be seen as edit warring, even if you're acting as a recent changes patroller. It happens, though... I've caught myself doing this plenty of times while patrolling. You'll eventually learn how to handle content-related edits that you believe shouldn't need to be published vs the addition of blatant vandalism and bad-faith disruption. In this case, it would fall under the former, and you'd handle this by discussing the matter with the editor, and if needed, Wikipedia's dispute resolution protocol. If you have any more questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them and help you further. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:11, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Yes, you're right back then i did believe i was right and the editor needs to add a source it's due to my lack of experience, however if i took a look at the Article it was highly Obvious, i will write an apology to the users Talk Page, and thank you for providing more details about Patroller, as i am to be learn more from you yet, thank you very much 😊 —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 15:15, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Sakura emad - No worries; you'll get more experience as you keep patrolling and handling more situations. It just takes time. :-) I'm always happy to help should you run into any more questions - don't be a stranger. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:18, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

I updated several pieces of information on this page which you changed back to being incorrect.

Population: The 2019 estimate was incorrect and is no longer needed as the 2020 population is now available from the US Census. The previous estimate years are regularly removed once the new, updated information is available.

Elected Officials: William C. Kortz is no longer in office and was replaced by Nick Pisciottano. Conor Lamb no longer represents this community and it is now represented by Mike Doyle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:540:c502:c2a0:81aa:4e6e:2d0e:ec0d (talk) 17:28, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message regarding your edits to the Pleasant Hills, Pennsylvania article. I apologize; I only meant to revert the edit you made here because you had removed content without explaining why using the edit summary. I've restored your first edit back to the article. In the future, you'll want to add an edit summary with each edit that you make. This will help other editors to understand what you're doing and why, and will avoid potential confusion (such as what happened here). :-) Please let me know if you have any questions or further concerns, and I'll be happy to answer them and help you. :-) Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a great day and happy editing! Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:36, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi, your bot Cancel my edit here: Khomeini's letter to Mikhail Gorbachev can you look it? Thanks in advance — MUSA (talk) 17:34, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi موسى, and thanks for the message. Ah, okay - that was actually my fault. I thought that the edit added the word "Shiiite", as in "Shite" or "shit" - I thought it was vandalism and reverted it. Looking at the edit now, I see that you in fact added the word "Shiite", which is obviously a legitimate word. I've reverted my changes to the article and I removed the warning that I left you. Please accept my apologies for the misinterpretation, and I hope you have a great day. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:43, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

but why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MARYWASHINGTONSASHO (talk • contribs) 17:38, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi MARYWASHINGTONSASHO! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for leaving me a message here regarding your edit to the Vairaatea article. I apologize if I misinterpreted your modification to the article; I believed that it was likely a disruptive edit that you made, so I reverted it and added a message to your user talk page in order to talk to you about it. If you edit was a legitimate attempt at improving the article, please accept my humble apologies and feel free to restore the content that you changed to the article. Please let me know if you have any questions, and I'll be happy to answer them and help you. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:47, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

What is cooliobean supposed to be? Gbooks [4] has no idea. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:20, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Gråbergs Gråa Sång - I honestly have no idea... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:21, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Just a college student who actually isn't the biggest fan of baked beans. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:23, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Gråbergs Gråa Sång - LOL ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:25, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

please don't change my last edit. and also I don't have that one key so --- — Preceding unsigned comment added by MARYWASHINGTONSASHO (talk • contribs) 17:52, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi MARYWASHINGTONSASHO! I'm not sure what edit you're referring to. Did you need assistance with something? :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:28, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Information is no longer relevant this is why I removed it from my profile thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.198.236.97 (talk) 18:32, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message regarding your edit to the Alessandra Lanzara article. Your message here implies that you're claiming to be the article subject, Alessandra Lanzara. Is this correct? In any case, the content is still very much relevant. I'm not sure why you think it should be removed? Please know that editing your own article on Wikipedia is a very frowned-upon behavior, as you have a personal conflict of interest with the article subject (which would be yourself). Please consider making edit requests instead of editing the article yourself. Other editors will be happy to review your request and make the changes for you (assuming no issues are found with your request). Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns, and I'll be happy to answer them and help you. :-) Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a great rest of your day. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:33, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Okay thanks-below is the link to a reliable source. The U.S.-China Perception Monitor is run by the Carter Center's China Program.

Why would you remove an entry without first reaching out to the contributor? That way, the link can just be added instead of making the contributor redo the whole entry. This is just one of the reasons why people hesitate contributing to Wiki...

https://uscnpm.org/2019/07/25/trilateral-cooperation-timeline/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.252.69.13 (talk) 18:46, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message regarding your edit to the Seyoum Mesfin article. I apologize if my revert caused you any kind of inconvenience or frustration. I never intend on causing any kind of difficulty or feelings of disheartenment when I patrol recent changes and make any reverts or changes. I don't want you to feel hesitant to edit and improve Wikipedia - in fact, we encourage it. Please feel free to restore the content you added to the article, and please let me know if you need help with citing the source you provided in-line with the content. I'll be more than happy to help you. :-) Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a great day and happy editing! :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:38, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Kargil is city of pakistan Chak bega (talk) 19:03, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Chak bega - Okay, thanks for letting me know. I apologize if my revert caused any kind of confusion... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:29, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

The only confusion is in Chak bega's mind, Kargil is very much Indian. FDW777 (talk) 19:33, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

FDW777 - Yeah, that's what I thought. I checked the edit history of the article, and it's very much been set as an Indian country throughout the past... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:39, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

There are some people who disagree who should be in charge, hence the Kargil War. FDW777 (talk) 20:09, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

hiii beef ban in india so remove it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.190.129.236 (talk) 19:47, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Can you elaborate a bit more so that I can understand and try and help you? :-) Thanks - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:56, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Looks like an anti-beef user of some sort. They may be saying beef is illegal in India, or at least should be. It's still no excuse for removing content. BilCat (talk) 20:54, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

BilCat - I agree. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:05, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Why did you take a character’s characteristic off? I mean he’s a sexist and crass he’s not the best character but he’s also racist. It’s like literally the beginning half of the story. I’m confused, is there another copy of the book where he’s less racist, I’d like to read that book — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8807:9080:9800:50d:5bb1:b6e:1d75 (talk) 21:43, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for leaving me a message regarding your edit to the Filth (novel) article. The reason I reverted your edit was for a number of things. First of all, I was suspicious that the edit might've been vandalism or bad-faith. I'm sorry for making that assumption, but I hope that you understand that edits like these are going to be suspicious when they're reviewed. :-) The other reason I reverted the edit was because it adds commentary to the article about the character. "Racist" is, if anything, an opinion. We shouldn't be adding what we believe this character is in the book. We should be proving the reader with content that is worded to reflect a neutral point of view, which will allow them to make their own determination. If the content we write makes them conclude that the character is a racist, then great - that's based off of their interpretation from the neutral comment. It's not up to us to be stating that the character is racist. That adds bias, which we need to avoid as much as possible. 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 a happy Friday and a great rest of your day. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:45, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

There was a interesting sentence at the beginning of the popularity tab today, I have just gone back to check it and it has suddenly disappeared...please explain osh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a01:4c8:482:9b07:1:2:2e4b:445a (talk) 21:57, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! I have absolutely no idea of what you're talking about. Can you provide me with more context and information so that I can help you? What article or page are we talking about? :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:26, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Oh the joys of open editing! BilCat (talk) 02:07, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

I had posted Cells at Work! a link to a limited-time spin-off of the same work, and it was retracted by you. I regret to say that I doubt if you checked the link with your own eyes.----4th protocol (talk) 02:28, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi 4th protocol! Thanks for leaving me a message here regarding your edit to the Cells at Work! article. I reverted your edit because I didn't feel that the external link was necessary or encyclopedic. Wikipedia's policy on external links will provide you with useful information as to what external links are appropriate and which ones are not, along with where in the article that external links are appropriate and where they're not. Give the policy page a read, and if you feel that your external link was appropriate given the policy, let me know and I'll be happy to give it another look. :-) Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a happy Friday, a great rest of your day, and happy editing. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:34, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Am I correct in understanding your removing is based on WP:ELMIN? In that case, I would say that this case corresponds to the case "More than one official link should be provided only when the additional links provide the reader with significant unique content and are not prominently linked from other official websites.". But since this is a non-native language version, I'm not going to restore it for now. Good day.----4th protocol (talk) 02:58, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

4th protocol - The reason I removed the external link was because I didn't feel like it was very relevant. If you disagree, feel free to restore the link. If you have any questions or further concerns, please let me know and I'll be happy to help you further. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:07, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello Dear @Oshwah, i don't know what's wrong with this user as you can see their actions = [1], [2] but i think it's called terrorism however i report this user, if i could i did to authorities as well but i can't can we do something about it? i am really shocked. —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 02:50, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Sakura emad! This is an example of what we refer to as abusive users. They will threaten physical harm or injury of other editors, and they exist solely to abuse the project. When you run into users who make threats of harm like this, you must contact the emergency team by following the directions here. It doesn't matter how serious you believe it is - if an editor makes a threat of physical harm against another editor (or themselves), that is where you must go. As a recent changes patroller, you will run into situations like these, and you will run into situations that require users with advanced user rights in order to handle. The important thing is that you will learn how to properly respond to these situations, and you will learn how to properly handle severe issues such as this one. I know that this is shocking if not frightening to you, but as a user who takes on the responsibility of cleaning up vandalism, disruption, and abuse - you will be the person who is at the front lines and will see these kinds of things. Don't be afraid, don't be offended, and don't get upset. Learn what you must do in order to have these situations taken care of, and handle them correctly. Users who have a senior-level amount of experience with patrolling recent changes will tell you that remaining calm and doing what's needed to be done to take care of the situation is what's important. Please let me know if I can help you with anything else, and I'll be happy to do so. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:02, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you alot @Oshwah your words alone made me calmer, i was frightened actually, i will send a report to emergency team hopefully they'll be able to handle the situation. thank you —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 09:48, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Sakura emad - You'll see that kind of stuff more and more often as you gain experience and spend more time patrolling recent changes. Heck, you'll inevitably have someone shouting death threats and other nastiness toward you at some point in time. The key thing is to not let yourself get frightened over it. Otherwise, you're just giving the user exactly what they want. When you see any kind of threat of harm (either to another editor or themselves), no matter how realistic it seems, you absolutely must contact the emergency team. We're neither trained nor certified to handle the situation - the emergency team is, and they'll be able to handle the situation. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:11, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Yes, i will train my self to act more professionally towards these kind of situations and immediately reporting them to the emergency team, thank you for caring again (🌸) —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 01:18, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello Friend how are you today, i hope you have/had a great day, i have a problem with reverting actually it's better to say i have a question than "Problem", i will start, i restored this edit because it was sourced and mistakenly removed by a user, however my Reverting also removed next edits where done by Bot and other user as well, i just wanted to restore sources that were removed by mistake but it also removed next edits as well, and sorry for my Bad English (you can see the rest History), can't i undone just a specific edit from a specific editor without reverting any other edits ? —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 18:04, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

@Sakura emad: The edit in question can not be undone due to the conflicting intermediate edits. If you wish to undo the change, it must be done manually. Unfortunately there's no automated process to undo a specific edit without reverting sequential edits as well. ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 20:42, 15 August 2021 (UTC) (talk page stalker)

@FormalDude This is unfortunate, Thank you i appreciate your time. —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 21:04, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

You're welcome! ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 21:07, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Sakura emad! FormalDude is correct above; if there are edits by other users in between the edit you wish to undo or revert, you need to manually perform the reversion. You would open the edit before the removal of the content, then manually change the content to match what the other two users did. This way, you're both restoring the removed content and implementing the changes that the other two users made. Does this make sense? If you have any more questions or need help with anything else, please let me know and I'll be happy to assist you. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:14, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Yes i understand But sometimes i can't catch to your words in certain or maybe i need to read them twice to understand it's because i am stressed because of that my mind sometimes works more slowly than ever. (i think you noticed by now, that my answers are not satisfactory enough or sometimes i may poorly Talking/Answering you and i do apologize for wasting your time like that. —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 01:25, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

You're not wasting my time at all, Sakura emad. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:47, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Can you delete User:Johnnyconnorabc/sandbox2 for me? I've transferred the contents to article space and it's no longer in use. Johnnyconnorabc (talk) 04:05, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Johnnyconnorabc: Oshwah has been offline for a couple of days. All you need to do is add {{Db-userreq}} to the page you want deleted, and an admin will delete it for you. BilCat (talk) 04:11, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

@BilCat: Thanks for the advice! Johnnyconnorabc (talk) 04:14, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Johnnyconnorabc! Thanks for the message! It looks like another administrator has already deleted the page for you, so I'll call this request 'solved'. :-) If you need anything else, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be more than happy to help. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:15, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Well, They're back to editing, still making massive edits with no references, and no evidence of seeing their talk page.. The edits might be accurate, I don't really have a way of knowing - but no citation has been provided. E.g., edits to NH House, Iowa Senate. They might not have even seen your previous block - perhaps a week this time, so a weekly editing pattern might be interfered with? Tarl N. (discuss) 00:12, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Tarl N., and thanks for leaving me a message here and letting me know about this user's continued edits. Have you filed a follow-up report at ANI yet? If not, let's go ahead and do that. List as many recent diffs as you can where you see issues with the user's changes, and let's go from there. I'd like to have community input before I decide to block this user for a longer duration. Some of their edits seem to be good changes, while others (as you point out) have some problems. I'd like to discuss this user at ANI and get some input. Let me know when you file another ANI report, and I'll take a look at it. :-) Thanks - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:19, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

You should not have granted her more rights/access as a "pending changes reviewer". She has gone crazy reverting edits in numerous articles, including legitimate edits that were either writing improvements or added more information (including sources). Many people are now complaining on her talk page about her disruptive revisions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sakura_emad

Please take away her extra privileges/powers. Thank you. 136.49.32.166 (talk) 03:37, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

I think IP is probably right. ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 05:38, 17 August 2021 (UTC)(talk page stalker)

Hi there, and thank you for leaving me a message here with your concerns regarding Sakura emad and her recent edits. The user right that I granted to Sakura emad was the pending changes reviewer right, which allows this user the ability to review edits that are currently awaiting review, and either accept them to be published, or decline and revert the changes. Outside of edits that are awaiting review, Sakura emad does not have any additional abilities to roll back edits (in fact, I recently declined her request for rollback rights not too long ago). If you believe that this user is abusing the pending changes reviewer right or is not using it properly, please let me know (supply relevant diffs and other evidence) and I'll be happy to take a look. At this time, I don't believe that Sakura emad has abused (let alone even used) the pending changes reviewer tools at all. I don't see a need to remove this permission when it doesn't involve the concerns that are being expressed. That being said, I will talk to the user and encourage her to slow down and make sure that what she reverts is blatant vandalism only. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:46, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for double checking. Looking at their Review log now, I don't see anything disruptive (I should've done that initially). I appreciate your clarification of their user rights. ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 02:01, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

FormalDude - No worries! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:03, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but whether or not she has used them is irrelevant. She is fairly new to Wikipedia and has made numerous errors. She should not be in a position to make editorial decisions, especially given her clear lack of command of the English language. 136.49.32.166 (talk) 06:34, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

I understand your concerns. The user definitely needs to be talked to about slowing down and making sure that they revert obvious vandalism - that I agree with. I'll be messaging Sakura emad shortly about this. However, if Sakura emad isn't misusing the pending changes reviewer tool, I see no reason to revoke it. Now, had this been the case of the user making errors and if they had involved the use of rollback, that might be a different story. I'd warn the user first, and if things don't improve I'd have to revoke it. Let me talk to the user and hopefully get them to slow down. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:40, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Whatever, man. Clearly Sakura is one of those "rule followers" who don't understand context and the idea that the spirit of a rule needs to be taken into consideration. Furthermore, she's reverting edits on science/technical pages despite her lack of expertise. Finally, her English-language skills are very poor. She should not be editing at all -- even if she's "only" reverting. 136.49.32.166 (talk) 17:22, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

I find it sad that you think that this user shouldn't be editing at all. We were all new here once, and we've all made our fair share of mistakes while we were learning and growing our experience on Wikipedia. Shoot, I've made more than my fair share of mistakes over the years that I've been on Wikipedia. Instead of discouraging users and pointing them to the door when they make mistakes, why not talk to them civilly and help them? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:41, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

What she needs to do is read more articles and Edit Histories while improving her English-language skills, not randomly reverting other people's hard work just because she found a new hobby. 136.49.32.166 (talk) 17:51, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

And furthermore, please don't hold someone's language skills against them. I have professional-level English language skills, and I find Sakura emad's English to be more than sufficient, especially considering it is likely not their first language. ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 17:58, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

You're defending someone who has caused more disruptions than the purpose of Reverting is supposed to achieve. Reverting is supposed to restore an article to a better state, NOT cause more work for other people talking about the one making useless Reverts. 136.49.32.166 (talk) 18:02, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

I just want to note- this IP user has been making personal attacks against Sakura for reverting the removal of sourced information without sufficient explanation. The IP user is upset that Sakura wont take their word that this information is wrong. I don't know if the information is correct or not- but the IP user has been advised to source the changes or at least discuss them on the article talk page and has, instead, done this. Sakura has handled it professionally up until this posting. Nightenbelle (talk) 18:13, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

I'm not defending them–I'm merely saying it is unbecoming to cast aspersions about someone's language skills when that has little to nothing to do with your issue. You should take Oshwah's advice about trying to guide other uses when they make mistakes rather than discourage them. ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 18:13, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Sakura emad needs to learn by observing, not by doing. 136.49.32.166 (talk) 18:23, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

I am officially requesting that you intervene. Sakura emad is now adding improper citations. Please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sakura_emad#I,_ROBOT . 136.49.32.166 (talk) 20:38, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Acknowledged. I'm on lunch right now and only on mobile. I'll be heading back to the office soon and I'll review the link you provided. Stand by. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:44, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

C'mon, dude... Messaging Sakura emad and yelling at them in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS is not a way to civilly discuss your concerns with them and expect that they're going to listen to you. How do you expect any user to react and respond if you do that? If you really want this user to improve their edits and listen to what you're telling them, you need to be cordial and professional with your messages, tone, and use of words. I understand that you're frustrated, but there's an essential skill and a personality trait that comes with remaining calm and talking to the user in a similar manner. I hope that, over time, you develop this skill and that you learn the importance of open, positive, and collaborative communication. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:58, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

At what point does the babysitting end? While I'm sure there are people in the world who enjoy reverting other people's reverts, I think you and I can both agree that we'd rather be adding useful content, not constantly subtracting garbage or "honest" mistakes. 136.49.32.166 (talk) 21:01, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Now she wants to get into an edit war over facts which have already been proven! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sakura_emad#Victorian_Health_Promotion_Foundation 136.49.32.166 (talk) 21:20, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

actually i am really tired with this IP and if he/she continuously Harasses me like that i am planning to Leave wikipedia, let alone i am handling my stress, i am tired to explain to this user if there anything wrong please revert them in a wikipedian manner, not to Defaming me, harassing me, let alone discouraging me from using Wikipedia —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 21:57, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Sakura emad - Instead of having the IP user come to you with complaints and issues directly, I'll ask that they instead channel their concerns and issues through me. This way, I can still look into any problems and talk to you about them respectfully, but also not have you feeling stressed and frustrated due to their direct interactions with you. Will that work? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:21, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Instead of having the IP user come to you with complaints and issues directly, I'll ask that they instead channel their concerns and issues through me
— User:Oshwah

. Yes this is alot better and thank you for helping again :) —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 22:29, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Oshwah, i am not trying to harm nor doing disruptive edits or wasting anyone's time here, i am just participating and trying my best to keep the Standards, it is right i do mistakes from time to time and i am not enjoying it, as i said in my User page

This user tries to do the right thing. If they make a mistake, please let them know.

—— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 22:06, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Sakura emad - I know that you're not trying to waste anyone's time nor cause any frustration or issues. :-) You just need to remember to only revert edits that are blatant and obvious vandalism or bad-faith disruption. I think that we're at a point now that we really need to make sure that you only revert those kinds of edits. I would take some time and re-review and make sure that you understand Wikipedia's policies on what is and is not vandalism. Don't revert edits that are questionable or edits that you're not sure about. If the edits are not blatant and obvious disruption or abuse, don't revert the changes. I think that this is where we're running into problems, and that this is where we really need to correct course. If you have any questions about Wikipedia's policy on vandalism and bad-faith edits, please let me know so that I can answer them and clarify any confusion. At this point, I need to start holding you to the expectation that your reverts will be done correctly, and to content that should be reverted without question. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:33, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Dear :@Oshwah Thank you for your kindness, and i am really sorry

I would take some time and re-review and make sure that you understand Wikipedia's policies
— User:Oshwah

i don't mean to take your Precious time and wasting it on me, Fine.. well give me sometime until i Read all wikipedia Policies and guidelines until then i am not going to edit a single article or doing any other activities that involves in this matter. —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 23:17, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Sakura emad - Just take some time and read through Wikipedia's policy page on vandalism and what is not vandalism to start. Make sure that you don't have any questions. If you do, let me know and I'll be happy to answer them and help you. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:29, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

The article itself had the information required to show that it's now a South Korean company, it is one since Hyundai Motor Group made it so in 2020, changing an information that should be changed since 2020 was not any attempt of vandalism as it was being implied, neither it was an unconstructive edit. Sorry if vandalism was the thought that crossed your mind, it was never the case and to me it just felt obvious that someone would have checked the information on the page itself after it was corrected after so long.

Sources:

Hyundai Motor acquires Boston Dynamics from SoftBank for almost $1 bn | Dec 09, 2020 (Gmt+09:00)

Hyundai completes Boston Dynamics purchase from SoftBank

Ps.: On a similar note, it hasn't even been American for a longer while, Softbank (Japanese) was the one selling 80% of its 100% stakes to Hyundai. And being based in a country is not the same as being inherently linked to it on all spheres, it is still a South Korean company. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2804:431:cfcf:4f9a:3446:9385:8f97:d2d2 (talk) 23:36, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message here and for letting me know about this. I apologize for the mistake on my part and for classifying your edits as vandalism. Your message here with the information you provided shows me that your edits were clearly not. Please feel free to restore the changes you made to the article, and please don't hesitate to let me know if I can be of any assistance to you. Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a great day and happy editing. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:03, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Oshwah, I just noticed you over at u:Alex Sigley. Could you also have a look at this user who seems to have been self-promoting without disclosure for almost ten years? --- Possibly ☎ 06:12, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Possibly! Long time no chat! I hope that things are going well for you! :-) I'll need to read up on how to properly handle cases like these, but I can definitely do that and take a look. It might take some time for me to read up on everything, but I'll definitely do so. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:21, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Hey! Yes, long time. No worries, if it takes more effort than a few minutes, it is probably not worth your time. There are some other admins cruising COIN that regularly deal with that kind of thing. Keep doing what you do! Good night. --- Possibly ☎ 06:25, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Possibly - It's probably something that I should read up on anyways... Someone will probably get to it sooner than I will, but I want to read up on it nonetheless. Have a great night, and keep in touch! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:26, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I want to create a personal article for Mr. amine mokretar, but I cannot create it. Can you help me? Mokretar mo (talk) 12:06, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Mokretar mo, and welcome to Wikipedia! Your account needs to be confirmed before you can create articles. This requires your account to be at least 4 days old and have made at least 10 edits. In the meantime, you can visit Wikipedia's articles for creation page to learn how you can create a draft of the article.

Since you're brand new to Wikipedia, I highly recommend that you go through Wikipedia's getting started page and that you complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial before you make any edits or take on any major tasks around here. It will provide you with many 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.

Please let me know if you have any more questions, and I'll be happy to answer them. Again, welcome to Wikipedia! I hope that you decide to stay with us and become a long-term contributor and editor here! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:11, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

This user https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2001:D08:229B:F91A:81B7:BD8F:72D6:40CD keeps Abusing. Please Block him/her. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.159.132.128 (talk) 16:54, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! I've range blocked this user from editing your user talk page. This hopefully shouldn't continue any longer. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:59, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much. This Person really Annoying me and im glad you help me.110.159.132.128 (talk) 17:01, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

You're welcome. :-) If the user returns and continues harassing you, please let me know and I'll be happy to put a stop to it. Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:02, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

I am sorry for my disruptive editing. However, User:110.159.132.128 is clearly a sock puppet of User:Mr. Samerkov, who has been blocked indefinitely from Wikipedia. If you look at the edit histories of both users, you can see that they are editing pages of the same topics (military equipment and Malaysian politics), they have the same editing patterns (accusing others of being fanatics of Pakatan Harapan) and their edit summaries are so similar (in the sense that they have occasional spelling mistakes, poor grammar and randomly capitalising words in sentences). In fact, Mr. Samerkov had been in the past written something similar to "I prefer you block me from this nonsense fighting". It may be worth to investigate this further. Thanks. 2001:D08:229B:F91A:81B7:BD8F:72D6:40CD (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

What the..., You using the fake sources from Mkini and others. Please stop Spreading fake news and slandering me calling PN Fanatics Mr User 2001:D08:229B:F91A:81B7:BD8F:72D6:40CD.. 110.159.132.128 (talk) 04:49, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

This is something Mr. Samerkov used to say as well. It's all in the edit history. And no, I didn't use any source from Mkini (Malaysiakini) in my recent edits. I only used them in my past edits when I had to deal with Mr. Samerkov. This is a clear proof that the user is a sock puppet of Mr. Samerkov. 2001:D08:1012:2CFD:197A:3955:1B02:6F76 (talk) 07:00, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Instead of directly accusing other editors of being sock puppets, why not just file a report at SPI? All you're doing is harassing, antagonizing, and frustrating another editor. Users in general should never be accusing other users of being a sock puppet on Wikipedia. If they have evidence supporting such a claim, they should file a report at SPI with that evidence. Accusations like this serve absolutely no good or helpful purpose in any context. Let's say that the accuser is correct and the user being accused is a sock puppet... Why would you let that user know that you're onto them and that their "cover is blown"? Now they have an opportunity to quickly go and make another account or switch IP addresses before they get blocked. This makes enforcing the matter much more difficult for administrators. Now, let's say that the accuser is not correct and that the user being accused is not a sock puppet. Well, now you just look like an ass - especially when it comes back that your accusations are incorrect. :-) So, please file an SPI report with evidence if you have any, and please stop accusing other editors of being sock puppets. As I explained and pointed out above, it does absolutely no good and there's absolutely no benefit to doing so. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:28, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

How do I add a source to an article? MrDanielBryer (talk) 19:16, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi MrDanielBryer! See Wikipedia's guideline page on how to cite sources in-line with content. This will show you how to take a reference and format it properly so that you can use it as a reference in an article. Please let me know if you have any more questions, and I'll be happy to answer them. :-) Happy editing! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:26, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Greetings Oshwah. For what it's worth, I remember a joke from my youth. It goes: "what word starts with F and ends with UCK? The answer is FiretrUCK. The account you recently blocked for 36 hours, Firetrucklgbtq is basically saying Fuck lgbt & q and their edits, exclusively to lgbt articles suggests, to me, that they are a vandalism only account. Best regards.--John Cline (talk) 19:47, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi John Cline! That's a pretty good joke! ;-) The user has been blocked indefinitely, not for 36 hours. The 36 hour block you may have seen was applied accidentally. I fixed the block duration as soon as it saved. ;-) Keep in touch, and I hope that you're doing well! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:49, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi,

I believe you reverted to prior content after I edited the Psychological Trauma entry. I did include a description of the edit, but perhaps a more detailed description is needed to prevent reversion?

I am an expert on psychological trauma and the content I deleted seemed to me to be poorly conceptualized. For example, it defined psychological trauma as "damage to the mind" which is not an authoritative definition. The sources cited for this definition were low quality and dated.

Is this the type of explanation needed to avoid reversion? Is it necessary to explain the reason for every single point edited?

Honestly, the current content of the entry appears to be the interpretation of low quality and dated information by someone who does not have expertise in psychological trauma. Editing the current content is difficult because it is not comprehensive, well-organized, or well-informed. I think it largely needs to be replaced. Mountainview1462 (talk) 20:28, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Mountainview1462! Thanks for leaving me a message here regarding your edit to the Psychological trauma article. The reason that I reverted your edit was because you removed content without explaining why using the edit summary. In the future, you'll want to include an edit summary with each edit that you make. An edit summary just quickly explains what changes you made and why. This allows other editors to understand what you're doing when they review your changes to the article. If you were making a large change to the article and removing poorly described or poorly referenced content, that's exactly what you'd put in the edit summary to explain your changes. :-) Please feel free to restore the changes you made to the article. I apologize for any confusion that my revert may have caused upon you. If you have any questions or need any help, please let me know and I'll be more than happy to help you. :-) I wish you a great day and happy editing! Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:27, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Greetings, I am sorry I added the external link to the page. I am Scott Van Dorsten. I am the Gunsmith Scott that was on the show. I was simply trying to show people where they can find me. I did not know it was against the rules. Also there is someone listed in the Gunsmiths that was never on the show. i believe this person is trying to take credit for being on the show to gain notoriety for something they did not do. The name Rocky: gunsmith/Revolvers. there was no one by that name on the show. As I said I am Scott from the show so I can tell you for certain the there was no Rocky. I would like to request that that name be removed. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.36.17.10 (talk) 20:37, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message here! Per Wikipedia's policy, we are not a social network. External links with updates on actors, where to find them, and how to reach out to them are unnecessary and are not fit for an encyclopedia. You can read more about Wikipedia's policy on external links by clicking here. If there is content in the article that is inaccurate or incorrect, please don't hesitate to fix it! We encourage our editors and users to be bold, and if there's something that you can do in order to fix or improve an article, please do so! If you have any more questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them and help you further. Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a great day and happy editing. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:53, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Accidental undo. Please ignore the auto notice. Meters (talk) 23:53, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Meters - No worries, man! Hope you're doing well; it's been awhile since we've said hello! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:57, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Yup. No COVID in my household, but lots of other stuff. Meters (talk) 23:59, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Meters - I'm glad that COVID hasn't infiltrated your household and your daily life. :-) As far as the "other stuff" you describe, I hope those are good things... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:03, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

March 2021

Hello, I'm Oshwah. I noticed that you made a change to an article, List of indigenous peoples, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:58, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

citation https://aiatsis.gov.au/sites/default/files/catalogue_resources/ms_2303_warner.pdf https://aiatsis.gov.au/blog/serendipitous-discovery — Preceding unsigned comment added by Josu1 (talk • contribs) 00:14, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Josu1, and thanks for leaving me a message here regarding your edit to the List of indigenous peoples page. Great, it looks like you have some references that you can include with your edit! What you just need to do is add the content back to the article, then cite these references in-line with your changes. The guideline page I linked you to in the previous sentence will show you exactly how to do this. If you have questions or run into any problems, please let me know and I'll be more than happy to help you. :-) Thanks again for the message, and I hope you have a great day. Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:58, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Hey! How are you doing? I just finished grade 12, but I am still in online school doing Japanese, and another online course, and it is hectic! How are you? --つがる Talk to つがる:) 🍁 03:39, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi つがる! Long time no chat! It sounds like you're busy with school, which is probably why I haven't heard from you in awhile. Congratulations on finishing grade 12! That's a great accomplishment, and I hope you keep up the momentum. Life has been busy for me lately. I just moved into a new place, and I'm still going through and unpacking all of my boxes and getting my stuff settled in. I'm working full time, and still managing to find time to be available on Wikipedia. My participating here comes in waves; I'll be active for a few weeks, then I'll get super busy and be inactive for a week or two after that. Then the cycle continues... I wish I could be consistently active here like I used to, but that's life right now, and I have obligations that I have to give my time and attention to. Overall, I have no complaints. I just wish I wasn't so busy and that I had more free time on my hands... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:21, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Hey! Nice to hear from you too! Yea, I totally understand how busy things get in life, then for me, when I end up having free time, I feel something is wrong, because then I feel like I am forgetting to do something! Life gets so busy, but it can never be too busy where we cannot take care of ourselves! つがる Talk to つがる:) 🍁 19:35, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Diplomacy
		For taking a sincere, but still learning editor and mentoring them instead of biting or just removing rights. Nightenbelle (talk) 14:20, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Nightenbelle! Thank you for taking the time to leave me this barnstar, and for the very kind words. It means a lot to me, and I appreciate it very much. :-) Honestly, this is how we should be treating all good-faith users on Wikipedia who are going through a rough patch as far as making mistakes and trying to learn from them. We were all brand new to Wikipedia at one point, we all had to take the time and learn Wikipedia's policies and grow our experience with contributing to the project, and we've all made silly, stupid, or even annoying mistakes during that time of growth. The last thing that we should be doing is biting our newcomers and sending them toward the exit door. We should be patient and understanding, and we should expect users to make mistakes - even more than once. So long as they commit to learning from their mistakes and that they show that they're improving their edits and not repeating mistakes again and again, we should be positive and encouraging toward the user, available to help them when they ask for it, and happy that they're here to build an encyclopedia. Thanks again for the awesome barnstar, I hope you have a great rest of your day, and keep in touch! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:12, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Good morning! (if it's morning where you live.) I wanted to ask about helping with an edit needing to made with Dogfish Head Brewery. There are a few new year round selections that have come out in the past year, which should probably be added to the article. Since the selections are formatted as a table, I didn't want to make an edit without making sure I don't somehow mess up the table. Is there any advice you can offer for this? I know it's not super super important, but I've visited the brewery recently, and just want to make sure the article is 100% updated. Thanks!! (Redacted) 15:06, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello! I was the one who sent you the message a minute ago about Dogfish Head Brewery and for some reason I wasn’t signed in. Sorry about that! Spf121188 (talk) 15:08, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Spf121188! No worries; it happens all the time. I suppressed your IP address information so that nobody can see it. This will keep your personal information private. There are three pages that will provide you with good information on the formatting and style of tables. You can see the list of pages here. On another note, I understand that you just visited the brewery and wish to update the article to be up-to-date. That's awesome, and I'm glad to see that you want to do this. However, I advise making sure that you have some references that you can cite to support your changes. Otherwise, what you're adding will constitute original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. Give those pages a read, and let me know if you still have any questions after going through them. I'll be happy to answer them and help you further. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:50, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

If I may add: if you don't know this already, you can preview your changes by clicking the "show preview" button (below the edit box, next to the "publish changes" button); this will render your changes in the context of the full page, letting you see how your changes will look on the live article before you save them. This is very helpful when editing tricky-syntax things like tables. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:53, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Yes - Writ Keeper is absolutely spot-on here. The "show preview" button is your absolute friend! Definitely use that feature before you publish any changes. You'll be able to catch issues and errors before-hand and fix them without them taking effect on the actual article. Once you're done and have verified that your changes are ready to be saved using the "show preview" button, you'll then be ready to save them. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:01, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the resources and the guidance! I will make sure to be thorough and have citation support for any changes I make. I greatly appreciate it! Spf121188 (talk) 15:57, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Spf121188 - You're very welcome! :-) If you run into any issues or problems, please don't hesitate to let me know. I'll be more than happy to help you in any way that I can. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:02, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello dear @Oshwah nowadays i am busy with my studies about Wikipedia and how wikipedia works, while i am studying i am really happy to have someone to ask my questions, i really appreciate if you'll be the one who can Teach me more and guide me to wikipedia, although i am not new :), but not experienced as you are. —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 16:43, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

i would like to ask you if this (diff) is vandalism and should be considered as one?, while i can't find it that way, according to WP:VD This is vandalism

adding irrelevant obscenities or crude humor to a page, illegitimately blanking pages, and inserting obvious nonsense into a page. Abusive creation or usage of user accounts and IP addresses may also constitute vandalism.

but this (one) i think it's not vandalism AS WP:VD "Even if misguided, willfully against consensus, or disruptive, any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia is not vandalism." —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 16:48, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Sakura emad! Thanks for the message! I'm happy to see that you're learning and that you're taking the time to slow down and ask questions regarding reverts and edits that you're not sure about. Thank you for doing that, and keep up the great work! Looking at the edit history of the article, it looks like an account (Anonymous gay.fairy) added content to the Testosterone article. Shortly afterward, an IP user (136.49.32.166) removed the content stating in the edit summary that it was "vandalism". If you look on the account's user talk page here, you'll see that the IP user messaged the user telling them that the content they added to the article was going off-topic and out of scope of the article's focus. The IP user was likely correct in removing the content, as it did add a lot of information regarding food and the testosterone hormone. However, the IP user was not correct when they stated in their edit summary that the content was vandalism. It was a good-faith attempt to add content to the article and expand it, not vandalism. The content just wasn't suitable or within the article subject's scope and focus. In the end, I would leave the edits alone and not do anything. I debated whether or not that I should talk to the IP user about their edit summary, but I'll hold off and leave well enough alone for now. In the end, what you were seeing in that diff was not vandalism and not a bad-faith edit. :-) Please let me know if you have any more questions about the revert, or if you have any other situations that you're not sure as to whether or not it is vandalism. I'll be more than happy to take a look, respond, and help explain things to you. :-) Thanks again for slowing down and for asking questions. This is a sign that you're starting to improve your edits and not accidentally revert edits that aren't made in bad-faith. That's the goal that you and I set together, and I hope that you continue to stick to it. We don't want to be making any more mistakes. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:21, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Yes i was sure that it was not vandalism, i didn't know if the content that'd been added should've stayed or not,🥰 thank you for reading and caring about the messages, This is very kind of you. —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 18:37, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Sakura emad - You bet! I'm always happy to help! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:42, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

and also i would like to ask @136.49.32.166 why it's vandalism? —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 16:49, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

for your information @136.49.32.166 the edit you were reverted was also well sourced. —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 16:50, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

@Sakura emad FYI, IP:s can't be pinged. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:08, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

aw ok thanks @Gråbergs Gråa Sång if it was not for you, i might ping IPS Forever (haha😁). —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 17:13, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

@Sakura emad We learn the strange ways of WP as we go along. Also, pinging someone at their own talkpage has no extra effect, they get a notice for the writing alone. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:17, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

what do you mean 😕❔

pinging someone at their own talkpage has no extra effect

—— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 17:22, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Sakura emad when you post on a persons talk page they automatically get a ping notice the next time they log on to WikiP. Thus they don't need @[[User:Oshwah|Oshwah]] to know that a message a been posted on their talk page. Best wishes in your future editing. MarnetteD|Talk 17:28, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

That's Right Thank you @MarnetteD —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 17:31, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

You are most welcome Sakura emad. MarnetteD|Talk 17:40, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Actually, Sakura emad, those are terrible "sources". Those webpages basically say that there's nothing definitive about the foods that that anonymous "user" added to the Testosterone article. I also left a message on that account's Talk page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Anonymous_gay.fairy He/she/whatever added irrelevant nonsense to the article. 136.49.32.166 (talk) 18:08, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Sakura emad, you need to understand that there are two criteria for sources: 1) the source's reputation and 2) the actual CONTENT of the source. If Nihon Keizai Shimbun published an article about how the moon is made of freeze dried miso, that is not a good source. The same applies to the "sources" that that anonymous user added to the Testosterone page. Those "sources" only state that certain foods may or may not increase/decrease testosterone. Therefore, the "information" is contestable and really of no value to a page about Testosterone as a hormone / chemical compound. Plus, Wikipedia is NOT a blog dispensing diet advice. 136.49.32.166 (talk) 18:17, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

ok this is right

the content they added to the article was going off-topic and out of scope of the article's focus.

i was unsure whether the content should stay or not, but i was sure what they added is not "Vandalism" and that's my Question from the beginning. —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 18:49, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

By the way, Sakura and oshwah, the "information" was also plagiarized. The person just copied and pasted from the "sources". That was an improper addition to the article and INDEED vandalism. That "user" should be Banned. 136.49.32.166 (talk) 18:58, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Sakura emad, take a look at this.

What was added to the Wikipedia article -- "Tuna is linked in testosterone production. It’s also low in calories and a natural way of boosting testosterone. Moderation is key, aim for two to three servings a week to minimize your intake of mercury, found in seafood"

What's in the linked "source" -- "Tuna is rich in vitamin D, which has been linked to a longer life and testosterone production. It’s also a heart-healthy, protein-rich food that’s low in calories. Whether you choose canned or fresh, eating this fish can be a natural way of boosting testosterone. A serving of tuna fulfills your daily vitamin D needs. If you aren’t a tuna fan, you may consider other fishy sources of vitamin D, such as salmon or sardines. Remember that moderation is key. Aim for a max of two to three servings a week to minimize your intake of mercury, which is found in seafood."

This is plagiarism, which is a form of intellectual property theft. Moreover, that healthline "source" includes links to buy food, so it's a terrible reference that should not be added. 136.49.32.166 (talk) 19:44, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

On August 18, 2021, Sakura emad said that she would stop all activities on Wikipedia and learn more about Wikipedia policies before continuing.

Subsequently, on August 19, Anonymous gay.fairy added plagiarized "information" to the Testosterone article under the heading "Testosterone - For People on the Non-Binary Spectrum. & Women." This added "information" had grammar errors similar to Sakura emad's grammar errors in other areas, including the article about Transgender.

on January 20, 2020 After Joe biden becomes President[129][130] President Joe Biden signs an executive order for lifting the transgender military ban[131][132], that have been previously banned by President Donald Trump[124][125][126] And he Officially Declares that he supports Transgender People "Your president has your back"[133]

I reverted Anonymous gay.fairy's additions to the Testosterone article, and Sakura emad immediately came to Oshwah's Talk Page to ask about my Revert. She seeks affirmation that the additions weren't vandalism, but they are in terms of exceeding the scope of the article, in terms of poor sourcing, and in terms of plagiarism. (By the way, Sakura emad had already tried to add an unneeded "source" to the Testosterone page, so there's clearly a pattern of behavior.)

Please investigate. Thank you. 136.49.32.166 (talk) 19:10, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

ohhh no way —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 19:34, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

i understand that i am not to your liking but you're going too far for this, let me clarify That is totally ok Please Investigate my account > @Oshwah, but Dear IP This is way too far and it damages our friendship in the future, if you keep going on these kind of behaviors. —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 19:38, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

and after the Investigation i request interaction ban between me and this IP, if they don't want to be friends with me totally ok, but no more personal attacks and hates towards me. —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 19:55, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Sakura emad - Unfortunately, I cannot unilaterally apply and enforce an interaction ban between editors on Wikipedia. Interaction bans can either be applied by community consensus, or by the Arbitration Committee. If you wish to request an interaction ban be applied, you need to start a discussion at ANI where you can request one there. You'll need to provide evidence of repeated harassment and where it's been occurring, and explain why an interaction ban is necessary and should be considered. If you have any questions about interaction bans or the process of requesting one, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:18, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

now i understand, i can take proper actions later on, if the IP continues to grow more hatred behavior towards me, i really wanted and still want to be friend with this IP i don't know why i am treated like that. —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 23:42, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, but two accounts who happen to edit the same article with more than 24 hours of time between the edits is insufficient evidence for me to assert that sock puppetry is likely. If you believe that these two accounts are sock puppets that are operating in violation of policy, please file a report at SPI and provide diffs and supporting evidence that shows that your accusations are likely.

Users in general should never directly accuse other users of being a sock puppet on Wikipedia. If you have evidence supporting such a claim, you should just file a report at SPI with that evidence. Accusations like this serve absolutely no good or helpful purpose in any context. Let's play the "what if" game for a moment here, and let's say that your accusations are correct and the user that you're accusing is a sock puppet... Why would you let that user know that you're onto them and that their "cover is blown"? They now have the opportunity to quickly go and make another account or switch IP addresses before they get blocked. This makes enforcing the matter much more difficult for administrators. Now, let's say that your accusations are not correct and that the user you're accusing is not a sock puppet. Well, now you just look like an ass - especially when it comes back that your accusations are incorrect. :-) So, please file an SPI report with evidence if you have any, and please stop directly accusing other editors of being sock puppets. As I explained and pointed out above, it does absolutely no good and there's absolutely no benefit to doing so, no matter which way you look at it. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:08, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Oh come on, she's obviously looking at my Contribs page. She's not going to notice this? https://i.postimg.cc/brx9mHkg/Sock-Puppet.jpg 136.49.32.166 (talk) 21:40, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

That doesn't give you an excuse to directly accuse someone of being a sock puppet. Like I said, there's no benefit at all to doing so. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:50, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

before coming here i was at CKB wiki, i never had such an unpleasant experience in my lifetime during Wikipedia. —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 23:27, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

I need help with coding on here? How do I create my page, and make it good? I am pretty good with computers or I thought I was Panda Parker (talk) 21:05, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Panda Parker! Welcome to Wikipedia! For help with the formatting of pages, text, tables, images, elements, and other objects, see Wikipedia's help page on wikitext. It will provide you with information, examples, and lots of code that you can use to help with designing and formatting a nice-looking page. Are you trying to create things on your user page? Or are you trying to write an article? If you're trying to create an article, please know that there's a manual of style that needs to be followed in order to properly standardize the look, structure, formatting, and text of the page. If you're just looking to design a nice user page, then you're obviously free to experiment, test, build, design, code, write, and create to your heart's content (provided that you follow the rules). If you run into any questions while reviewing the documents and pages that I provided for you, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them and help you. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:24, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

I am currently working on my page once I have that mastered I shall move up to articles. How do I make my name different colors?Panda Parker (talk) 21:32, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Panda Parker - When you ask about "making your name different colors", are you talking about your signature, or the page title text of your user page (like mine, for example, is red)? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:40, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

well both really Panda Parker (talk) 21:50, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Panda Parker - Your signature can be customized by visiting your preferences page. You can visit this page if you'd like tutorials, examples, and code to help you customize your signature to your liking. To customize your user page title text, I believe that this is outlined somewhere in this guide. If you can't find it, let me know and I'll find the code for you. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:35, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so very much!!!🦠|🌀User:Panda Parker|Panda Parker🌀🦠 16:16, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Every single country’s Olympic pages (and Mexico’s previous Olympic years) follow the same outline and none of them include “Olympic Diplomas”. This section for “Mexico at the 2020 Summer Olympics” seems superfluous and not in tune with every single Olympic page on Wikipedia. Plus, they already have the rankings for each sport below which makes the diploma table unnecessary. If someone wants to add a asterisk and footnote saying 4-8 get diplomas, then that would make more sense and the wiki page could be more in tune with all the other Olympic pages — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1012:b063:b552:a454:be5f:6bcc:dd05 (talk) 21:31, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message here. You are temporary partially-blocked from editing the Mexico at the 2020 Summer Olympics due to edit warring and causing disruption there. If you believe that the article should be updated, edited, or changed - you can create an edit request on the article's talk page. Another editor will review your request and the changes that you believe should be made, and they'll update the article on your behalf (assuming no issues were found with your request). This is what you must do if you believe that there are issues with the article. Please let me know if you have any more questions, and I'll be happy to answer them. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:14, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi i deleted a very old list of board members - many who are no longer on the board. I thought would be cleaner and easier to maintain if we simply removed the outdated list and update the link to the board list on the chamber website as it is always changing.

Sherriene

70.184.228.67 (talk) 21:51, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message and for letting me know. In the future, you'll want to include an edit summary with each edit that you make to Wikipedia. Edit summaries, when used correctly, are a brief description of what you changed and why. They are visible on page revisions and edit histories, and they help other editors to understand what you're doing and why when they scrutinize and examine your changes. They'll also help to avoid confusions such as this in the future. :-) Please let me know if you have any questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks again for the message and for letting me know about your edits. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:43, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

the citation / source is the new citation. the website is different now and doesn't feature the old flash version anymore.

The source would be www.zombo.com and wouldn't really be applicable as a source because it is the website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.176.5.71 (talk) 22:30, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for leaving me a message and for letting me know. I've gone ahead and restored your changes to the article. Please accept my apologies for the removal and the confusion, and please let me know if I can answer any questions or address any concerns. I'll be happy to help you in any way that I can. Thanks again for the message and for letting me know, and I hope you have a great rest of your day. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:38, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your help on Michelle Pfeiffer. However, I noticed that the protection you put in is significantly shorter than the previous protection which expired only a short time ago. Would you please take a look at the page's protection history and consider making the protection longer? The page is an LTA target. Thanks. Trevor Forrest Riggs (talk) 23:38, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Trevor Forrest Riggs - Good call -  Done. Extended to three months. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:55, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

An innapropriate edit on User:Danpengui was made containing PII. I reversed this edit. You, for some reason, have decided to reintroduce it except with a replacement of your username, then oversight both edits, including mine which contained absolutely no OS-worthy content at all.

Please remove this. My revision contained no content which falls within the Oversight policy, making the use of OS tools in this case done in violation of the policy. In addition, I don't find the addition of disclaimers and your username to fall within any of the steps for removal of such information, and was considering whether or not to revert your edit, when you decided to make that option entirely unavailable to me through the use of advanced tools. Naleksuh (talk) 23:40, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Naleksuh! Thanks for leaving me a message here. Yeah, what happened was that I edited the user page to redact the information, and it saved over your edit which removed the paragraph entirely. I'm not sure why I suppressed both revisions. I only meant to suppress the revisions that contained the PII and nothing else. Weird... anyways,  Fixed. Thanks for letting me know about that, and I hope you have a great rest of your day. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:51, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

As you deleted Reliability of The Times Bulletin. Can you explain is The Times Bulletin a reliable source for to get reference? Boti2481 (talk) 01:09, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Boti2481! Welcome to Wikipedia! I'm not exactly sure what you're talking about or what you're referring to. Can you elaborate with a bit more information and details so that I can answer your question and help you? :-) Thanks - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:44, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

You removed my edit because I did not explain "why",yet, I don't have to explain anything to you. My edit was accurate and fair and the references supported it. Mind your own business! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.116.170.113 (talk) 02:01, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

(Talk page enjoyer) communication with other editors is an important part of collaboration on Wikipedia. An unexplained edit is more likely reverted as the reasoning behind it isn't always clear to other editors. I'd suggest using edit summaries to explain your changes, as that will make them less likely to be reverted - and if it is reverted, provides a better place for discussion. Elli (talk | contribs) 02:08, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Looks like this vandalism on 2022 FIFA World Cup qualification by 180.254.69.194 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) is a part of Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Jakarta Goat vandal. The page may need protection to prevent further vandalism. Jalen Folf (talk) 02:46, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi JalenFolf! Good call! I've just applied semi-protection to the article, and I'll look into the LTA matters here shortly. Thanks for the message and for letting me know. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:48, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

On page lahoti you revert my edit please dont do it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 43.224.182.230 (talk) 03:41, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello I have fixed all the issues of Draft:Rishton Ka Manjha by taking to an administrator can you please move it to the mainspace ? Boti2481 (talk) 04:47, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Boti2481! Only an articles for creation reviewer is authorized to move a page from the draft space to the mainspace. Even though I'm an admin, I do not have the authority to override their process and perform actions on their behalf. That would be considered misuse of my administrator rights, and that could get me into trouble (which I obviously don't want to have happen to me). To have your draft page reviewed and approved, you just need to follow the instructions outlined in the "Submitting for review" section here to submit your draft page to be reviewed. Please let me know if you have any more questions, and I'll be happy to answer them and help you. I hope you have a great day, and I wish you happy editing. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:36, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello I need an urgent help as you know that i am an new Wikipedian so maybe I did some mistake. Someone reported issue called "Sock Puppet" how to solve it can you help? Boti2481 (talk) 05:39, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi again, Boti2481! Where at exactly? Can you provide me a link to where this report is? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:41, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Sockpuppet_investigations/AnonymousIndiaz Boti2481 (talk) 05:44, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, but after reviewing the SPI report and investigating, the evidence is too convincing... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:05, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Oshwah, I think it's admirable that you continually help new editors who are flooding talk pages with questions, even when they sometimes are revealed to be sockpuppets. Keep that optimistic spirit. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:13, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Liz is exactly right! It's inspiring. #TeamOshwah ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 06:39, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

+1 Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:01, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Pahunkat (talk) 15:50, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Pahunkat - Received and replied. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:12, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Oshwah, I've replied :-) Pahunkat (talk) 09:40, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Pahunkat - Just replied back to you. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:47, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Oshwah, that was fast - do you never sleep? You got the right log entry. Pahunkat (talk) 10:26, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Pahunkat - I sleep sometimes. ;-) Awesome! I'm glad I got it. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:28, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

I can safely assume that Oshwah is such a good vandal fighter that he probably uses Huggle in his sleep ;-) Pahunkat (talk) 12:09, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

why are you sweet Spaceman6651 (talk) 17:24, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Spaceman6651! Yum! Thanks for the cookie! It's chocolate chip, too! My favorite! ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:26, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

send me a site for a good place for info for Gregor Mendel please. That would be a great help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spaceman6651 (talk • contribs) 17:27, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

hey can you help me find a good site for Gregor mendelSpaceman6651 (talk) 17:51, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Spaceman6651! Have you tried looking up information on this person using [Google Scholar]? This search engine from Google limits its results to scholarly literature such as academic papers, reports, studies, journals, and other sources that are generally reliable. I'd try searching for him there and see what you find. :-) Please let me know if I can help you with anything else, and I'll be happy to do so. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:53, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

I do not have accesses to that sorrySpaceman6651 (talk) 17:58, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

You might need to be associated with an institution, but if you are - [JSTOR] is another good search tool. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:14, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

	Abraham Lincoln
	One of those situations where a mistake has been made when using the original email address for replying to you earlier today. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 17:44, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Iggy the Swan - LOL! No worries, Abraham Lincoln. Your secret is safe with me. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:46, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

friends? Spaceman6651 (talk) 17:53, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Spaceman6651 - Sure! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:54, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

I think I will need a brownie after my blunder while emailing Oshwah (details above). Or perhaps a magnum on Sunday before normal schedule finally returns for me pre-lockdown. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 18:00, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

lets talk on my pageSpaceman6651 (talk) 17:56, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

You've reverted an edit. I'm from his family and didn't want the rumour mongers to speculate his cause of death. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2406:7400:73:7346:59c8:1547:555e:e854 (talk) 20:06, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for leaving me a message here regarding your edit to the U. Srinivas article. Unfortunately, your edit and your attempt to "set the record straight" added unreferenced content to the article. Per Wikipedia's policy on verifiability and attribution, all content must be attributable or directly attributed to a reliable source. This is why I reverted your edit. I highly recommend that you review and understand the policies that I've linked you to here. Please let me know if you have any questions after reading through those pages, and I'll be happy to answer them and help you. :-) Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a great Friday. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:11, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello! I am trying to make updates to the Instant Brands page to reflect the information for our parent company. This page has incorrect information as we have merged multiple companies under the Instant Brands umbrella. I keep making updates and they continue to be reverted. My company needs these changes today for national media coverage that is coming out and I need these changes to stay. Could you let me know what information you need in order to let me make these edits? Thanks! Jessi 76.243.193.171 (talk) 20:19, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

• Hi Jessi, I changed some of your edits to Instant Brands and left you a message on your talk page. ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 21:20, 20 August 2021 (UTC) (talk page watcher)

Hi there! Thanks for leaving me a message regarding your edit to the Instant Brands article. The reason that I reverted your edit was because you removed content from the article, but did not explain why you did so with an edit summary. When making edits to articles and pages, it's important to include an edit summary with each change that you make. The edit summary is saved with your changes and shows up on the article's edit history. Edit summaries help to explain the changes being made and why, so that other editors will understand what you're doing when they go to review or scrutinize your changes. Using edit summaries is helpful to others, and it helps to avoid confusion such as this. It looks like FormalDude has implemented some changes onto the article for you, and has reached out to you on your user talk page. Feel free to work with this editor, as I trust their judgment and I believe that their changes and suggestions will be helpful to you. Please let me know if you have any more questions or concerns, and I'll be more than happy to help you further. :-) Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a happy Friday and a great rest of your day. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:38, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

The content removed from The Fame was unsourced, that's why I removed it from the article with my edit (and my edit summary was "unsourced" - admittedly brief, so maybe I should be more detailed next time). --92.28.190.117 (talk) 20:28, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message regarding your edit to The Fame. Please accept my humble apologies! I'm not sure what happened, but I did not mean to restore your removal of the content and warn you for unexplained content removal. For the record, your explanation in the edit summary was sufficient, and it was my mistake for undoing the changes you made. I've gone back to the article and restored the changes you made to it. I apologize for any frustration or confusion that I may have caused. Please let me know if you have any questions or further concerns, and I'll be more than happy to answer them and help you further. Thanks again for the message and for bringing this to my attention. I appreciate it very much, and I hope you have an excellent Friday. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:42, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi. You said "I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Modern Warfare (Community)—because it did not appear constructive." I'd like to learn how a cultural reference appended to the end of a section called "Cultural References," in the same basic format of the previous three cultural references is not "constructive." --Emarsh611 (talk) 21:04, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Emarsh611, and thanks for leaving me a message with your response and your concerns. I apologize; I went back to the article and re-read your changes. While I don't believe that the content is suitable for inclusion in the article, I was incorrect when I believed the edit to be vandalism - it clearly was not. I've gone back and restored your changes to the article, and I've removed the warning message that I left on your user talk page. Please accept my sincere apologies for the mis-translation on my part, and please don't hesitate to let me know if you have any questions or further concerns. I'll be more than happy to discuss them with you further and assist you with anything that you need. :-) Thanks again for the message and for bringing this to my attention. My best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:47, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Minority means those communities who are having very less population but here in Bihar Muslims constitutes 18% whereas Jainism less than 1 per cent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editor34211 (talk • contribs) 21:13, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Editor34211! Thanks for leaving me a message here. I believe that we might be confused on what we're talking about here. The reason that I reverted your edit was because you removed content without explaining why using the edit summary field. When making edits to articles and pages, it's important to include an edit summary. It helps other editors understand what your changing and why, and it helps to avoid confusion such as what happened here. This is the reason that I reverted your changes. Please let me know if you have any questions or further concerns, and I'll be happy to help you with anything that you need. :-) Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a great day and a happy Friday. Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:50, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I see that you remove the link and minor correction that I had in this page. I didn't understand why. in the same page are several link to the website and i see the rules about the link allowed. Let me know. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.90.225.73 (talk • contribs)

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message here and for explaining your changes to the Impact Hub (Global Network) article. While I don't believe that the big list of links is suitable to be included in the article for an encyclopedia, I understand where your position is. You were simply adding items to a list of links that already exist. Because of this, I've gone ahead and restored your changes and removed the warning messages that were left on your user talk page. Please accept my apologies for any confusion that I may have caused you, and please let me know if I can assist you with anything that you need in any way. I'll be more than happy to help you. Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a happy Friday and a great rest of your day. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:54, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks

Oshwah

Good evening. I made the change to the Quibell Park subject. I didn't think I needed to name a "source" as I AM the source. I was at the opening speedway meeting on May 3rd, 1971.

Why was the speedway not included in the original article. Were you there?

Please reinclude it as it is fact not fiction 2A00:23C4:788F:7800:7465:BF4F:A594:6F9F (talk) 22:30, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message here. Sorry, but you cannot "cite yourself" as a reference or source when adding content to Wikipedia articles. That constitutes original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. To explain: "original research" is when someone cites themselves or their relationships, personal experience, or personal knowledge when adding content to Wikipedia. It also means that you cannot cite your own research, published works, or references if they were written by you. In short, we don't allow original research on Wikipedia because it adds a level of bias to the article, and because of the fact that most original research is impossible for readers and editors to review, scrutinize, and evaluate. How can I evaluate the quality and reliability of a reference if the reference is someone saying, "believe me, I was there so I'm the source"? You can't. It adds many levels of bias, complexity, unreliability, lack of verifiability, and inaccuracies with content that we just cannot allow it on this project. Therefore, if you wish to add the content to Wikipedia, it will need to be attributable or directly cited by a reliable source. If you have any questions about Wikipedia's original research policy, or if you have questions about anything else, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them and help you. :-) Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a great day and happy editing. Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:27, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

I thought my edit could be useful if someone wanted to know specifically what episode the teams split up in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maggiegreen1 (talk • contribs) 00:27, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Maggiegreen1! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for leaving me a message here regarding your edit to the Total Drama Island article. The reason that I reverted your edit was because I was suspicious that it might've been vandalism. After all, the edit replaced content with the phrase "[b]unch of disgustingness", which I interpreted to be suspicious when I reviewed your edit. If I was incorrect in my evaluation of your edit to the article, please accept my sincere apologies for mis-translating your intentions, and please feel free to restore your changes back to the article. Please let me know if you have any further questions or concerns, and I'll be more than happy to help you. :-) Thanks again for the message and for letting me know about this, and I hope you have a great Friday. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:33, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

If you have evidence of me engaging incivility, personal attacks, finger-pointing and bickering, then I'd like to see it. I've been more than patient with the disruption at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mario Kleff (2nd nomination), but enough is enough. Vexations (talk) 02:12, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Vexations! Happy Friday! I hope you're having a good day! :-) I haven't done any digging at all, and I don't have evidence of any incivility, personal attacks or other violations of policy on your part. I just saw that you two were going at one another on the AFD page and that the next step was ANI. My comment simply asked the question of "why?". :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:15, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Because I take umbrage with misrepresenting what I wrote. the user in question has been warned, was asked to retract false claims about me, refused, and persists in making false statements about me. Vexations (talk) 02:20, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Vexations - I understand. If you believe that filing a report at ANI against the user is the necessary next step in resolving the matter, and that resolving things with the user in a civil and peaceful way is not going to happen, then that's absolutely your prerogative and you're absolutely welcome to file a report at ANI if you wish to do so. Either way things go, I hope that the matter reaches a resolution, and that you two can work things out, shake hands, forgive one another, and move on peacefully. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:40, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

You know what? Do me a favour and remove my user rights, block my account, lock down my talk page, and remove me from the Library, so I no longer take up anyone's space. I'll scramble my password, and make sure I don't know what it is, 24 hours from now. Vexations (talk) 04:49, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Vexations - Oh c'mon, man.... Don't do that. Having a quarrel with another editor isn't a reason to leave the project. Why not take a break, relax, recharge, and come back when you're not frustrated? Be reasonable and think logically. You appear to be a great editor! C'mon... we can get through this. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:51, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

I appreciate the work you're doing, and just watching the abuse you receive on your talk page is astonishing. You are clearly a force for good, but our collective inability to deal with harassment, undisclosed paid eding, spam, and disinformation is intolerable. Vexations (talk) 05:10, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Vexations - I agree. There's a lot that we can do better with, and there's tons of room for improvement when it comes to those areas. Man, I really really hope that you don't throw in the towel and call it quits here. You've done awesome work, and if anything, the harassment you're receiving is a sign that you're doing things right. That's at least what I tell myself when I get death threats and other fun shenanigans. ;-) If you need to take a break for a bit, by all means, you should definitely do it. There's nothing wrong with walking away from something that's frustrating you and allowing yourself to recharge and let emotions settle down. In fact, it's something that people with high emotional intelligence will do. Stick around with us, and keep doing the awesome things that you're doing. Like I said, we'll get through this. I want to help you if I can... is there anything that I can do to help? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:15, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Why did you block me? What rights as a censor do you have? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:647:5580:d20:481b:a4a6:4b13:9436 (talk) 03:49, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! You are currently partially-blocked from editing the Myopia article due to edit warring. Edit warring is against Wikipedia's policy, and I applied this block because it was the logical next step in putting a stop to the disruption. Your IP address changes frequently, and it made it hard to try and reach out to you and ask you to stop. Therefore, given the circumstances and the need to stop the disruption and prevent further disruption from occurring, a block was necessary. If you have issues with the current revision of the article, please start a discussion on the article's talk page and express your concerns there. If you have any more questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. :-) Thanks - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:56, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Man, don't add these fighters to the Bellator roster because they are not signed with the company. These were just 1 fight and they are not with Bellator anymore. I mean Swanson, Moegenburg and the crew. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.2.216.111 (talk) 03:55, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for leaving me a message regarding your edit to the List of current Bellator MMA fighters. The reason that I reverted your edit was because you removed content without explaining why using the edit summary. In the future, you'll want to include an edit summary with each edit that you make. An edit summary just quickly explains what changes you made and why. This allows other editors to understand what you're doing when they review your changes to the article. If you were making a change to the article and removing poorly described or poorly referenced content, that's exactly what you'd put in the edit summary to explain your changes. :-) Please let me know if you have any more questions, and I'll be happy to answer them and help you. :-) Thanks again for the message, I hope you enjoy your weekend, and I wish you happy editing. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:00, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Oshwah:, Hope you are safe on this global pandamic. Why you warned the User:Damak15 by level 1 warning as the user had already warned, level 2 by me? Thank you ! Fade258 (talk) 07:09, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Fade258! Happy Friday! I'm doing well, and keeping away from the pandemic so far. :-) The warning was automatically left by Huggle. It's supposed to detect and know that the user already received a level 1 warning and follow up with a level 2. I'm not sure why it didn't do so this time. Most likely, it's because the user received your level 2 warning 13 days ago and decided to start over since so much time has passed. Nothing to worry about, though. If the user keeps up with their shenanigans, I'll know about it and I'll make sure that the matter is taken care of. ;-) If you have any more questions or concerns, please let me know and I'll be happy to look into it and make sure they're addressed. Thanks for the message and for letting me know, and I hope you have an excellent weekend. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:15, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your clarification. As i am new to Wikipedia so i didn't know very well. So, I asked this question to you. Please tell me, For example: If any user had added Facebook page link of Sukuna Multiple Campus in that article name which is mentioned in this message then which warning is suitable. Fade258 (talk) 07:24, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Oshwah,

I have seen your message. This is my fault when I did not explain clearly why I deleted a part of the article "The Voice of Vietnam" (which I will call article A for short). I deleted the part "Kids Edition" of that article because I want to edit another article, "The Voice Kids of Vietnam" (which I will call article B). I realized that article B should be an article about the summary of the whole series "The Voice of Vietnam", not just a season. So I use the part "Kids Edition" of article A to edit temporary article B. But don't worry, I will spend more time make article B more detailed and accurate.

I hope that my explanation above satisfied you. Thanks for reminding me about this.

Sarah. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarah Hèng (talk • contribs) 07:43, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Sarah Hèng, and thanks for messaging me regarding your edit to the The Voice of Vietnam article. Thanks! I appreciate you for taking the time to explain! :-) No problem; you're new here, so you're still learning. Yeah, you'll just want to make sure that you use edit summaries when you make edits. That way, other editors can understand what you're changing and why. Feel free to restore your changes to the article. :-) If you run into any questions or need anything, please let me know and I'll be happy to help you. Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a great weekend. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:49, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Why change page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.55.78.21 (talk) 09:33, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for leaving me a message here regarding your edit to the Hestia (character) article. The reason that I reverted your edit was because I didn't believe that it was constructive. It was unreferenced and referring to a name that didn't seem believable. If the edit you made was not a mistake, please feel free to restore it back to the article. Please let me know if you have any more questions, and I'll be happy to answer them and help you. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:25, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

I just want to inform you that User:IamMasterTiger is vandalising many pages. I hope he can be blocked. --FikkuFiq 09:56, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Fikku fiq, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your concerns regarding IamMasterTiger. I do see that they've made a number of edits removing content from the Selangor article (1, 2), as well as some edits adding content without references (1, 2). However, the editor seems to have stopped editing since the 21st of August, so I'm going to hold off on doing anything for now. Keep a watch on this editor, and let me know if they return and if they keep making edits that appear to be disruptive. I'll be happy to take another look. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:35, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi I included this source, a British newspaper article . Is it not good enough? Thanks

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/obituary-lev-razgon-1120992.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spadar Sozhau (talk • contribs) 10:27, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Spadar Sozhau! Yes! Your reference is just fine. Please accept my apologies for reverting your edit to the Horki article. I'm not sure how that managed to happen... I must've done it my mistake. Nonetheless, it looks like the content has been restored back to the article. Please let me know if you have any questions or further concerns, and I'll be more than happy to help you. :-) Thanks again for the message and for bringing this to my attention, and I apologize for the error on my part. Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:39, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Oshwah. It is good you keep a beady eye on vandals :)

The user HamoBeast seems to be vandalising a number of pages, I recommend banning him User2983 (talk) 12:14, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

@User2983:

1. Report this to WP:AIV

2. I don't see any vandalism? - AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 12:19, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

See the James Rose (footballer) wikipedia page — Preceding unsigned comment added by User2983 (talk • contribs) 12:23, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

@User2983:

1. Sign your messages (add ~~~~ at the end of messages)

2. You can report to WP:AIV, if they are a persistent vandal

3. Don't revert all the edits someone made just because one of them was unconstructive

- AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 12:36, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi User2983, and thanks for leaving me a message here with your concerns regarding HamoBeast. I definitely see edits that are vandalism or at least unreferenced (1, 2, 3, 4, 5), and the user has continued doing this through today. I've indefinitely blocked the account for vandalism, and I appreciate you for bringing this to my attention. In the future, you'll want to report repeat offenders to AIV. This will result in things getting handled faster in the event that I'm away from Wikipedia or offline. Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a great day and happy editing. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:49, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

You reverted my edits that corrected the Persian meaning of Dara. Please accept them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.247.232.233 (talk) 14:47, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message here regarding your edit to the Dara article. The reason that I reverted your edit was because you removed content that was referenced and replaced it with content that was not referenced. The next edit you made after my revert here also adds content but without any kind of reference. Please review Wikipedia's policy on verifiability and attribution. In the end, any content added to Wikipedia must either be attributable to a reliable source, or directly cited by a reliable source. Your changes should cite a reliable source - especially if you're removing content that's referenced. If you believe that the content in the article isn't correct or accurate, please start a discussion on the article's talk page here. Other editors will be happy to respond and help you. Please let me know if you have any questions about the policies I've linked you to here, and I'll be more than happy to answer them and help you. :-) Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a great rest of your day. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:10, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I removed the Ganymede irrelevant content because it was irrelevant. Claims that a Chinese astronomer thousands of years ago might have discovered Ganymede seems beyond the pale. This sort of Chinese propaganda is proliferating across the web and wikipedia. It is secure knowledge that only with telescopes in the 1600s are the moons of Jupiter discoverable. Hopefully Wikipedia can hew closer to science than science fiction. See also: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/2010JRASC.104..101M 171.4.221.249 (talk) 04:16, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message here regarding your edit to the Ganymede (moon) article. The content you tried to remove seems to be well referenced. It cites an encyclopedia, a Google Scholar book, and other references. If you have concerns as to whether or not the content is accurate or real, I highly recommend starting a discussion on the article's talk page here. Include your evidence and your concerns, and other editors will be happy to discuss it with you. :-) Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a great day and happy editing. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:20, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

You removed my external link to Death Grip's Government Plates official album download hosted on their label's site Third Worlds. Does Wikipedia not allow external links to official free downloads of the music that's the subject of the article? I <Ctrl-f>'d Wikipedia:External_links and found no mention of official downloads being explicitly unallowed, and seeing as the album is categorized under Albums free for download by copyright owner, would it be odd to let Wikipedia users interested in the album have the ability to download it? If it's alright to do so, I plan to do this for Exmilitary, Black Google, and Fashion Week (album) as well.

-Kyle SuperSonicSpy1 (talk) 16:43, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

@SuperSonicSpy1: Is the music public domain or licensed for free use? If so, you could upload it as a media file to WP:COMMONS and then add an audio player of the song to the article. This might be better than external links. ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 16:53, 23 August 2021 (UTC) (talk page watcher)

@FormalDude: Government Plates is an album, so that wouldn't really work. I could do that for some of their singles, though; if I were to do that, how would it be integrated into the article? Still hoping for some insight about allowing a direct album download. -Kyle SuperSonicSpy1 (talk) 17:11, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

@SuperSonicSpy1: You would add the media file to the article (after first uploading it to commons) and it would show up as an audio player. Example: Carmen#Recordings. Again, we'd need to be sure about the licensing beforehand, as it can't be copyrighted.

I'm not quite sure about the external link to the download, but someone else will probably be along soon to answer that for you. ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 18:41, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Dear Oshwah,

Greetings,In the Amhara region wikipedia artcile, there were serious factual errors. And, as a native i felt i have an obligation to lend a hand and do minor corrections so that the world has an empirically valid information.

Best, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Desta Tessema (talk • contribs) 17:49, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Desta Tessema! Thanks for leaving me a message here regarding your edit to the Amhara Region article. The reason that I reverted your edit was because you removed content that was referenced and appeared to be accurate, and you replaced some of that content with changes that did not cite any sources or references. You also made these changes without explaining why using the edit summary. In the future, you'll want to include an edit summary with each edit that you make, and explain what you changed and why. This helps other editors understand what you're doing when they go to review or scrutinize your changes. Another editor expressed concerns that your changes may have included content that wasn't worded in a neutral point of view. Per Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, all content written into articles must be worded to reflect a neutral point of view. Please review this policy as well, and let me know if you have any questions. I'll be more than happy to answer them and help you. :-) Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a great rest of your day. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:57, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Dear ‪Oshwah,

Thank you for your prompt reply.

I should have included the reason for the edit history. Unintentionally overlooked. Will do in the next edits.

second, i have made couple of citations to all the changes i did and all in neutral tone. Please accept the changes.

The article you reverted communicates to any foreign reader biased and inaccurate information and highly likely edited by a biased partisan person.

I suggest that it is better if you still rely on another moderator to check and then determine.

It is important as well as sensitive to my community. Because ethnic Amharas are currently facing genocide and ethnic cleansing and the article exactly blame the victim i.e. the Amhara which i as a student consider is narrative injustice.

Looking forward to see your positive response. Have a good one

Best, D.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Desta Tessema (talk • contribs) 23 August 2021 18:20 (UTC)

Hi Desta Tessema! So long as the content you're adding to the article cites references and sources that are reliable, you shouldn't have any problems. If you find that other editors have concerns with your changes, you should start a discussion on the article's talk page here. Other editors will be happy to respond to you and provide you with assistance. Thanks again for the messages, and I wish you a great day! :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:38, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Regarding the update to her page as "Unemployed" or "Robert Pattinson's Girlfriend" she has not done anything notable or worked on a project in years. She is also not a list, this edit was rooted truth and made with good intentions. The culture agrees as this was mentioned on Gossip Girl and several outlets. I would be happy to make the edit and add appropriate annotations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.15.144.250 (talk) 19:29, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for leaving me a message here. Because the article subject may not be active with anything notable or project-wise does not mean that we put "unemployed" or "Robert Pattinson's Girlfriend" as her job status. These edits translate as being disruptive. If the article subject isn't active in anything at this time, just leave the field blank. If you have any questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. :-) Thanks! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:55, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Oshwah! You alerted me that I'd deleted text without explaining why, and I think you've kept it ... that's all fine. I'd been asked to edit my draft page and some of the reasons why were insufficient attribution to sources, so the text I deleted was in response to that ... but if the text can remain, I'm of course happy with that. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quiltykkl63 (talk • contribs) 19:33, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Quiltykkl63! Thanks for leaving me a message here. I reverted this edit that you made to the John Peyton Cooke because you removed a reference from the content but did not explain why using the edit summary. In the future, you'll want to include edit summaries with each of your edits and explain what you're doing and why. This helps other editors understand what you're trying to do when they go to review, examine, or scrutinize your changes. Please let me know if you have any questions, and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a great day and happy editing. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:57, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Oshwah, I am MarkieC07. I noticed you've recently reverted my change on Mariah Carey's wiki page, due to a lack of source. There are multiple sources indicating that Mariah Carey's baptism name is "Mariah Angela Carey", kindly refer to this source: https://gw.geneanet.org/tdowling?lang=en&n=carey&oc=0&p=mariah+angela MarkieC07 (talk) 19:51, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi MarkieC07, and thanks for leaving me a message regarding your edit to the Mariah Carey article. The reason that I removed your edit was because it did not include a reference to a reliable source. I see that you've provided a reference in your response here. However, I don't believe that this reference could be considered reliable. Where does this page cite their references? How do we know that this is of the correct "Mariah Carey"? There are lots of questions here, and I don't believe that we've included a good reference. Please let me know if you have any questions, and I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a great day! :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:01, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Hey Oshwah, the points you stated above makes sense, but however if we Google "Mariah Carey", there are multiple sources like this saying that Mariah's baptism name is "Angela" - yeah it's understandable that the Internet is full of hoax, but I don't think people would make up her baptism name just for fun - I'm actually thinking she may have mentioned it in a concert/live stream, hence fans started creating sources like these. MarkieC07 (talk) 20:10, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

MarkieC07 - Sure, no problem. I recommend locating a source that's considered reliable and then cite that source with the content that you're adding. This way, it'll avoid any confusion or reverts by other editors in the future. One thing you'll need to remember is that the onus is on the user who is adding content to supply a reliable source. So if you do this now, you'll be all set. :-) Please let me know if I can answer any more questions. Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:25, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Hey Oshwah, just an update - I had verified this information and it is true indeed that the information is not supported by any reliable sources at the moment. Sorry for the misinformation I included earlier. I am still new to Wikipedia and willing to learn more to make useful contributions and would be more than happy to learn from people like you. MarkieC07 (talk) 03:29, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi MarkieC07! It takes a lot of guts to come back to someone and tell them that you were wrong. I commend you greatly for doing that. It puts a shine and a glow on your character, and that means even more that you belong here as an editor. Don't worry about it. :-) Learn from this, and grow from this - that's all you can do. You're new here... You're going to make mistakes. I made a lot of them when I was new here, too. Thank you for letting me know, and please don't hesitate to message me on my user talk page if you have any questions, need my input, or need help with anything at all. I'll be more than happy to lend you a hand. ;-) Thanks again, and I hope you have a great rest of your day. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:32, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

That's right indeed, Oshwah. Certainly for inexperienced people, through experiences like these we learn and improve ourselves to become an advocate in a certain field. It's a pleasure to meet you throughout my Wikipedia journey and I would definitely consult you if I need any assistance. Cheers MarkieC07 (talk) 03:48, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

MarkieC07 - Please do! I'll be happy to help you with anything that you need. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:49, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi, you deleted my changes to Liam O'Briens page. I'm a family member, he passed away a short while ago in Kilkenny hospital. It's okay, someone will read it in the newspaper tomorrow and republish. Regards Sandra — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.17.168.37 (talk) 22:39, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message regarding your edit to the Liam O'Brien (hurler) article. Sorry, but edits like these made to articles on biographies of living people require that a reliable source be cited in-line with the content. Wikipedia has strict rules regarding edits that are controversial in nature that are made to articles on biographies of living people. If what you're saying is indeed true, then reliable sources will undoubtedly publish articles and information on this, which we can then use to update the article. Until then, this information cannot be added. Please let me know if you have any questions, and I'll be happy to answer them and help you. :-) Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a great rest of your day! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:51, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi. I did not delete some information from "The Monsters are Due on Maple Street". Rather , I moved it to the infobox. This way you don't have the information listed twice. Jimknutt (talk) 23:31, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Jimknutt! Thanks for leaving me a message regarding the The Monsters Are Due on Maple Street article. Please accept my sincere apologies; I only noticed your edit here and didn't see the previous one where you added the information elsewhere. I've gone ahead and restored your original changes. Please let me know if you have any questions or additional concerns, and I'll be more than happy to answer them and help you. :-) Thanks again for the message and for letting me know about this. I hope you have a great day, and I wish you happy editing. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:45, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)@Jimknutt: In most cases, an infobox should be a summary of information found further down in the body of an article, where the character names are generally listed with the actors per WP:TVCAST. As you are interested in improving Twilight Zone episode articles, I'd encourage you to look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Television, and in particular the style guides linked there, such as Wikipedia:Television episodes. This helps to ensure uniform approach to TV episode articles on Wikipedia, and helps readers to quickly find what they are looking for. For example, a reader may just want to know if an actor was in a certain series or episode, so the look in the infobox without having to read the rest of the article. On the other hand, if they want to know the name of the character, they know to click on the Cast list in the Table of contents. It may seem redundant to you, and that's understandable, but that's how TV episode articles have evolved on Wikipedia. I'm not generally involved in maintaining TV episode articles, but editors who are will probably revert your edits eventually. Wikipedia can be very complicated at times, but in the end it can be quite rewarding if one takes some time to learn the ropes along the way. BilCat (talk) 00:27, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

The former name commonly used for Anû Kathâ Îpa is incredibly racist and sexist. I urge you to allow my edits to censor this former name, if not remove it completely.

Johnthepirate55 (talk) 00:59, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Johnthepirate55! Thanks for leaving me a message regarding your edit to the Anû Kathâ Îpa article. Please see this page; Wikipedia is not censored. Your attempts to remove and censor the phrase is against Wikipedia's guidelines on open and free information. You must understand that there will be content in the encyclopedia that is controversial, radical, offensive, and even repulsive. However, just because someone feels that the information is such is not a reason to remove it. Open and free knowledge comes at that cost; we do not censor things or cover them up so long as the information and the content has encyclopedic value. If you believe that the content should be removed, I recommend that you start a discussion on the article's talk page here. Other editors will be more than happy to respond and help you. Please let me know if I can help you with anything else, and I'll be happy to do so. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:06, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

hello I'm Hussnain Awan You have removed my link. Please allow me to post. I am doing SEO work on my client's website

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hussnain Awan (talk • contribs) 01:28, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Oshwah, I added some factual content to my Bio that I felt was missing from my overall body of work. I retired at end of the 2021 season so wanted to finalize and update Redflashfox Knight (talk) 04:14, 24 August 2021 (UTC)Dave Magarity

Hi Redflashfox Knight, and thanks for messaging me about your edit to the Dave Magarity article. The reason that I reverted your edit to this article was because you added content that was completely unreferenced and not supported by reliable sources. Please take some time to read through Wikipedia's policy on verifiability and Wikipedia's guidelines on reliable sources, as they will help you to understand why references are important. If you have any questions after reviewing these pages, please let me know and I'll be happy to help you. :-) Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a great day and happy editing. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:19, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

That guy who keeps removing sourced content and insert his own personal commentary on the article Islam and violence has been harassing me with threats on my Talk page since I warned him to stop doing that. GenoV84 (talk) 04:51, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi GenoV84! It looks like this user is trying to explain their edits and ask you not to interfere - I don't see any edits from this user where they explicitly threatened you. Just ignore their messages on your user take page and continue doing what you're doing. I've left a warning on this user's talk page for edit warring. If this user continues to edit disruptively or if they become uncivil toward you, please let me know right away - I'll be happy to step in and put a stop to it. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:58, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your suggestion. I replied to the editor on the article's Talk page and explained the reasons for reverting his edits and warning him, but he keeps leaving messages on my Talk page. GenoV84 (talk) 05:12, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

GenoV84 - Just ignore it. ;-) Start a discussion on the article's talk page with your concerns, let IslamIsPiece know about the discussion, and start from there. If this user doesn't participate and keeps edit warring on the article, let me know. Don't edit war yourself; start a talk page discussion to cover yourself. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:16, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

He already started a new section on the article's Talk page and I replied to him. He said that it's "a shame" that I don't know what's the matter with a particular source that previous editors added before I started to work on that article, reinserted his personal commentary on the article, and continued to harass me by writing "stop trolling here" on my Talk page. GenoV84 (talk) 05:27, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Could you explain "reinserted his personal commentary on the article"? Please explain where exactly is my personal commentary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IslamIsPiece (talk • contribs) 05:37, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Oshwah for your interruption. Actually, this user says my material is "own personal commentary". Now I put everything in quotes, so he knows this is not my personal commentary. Anyway, thanks - it is quite inappropriate to repeatedly remove material without any explicitly stated reasons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IslamIsPiece (talk • contribs) 05:22, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

IslamIsPiece, GenoV84 - I think you both need to cool it down and talk to one another on the article's talk page. :-) No more reverting one another on the article, no more back-and-forth finger-pointing and calling each other "trolls", no more shenanigans. Go to the article's talk page and discuss the dispute, and stay on-topic. Resolve the dispute properly, and come to a consensus. Work together and be helpful to one another. Can we try and do this before things have to escalate? :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:39, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

I replied on the article's Talk page. Honestly, the fact that this guy, girl, or whatever it is, repeatedly left uncivil messages and threats on my Talk page despite the fact that I reverted them more than once is a sufficient reason to understand that this person refuses to engage in a respectful manner with other editors, including me, therefore I don't have to waste my time with a troll. If someone else wants to join the discussion, that's fine by me. GenoV84 (talk) 05:56, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Once again, the editor keeps changing the content of the article despite the ongoing discussion on the article's Talk page. Moreover, I warned him/her before that reaching consensus on the Talk page is necessary in order to apply contentious edits. GenoV84 (talk) 06:37, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Also, this stuff:"I make you an offer. If you are a scientist, let's exchange our names. I can give you an email address (not my official one), and we take it from there." GenoV84 (talk) 06:45, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Right, but you reverted my additions again without any notice (and without reaching a consensus) and without any explanations of why my comments are "personal" or "disruptive". I gave explicit explanations why my changes are justified. So far, I don't get anything from you.

There are two points: 1) is content. We resolved this already - you arbitrarily classify my comments as "personal" and "disruptive"; since you give no reasons for this, the matter is resolved for me. 2) is threats, insults, etc.: my comments on your talk page are deleted, aren't they? Unlike you, I do not insult anyone at the moment. All is cared about was 1). As this is resolved, I have nothing else to say.

Thanks, Oshwah. I'm still learning editing (signatures and stuff), but I know enough about science to judge the quality of my added material, the original sources, and the current state of the wikipedia article. All is cool with me. As long as GenoV84 does not explain "disruptive material" and "personal commentary", I would not change my additions, which are quite obviously neither disruptive nor personal commentary. Just sticking to the original sources. Please don't make any uninformed deletions in the future (for other users) which are based on your subjective assessments, without being knowledgable about the sources.

He has deleted my additions again. Oshwah, can he please be blocked for that? I do not want to add it again. My comments are merely quoted from the original articles regarding Fish and regarding Anderson. As long as I do not get an explanation of what is "personal commentary" or what is "disruptive", this editor's behavior is arbitrary random classification of my added content. 6:13

• The admin Oshwah suggested us to cool down and I told you more than once to follow the rules. The last time that I reverted your edits the discussion was still open and consensus hasn't been reached yet, therefore I have to acknowledge the fact that you deliberately refuse to listen and continue to edit the article even though the aforementioned admin also warned you for edit warring.

• Despite the fact that I suggested you to stop harassing me by posting personal attacks, threats, and uncivil comments on my personal Talk page multiple times, you continued to do so regardless of my advice, the ongoing discussion, and the admin's intervention.
• "I am a scientist (and you are not)".... Everybody is welcome to edit and improve Wikipedia, regardless of their professional status or degree. You seem to assume quite a lot about other people's lives, how do you know if I am a scientist or not? Do you have any evidence to backup for your claims about me and my personal life?
• "I make you an offer. If you are a scientist, let's exchange our names. I can give you an email address (not my official one), and we take it from there." Asking another person to dox himself by releasing his personal informations and e-mail address in order to "make a deal" is a totally inappropriate behavior and ridiculous thing to do on the internet, and a potential violation of WP:PRIVACY on Wikipedia.
• From my perspective, it doesn't really matter at this point what that source says or what you "have to offer", because you have nothing to offer and the source is not the main reason for the beginning of this discussion, my warnings on your Talk page are, because from that point on you kept escalating with your aggressive and disrespectful behavior towards me along with your complete disregard for the WP guidelines. What really matters here is your behavior towards me and other users on Wikipedia: everything that you did in just a few hours is unacceptable, and proves that you are clearly WP:NOTHERE to build an encyclopedia. GenoV84 (talk) 17:43, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Oshwah,

I was just wondering, how do you know if a user is a spambot as opposed to a regular spammer? I was looking at User:LottieTillman when you blocked it and I was just curious if there was a way to tell. Or is there more account info visible to admins?

Kind regards, Princess Persnickety (talk) 14:46, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi PrincessPersnickety! They put the same exact thing on their userpage as the many other spambots that I've blocked, which includes HTML code and line break tags. Once I see the exact format and the use of code on their userpage, I know for sure that it's another one. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:49, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) PrincessPersnickety, see the logs of the accounts at User:Pahunkat/Spambot log#Traditional English format User:Pahunkat/Spambot log#Russian Casino, you'll notice a pattern pretty quickly. Oshwah's noticed one of the things I've noticed as well, I'd like to try making a filter one day combined with some other observations - apparently enwiki doesn't have a filter that can be set to disallow without providing false positives. Pahunkat (talk) 15:45, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you both for the explanation. I suppose if you're spending a lot of time blocking users you'll come to recognise repeat offenders! Princess Persnickety (talk) 19:55, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

In full details of how to study for a lifestyleHolly Mamay (talk) 18:29, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Holly Mamay! I'm not sure what you're asking here - do you need help with something? How can I help you? :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:30, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi how do I add my profile Majozii (talk) 19:41, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Majozii! Are you talking about creating a user page? Just go to User:Majozii, and you'll be able to create one! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:09, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, You recommended I message you. Bryan Konietzko's actual birthdate is on Imdb https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1665983/ That was my source for the change — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.112.171.89 (talk) 21:46, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for the message and for letting me know. If you need assistance with anything, please don't hesitate to reach out to me. I'll be more than happy to help you! :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:12, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello Oshwah! I'm sorry for cluttering your talk page again, but wanted to make sure I understood the findings from the SPI case brought against me a few weeks ago. It looks like a clerk merged me with another case, and the IP's were already blocked, but I believe that means I can make edits where appropriate (with citations, of course,) and it was found not to be related to the IP's in question. I just want to make sure I understand correctly, I'm still a little new to this. On a side note, the resources you gave me a few days ago to help me with an edit on Dogfish Head Brewery have been more than helpful, so I'm working to make some updates on that page for anyone who may use it. Thank you again for your help with everything, I greatly appreciate it! Spf121188 (talk) 16:16, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Spf121188! Thanks for the message. Please accept my apologies for such a delay getting back to you. This last month has been very hectic for me, and I just needed to take a break from some things for a bit until things became less busy. That sounds correct; if you were found to be a sockpuppet account, you wouldn't be sitting here able to message me here. You'd be blocked, and you're obviously not, so breathe easy and move on. :-) I'm glad that the help I provided for you was valuable to you. If you need anything else, please don't hesitate to reach out to me and I'll be more than happy to help you. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:15, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

I edited the Wikipedia page the labradors because what I wrote was correct. I've read a lot of boos about dogs and they mentioned that labradors are from a province in Canada called Newfoundland. Like the breed, the other breed also named Newfoundland which is also related to the Labrador breed. Hope to hear from you soon — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.228.240.193 (talk) 23:29, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for the message. I understand, but you need to cite references if you're going to make the changes that you've been making to that article. Please review this guideline, and let me know if you have any questions. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:17, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

—— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 01:21, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Sakura emad! Thanks for the new doggy! Sorry it took so long to respond and to thank you for this. It's been a hectic month for me since August, and I needed to take a break from things for a bit while things were so busy. I hope you're doing well! Keep in touch, and let me know if I can help you with anything - I'll be more than happy to do so! :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:20, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

I'm just saying that Johnato3126 is a sock of blocked Johnjoshua1. He was already CU blocked on Wikimedia Common [5], with the same editing behavior. 220.126.9.232 (talk) 09:06, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

If you are not too busy could you take a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Prince1917 and tell me what you think? --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:05, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Kansas Bear! I apologize for such a delay with responding to your request here. I had a very hectic September, and I needed to take a break from things for awhile. It looks like a checkuser has confirmed the sock puppetry and closed the SPI case, so issue resolved. :-) If you need anything else, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be more than happy to lend a hand. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:22, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Not a problem, Oshwah! I completely understand. My grandson arrived 3 weeks early so things have been hectic here for the past week. But he is fine and my daughter-in-law is doing well. --Kansas Bear (talk) 02:35, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Kansas Bear - Wow, three weeks early? Yeah, that can definitely be worrying and a bit stressful to go though. I'm glad to hear that he's fine and that the premature birth didn't cause any harm to him and his development. Congratulations! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:17, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Oshwah. You have new messages at Pahunkat's talk page.
Message added 15:47, 28 August 2021 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello Oshwah, another email from me. I'm not sure if you're already aware of this, but I've just sent it to you in case you weren't. Pahunkat (talk) 15:47, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

I'm an idiot, that should have been a ygm. Forgot to tick the right box on twinkle. Pahunkat (talk) 15:59, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello User:Pahunkat, I am still waiting for a reply to an email I sent to Oshwah the previous week so you may not be the only one waiting patiently. It appears he has not edited Wikipedia since 25 August 2021 except a single edit at the end of the same month. Only Oshwah knows if the reason for the break was Hurricane Ida or not, the user page does not reveal where he is. p.s. everyone makes small mistakes on Wikipedia which can be easy to fix while noticed. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 06:45, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

I hope Oshwah's alright given the hurricane. It's an OS matter related to Oshwah, but from a long time ago and I suspect Oshwah already knows about it and decided to do nothing. Pahunkat (talk) 18:23, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Pahunkat, Iggy the Swan! Sorry for such a delay responding to you here! It's been a really hectic September, and I needed to take a break from some things in order to get my affairs in line. I plan on responding to each message left on my user talk page here, then I'll tackle my email inbox next. You'll just need to bear with me for the time being, as my absence from Wikipedia since August has resulted in 146 Wikipedia notifications and 66 emails sent to my Wikipedia inbox. :-) I'll hopefully be able to get to your message soon; again, just bear with me. :-) Cheers - great to be back! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:26, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Based on my experience here, how likely do you think I'd be granted administrator privileges on Wikipedia?. Regards StarryNightSky11^(talk) 21:35, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi, @StarryNightSky11, I think it's great you're interested in getting more involved in Wikipedia through adminship. Based on your current experience, however, any request for adminship from you is likely to be speedily closed (see Adminship is not for new users). The expectation for admin qualifications is quite high, as this humorous essay makes clear. You may want to read the answer to this frequently asked question. Happy editing! ––FormalDude talk 22:09, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

@FormalDude: Thank you for your advice. Best StarryNightSky11^(talk) 22:21, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi StarryNightSky11! I apologize for such a delay responding to your question here. Let's just say that September was a ridiculously hectic month for me, and I needed to take a break from some things so that I could get some affairs in order. :-) It looks like you've been given some good advice above. In my perspective, when people approach me about the prospect of running for adminship, here is what I usually say:

Administrators on Wikipedia are volunteer users who are given (literally) a few extra buttons in order to carry out advanced actions that, for obvious reasons, can't be given out to everybody. That's the only difference between a Wikipedia editor and a Wikipedia editor who is also an administrator. Administrators have to follow all of the same policies, guidelines, rules, and norms that non-admins have to, and they have absolutely no "authority" above other users or accounts, nor do they have any kind of access to hidden "special things" like any exemptions from certain policies or rules, or more rights or "status" above other users to edit articles and content. Apart from the few extra buttons that administrators have in order to carry out those few additional actions and tasks, they are absolutely 100% equal and are exactly the same as non-administrators in regards to everything else - authority, power, "status", importance, and the right to make edits and changes to articles and content. They don't make up rules, block who they want, protect what they want, or do whatever they want - their responsibilities are to carry out the tasks that the community has allowed and outlined in the appropriate policies to carry out and only in situations that are deemed necessary and acceptable by those policies.

That being said, the administrator user right is a senior-level toolset that's only given to highly experienced editors who can demonstrate many years' worth of above-proficient and consistent policy knowledge, judgment, community trust, appropriate use of tools and policy, and other requirements the community deems relevant to examine before giving their support. It is not a user right that's given to new, novice, or even established editors on Wikipedia. To give you a good idea and perspective: I've been an editor since the beginning of 2007 (14 years), and I've only been an admin since August 2016 (5 years) - meaning that I was an editor on Wikipedia for just shy of 10 years before I was considered for the tool. You can refer to this guide, as well as this guide - for more information about how users become administrators, the process, the various requirements, and (in a nutshell) how difficult it is in order to become one. Most requests by users to become administrators fail, even by users with years of good experience. There are many good editors and contributors on Wikipedia who will never become administrators (for various reasons), and there are many requirements before even being considered for the role or even having your request taken seriously. In a nutshell: It's not easy.

I hope my response has answered your questions and provided you with a good explanation of the role, the responsibilities, what admins are and what they're not, and the general requirements and process that users go through in order to become one. If you have any questions, let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. Best regards and happy editing - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:30, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

—— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 01:35, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Sakura emad! Wow, 5 years really do go by fast! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:33, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

@Oshwah hope you happy and healthy life. —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 02:54, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Sakura emad - So far, so good! Let's just hope that it stays that way... ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:58, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Sorry I'm one day late, but happy adminship anniversary :-). Thanks for all the work you've put into the English Wikipedia and as well as throughout Wikimedia as a global renamer. SHB2000 (talk) 09:33, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi SHB2000! No need to be sorry - it's all good, man... ;-) Thanks for the message and for the kind words, and I hope you have a great rest of your weekend. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:13, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Oshwah :-) SHB2000 (talk) 21:12, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi CAPTAIN RAJU! Thank you for the well wishes! I can't believe that it's already been 5 years... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:34, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Precious

Six years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:15, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Gerda Arendt! Thank you for the anniversary well-wishes! I'm just sorry that it took so long for me to respond to you with my gratitude. It was a very hectic September for me, and I needed to take a break from some things in order to get some affairs sorted out and in-line. Not to worry though! A lot of users have speculated and were curious about where I've been... I'm not retired, I didn't quit Wikipedia, and I'm definitely not dead. It's good to be back! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:38, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

	The Special Barnstar
	for friends only Spaceman6651 (talk) 22:12, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Spaceman6651! Thank you for leaving me this barnstar! I'm happy that you consider me a friend - I feel the same way. I'm sorry that it's taken me so long to get back to you. It's been a very hectic September for me, and I needed to take a break from some things so that I could get some important affairs sorted out and in-line. I hope that you're doing well, and I hope you keep in touch. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:39, 9 October 2021 (UTC)