From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Information.svg You are currently viewing an archive of Oshwah's user talk page from September 2016. Please do not modify this page.

These discussions are no longer active and were moved here for historical and record-keeping purposes.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

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

Block of User:

Is it possible that this block could be extended for quite a bit longer but perhaps as a soft block (so registered users could log in)? This IP editor has been active for months vandalizing and the last block was 31 hours. Thank you. -- Dane2007 talk 01:54, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Dane2007 -  Done ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:58, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

look at the EF logs at AIV

Hey - be sure you look at the edit filter logs when you're looking at IP edits at AIV. If the filter is set to 'disallow', it won't show up in the normal contributions. You declined one report tonight that has been tripping an edit filter today. Blocking for that is up to you, but I agree with Materialscientist that it's likely a school, and I would block for three to six months.

You're not used to looking at the deleted contributions and EF logs, and I know it takes getting used to. You're doing a great job, but don't be overly cautious. :-) Katietalk 01:46, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Katie! It's nice to see you again! Thank you for the feedback; having access to new stuff does take some getting-used-to :-). I saw the deleted contribs (the two edits made that were disallowed via the edit filter). I wasn't sure how blocking works when only edit filter trips exist as a rationale, so I decided to error on the side of caution and not proceed. However, if you feel that a school block should be set, by all means... please do :-). I'll get used to holding the mop; in the meantime, I'd much much rather be given feedback for AGF and for not blocking, as opposed to using the tools in situations that they should not have been :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:49, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
I hear you. There's a uw template for tripping the edit filters; I don't use it that often but it's there if you need it. As for handling, if it's not a false positive, and there are certainly a fair share of those, you treat them just like you would a disruptive edit. Since this one has stopped for now I'll leave it alone, but just be aware in the future. Like I said, you're doing great! :-) Katietalk 01:58, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Katie - Awesome! Thanks for informing me on the consensus for taking action based on edits that trip filters. This is good information. I'll keep that in mind for sure. And I appreciate the compliment - I'm mostly familiar with process, but I still have a lot to learn now that I actually have those cute little extra buttons all over the history and contribs pages. I won't let you down, Katie! Keep in touch :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:03, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Kinda related, I've recently been reporting some of the worse offenders from the <filter dinged me??/> filter log - sometimes these editors have made 5/6 repeated edits to an article trying to <filter filtering/> it up, but these are all disallowed and thus the report seems to be for an editor with no contribs. Echoing Katie, and a plea from a mere EFM, please do block these! -- samtar talk or stalk 06:42, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
on that note, the filter has broken -- samtar talk or stalk 06:49, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Filters like Special:AbuseFilter/784 are for a vandalism trend, as opposed to long-term abuse, so there's no overwhelming need to block everyone who trips the filter. If they trip it over 10 times during a span of five minutes they are automatically reported to AIV, and I'll usually block in that case. Just make sure the filters they were tripping clearly shows they are here only to disrupt. On the other hand, as Katie said, if you review a report and see they've had 1 or 2 bad edits and have been warned, but a bunch of filter hits, you should take those into account. I'll usually append the language "see also filter log" in my block summary, so others will know that played a role in the decision to block. Blocking solely on filter hits (when there are no live edits) is acceptable too, and there's an option for this in Twinkle. Just ask yourself, is there a chance they'll find their way around the filter? Not blocking is just as fine, though – the filter is doing its job and there's no added expense of a user continually triggering it MusikAnimal talk 16:07, 2 September 2016 (UTC)


You noted your ability in mediating in disputes, - perhaps look at WER, where editors are missed whom I drove away, allegedly. Background: RfC for Noël Coward. More peace among those arguing would be nice, - I won't be one of them ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:49, 2 September 2016 (UTC)


Hi Oshwah,

Thank you for defending my created page, Onnit. It appears Zefr has a gripe against that company for some reason with such quick cold deletions -- which takes away from the inviting community feel of Wikipedia. I would love your help to remedy this situation if possible! My original article, as approved and published, features multiple primary source citations that were non-promotional. Big outlets like: Forbes, Inc., Austin Business Journals, Rolling Stone, Entrepreneur and a Journal of Medicine have covered the company. Also mentioned the "Clinical Study" as paid for by Onnit, no secret and all public info that I was able to gather through a simple search since it's been a controversial topic. Then, I thought this would be a great Wikipedia entry.

Would it be possible to have the user removed from editing the page? Marked for deletion seems harsh and other users seem to disagree with Zefr's edits. Onnit seems a prominent company, no? Help me understand if I have gone about the creation incorrectly despite it being accepted. I hope to continue being a positive contributor to Wikipedia. Many thanks!Orsto (talk) 13:36, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Orsto. I declined the speedy deletion tag that was placed on the article because it did not fall into any of the criterion cited in the tag. While the article may not fall into a deletion criterion that does not require a discussion per consensus, it may meet a deletion criterion that does require a discussion. Make sure that you read and understand what constitutes a company or organization as notable - this is where many articles that are of companies or organizations fall short, and it's important that you understand why this is. My decision to decline the speedy deletion tag does not imply nor come with any "ruling" or "judgment" regarding the article or any user who has edited it. It was simply because of the fact that the article was not eligible for speedy deletion under the rationales and criterion cited in the speedy deletion tag. Please let me know if you have any more questions or concerns. I'll be happy to assist you and point you in the right direction. Have a great rest of your day, and I wish you happy editing. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 17:16, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Oshwah, the help is much appreciated! I reviewed some of the policies and would it make sense to request that user be blocked from editing the wikipedia entry? It appears there is a personal vendetta against the company. The original approved post appeared to highlight facts backed by primary sources, so I'd love to learn how to protect a page, especially when other users also share the opinion that its a legitimate entry. Your advice has been great, thanks again!!Orsto (talk) 14:20, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Someone you just blocked

FYI: Special:Contributions/Hipsydipseee seems to have been dumping copy-pastes of Solitude (album) all across formerly non-existent talkpages, user talkpages and userpages outside their own userspace. Can you just blast all pages they created into oblivion, or d'you want me to go & CSD-tag 'm? AddWittyNameHere (talk) 19:01, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Nevermind. Looks like you sent 'm to oblivion more or less the same moment I posted. XD AddWittyNameHere (talk) 19:02, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
AddWittyNameHere -  Done ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:04, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! Oh, and a belated congratulations on adminship, since I appear to have forgotten to do so before. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 19:05, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Thank you, AddWittyNameHere! I won't let you down :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:20, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
You're welcome. :) I wouldn't have supported if I thought otherwise, mind.Face-tongue.svg AddWittyNameHere (talk) 19:27, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Talk page deletion

Did you mean to delete the user talk page when you mass deleted Hipsydipseee's creations?--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:05, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Ponyo - Nope, I dun goofed. I didn't realize that he created the talk page and it was deleted. I've restored the page. Thanks for letting me know about this. Sorry; still new and learning :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:13, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
No worries. If you're using the mass delete script it's easy to forgot to unclick the user talk.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:51, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Hong Kong Soya Sauce Chicken Rice and Noodle

Good grief, I am getting so hungry. :) — Diannaa (talk) 22:00, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Diannaa - Dang it, now I'm hungry! :-P ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:03, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I'm hungry too!! :P KGirlTrucker81 huh? what I'm been doing 22:18, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm a bit late to the party...

A very beautiful Nectarine Pie.jpg ...but I baked you a congratulatory pie. Best of luck with your new tools! MJ94 (talk) 22:15, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
MJ94! Yay! I love pie! <3 ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:16, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Also, I wish I could thank every single editor who wished me well and offered their congratulations on my talk page. There would be a lot of edits to make... and that brings a sincere and honored smile on my face. For those who I haven't gotten to thank, I give you my sincere and humbled "Thank you!", from the bottom of my heart. I am humbled by all of your kind words, your wikifriendship and wikilove, and (most importantly) your trust. I will not take any of it for granted, and I will not let any of you down. I promise :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:19, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

legit information

please visit its all legit info — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rasikhgems (talkcontribs) 22:53, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

mk fintel wind

hi there, can you please review my comment on your request for deletion? You can just type mk fintel wind on google and see thousands of pictures and articles about the company i wrote about. First ever to bring renewable energy in Serbia! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Merrimark56 (talkcontribs) 00:40, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Last edit to Igor Vovchanchyn


The last edit I made was indeed a true circulation. That particular story can be found on many websites and is a popular 'legend', so to speak. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:446:C401:3570:C83A:F29F:5E77:9A6C (talk) 02:41, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

User block requested/review of your decision

Hi Oshwah, you left a note on AIV against my report that user had been incorrectly or insufficiently warned. Please note that as per our wp:blocking policy, "note that warnings are not a prerequisite for blocking. In general, administrators should ensure that users who are acting in good faith are aware of policies and are given reasonable opportunity to adjust their behavior before blocking. On the other hand, users acting in bad faith, whose main or only use is forbidden activity (sockpuppetry, vandalism, and so on), do not require any warning and may be blocked immediately." This user's edit was BLP vandalism on José Calderón (basketball) and contained the following words: sam sells like penis...Peniz...penis....Penis Lickers Association....Is Penis a country...penis...ended with dick in his butthole, and all done in the infobox, from changing the BLP's name to his nationality. Of course, apart from dick weed in the edit summary. Unless you consider this a good faith edit as per policy, there is no warning required for a user undertaking BLP vandalism like this. Additionally, I had requested that the edit also be revdeleted, which I believe you have not done. May I ask the reasons why you have chosen to not revdel the particular edit while revdeling the edit summary?
In summary, may I request you to block the said user indefinitely and to revdel the user's edit? Blocking ensures that if the user attempts to undertake similar edits using the underlying ip addresses or using other names, the user is restricted from vandalizing Wikipedia again. Revdeling the edit ensures protection of a BLP. AIV reporters like me take considerable time in identifying such editors, and it takes our time away when such editors are not blocked and revdel requests are not heeded to. I respect your decision, but strongly encourage you to reverse the same. In case you decide not to reverse your decision, may I request you to put up your decision for peer review on ANI, and additionally not undertake decisions on BLP violations in the future? Thank you in advance. Lourdes 07:17, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
@Lourdes: If you had checked the log you would have seen I messed up and deleted the edit summary instead of the edit. I've fixed that now (it doesn't help that you've repeated the offending material twice). However, Oshwah was completely correct in his assessment. You'll note that the editor who reverted the vandalism is also an admin and gave a level 1 warning. I would have given a level 3 warning but would not have blocked either. --NeilN talk to me 07:28, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks NeilN, I've had to repeat the offending material to push the point across because you missed out deleting. Thanks for revdeling it now. Please do clarify for my knowledge. The blocking policy mentions (as said above) that "In general, administrators should ensure that users who are acting in good faith are aware of policies and are given reasonable opportunity to adjust their behavior before blocking. On the other hand, users acting in bad faith, whose main or only use is forbidden activity (sockpuppetry, vandalism, and so on), do not require any warning and may be blocked immediately." Do you consider the BLP violation edit a good faith edit and the editor a good faith editor? Lourdes 07:33, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
@Lourdes: The proper way to have done that is to have provided a diff. And note the policy says, "may be blocked immediately." It is rare for a vandal to be blocked after one edit and there's a reason why we have 3rd and 4th level warnings, both of which assume the user is not acting in good faith. --NeilN talk to me 07:41, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
NeilN, thanks. By your response, I presume that you agree with me that the user is a bad faith editor. If you note, the policy says that bad faith editors "do not require any warning" and not "may not be warned". In other words, bad faith editors absolutely don't require any warning (opposite to what Oshwah wrote at AIV that "user had been incorrectly or insufficiently warned"). While you mention that the notices assume bad faith editing, the policy says otherwise, and recommends notices are for good faith editors. Do please clarify if my reading of the policy is wrong. I'm hopeful I'll leave with better understanding of the issue post your response. Lourdes 07:48, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
@Lourdes: Again, policy does not say "must be blocked". It says "may be blocked". And again, blocking a vandal after one edit is rare. You've got three admins including C.Fred who saw the edit and declined to block, using their judgment. Bad faith editors do not require any warning but that doesn't mean admins will block after one edit and not give the editor the chance to stop or change their behavior. --NeilN talk to me 07:58, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks NeilN. In summary, as per you, a bad faith editor need not get blocked after one edit. Also, as per you, a bad faith editor does not require any warning. Can I therefore presume that Oshwah's statement at AIV that "user had been incorrectly or insufficiently warned" should rather have been "wait for more evidence"? (I promise, this is the last clarification requested of you.) Lourdes 08:03, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
@Lourdes: AIV reports should be made after the vandal has been sufficiently warned as it's not designed to be a holding pen. Oshwah could also have declined, using, "No edits since warning". Most declined reports appear on AIV for at least a couple hours after being declined so many admins do check for additional activity when doing sweeps of the board. Also, WP:UWLEVELS may be worth a read. Most, if not all, admins who regularly patrol AIV look to see if that advice has been followed on the editor's talk page. --NeilN talk to me 08:15, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
That's a good read. Oshwah, I think it would be good if in case of BLP violations, you use what NeilN recommends than the template message you left me at AIV. NeilN, although in case of bad faith editors, policy goes against your statement of "AIV reports should be made "after" the vandal has been sufficiently warned" (and I hope that's a new perspective to you too), I think I understand the punchline of your clarification, which is that even in the case of any absolute BLP violation by an utterly bad faith editor (like the one noted above), don't report the editor to AIV until the editor has attempted multiple similar egregious BLP violations. Thanks for the time taken to discuss. It's a new perspective for me. I'll get back if I need more help. Ciao. Lourdes 08:28, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I would have declined the block as well. A single instance of vandalism is an extremely low threshold for any block; very few administrators will enact a one strike policy. Blocks are preventative but the editor must demonstrate a pattern which cannot be extrapolated from a single edit. The word "persistent" appears frequently in several administrative blocking guidelines and policies. Additionally, there's a worthwhile section at WP:BITE about behaviourial guidelines for newcomers who are vandals: "today's vandals might be tomorrow's editors". Mkdwtalk 07:05, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Lourdes. Let me start off my apologizing -- I didn't mean to "template" you in my response in AIV nor did I mean for it to upset you or frustrate you in any way. I also don't want my response to discourage you from filing reports when you feel that action should be taken. I won't go too in-depth with what others have already pointed out, as they're already explained my rationale very well. Basically, the vandalism was childish and quite ridiculous for sure, but we try not to block due to one instance of vandalism. Even if it's quite... childish. Blocks cannot be used in a punitive measure, but used in preventative measures. In the future, I'll make sure to explain instead of just pasting a template. I appreciate you for expressing your concerns here, and you're welcome to do so. I've only been an admin for about a week now, so I have plenty to learn :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 13:15, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
No worries. Thanks for the response. I think the tipping point was the template (and the fact perhaps that this was the first and only one of all my AIV reports to have ever been rejected). Now that I have been proven right, and you're feeling dismally apologetic and are ready to give up your bit for the mistake committed, I feel much better :D Have fun and see you around. Lourdes 13:51, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

Choco-Nut Bake with Meringue Top cropped.jpg Congratulations on your successful RfA! I have been stalking observing you work for a while now and I would have undoubtedly supported. Too bad that real life has been a drag since a few months and I barely get time for this wonderful site. Anyway, kudos to you for passing; I am sure that you'll do a great job as an admin. Good luck with the mop! Yash! 12:44, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Yash!, and thanks for the cupcake! Thank you for the wikilove and for the kind words; I very much appreciate it. No worries my friend! It was a squeaker, but I passed and it's all over and behind me now. I won't let you down! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 13:22, 6 September 2016 (UTC)


Just wanted to congratulate you on your successful RfA :) CatcherStorm talk 14:40, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, CatcherStorm :-). I'll do my best! You have my word. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 08:44, 7 September 2016 (UTC)


Well done. Anything else would have been a travesty. Eagleash (talk) 18:06, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Eagleash - HA! I barely passed! But nonetheless, I thank you for your support and your well wishes. I'll do my best :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 08:45, 7 September 2016 (UTC)


Congratulations for your adminship. Now take that mop and whack vandals on their heads. Poking is also fair game. WannaBeEditor (talk) 14:23, 5 September 2016 (UTC)


Export hell seidel steiner.png I think it's time for another beer! Congratulations on you successful RfA. You deserve it and the Wikipedia project will benefit! Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 15:19, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Crystallizedcarbon - More beer! Yay! Thanks man!! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 08:46, 7 September 2016 (UTC)


Dear Oshwah, may I ask you to semi-protect Hazal Kaya article indefinitely? Reason: too many disruptive edits made from IPs (Pakistan, etc.). Thank you. Mona778 (talk) 19:49, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

@Oshwah: didn't you read my post? Mona778 (talk) 21:53, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Mona778! Please accept my humblest apologies for the delay getting back to you. I didn't mean to skip your message at all. I'm currently on mobile and should be home in about 15 minutes. I'll take a look at the article as soon as I get in. Thanks :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:07, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
No problem at all, take your time. Best regards, Mona778 (talk) 22:19, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi Mona778! After looking through the page history, I don't see a high level of disruptive edits, but I also take note that there have been recent disruption by unregistered users. I've gone ahead and applied Pending Changes protection on the article. Please let me know if I can do anything else for you. Thanks again for understanding, and I hope you have a great rest of your day! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for being so helpful. You too have a great day. Mona778 (talk) 22:56, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
You're welcome, Mona778. Have a great rest of your day :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 08:46, 7 September 2016 (UTC)


Hi Oshwah, How have you been mate. It has been a while since we last spoke. I would like to just give an update on the date. We have decided that we are starting to go out, considering that she really likes me and I have decided, I am going to treat her to the movies. In addition, I hope you liked the dance off videos that I created. These videos were published. Anyway, I would like to hear from you, how you have been keeping. --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 15:04, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

I saw you remove the entire message, so I responded on your talk page. Cheers -- ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:30, 7 September 2016 (UTC)


Hi Oshwah!! I'm so happy that you are now an admin! Good job and congrats on attaining it! It's not easy! Thank you for always being there to answer my questions and I wish you well with your new position! NikolaiHo 22:16, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Nikolaiho! It's nice to talk to you again! Thank you for the message, the happy wishes, and for the kind words. I appreciate it very much and I hope you had a good weekend. I barely made it, but I did! I won't let you down! I promise! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:28, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry

I'm so sorry about that I forgot to — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:10, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

I hear congrats are in order!!!

Congratulations!! Glad to see you got Admin, keep that mop clean lol. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 00:37, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi WarMachineWildThing! Thanks for the message and for the congratulations and well wishes! Don't worry, I plan on getting this mop filthy, but I won't abuse the powers ;-). Again, thank you for the kind words, and it's great to talk to you again! I hope you enjoy the rest of your day, and I wish you happy editing! :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:39, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
I know ya won't use and abuse that's why I support ya Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 00:44, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Another admin being vandalized

I have warned the user, which they deleted, but they are continuing to remove another users question to place a kitten picture here I've reverted and warned but they are just deleting the warning and reverting back. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 00:58, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, he's clearly WP:NOTHERE. Aaaand he's gone! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:03, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

UTRS Account Request

I confirm that I have requested an account on the UTRS tool. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs)

No subject

hi i wana create my own biagrophy it is possible please suggest me for this — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shaik allauddin (talkcontribs) 04:23, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Shaik allauddin! If you're trying to create an autobiography about yourself, you should read and understand Wikipedia's guidelines on autobiographies. In short, you should not create articles about yourself, as it represents an obvious conflict of interest. You also have to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines as well. Please review these policies and guidelines, and let me know if you have any more questions. I hope you have a great rest of your day, and thank you for leaving me a message with your questions :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 12:24, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Administrator Barnstar Hires.png The Admin's Barnstar
Yup, putting the new mop to use, thanks for your counter-vandalism efforts, particularly with your swift response to User:BobTheDogWithAHat WannaBeEditor (talk) 08:11, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Hey WannaBeEditor! Thanks for the admin wikilove! Glad I'm not doing too shabby for my 8th day ;-). Always happy to help, my friend. See you around :-) - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 08:17, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Can you check this diff please?

Not sure if it is vandalism or not. diff WannaBeEditor (talk) 08:50, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

WannaBeEditor - The edit summary left by the IP is in-depth; the edit upon first glance looks to be good faith issues... however, this IP has done it twice (1, 2)... time to start warning and figuring out what he's doing. It's starting to look less believable the more the IP does it repeatedly. But do try to leave messages and talk to the user. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 08:55, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

can you please help

I am with a team of people working of the Robert Travers Atkin Restoration Project. I have found a photo on the site Robert Travers Atkin.png which is a portrait uploaded by RocketRod1960. I don’t think this user has been active for a while, is there any way that I can get a message to him, as we have been desperately looking for a copy of the above mentioned image and cannot find it anywhere. Maybe RocketRod1960 can help us. I could not find anywhere on his page to message him…though I am not familiar with Wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Playitcool (talkcontribs) 12:16, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Playitcool, and thank you for the message. You can always leave a message on the user's talk page, or (if he has email enabled) send the user an email using the Wikipedia interface. The image is in the public domain, so it's free to be copied and used. If you're looking for a higher resolution of the photo, you might be able to locate it by using search engines to do so. Please let me know if you have any more questions. I wish you good luck on your search, and I wish you happy editing :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 12:21, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Adding Images

Dear User:Oshwah, i visited your profile and found it so impressive. I am writing this mail to you because i am new here on Wikipedia and don't know how to add images with proper license for any Wikipedia article. The articles which i have created still don't have any image. Hope you help me to fix this

Thanks Mindcap (talk) 12:30, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker), Mindcap, mate you should actually consider adding images to Wikimedia Commons. Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia whilst commons is an image website, where you can post your images. You should use the upload wizard on that site as it is easy for you. Kind Regards, --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 12:47, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi Mindcap! Thank you for the message and for your questions. Before you begin any kind of image uploading and use on Wikipedia articles and pages, I highly recommend that you review and verify that you completely understand Wikipedia's policies on copyrights (specifically, for images). It's very important that you understand this policy -- uploading copyrighted images is not only a common pitfall that I see new editors run into, but it's also a serious violation if you violate copyrights (especially if you do so repeatedly). Once you feel that you're ready, you'll want to upload your image to the Wikimedia Commons and then refer to the manual of style regarding how to render it on an article or page. Please let me know if you have any more questions regarding the policies or guidelines that I've provided for you. I'll be happy to answer them. Good luck! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 13:12, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
HeyOshwah, Thanks mate for your revert, now i am moving towards Wikipedia images guidelines.
Mindcap (talk) 07:32, 8 September 2016 (UTC)


Hey - no need to reply here, just a quick note to remind you to remove {{copyvio-revdel}} from articles you handle in CAT:RD1, so they're removed from the category. :-) Katietalk 14:51, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi KrakatoaKatie! D'OH! I must have forgotten... all these templates you gotta add when you protect, and the templates you remove when you unprotect, respond to requests in templates... I'll get it down eventually! Thanks for the note; I'll keep a better eye out next time. It's good to talk to you again, and I hope you're doing well! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 14:53, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

User:International Journal of Global Science Research

You may wish to revoke talk page access as well.--Cahk (talk) 16:50, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Cahk -  Done. Thanks for the letting me know :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 16:56, 7 September 2016 (UTC)


1 IP & 2 users left. rm 2607:FB90:4C45:7D57:66A2:C194:F134:24A3 (blocked 31 hours by Oshwah (AO ACB)).

We don't really know each other, I know, but we interacted once very briefly on AIV, Well, congratulations to you. When did you become an administrator? Amaury (talk | contribs) 22:24, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Amaury! Thanks for the message! Lets see... I've been an admin for.... 8 days now. So I am what you call an "admin noob" ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:26, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
We tried to stop Oshwah from becoming an Admin! But it didn't work!! Face-devil-grin.svg --IJBall (contribstalk) 02:30, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
I'm sorry, IJBall... the 'Support' votes were just too much to overturn ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:04, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Reversion of my edit

You reverted this edit of mine. My edit corrected an error in the image caption, which I can prove if required. Please at least talk to me before reverting any of my edits. Thanks ... SEThorpe (talk) 23:36, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Edit of "Katherine Harris"

Oshwah, You contacted me regarding my recent edit of "Katherine Harris". I discovered that the page had a very opinionated and biased entry under the subject "Purging of Voters". I edited the content, without removing it, to show that the entire subject was the opinion of the writer, based on the book written by Jake Tapper, as noted in reference #16. I only changed the content to reflect that some of the accusations presented were not factual only alleged and/or opinions, by changing words to "may have" and "alleged" et cetera. I also added at the end the name of the book written by Jake Tapper (once again in reference #16) and noted it was a opinion of Jake Tapper as presented in that book. My first edit was removed by RunnyAmega, sighting incorrectly that I needed references, but nothing I had entered changed the content or referenced any new material. It only identified it as opinions, as was already put in as a hidden reference by the original writer in reference #16, which references a book based on a political opinion, not facts, but they present them in the entry as fact. Because RunnyAmega removed my 1st edit, I then re-edited it and also, in addition to previous edits, clarified who the "elections Supervisor Ion Sancho" was, as the way this was originally written made it sound like Sancho was a high up Florida State official, when in fact he was/is only the Supervisor of Elections for the county of Leon, a small part of The State of Florida (and one OPINION), in which, by the way, I live (Orlando specifically). After RunnyAmega removed my edits for the second time, apparently without paying attention to the corrections, or because RunnyAmega wanted to preserve the politically biased narrative provided by the original writer, I decided that the entire "Purging of Voters" entry, being solely based on the opinions of the writer and Jake Tapper' political opinion book, should just be removed. That is when I received your message. Please read the content, note what I have told you, and reply. If you feel that Wikipedia should contain politically biased material based on opinions not fact, then so be it. It will only show that Wikipedia may not be credible. I hope you take the high ground for the future of mankind and realize that this piece needs edited so people in the present or future aren't misled into believing a false narrative of history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:12, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Edit of "Katherine Harris"

I am sending this again, because I wasn't signed in the first time I sent it, so you might not have known who I am.

Oshwah, You contacted me regarding my recent edit of "Katherine Harris". I discovered that the page had a very opinionated and biased entry under the subject "Purging of Voters". I edited the content, without removing it, to show that the entire subject was the opinion of the writer, based on the book written by Jake Tapper, as noted in reference #16. I only changed the content to reflect that some of the accusations presented were not factual only alleged and/or opinions, by changing words to "may have" and "alleged" et cetera. I also added at the end the name of the book written by Jake Tapper (once again in reference #16) and noted it was a opinion of Jake Tapper as presented in that book. My first edit was removed by RunnyAmega, sighting incorrectly that I needed references, but nothing I had entered changed the content or referenced any new material. It only identified it as opinions, as was already put in as a hidden reference by the original writer in reference #16, which references a book based on a political opinion, not facts, but they present them in the entry as fact. Because RunnyAmega removed my 1st edit, I then re-edited it and also, in addition to previous edits, clarified who the "elections Supervisor Ion Sancho" was, as the way this was originally written made it sound like Sancho was a high up Florida State official, when in fact he was/is only the Supervisor of Elections for the county of Leon, a small part of The State of Florida (and one OPINION), in which, by the way, I live (Orlando specifically). After RunnyAmega removed my edits for the second time, apparently without paying attention to the corrections, or because RunnyAmega wanted to preserve the politically biased narrative provided by the original writer, I decided that the entire "Purging of Voters" entry, being solely based on the opinions of the writer and Jake Tapper' political opinion book, should just be removed. That is when I received your message. Please read the content, note what I have told you, and reply. If you feel that Wikipedia should contain politically biased material based on opinions not fact, then so be it. It will only show that Wikipedia may not be credible. I hope you take the high ground for the future of mankind and realize that this piece needs edited so people in the present or future aren't misled into believing a false narrative of history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Smartest Man on Planet Earth (talkcontribs) 00:18, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

@The Smartest Man on Planet Earth: The claims you're making that I didn't understand were that Tapper's words are his opinions, they're not necessarily true, and everything attributed to him needs to be qualified with "allegedly" and similar terms. Apparently, your source for all of this is his book, which is classified by CNN as nonfiction and can thus be considered a reliable source of factual information. What's your source that Tapper's claims are all his opinions and could be wrong? RunnyAmigatalk 00:45, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

The fact that CNN refers to Jake Tappers book as non-fiction would be correct in that any book based on fact, but not necessarily free from political opinion, would be labeled as non-fiction. I live in Florida, I was a poll watcher during the 2000 election, I know what happened with Katherine Harris, and I know that whoever was allowed to post the subject in the Katherine Harris entry did so with malicious intent. I don't know where you live or what your knowledge of the subject is. If you live in The U.K., for example, or even outside of Florida, or if you are under 35 years old, you probably don't know who Katherine Harris is, other than what you read on the internet. Once again, I did not add any new content that would require a reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Smartest Man on Planet Earth (talkcontribs) 01:01, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

  • If you wish to argue that the facts and opinions set forth in the book are either incorrect or invalid, you can do so on the talk page. If you wish to argue that the book is unreliable, you can do so on the talk page or perhaps on WP:RSN. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 04:32, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Recreation of salted article under different name.

Hmm good find. I'll keep an eye on it and look into the matter :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 12:30, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

List of Telugu castes and RFPP

Hi Oshwah, I wonder how familiar you are with the timesinks that are lists of castes/lists of people allegedly belonging to a caste. I was a bit surprised at your decision here. Is there any chance that you might reconsider?

I don't really want to relist it at RFPP but that is what is probably going to happen in the next 2 or 3 days because we'll likely have another anon edit by then. I think the fact that RegentsPark stuck a six-month semi on the thing in January when it had not been protected previously says an awful lot, bearing in mind RP's familiarity with the general subject area. It probably will eventually need to be indef semi'd but I do realise that would be a big step for a new-ish admin and temporary would suffice for now. - Sitush (talk) 18:34, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hi, Oshwah, I see you have a lot on your plate on this page. I've always thought Wikipedia would be better without any castelists at all, they're honeypots for drive-by editing of an uninformed/promotional kind and very difficult to keep in reasonable shape. Semi might well be good for them all (I recently semiprotected List of Brahmins for a year), but a proposal for such would be hard to get consensus for, no doubt. If Sitush thinks this one should be protected, I'd trust him, as I generally trust his knowledge and judgment re Indian topics. Bishonen | talk 14:52, 9 September 2016 (UTC).
  • Leaving Sitush hanging like this is getting a little awkward. I've semi'd the page myself, hope you don't mind. Bishonen | talk 19:16, 9 September 2016 (UTC).
Sitush, Bishonen: I'm so sorry! I didn't mean to leave anyone hanging here. I'm at the office right now and I typically keep to refreshing the new user logs and then try to respond when I get home. It lets me contribute but keep my focus on work. I should have gotten back to you yesterday and I didn't. Please accept my apologies; that was unacceptable of me to leave you hanging like that. Yes, Bishonen, thank you for semi protecting that page for me. It's what I totally would have done after reading the messages here. I appreciate you for doing that. I'll look into my response and the request when I get home and I'll get in touch with you again. I definitely want to make sure I get the hang of RFPP and that I respond and act appropriately. Thanks again :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:24, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
Gosh, I didn't mean to reproach you for prioritizing your job, Oshwah..! I know what you mean about the new user log, it's sort of hypnotic. Catch a bad username, delete their promotional userpage, block.. all done with one click, while half asleep, with the new Twinkle "delete and block" module. (And somehow more satisfying than reading WP:UAA, though I do that too sometimes, so as not to be completely unfair to the people who report there.) Bishonen | talk 20:46, 9 September 2016 (UTC).
Bishonen - Hahaha, indeed it is :-). I didn't know Twinkle had a delete and block module. I think since I'm new, it's best if I stick to keeping it slow; I was iffy on using automation at all to perform blocks. However, I've become okay with using Twinkle to do so; it helps a lot with the template part (no more copying and pasting from here, lol). And no worries; I should have responded to this sooner, and I didn't. I'll keep this conversation in mind when dealing with RFPP in the future. Obviously, I still need to get a feel with "where the line is" regarding protection. No worries, I'll get there :-). Thanks again for performing the page protection for me, and I hope you have a great weekend. Happy Friday, dude! :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:39, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
Thank you, both. - Sitush (talk) 04:22, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
And look what I found just now — the kind of thing that makes watching the new user log worthwhile. (How's your German?) Bishonen | talk 09:11, 10 September 2016 (UTC).


Hey, dude :) mind having a look at your mail again? Ilyushka88 | Talk! Contribs 01:29, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

 Done, and responded :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:37, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Administrator Barnstar Hires.png The Admin's Barnstar
The Wikipedians Since Is Old Or Active Even Inactive You Might Edit These But If you edit in the bad way you may be blocked from Wikipedia but this is for all users not following direction but you do follow directions I like and love you Manally and you should tell many people who didn't follow directions if do not no it's fine. 2SE (talk) 01:31, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

zonk edit

Hi. Not sure why you deleted my edit. What wasn't neutral about it? Sincerely, John — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:584:201:60A0:2C2E:D7FB:EAA9:9568 (talk) 01:32, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Miracle Mattress, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page KSAT (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:36, 9 September 2016 (UTC)


Hello, I was wondering if you could reevaluate whether the user Okeydanny (who changed their username from 'Toletdmteam') still has a COI in editing about it. They state they don't, but have been sort of evasive when I asked about their initial username. Whether you do or not, thanks 331dot (talk) 14:14, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi, 331dot. Yes, of course. It's why I'm here... to help :-). I'll look into it. Thanks for the message and for discussing your concerns; you're always welcome to do so. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 15:16, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm not editing anything...

I have been getting repeated messages from you and other users about vandalism and edit-warring.However,I have never(to my knowledge)edited anything on Wikipedia.I do not even have an account.This is very frustrating,and I would like to know why this might be happening.

              Anonymous.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:45, 9 September 2016 (UTC)   — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk)  
(talk page stalker) The most likely explanation is that your IP address is one that is assigned at various times to different users. ThePlatypusofDoom has placed the {{SharedIP}} template on your Talk page, which should be helpful. The solution is to create an account, but you can continue as you have been and simply ignore the messages that are clearly not applicable at you.  —jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 22:14, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Big Gold Belt

I added an edit summary. This was not the 1st belt to feature a name plate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:13, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

I apologize; that revert was (literally) due to striking the keys on my keyboard funky (I was reverting vandalism that was underneath your edit). I've restored your changes and removed the warning. Again, I owe you an apology. I didn't mean to do that. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:16, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
No problem thanks, it spurred me to find a reliable source so it's all good! — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:32, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
You bet! Happy editing to you :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 12:29, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Please don't delete the page we are trying to create

Hello, the page we are trying to create is for a university project and by no mean is a way of advertising or promotion. Please be understanding. Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikaela Martirosyan (talkcontribs) 20:57, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

@Mikaela Martirosyan: What do you mean by "we"? Do multiple people control your account? KSFTC 21:31, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Hmm. Your usage of the word "we" - royal "we"? - suggests you are operating a shared account. Furthermore, this is definitely an advertising issue - I think based on these two factors alone an indef may be in order. What are your thoughts on this, Oshwah? Zerotalk 21:34, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) the page has already been deleted. I would also agree that an indef may be needed. Class455 (talk) 21:59, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) "We" is certainly alarming. Do you understand that editors can't use shared accounts? Joel.Miles925 18:37, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Administrator Barnstar Hires.png The Admin's Barnstar
For your civility and kindness, which I value above all else. Mona778 (talk) 01:44, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi Mona778! Thank you for the barnstar and for the compliment :-). I value civility above all else, too. It's become a big problem, and I hope that I set an example for others so that we can retain new editors and not chase them away due to something we all should be doing in the first place ;-). I hope you have a great day, and I wish you happy editing :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 12:28, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Jeanne Lusher article

I wanted to add the date of death and change present tense verbs to past tense, since the person is now deceased. Somebody already added a statement ' Jeanne Lusher has passed away on 9/13/2016' . I know of her death personally, it is not in the obituaries yet.Bulent Ozgonenel (talk) 23:38, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Bulent Ozgonenel, and welcome to Wikipedia! Sorry, but your personal knowledge of the person or event constitutes original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. On top of this, the article you added content to is a biography of a living person, which is held to higher scrutiny than other articles (such as the requirement to cite a reliable source with any contentious information that is added). Content that is unreferenced and could be seen as controversial must be removed from biographies of living people immediately. Once you locate and reference a reliable source, you'll be all set. Please review the policies and guidelines I've linked you and feel free to message me if you have any questions about them. Thank you for leaving me a message with your concerns, I hope you have a great rest of your day, and I wish you happy editing :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:43, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello, please consider my changes once again. I am not adding a new information. The article already says the person passed away and I am adding the death date into the parentheses and I am changing the present tense verbs to past tense. Why would I need a reference for that if the article already says the person is deceased and I am only trying to edit grammar? Bulent Ozgonenel (talk) 23:48, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi Bulent Ozgonenel. When I reverted your changes, I also reverted the previous changes made (which also did not cite a reliable source). Trust me, I'm not doing this to be mean or pick on you :-). To allow the content to be added as-is and without a reference would be in violation of Wikipedia's biographies of living people policy. Like I previously stated, all you have to do is cite and include a reference to a reliable source with your desired changes. Once you do this, you'll be all set; that's all you need to do. Please let me know if you have any more questions regarding Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. I'll be happy to answer them for you :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:53, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
hello, I found this obituary link
is this acceptable? how can I add this as a reference? Thank you Bulent Ozgonenel (talk) 00:08, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Bulent Ozgonenel - I wouldn't call that a reliable source myself, no. There's no ability to show or examine the legitimacy stated on that URL you gave me. Is there something else you might have found? Maybe an online news article or newspaper entry that has this information? ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:40, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) There is nothing on the site that shows they are the same person, no photos, no information about them, nothing. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 02:54, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Block change

Hey Oshwah. I don't mean to step on your toes with the quick block settings change but I had a visceral reaction to seeing that. I watched the towers fall from my window.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:13, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Fuhghettaboutit! Which block change are we talking about? ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:14, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
See here.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:16, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi Fuhghettaboutit! Ohh, I thought you meant that I was the one who changed a block after someone else! You scared me for a minute; I was flipping through my block history wondering what the heck I might have screwed up. Sorry, please excuse my idiot misinterpretation. Yeeeap... I should have removed talk page and email access with that user when performing the block. Thanks for letting me know. And for the record: you're not stepping on my toes at all. I've only been an admin for... what, two weeks now? So I'm still in the process of getting those things like that completely perfected. You're free to modify a block I made if you feel that a better solution is obvious (just let me know!), and I appreciate you for doing so... thanks :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:22, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Welcome to the janitorial corps, Oshwah! I pretty much always give a heads up if I modify anything another admin has done (whilst using the tools) and of course never unblock without process. By the way, if you ever need admin advice, a second opinion, please feel free to drop by.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:34, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Fuhghettaboutit - Thanks! I appreciate the welcome and for offering to be available if I have questions! I really appreciate it. Thanks again for the message and for the heads up Re: that block I did. FYI's such as this are what will help me to learn :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:38, 15 September 2016 (UTC)


Hey Oshwah!

I've been away awhile, and just saw the news! Congrats on admin! You've worked hard and you really deserve it! See you around the wiki-web!

Best, TJH2018talk 00:46, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks TJH2018! I won't let you down!!! :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:12, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Why did delete my page

Why did you delete my page???? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8803:C00:752:C1D5:DBD2:DC9E:9966 (talk) 02:07, 15 September 2016 (UTC)


This is a test. Oshwah-TEST (talk) 03:28, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

That was me. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:28, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
I was getting ready to report lol, thank goodness you responded. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 03:30, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
LOL no worries, dude. Typically, you'd be right :-) - I get a lot of impersonators, and I'll typically follow-up like this if it is, in fact, me. I wanted to test the "floating new talk page message" gadget in Special:Preferences; needless to say, I'm okay with it being off :-). Also, I realized that I didn't use this account to create the redirects under that username, so I added a diff to show that It's really me... so that was actually my fault :-). Thanks for being so diligent and for keeping watch for me. I really appreciate it; it makes my life a lot easier :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:39, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Hanky-panky in the archives

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AynuraJafarova/Archive (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) Sections deleted by IP and newbee. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 05:26, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Jim1138 - Thanks, I'll keep an eye on. ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 05:35, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Advice on Lucas Glover edit, please?

An IP removed some content claiming the source was no longer available here. I check the source which still exists, so the accuracy of the ES is dubious. It seems somewhat off topic and undue. Should it be restored? Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 05:43, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jim1138! Let me take a look. Stand by... ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 05:47, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi Jim1138 - The removal reasons were definitely not accurate; the URL worked for me too. If you can restore to a more relevant place, I'd suggest doing so. If anything, I'd say it's okay to undo and ask the user to explain further on the article's talk page. Explain that the URL works for you. AGF ;-). If you need more input or if you have other questions, you know where to find me. I'll be happy to help! ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 05:50, 15 September 2016 (UTC)


Hi Oshwah - was the user you just blocked an LTA? I think most of the time, block notices aren't left at the pages of such users - my apologies if this was not the case. I wonder if the user and user talk pages would be eligible for deletion also? Thanks, Zerotalk 12:01, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Patient Zero! Which user are we referring to? And Twinkle leaves the templates automatically; if anything, it's good to do so (from what I've been told by other admins). :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 12:06, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Indeed, thanks for letting me know - the user was called Block Evasion, I reported them to UAA. Zerotalk 12:07, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Patient Zero - Ah, yes! That user... yes, I blocked because of the username and behavior. Pretty certain that it's a sock, probably an LTA. Some admins leave block templates, some don't. I was advised to just leave them regardless; Twinkle already does it automatically when I block, and it's (from what I've been told) the proper thing to do. I think it's a grey area and varies between preference - I just leave them. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 12:12, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. I assumed it was an LTA myself, but yes, I reckon leaving the template wasn't a bad idea. :-) Zerotalk 12:13, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
(tps) Actually, in the case of LTAs like this guy, I don't recommend leaving block messages or tags. It's  Confirmed, btw. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 12:21, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Interesting... I've been told different things, but I do notice that it appears that we usually don't when I see other admins applying blocks to LTE/sock puppets like this. Cool deal; I'll keep that in mind and apply that to future blocks. Thanks for the input, DoRD :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 13:10, 15 September 2016 (UTC)


You are in violation of Wikipedia's rules of hostility:

Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers

I was unaware groups cannot volunteer for Wikipedia.

I was unaware cultural promotion was a violation.

Which is strange, since PAID editing is allowed!

It was really great that you PERMANENTLY BANNED me for the name "German Preservation", while I was trying to save a major edit to one of your articles. I feel like my time here bettering wikipedia was wasted.

What is worse?

I have edited before as anonymous, and have NO PROBLEMS.

I tried to make an account and finally be a member of the wikipedia community, and I am PERMANENTLY BANNED, I have to make a SECOND ACCOUNT, fill in multiple captchas, bypass an "external link" filter, because German wikipedia is an "external link"???

No wonder no one takes this site seriously...

HeinrichMueller (talk) 16:51, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi HeinrichMueller, I believe you're referring to User:GermanPreservationGroup. Am I correct? If so, then I'll be happy to explain the reason behind the block and exactly what it was for and what it means. The reason that the account was blocked was simply because of the username; you're not permanently banned from anything. All you needed to do was either request a username change (per the instructions), or simply create a new account (which you did) - that's all. Per Wikipedia's username policy, usernames need to represent an individual person, and not a group, organization, or company. Accounts that do are typically required to change their username or use a new account in order to continue editing. If you're still adding content to articles, you're still welcome to do this - just use your new username when doing so. I understand that you may be frustrated, but please be assured that the reason was only due to your username, and nothing else (which is why we let you continue editing after having it changed). After that, you're all set. I hope my response has sufficiently explained the username policy and helped you to understand the reason as to why these policies exist. If you have any questions or concerns regarding Wikipedia's policies, please do not hesitate to reach out to me and ask. I'll be happy to answer them. Thank you for understanding, and welcome to Wikipedia :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 17:26, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
No, that is fine. I clearly already read about it, and decided it was not worth an argument. The same rules that said you should have reached out to me first, before banning me.
But that does not explain why you are threatening to ban me AGAIN for making a new account? You even just admitted that is perfectly fine. So how is it "account ban evasion"? HeinrichMueller (talk) 17:32, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Please see below. 331dot (talk) 17:33, 15 September 2016 (UTC)


Stop harassing me you racist!

You cannot threaten me for "user block evasion" saying I will be permanently banned again for making a second account! WIKIPEDIA told me to make a second account! Right on the block page it listed my options as: appeal the block, request a name change, or create a new account.

So, since my account was seconds old, and it appeared I may be in violation of a strange rule, I decided the best alternative would be to create another account. With the fear of wikipedia's complex, peculiar, and STRICT rules, I decided to use my real name, as any other name would seem in violation.

So I created a second account. AS WIKIPEDIA INSTRUCTED ME TOO.

I am sure that if wikipedia has rules this strict, that you harassing me has got to be a violation of at least one of them.

God, really? Contribute as anon. No problem. Join wikipedia-constant problems! HeinrichMueller (talk) 17:27, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

That was my gross misinterpretation of what I read, for which I greatly apologize. 331dot (talk) 17:28, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Apparently that was user: 331dot . Sorry for confusing it with you. Just really though. What a welcoming committee... HeinrichMueller (talk) 17:35, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
HeinrichMueller - I understand that you're frustrated, but it is not an excuse to call another editor a "racist", make personal attacks, or engage in uncivil conduct such as what you did above. Please do not engage in this sort of behavior toward other editors. If you're frustrated and would like to talk about it, you're absolutely free to do so. But making personal attacks at others is out of line, and it's not behavior that is tolerated. Thank you :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 17:37, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
@Oshwah: I would like to personally apologize to you for causing you this trouble. This wasn't what I thought it was. Taught myself a lesson here. 331dot (talk) 17:38, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
331dot - No worries, my friend! It was an accident and you didn't mean to do it. The situation is diffused and everyone understands what happened and why. It happens to the best of us. You're fine; don't worry about it :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 17:43, 15 September 2016 (UTC)


My apologies. I will not call people "racist" on wikipedia anymore, or other "personal attacks". From now on I will remain "civil" by banning people upon sign-up, threatening to ban them again for following the rules, making up my own rules contrary to wikipedia, and targeting people by ethnic affiliation. Glad to be part of wikipedia! HeinrichMueller (talk) 18:06, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) This is a non-apology worthy of a career politician. Can we just accept that mistakes were made and move on from there? clpo13(talk) 18:13, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Letting you know, Jeanne Lusher again

I've reverted [this] twice now as the refrences do not show it is the right person who has passed on,There is nothing on the site that shows they are the same person, no photos, no information about them, nothing. Letting you know it is continuing to be added. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 20:07, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi WarMachineWildThing! It's good to talk to you again! Thanks for the heads up; I'll keep an eye on the article and jump in if things continue like this. Let me know if things start to get out of hand there, and I'll keep eyes on it from here as well. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:09, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Just so you know the obituary was updated to include a photo so I did add the information back as her death was confirmed. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 05:42, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
WarMachineWildThing - I must caution you... I still don't believe that source to be reliable and enough proof to add this content per BLP. Anyone can create an obituary and it's possible that this person may not be actually her. Are there newspapers, news articles, anything peer-reviewed and secondary that supports this claim? ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 06:45, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Honestly she wasn't that famous, not sure how she got a Wikipedia article to be honest. There are hospitals posting condolences on the obituary, and I'm not sure about a news paper I'll have to search as she was in Michigan and I am not. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 06:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Then it sounds we might need to put notability of people on the table and look into whether or not this person meets the guidelines. If you need help with this, let me know and I'll be happy to give you a hand. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 06:53, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

I did find this site that shows she passed and tells when her funeral is. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 06:54, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

I also checked that funeral home out, only they can add an obituary as they took care of her arrangements, there is no way for the public to add one on there, yes I tried to add one and found no where to do so. Also it shows she was cremated and her service will be October 1st 2016. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 07:11, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Please talk to this user

Dear Oshwah, can you do me a favor and handle this? Because I must be out of the door in a few minutes... User:MayGh think I ask them to stop editing Wikipedia pages altogether after I gave them warnings for their disruptive editing, which is not true. I only asked them to stop "disruptive editing", that's all. Please, I don't want them to get disappointed and leave because of a misunderstanding. Thank you. Mona778 (talk) 21:26, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Mona778 - You got it! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:31, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
User:MayGh - It looks like there's a misunderstanding regarding your edits and why you're being warned. I want to help clear the air so that you understand the difference so that you can contribute positively, but make sure that your edits comply with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Is it okay if I offer you assistance with this? :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:35, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Request for assistance

Hi Oshwah. In the same vein, could you consider contacting the editor who opened this archived ANI (which you closed)? Or not, if you don't think it would help. They recently edited at 3 Talk pages. I replied to each of their comments, but it doesn't seem productive to me, and I am sure they are extremely frustrated. I am unsure whether or not the editor's local knowledge and interest can ever be accommodated in Wikipedia, if another editor mediated for them. But I am sure they're on track now to be continually frustrated, and I don't want to torment the person. I wish they could communicate differently, or be successfully directed to contribute in some other area for a while to gain some experience. The person has banned me from their Talk page, complained about me and the other editor in that ANI, and will not be able to hear suggestions from me about how better to communicate, or anything else. Again, not sure if you could help: maybe they should not be encouraged at all, maybe they're better off being left shut down and dissuaded from further participation. Anyhow, kudos for your helping others, as you do. --doncram 22:44, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi doncram - sounds like a sticky situation, especially given that he will not listen to feedback and instead "bans" editors from talking to them and pushes them away. I'll be happy to try and assist and see what I can do :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:58, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
doncram, looking at the talk page, I'm going to wait and see if he responds to your request for clarification and a response first, and go from there. I want to see if he's willing to further explain his concerns and address your questions first. I'll keep an eye on the talk page. Please feel free to keep me updated as well :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:03, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
doncram - Ehh, I just realized that it's been five days. Let me see what I can do. Sorry for the repeated responses :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:04, 15 September 2016 (UTC)


When I saw the article, the infobox for the show didn't look right. I edited to the way most infoboxes of the shows supposed to be. (talk) 23:31, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Barnstar of Reversion Hires.png The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thank you for helping block that one guy.... Creeperparty568 ~ Cool Guy (talk) 01:05, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi Creeperparty568! Thank you for the barnstar! I appreciate it, man. I see that you're just getting into vandalism patrolling - thanks dude! It's a messy area to contribute to, and we always need more hands in that area. I've been vandal patrolling for 8+ years; if you have any questions or need any help in that area, please don't hesitate to reach out to me. I'll be happy to lend a hand and help you out. Cheers, my friend! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 13:32, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

You're welcome Oshwah! ;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creeperparty568 (talkcontribs) 21:23, 16 September 2016 (UTC)



Should my talk page be revdelled too? It's the same stuff. Adam9007 (talk) 01:32, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Never mind, it's already been done. Adam9007 (talk) 01:32, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Adam9007 - I got your back ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:36, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Can you add the image they used to the bad image list? —MRD2014 (talk) (contribs) 01:49, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
MRD2014 - Let me verify that the image is not being used on any articles and live. If not and it's only used for trolling, then yeah I'll throw it in. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:52, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
You can add the image to the bad image list and mention what articles it can still be used on. Also, can you revdel the edit summary that said (←Replaced content with {{unblock|500px}}) because you can still click on the link. —MRD2014 (talk) (contribs) 01:54, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
MRD2014 - Where? Call me crazy but I'm not seeing it. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:14, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
I got it. -- GB fan 02:15, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
GB fan - Awesome, man. Thank you. I took a break for a bit; appreciate you for handling this. Also, the Seahawks are better than the Green Bay Packers, dude. Just sayin'... Aaron Rogers is going down this year :-P ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:29, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Here's an example:

The file name is mentioned then it says "except on" and it mentions all pages it can be used on. All pages mentioned there will show the image, all other pages won't. —MRD2014 (talk) (contribs) 02:42, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

All references to Season three of TF:RiD should be removed, what is airing is a continuation of season two, NOT season 3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:46, 16 September 2016 (UTC)


Holy... That was quick! :) Did I manage to tag it? Adam9007 (talk) 23:03, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Adam9007 - Good question, I'm not sure. I will say... it's super convenient to have the mop and be a proficient Huggler. I can take care of many things as they happen instead of having to ask an admin to do it and twittle my thumbs in the meantime ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 13:50, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
I think I might have just about managed it; Twinkle said tagging completed and all that (it's in my CSD log too, and if the page has been deleted when tagging it, an error would have been given instead), but when it reloaded the page, it said Oshwah deleted page G3 vandalism (the same criterion I used). But I suppose I'll never know... Adam9007 (talk) 15:50, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Vandal fighting

Man, you're even faster than ClueBot. That's brilliant. And faster than me. That's annoying. Face-wink.svg Yintan  23:11, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Yintan! Haha, I get that a lot... and from many people. Vandal patrolling is what I've done for 8+ years, and it's what I enjoy. But worry not! I, like all humans (and unlike cluebot), have to work, eat, sleep, socialize... you'll find plenty of time that I'm not Huggling or vandal patrolling... lol ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 13:52, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
Don't believe him. Oshwah is a robot! Face-tongue.svg — JJMC89(T·C) 19:47, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
Domo arigato, Mr. Roboto! Ravensfire (talk) 19:48, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
No way! I'm just as human as everyone else! Beep beep boop bop beep boop. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 20:03, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Semi protection

Did you mean to semi-protect User talk:Adam9007 indefinitely? I thought that was something not normally done. Sro23 (talk) 17:11, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Sro23! Oops! No I did not. I thought I had set an expiry of a few days, but it looks like I didn't. Adam9007... my apologies, dude. Your talk page is now unprotected as it was before. If protected is needed again, just message me and I'll make sure you're all set. Thanks for the heads up, Sro23! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 13:49, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Feinstein Edit

What I said is entirely true. She did sweep the room with a Kalashnikov with her finger on the trigger.

The gun rules I stated are the ones taught to 11 year old boy scouts (I'm an Eagle Scout)

These facts demonstrate her incompetence in gun law. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tacoman1921 (talkcontribs) 00:35, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Elizabeth L Ulanova

Hey Oshwah, considering this earlier edit, I'm going to go ahead and delete this. The early attempt at deletion nomination is for A7, but I suppose the nominator wasn't so adept at Twinkle or whatever; that "not notable" isn't a valid criterion is of course incorrect. I think A7 is very valid here, and there is at least a suggestion (in that IP edit) of a BLP issue. Feel free to look again at the history with your brand-new magic glasses, and if you disagree, do what you think is right. Take care, Drmies (talk) 01:23, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Drmies! It's good to talk to you again! I hope things are going well for you. I'm taking a look at the last revision. Stand by... ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:25, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
Drmies - I agree that it's A7. The sources point to home pages, searches, and reference non-notable things. And I don't think being an owner of domains qualifies a person as ineligible for A7. Good call; thanks for deleting and for letting me know! :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:28, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
I only saw it because I saw that edit of yours go by, and frequently you're right about things. :) Drmies (talk) 16:11, 20 September 2016 (UTC)



i am paulbconsulting

this is just the name i have given myself for my consulting business. i employ no one and i don't want a wiki user name with numbers etc. it is easier for me to use this one that ok? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulbconsulting (talkcontribs) 06:54, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Tim Vipond

Hi Meatsgains! Thanks for the fresh cup of java, and thank you for taking the time to leave me the kind words. I very much appreciate it. I hope you enjoy the rest of your day, and I'm sure we'll run into one another again very soon ;-). Until then -- ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 15:23, 20 September 2016 (UTC)


Welcome to Wikipedia. Although all admins are welcome to delete constructively on Wikipedia, at least one of your recent deletions, such as the one you performed on the Main Page, did not appear to be constructive and has been undeleted. Please use Jimbo Wales' user page for any test deletions or blankings you would like to make, and read about our main page deletion guideline to learn more about deleting things on this encyclopedia. Thank you.

Dat GuyTalkContribs 15:19, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
DatGuy - Shit my bad. I'll take my test deletions on Jimbo's talk page instead of the main page. I'm not sure how I missed that policy! *Takes the wikimanual and turns it right-side up* ... Ohhh.... riiiiiight :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 15:25, 20 September 2016 (UTC)


Why have you changed my post? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kapilsamra (talkcontribs) 22:58, 20 September 2016 (UTC)


Hey that was a mistake, I was trying to edit and add some info. Didnt mean to reomve everything hope it was fixed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:882:100:958B:C0D0:44F5:DA62:CFD (talk) 23:10, 20 September 2016 (UTC)


Thank you for deleting TJY (the rapper). As I recall, the TJY article was not newly created, and was actually an old redirect for (an Indian politician??) who also used the initials "TJY". This recent editor deleted the redirect and created the new article for the rapper by the same initials. Not sure how to restore the redirect without restoring the rapper. Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 00:12, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Magnolia677! No problem! Just doing my job; always happy to help! :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:13, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Do you know how to restore the redirect? Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 00:14, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Magnolia677 - From what I see in the deleted history, I don't think the redirect is to a page that exists. If it does and I'm incorrect, feel free to create the article with a redirect to where it should go. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:17, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
As I recall, the article was created a few years ago as a redirect only. If not, no problem. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 00:25, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Magnolia677 - Indeed it was! I took a look at the restored edit (someone restored a revision after the first deletion in 2014) and it redirects to a page created by a user with the same name (COI) that doesn't exist anymore ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:27, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
I'm sure I followed the redirect to an article yesterday. It was about an Indian politician (or actor). Sorry for all the trouble. Magnolia677 (talk) 00:58, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Magnolia677 - Don't be sorry! If you disagree, think I missed something, or you think I made a mistake and should look at something again, I prefer it that you say something so that I can make sure that I'm doing something correctly (especially with admin tools or viewing privileges). Let me take another look and then get back to you... ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:00, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Magnolia677 - I took another look for you; the only redirect I saw made to that article was to TJY ii Menn back in March 2014 (which was also last deleted in March 2014). I didn't see any redirects added since. All of the other diffs were content or process-related. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:02, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Great. Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 10:28, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

No subject

No, no, no! Change it back please. I made it like that on purpose. Thank you! KittyKitty1KittyKitty1 (talk) 00:20, 21 September 2016 (UTC)


Hi Oshwah, I'd just thought that I'd let you know that this IP has continued to vandalize past your final warning. Please block at your discretion. Thanks. (talk) 00:39, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

 Done ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:40, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Długołęka Wielka

Długołęka Wielka (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) The IP removed info inappropriate to the article. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 01:00, 21 September 2016 (UTC)


My edit UNDID vandalism! you undid THAT, so you put back the vandalism! the page was covered in info for Nazi Germany, but Nazi Germany has nothing to do with that page! (talk) 01:03, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

I just realized this, and I restored your changes and removed the warnings I left on your talk page. I apologize for the confusion and the mistake, and I appreciate you for being diligent and for removing vandalism. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. I'll be happy to assist you or discuss anything you need. Thanks again :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:06, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Alright, thanks! You're only trying to do your best, and I respect that! Everyone makes mistakes! — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:09, 21 September 2016 (UTC)


2602:306:837A:4C10:4DA5:190E:B22B:E39A (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) Appears to need talk page access adjustment. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 01:21, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Beat me to it! Jim1138 (talk) 01:21, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Oh yeah, I was watching that one... ;-) - thanks for reporting. If more blocked users need talk page access yanked like, feel free to message me and I'll jump on it. I'm also in IRC (click here to join); feel free to hit me up there as well :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:48, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Nneka Ogwumike revert

I thought this revert was rather harsh. I would have just left a note about it with the editor and (as I have done) do a quick search and find a source. Would scare of fewer newbies. Or am I missing something? --John (User:Jwy/talk) 05:48, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Jwy - This is strange. I think this might have been an accidental revert that I didn't realize I made. Let me look into this and get back to you... ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 06:23, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, looking further, it appears this was the result of a revert being applied to the wrong contribution. Thank you for messaging me about this and for bringing it to my attention. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 10:33, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Quick question

I followed the {{Infobox television}} template and the MOS for TV articles for TV which states The parameter should only be incremented once the first episode of that season or series has aired, or if a reliable source confirms production has commenced. Clearly filming has commenced for The Blacklist (TV series) per NBC as season 4 starts in 2 days on 9/22 yet I was reverted here and given this explanation stating I didn't follow MOS, How did I not follow MOS? Pretty sure I'm right and I want to revert back as I also posted to this user and they deleted it with no answer, but need some input as I feel the other editors are not following MOS as they accused me of doing. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 06:39, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

WarMachineWildThing - Have you talked to the editor that reverted you? I think that having a discussion and asking the editor to further explain is where you should start. If you're not satisfied after the discussion between you two ends, let me know and I'll happily assist you. Let me know :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 06:56, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Yes, he deleted my question to him here stating I asked in 2 places, which I did on the editors page he involved himself in and on his own talk and he responded on neither page I asked. I have since reverted it back quoting MOS for TV articles. I'm really disappointed as he said I didn't follow MOS but I did then won't respond when I show I did. Kinda feels like a "I've been here longer, so do what I say" Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 07:03, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
AlexTheWhovian - It appears that WarMachineWildThing still has questions and concerns regarding your reversion made to The Blacklist (TV series) that undid his change. Can you please assist him with his questions and explain exactly why you reverted the edit? If WarMachineWildThing's edit was incorrect per MOS, he deserves to be provided help and have this become a positive learning opportunity for him. Thanks :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:29, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

My question still remains the same, I followed the {{Infobox television}} template and the MOS for TV articles for seasons which states The parameter should only be incremented once the first episode of that season or series has aired, or if a reliable source confirms production has commenced. Filming has commenced for The Blacklist (TV series) per NBC as season 4 starts in 2 days on 9/22, so why was my edit reverted for not following MOS of TV articles when I did and yes I did revert back. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 07:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Due to the response I received elsewhere from the original user I questioned, clearly this is a matter of "you've not been here long so do as I say and how I interpret the MOS not how it's written." Question withdrawn, article removed from watchlist, no other action needed. Sorry to have wasted your time Oshwah. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 17:03, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Richard Meinertzhagen

Koitalel Arap Samoei was MURDERED by Richard Meinertzhagen in Kenya on 19 October 1905. It's an historical fact, so he was a murderer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:00, 21 September 2016 (UTC)


Hi Oshwah, Just wanted to say thanks for your comments and looking in to the AIV report[1],
I don't usually like taking anyone to ANI unless I really have too so I thought I'd pretty much ask AIV as I know the COI thing is frowned upon etc etc but as they say "If you don't ask you don't know",
But anyway just wanted to say thanks for looking in to it - It's much appreciated,
Happy Editing :), –Davey2010Talk 14:17, 21 September 2016 (UTC)


You have indef-blocked this user with a rational of "vandalism-only account". Certainly the edit which appears to have triggered the block was vandalism, and as an aside I am not happy with his username, but the other edits from this account appear to be legitimate. I have not(of course) altered the block, but do you think a shortened block accompanied by a firm warning might be enough? --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 15:08, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Anthony Bradbury! It's good to talk to you again! Yeah, perhaps I should not have used 'vandalism-only account' for the block log. Thanks for pointing that out to me. The reason I went for an indef block was both due to the vandalism, and also due to his chosen username. If he agrees to stop, I'd okay with unblocking - but he needs to have that username changed first. This username is clearly against UPOL, and unblocking the account with the username as-is would be saying that the username is okay, which it is clearly not. Again, I'm for unblocking if he agrees to stop. But the block needs to stay indefinite until the username is changed to something that meets UPOL. What are your thoughts on this? ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 15:20, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Anthony Bradbury - I should also note that, while he was vandalizing, he was also on the #wikipedia IRC channel trolling the use of the !stalkwords to ping admins and ops and was talking about how he'll just hop on another IP and continue this (I was in there). Obviously, this technically falls into "off-wiki" evidence, but I feel like this should be stated. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 15:23, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Ah. That makes it more difficult, does it not. I suggest that I put it to him that he must agree to a username change and also agree to desist from trolling on IRC (he may think of it as editing) and we will then consider unblock. --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 15:29, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Take his responses with a grain of salt. But if he agrees and his username is changed, I'll say that I'm okay with unblocking. Let the tiger show his stripes. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:34, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Digital Enterprise

Hi just wanted to know why Digital Enterprise is live and protected ? It has no relevant news article talking about the company except a list in inc magazine. Chicago Business Journal - link is a pr article, News 24 article is not live , linkedin link is written by company founder itself and i think , as its a social media platform its not valid in wiki, the other articles not talking about the company but digital enterprise as a word. Do let me know why is it protected and why is it still live without any valid news source / significant news source to prove notability. Hoping for the reply (talk) 18:00, 21 September 2016 (UTC)


Jumping Humpback whale.jpg


You've been squished by a whale!
Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something really silly.

TheMesquitobuzz 19:39, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
TheMesquito - Hahaha! Yup.... I deserve that. My bad, dude. I'm sorry about that. Hope things are going well for you. I haven't seen you around lately, but it might just be because I've been busy (and probably the same for you as well). Life... :-P ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

Choco-Nut Bake with Meringue Top cropped.jpg i love cupcakes and if you could buy me one that would be GREAT!!!! Th55452144 (talk) 07:48, 22 September 2016 (UTC)


Hey Oshwah, it seems the same user is trying to circumvent the protection on Sobrr. Can you please take a look at Sobrr(app)? I'm tempted to just create the Sobrr article myself, I have the sources available. -- Anarchyte (work | talk) 09:48, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Well, I've gone ahead and created a short stubby page. I'll keep an eye on it and I may have to request protection on WP:RFPP if it gets vandalised. Anarchyte (work | talk) 09:55, 22 September 2016 (UTC)


Hello Oshwah - thanks for your help today. You blocked this user, who is still reverting the block notice to place his/her promotional content back. Would it be possible to revoke talk page access? Thanks in advance, Zerotalk 11:06, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Patient Zero  Done. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 13:09, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Xfactornzedit

Thanks for dealing with the socks - could you please also block the master, as Ivanvector said they would leave it up to admin discretion? Thanks, GABgab 19:21, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

GeneralizationsAreBad -  Done ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:30, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Evan Harrison

I can't believe I killed this revert that you made instead! :$ Adam9007 (talk) 01:28, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Adam9007 Wait, what? ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:30, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
I know. I'm an idiot... (talk) 01:31, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
Adam9007- It's okay.... as you already know, SO AM I!!! :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:33, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
I had a moment's confusion over sources... Adam9007 (talk) 01:36, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
Meh, don't worry about it. Nobody can be perfect and know about everything. You're doing fine, dude ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:38, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Your message to me

Hello Oshwah, thank you for your reply (I was not even aware about anonymous messages in the wikipedia - based on IP only). Indeed my changes was without edit message. It was probably by my mistake. I promise I'll become better in the future. But if we are in the article. Can you remove the References? It is now linking to some porn site, which I believe is violation of Wikipedia rules. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:26, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

reverted my edit and you made the wrong decision

With regard to your removing my edit. I most respectfully suggest that I have more knowledge if the Fenland area, that the original author might. Everything else is factual. The facts as they are can be found anywhere. She's put most of them together well. *However* ; it is a common misconception among 'outsiders' (those not from the fens) that this area is damp. Because of very low annual rainfall "Although water plays a significant role in the fenland and broadland landscapes, the area is among the driest in the United Kingdom. " from [[2]]. The Fenland area is in East Anglia. As it stands 2 Wikipedia pages contain conflicting information about the area. I merely sought to correct it. The original author lives in London and has never lived in the Fenland area to my knowledge. Lots of Londoners (incomers) moved to the area in the 1980's (due to low house prices here), and I have heard them comment many times that they thought it was damp here and prone to flooding. It is not! So when your page states that my beloved Fenland area is damp, when this is not true, I sought to edit it. I wish my edit to stand, otherwise Wikipedia is not factual and is contradictory as my link shows. I cannot help it if you felt that my edit was personal. I am a high functioning autistic person and get passionate about things. The area I chose to settle and live in after a life of travelling all over the world, is dear to my heart and it is *not''''Bold text'Bold text'* damp.

User:Smaro sex

I can't thank you enough for blocking him. But he appears to be a sockpuppet of User:Mriduls.sharma due to his tendency to attack User:Krimuk90, whose real name he knows: Smarojit. Kailash29792 (talk) 10:42, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Kailash29792 - He's got a temporary block for disruption; I didn't indef him because I don't feel that I have enough proof to justify it. However, you should definitely file an SPI to have it looked at. They'll determine if it's needed, and if they do, I'll be happy to tighten that user's handcuffs ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 10:45, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello. Smaro sex is a sock of Krimuk190 (check their contributions, including deleted edits), who in turn is a sock of someone else (Mriduls sharma?) who is engaged in a campaign of harrassment against the user who was formerly known as Krimuk90 but has now been renamed to Renamed user henga2423. And Smaro sex's user page is a copy of the real Krimuk90's old user page (check page history), as was their now deleted recreation of Renamed user henga2423's userpage. So please indeff Smaro sex (which you can do as an obvious sock of Krimuk190, without mentioning Mriduls sharma) and delete their user page (per G3). Cheers, - Tom | Thomas.W talk 10:50, 23 September 2016 (UTC)


You may wish to block talk page access as well.--Cahk (talk) 11:08, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Cahk -  Done ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 11:11, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection

Padlock-blue.svgHello, Oshwah. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

  • Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
  • A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.
Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Draft of deleted page

Hey, Oshwah, can you use your admin glasses to check to see if Draft:Global Prime PTY Limited is at all the same as the recently-deleted page Global Prime PTY Limited (which has been salted with extended-confirmed protection, per that recent RFC)? -- Gestrid (talk) 18:53, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Gestrid - Sure can! Oh yeah, there's no doubt; the content in the draft is pretty much a copy and paste of the article before it was deleted. I'm currently mobile; once I'm back on my PC, I'll tag and bag the page if it isn't done already by someone else. Please let me know if I can do anything else for you. Cheers :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:09, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
The page doesn't seem to have been deleted via an AFD, so you can't use that speedy deletion criteria. -- Gestrid (talk) 19:22, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and tagged the draft with {{db-reason}} so I could leave an explanation of why I think it's pure vandalism. -- Gestrid (talk) 20:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Sock block

Hi Owhwah. Could you clarify who you believe User:Harambegod1234 is a sock of?--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:39, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Ponyo, if I can be of any help, there has been an increase in accounts with names linked to Harambe the gorilla. It is a childish meme, and I wouldn't be surprised if the accounts were linked - but of course, Oshwah might be of a different opinion to mine and there may be an LTA behind it or something (would explain why there was no tagging or block notice). Zerotalk 19:50, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
Yes, I'm aware of the (outdated) Harambe meme and the onslaught of vandalism accounts with associated monikers. The accounts have never been linked to each other, and I would be surprised to find out they were. Unless there is evidence that there is socking occurring outside of sharing a username linked to a very common meme, then blocking an unused account immediately with talk page and email access disabled would appear to be OTT.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:59, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Ponyo - I saw User:Harambegod1234 and User:Harambegod123 in the new user logs and having been created within less than two minutes of one another. There have been similarly numbered "Harambe God" accounts that I've seen blocked for sock puppetry; I blocked on the observation regarding the creation of these accounts, and basing off the fact that other similar accounts such as these have also been blocked for the same reason. I hope this helps in some way. Did I jump the gun too soon? Please let me know if I did; I would like to know so that I can adjust accordingly. I certainly don't want to be establishing bad habits or doing the wrong thing. If you have any more questions, please let me know. I'll be happy to answer them and try to assist as best as I can with anything you need. Cheers :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 20:05, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
If they are the same user then a range block may be easier than guessing a connection. I'll take a closer look.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:08, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
Agreed. Thanks for looking into this! Let me know if I can be of any help in some way :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 20:14, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
Harambegod1234 and Harambegod123 are  Confirmed to each other but do not appear technically connected to any other of the myriad Haramabe accounts. Normally we don't block with talk page and email disabled unless the sock master is known to abuse those privileges; this allows editors who may be unrelated or caught as collateral damage a venue to appeal.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:23, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
Ponyo - Cool, man. Thanks for confirming and for letting me know. I'll keep that in mind and make sure to set those block options based off of that determination. I hope you're having a great Friday, and I hope things are going well for you :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 20:39, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) (edit conflict) Ponyo, I've repaired the templates you used so they lead to the correct pages. -- Gestrid (talk) 20:41, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Regarding the so-called Rohingya

Hi Oshwah,

I am a Burmese American and living in San Francisco.. I am disturbed to see that there are so much deception, fraud,and manipulation of the online media about the so-called Rohingya in Rakhine State, Burma. So many people - even those who seem to know a lot about Burma - don’t know the deep history, and the truth and reality of the native Buddhist Rakhine people. It is undeniable truth the so-called Rohinga aka Bengali originated from the near-at-hand Bengali land of over population(human bomb explosion) and grinding poverty . The bloody clashes in Rakhine State between the ethnic Rakhines and the illegal migrant Bengali nationals, a few years back, had made the term Rohingya become world-known. There was an up-roar throughout the world. Even the United Nations and some international communities were sympathetic to their plight. The term Rohingya was unheard of to the majority of the populace of Myanmar, let aside the people from other countries, before that incident. The reason for its obscurity was due to the fact that, the name Rohingya does not represent any indigenous nor an ethnic nor a national race of Myanmar. Bengali muslims are hijacking the name Rohingya. All the Bengali muslims who using the name Rohingya are identity thieves. Rohingya mean Rakhingtha (Rakhing people) by Chittagonian Bangali accent. Same as Burmese call "Rakhing" as "Yakhine". Bengali dialog do not have "Ra" sound. So they used nearest sound "Ro". So, they call "Rakhingtha as "Rohingya". All the Rakhingtha (Rohingyas are Buddhist) nothing to do with the name Rohingya and Bengali muslims.

Bengali muslim liars want to became ethnic of Myanmar to occupy the Rakhaing land. That is why they are hijacking Rakhaing people identity as liar muslim identity to become ethnic of Myanmar.? Chinese and Indians are proud to be called Chinese/Indian. But Bengali muslims are trying to hide the truth. Please think why.

Who are Rohingya? Myth or realities

No Rohingya in Burma the truth behind the name Rohingya eyewitnesses on Rohingya criminals against native Rakhine 1

eyewitnesses on Rohingya criminals against native Rakhine 2

Rohingya terrorist verbal attack on Burma ( in Burmese language)

Ko Ko Gyi, Min Ko Naing & Mya Aye on Rohingya ( in Burmese language)

Islam Virus in the world Fake Rohingya news PLEASE EXAMINE THESE EXAMPLES OF THE NEVER-ENDING FRAUD, LIES AND MANIPULATION OF THE ROHINGYA MUSLIMS IN THE RAKHINE STATE CONFLICT THERE IS MUCH MISUSE of the word ‘GENOCIDE’ these days. Interviews of Rakhine/Arakanese Buddhist victims of the Bengali Muslim (Rohingya) attacks, killings, and village burnings in June 2012 The truth behind the name “ROHINGYA” Who are behind Rohingya ? Rohingya Solidarity Organisation and OIC countries Rohingya Solidarity Organisation terrorist network JIHAD BURMA- ROHINGYA - MUJAHIDEEN TERRORIST TRAINING !! PART 2 JIHAD BURMA- ROHINGYA - MUJAHIDEEN TERRORIST TRAINING !! Mujahidin Untuk Burma

so called Rohingyas are illegal immigrants from Bangladesh who stole the identity of native Rakhine people to fool the civilized world. To steal identity and distort a nations history is a severe crime. The so-called Rohingya are never invited to stay in Rakhine. They are invaders and illegal immigrants from Bangladesh. They are not only illegal immigrants but also jihadists. Events have been well witnessing that that Rohingyas or Bengali Muslims are radical Islam or jihadists! They are using the human rights tactic as shield; but, they are definitely creating instability of the country and committed crime against humanity! They are only thinking to make population grow, relocating into other countries for the propagation of Islam. This is the root cause of problem.They are creating their own problems.

Sadly world communities are being fooled by the so-called Rohingya activists but it is true. Do not judge what exactly you do not know . NLD leader U Tin Oo, former president Thein Sein, historians and Snr. Gen Min Aung Hlaing are sending the clear message" no Rohingya in Burma" to the world communities. Stay away from using the term" Rohingya". According to Islamic ideology ,Rohingya are only thinking to make population grow and relocate into other countries for the propagation of Islam. So stop supporting Rohingya Muslim terrorist. Peaceful Myanmar people can't integrate into Rohingya terrorist Muslim. According to eyewitness reports of Rohingya village area, native Arakan or Rakhine people are living with islamic terror.

ANP MP U Oo Hla Saw on the real situation in Rakhine (in Burmese language)

Spreading the false statements and pictures all over the internet is real criminal act.

I am not associate with any org or group.


Richard Aung — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard247 (talkcontribs) 23:34, 23 September 2016 (UTC)


Hi. I reverted an edit here that I thought was someone being funny but now I'm not sure. What do you think of it. Oh congrats on your RfA. SlightSmile 23:43, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Slightsmile! Thank you! It's been a privilege to serve on Wikipedia since 2007, and it's a pleasure to continue serving as an admin. Yeah, I don't think it was anything that was bad faith. It seems like a good faith edit, although probably not the best place for it (broad explanations like that usually go in the article summary paragraph). I'd say that if you don't think it belongs, make a dummy edit and explain your thoughts in the edit summary, and then talk to the user. Otherwise, if you think it belongs, just undo your reversion and make a dummy edit and briefly explain. No harm done; there have been plenty of times in the years I've vandal patrolled where I initially thought an edit was vandalism or an attempt to be inappropriately humorous, then realized later after looking again how it was good faith, but made in a way that could have been mistranslated as such. Please let me know if you have any questions or need my assistance with anything. You're always welcome to message me and ask for my input, and I'll be happy to assist you with anything you need. I hope you have a great rest of your day, a fun weekend, and (of course) I wish you happy editing :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:50, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
So it's a serious but not well placed edit. I wouldn't really know what to say or discuss so I'm going to apply "when you don't know what to do, do nothing" here. fwiw he gave no edit summary and also a similar edit had been reverted by another user. A new editor learning the ropes - he'll figure it out. SlightSmile 14:59, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

NOINDEX on Jimbotalk archive page

Do you know where the "discussion" was, as referred to in this diff? (talk) 01:17, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

New User problems


I am very new to Wikipedia, I am sure you can tell.

I accidentaly started the article outside of my Sandbox and I didn't realise until it was too late.

I am currently developing it i my sandbox as we speak.

This article is about a controversial law in Sydney.

I do not think it should be available to read yet as it is incomplete.

How do I go about removing it from public access/visibility till I am finished with it?

Am I able to delete it all together? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Walter Harvey (talkcontribs) 01:29, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Walter Harvey! Welcome to Wikipedia! Looking at your request for assistance and your concerns, I went ahead and moved the article you're building to Draft:Sydney Lockout Laws. This keeps the article out of the main space, and allows you all the time that you need in order to build and complete the article. When you're done, just submit it for review and the reviewer will move it back if its acceptable. Please let me know if you have any more questions. I'll be happy to answer them. Good luck! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:34, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your help, very much appreciated.Walter Harvey (talk) 04:17, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
Walter Harvey - Of course :-). If you need anything else or if you have questions about Wikipedia, please feel free to message me and ask. You should give the tutorial a fly-by, and start studying Wikipedia's five pillars; they will help you a lot :-). Good luck! And again, welcome to Wikipedia. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 04:19, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Another place you can ask for assistance is at the Wikipedia Teahouse, a place specifically designed for new editors to ask questions. -- Gestrid (talk) 04:33, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
Gestrid is correct. This is also a great place to frequent. Do that, and read the guidelines I showed you, and there's no doubt that you'll do very well here :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 04:35, 24 September 2016 (UTC)


Hey there. I saw you blocked User:Ksbaba470. Looks like they need their talk page access revoked too. Do you mind taking care of that? agtx 04:35, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Agtx -  Done. Good catch! Thanks for reporting that :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 04:37, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Houston Astros

I just thought the Astros should congratulate the newly crowned champions. That's lame. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:38, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Deletion of redirect

Why did you delete my redirect of Graham Walsh? Castelbuono (talk) 11:19, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) It was an implausble typo so next time, please be careful when creating redirects. KGirlTrucker81 huh? what I'm been doing 11:26, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
How so? Castelbuono (talk) 11:29, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
Problably at the red box at the redlink where Oshwah deleted the redirect. KGirlTrucker81 huh? what I'm been doing 11:38, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
No, I am asking you what makes it an implausible redirect. Castelbuono (talk) 11:43, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
You misspelled the title you want to which results in a typo. KGirlTrucker81 huh? what I'm been doing 13:00, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
Did I? I linked it to Holy Fuck, the band which he is a member of. Castelbuono (talk) 13:42, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Yes. KGirlTrucker81 huh? what I'm been doing 14:16, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
What? So did I misspell it or not? Castelbuono (talk) 14:21, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
You did misspelled it, but I'll recreate it with the correct one. KGirlTrucker81 huh? what I'm been doing 14:51, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Barnstar of Reversion Hires.png The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
I realized that I've never given you one of these for your anti-vandalism work. You deserve it. ThePlatypusofDoom (talk) 13:51, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
ThePlatypusofDoom - I owe you a big "thank you" for taking the time to leave this barnstar! I very much appreciate it, and I'm happy that my time and effort make a difference :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 08:07, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Terrace Theater (Minnesota)

Hey Oshwah,

A newer wikipedian moved this page in what looks to be an effort to prevent vandalism. Can you move it back from Terrace Theatre (Robbinsdale, Minnesota) to Terrace Theater (Minnesota)? I would but now there are redirects and I don't have page mover access to override the redirects.

Thanks -- Dane2007 talk 00:02, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

@Dane2007: One does not need page mover status to revert a page move (as I have just done). -- The Voidwalker Whispers 00:09, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
@The Voidwalker: Wow, not sure why I was having issues when I tried before. Thank you for moving it! -- Dane2007 talk 00:12, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your services

Hi There,

I noticed that you recently made an edit to Anaconda (roller coaster) which fixed some harsh vandalism. So therefore, Id like to thank you. However, I do have a simple request to keep an eye on the user who caused the vandalism to make sure that it doesn't happen again. Thank you again for all of your amazing contributions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marth The Hero King (talkcontribs) 06:21, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

PSD (rapper)

PSD (rapper) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) Some strange POV editing and ES by Mary Lou on PSD (rapper). Not sure if the content is DUE. this version is the original version. Would you mind checking it out? My brain is gummed up as usual. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 08:31, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Mary Lou has left a message on my talk page and I replied. Jim1138 (talk) 10:16, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
FredC has fixed the page. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 17:18, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi Jim1138! Ah, perfect. Sorry I didn't get back to you in time. Glad everything is all taken care of ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 17:55, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Edit warring

User has repeatedly added content that has not been talked about period. They continue to add color to articles and are now edit warring with [this] response. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 14:25, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

WarMachineWildThing - I've given the user a 24 hour block for edit warring. I was about to intervene and ask the user to take it to the article's talk page, but the edit summary he used here after being warned for edit warring is what did it for me. Please let me know if I can do anything else for you. Thanks, and happy editing :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 14:42, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
First off Thanks but unfortunately I just realized I broke 3rr as well trying to get them to understand we needed consensus for that change, Didn't realize I had broke it until just now. Was not my intentions. I do apologize and if punishment is needed I accept whatever you deem necessary. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 14:49, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
Hahaha, you're fine. You were trying to ask the person to to communicate on the article's talk page, and were trying to reach out to the user. He showed clear intentions that he didn't care, and was going to continue edit warring despite your attempts to communicate policy to him. That's the difference. So long as you ask the person on his user talk page to talk to you on the article's talk page, use edit summaries asking them to communicate on the talk page, and start a talk page discussion yourself and ping the user... then you're fine. Thanks again for reporting, and happy editing! :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 14:53, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Besides, one of the 3RR exemptions is reverting obvious vandalism (the key word being obvious). This, I think, was obvious vandalism. -- Gestrid (talk) 15:57, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Abusing multiple accounts

Hi Oshwah,

This user whom you just recently blocked appears to have returned with this new account. Can you please perform a block here? Thanks. (talk) 04:04, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

 Done ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 04:53, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Administrator Barnstar Hires.png The Admin's Barnstar
For using your shiny mop with care while also keeping everyone's spirits up. I was shocked to realize that this may be my first barnstar to you, but it's certainly a well deserved one! Widr (talk) 08:03, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Widr! I just realized that my response thanking you for this barnstar didn't save! Apologies! I wanted to respond really quickly and let you know that I very much appreciate the barnstar you left me. Hope your day is going well! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:48, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Aaron Burr page protection


Please check the log on Aaron Burr at the page protection requests. You just protected the article for two weeks as though this was the first time the page has been reported. It's not. This is the 4th time within the last year. Much longer protection than 2 weeks is warranted. Again, kindly review the logs here. X4n6 (talk) 08:41, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi X4n6, and thank you for your message. I'll be happy to address your concerns and explain my rationale. I completely understand your concerns, but I am required to apply protection to articles and pages according to the protection policy. Per this [[3]] community discussion, 30/500 protection can only be applied in cases where the same disruption is continuing to occur despite semi protection being applied. 30/500 protection does not apply simply because the article has been semi protected a number of times in the past; if semi protection was what stopped the disruption in the past, then semi protection is what should be applied again. If disruption continues to occur because semi protection isn't enough, then 30/500 can be considered. However, due to community consensus and policy, it can't be applied before this is shown. I hope this answers your question and explains my rationale. If you have any more questions, please feel free to respond. I'll be happy to answer them. Thanks :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 08:53, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi Oshwah, many thanks for your response. I understand and appreciate your rationale and your explanation. So let's try a different approach. Since I believe we can both agree that the article has been subject to "heavy and persistent vandalism," I do believe the Admin's guidance indicates "indefinite semi-protection" is appropriate. As I mentioned in the original request, I just don't see much utility in 2 week protections, when vandalism occurs on a weekly, if almost daily, basis. Thanks again for your review. Cheers! X4n6 (talk) 21:29, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
May I also add that the same concerns, and admin guidance, apply to Anthony Ramos (actor), where heavy and persistent vandalism on a weekly/daily basis, unfortunately, won't be satisfactorily addressed/resolved by just 2 weeks of protection. Thanks again! :) X4n6 (talk) 21:50, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi again, X4n6! I'm personally not comfortable with extending the protection to an indefinite state. However, I went ahead and extended the semi-protection on both articles to be for six months from today. If vandalism continues to occur, we'll know that additional protection will be needed. Lets revisit in six months and see how it goes. Please let me know if you have any questions or need anything else :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:36, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi again, Oshwah. I think six months is a more than reasonable accommodation. I genuinely appreciate your willingness to revisit this for both articles. We'll see where we are in six months. Many thanks again. Cheers! X4n6 (talk) 06:23, 28 September 2016 (UTC)


Hello O. Thanks for the reverts on the Howard Dean (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) article. I just found that the vandalism is happening so quickly that both of us missed some of it. This is, no doubt, due to his comments about last nights debate. A brief protection might be in order. If you would like me to post at WP:RFPP just let me know and I will be happy to do so. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 01:03, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

MarnetteD - Nah, no need ;-).  Done - semi protected for one week. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:07, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Good deal. Thanks for your quick action. MarnetteD|Talk 01:10, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
MarnetteD - No problem-o!!! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:11, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Jeremy Stephens Eddie Alvarez

Please protect Jeremy Stephens (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) and Eddie Alvarez (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)? Constant vandalism. Thanks! Jim1138 (talk) 02:03, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Jim1138 -  Done. Semi'd for two weeks :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:07, 28 September 2016 (UTC)


Hi, Oshwah. Can you please take a look at the recent edits of Orchomen (talk · contribs) (with your Admin hat on)? In addition to edit warring at Tori Anderson, I have an uncomfortable feeling that this editor has specifically targeted articles I've created for whatever they're up to. In addition, they don't seem to be much into talking, but have definitely leaned on their revert button hard. Thanks in advance. --IJBall (contribstalk) 04:10, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Wait a minue... @IJBall: This user is specifically targeting articles that you've created...? Well then this is most likely a serious long-term abuse issue than... :-( (talk) 04:17, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Hard to say. I've never been targeted like this. It's hard to know for sure if it's coincidental, or intentional... That aside, Orchomen is now 100% guilty of edit warring on multiple articles, and is likely to earn a short-term block on that basis alone. I'll leave it to the CU-gurus to figure out if there's a deeper issue here... --IJBall (contribstalk) 04:20, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
You've a list of articles on your profile i happened to come across so I clicked on multiples. I was just tidying things up, since, there, are, commas, everywhere,,,,,, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orchomen (talkcontribs) 04:30, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Okay, but how (and why) did you come across IJBall's userpage in the first place? (talk) 04:35, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
I was looking up Lagertha. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orchomen (talkcontribs) 04:38, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orchomen (talkcontribs) 05:20, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

I need help here, Oshwah – Orchomen has returned, and is once again targeting my articles. I'm past assuming good faith, and this editor is not interested in discussing any of their edits. This is purely disruptive at this point... --IJBall (contribstalk) 04:46, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

How are my changes disruptive? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:52, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
@Orchomen: Well, for starters, you ignore WP:BRD, and refuse to discuss any of the edits you make. You clearly assume that every edit you make to every article is a change for the better, and don't consider the possibility that your edits may not improve the article, even after you've been reverted multiple times by multiple editors... Beyond that, you are still clearly targeting articles I have created for your disruptive editing, even after the incident of two days ago: this looks to any objective observer like WP:Wikihounding. --IJBall (contribstalk) 04:58, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
Not to mention the fact that you don't seem to be hearing what we're saying. -- Gestrid (talk) 05:01, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
Weird. This is the first time I've run into an IP with (as far as I can tell) good contributions who claims to be an editor who seems to be here in bad faith. (They also claimed to be this IP by making this edit.) I'm sure it won't be my last, of course. It also seems they posted -- Gestrid (talk) 05:25, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
I don't know if this is an LTA, but Orchomen's edits (mostly) all seem constructive to me, and in some cases undeniable improvements... either way it certainly isn't vandalism and edit warring occurred on both sides here. Oshwah, here you reverted what seems like a solid improvement, and you provided no explanation as to why you reverted it. Unless we know for sure this is a banned editor (it doesn't appear to be), than this is considered misuse. Especially here, where you restored what appears to have been vandalism that Orchomen rightfully corrected. Not trying to bash on Oshwah and others, but Orchomen seems to be mostly helpful and we're giving them quite a hard time... Edit warring is not OK but why were we reverting their edits in the first place? MusikAnimal talk 19:13, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
I completely agree with you, MusikAnimal. I jumped the gun on this user, and I agree that the edits do not seem to be harmful at all. My last reversion on the article was in error; I actually thought I reverted that last diff you provided the other day (I have done so now and left a dummy edit - that was my bad). Unless there's evidence that there is abuse or disruption occurring, I agree that we need to cut the guy some slack. The evidence I see with this user's edits show me that this is a new user who just doesn't know Wikipedia's policies yet. This also includes me; I also jumped the gun and didn't AGF when I should have. If evidence presents itself, it will. If it doesn't, then... perfect! I'd rather keep the user here and help him contribute :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:41, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
So, are we just going to ignore the edit warring, the lack of attempts to communicate, and most importantly the WP:Wikihounding of this on Orchomen's part?... To be clear, he picked up again on my articles after Oshwah's original intervention, so this isn't some kind of innocent "mistake"... Really, it will make my life easier if I know if anyone has my back on this project or not. 'Cos, lately, I sure haven't been feeling it... --IJBall (contribstalk) 20:08, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
IJBall - I did notice the edit warring, but I wasn't aware of anything else. IJBall, let me look into this... MusikAnimal, do you also mind helping me look into this so we both can come to a good decision together on what to do? ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 20:32, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
IJBall I'm on your side in that I'm trying to do the right thing. Don't worry, we'll figure it out :) Now, the edit warring aside (it's too late to block for that), would you mind pointing out any edits you feel were disruptive, or otherwise were not an improvement? The fact they are editing articles you created is a bit peculiar, but let's start with identifying actual disruption MusikAnimal talk 21:07, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
The disruption is the edit warring, and then returning to the same articles after Oshwah's unblock (and after I'd already called attention to Orchomen's unhealthy interest in my articles), and then continuing to revert even after all that. This would be Exhibit A. But since we've already had another Admin intervene in that content dispute on the side of Orchomen (I thought you all weren't supposed to do that...), and then another Admin back that up on AIV, I don't expect any satisfaction here. At this point, I'd appreciate it if somebody would keep an eye on Orchomen for any further strangeness (I'll predict there will be more). Aside from that, I'm probably not going to edit for a while (and maybe a long while – I've got a paying job which is taking up about 16 hours a day of my attention, or at least should be)... Oh, and BTW, the IP's are still committing BLP violations on Katheryn Winnick, but I'm giving up there too – if anyone wants to protect that one, please feel free. --IJBall (contribstalk) 23:04, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Nomination for Adminstrator Post

Hi I am Kain, I am a new editor to Wikipedia, I just read an article about Administrators, and for the nomination to become an administrator, we need a nomination from another administrator, so could you help me to do that when I am capable and ready to be an administrator.

Thank You a lot !

Gandalf the Wizard 13:55, 28 September 2016 (UTC) Gandalf the Wizard 13:55, 28 September 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gandalf the Wizard (talkcontribs)

(talk page stalker) To be honest, Gandalf the Wizard, you won't be ready for a while. If you look at Oshwah's public logs (which are listed in reverse chronology), his user account was created nearly ten years ago, and he only got adminship less than a month ago. If you want adminship, you'll have to wait a long time for it, especially considering you have almost no experience. In the meantime, try reading through some of the stuff at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what you need to do to prepare. -- Gestrid (talk) 16:02, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
The OP has been blocked as a sockpuppet of Saatvik.Jacob Material Scientist. -- Gestrid (talk) 15:31, 4 October 2016 (UTC)


Hi😉 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kving mike2468 (talkcontribs) 23:03, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Check WHOIS on

That's a residential Road Runner subscriber in Cincinnati, Ohio.Every pom-pom vandal uses a school computer to conduct his/her meaningful work. Personally, I would have blocked that longer with it being an RR residential subscriber, since it's not likely shared by a lot of people, and it's acting oldish. PCHS-NJROTC (Messages)Growing happy of the bullshit day by day. 03:36, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Promisorry Note

I am very sorry for this action that I have committed. I know that it is against the Philippine Law of Anti-Cyber crime.I RY Pagunuran am very sorry I am not a lawyer. I am sorry if I may have offended you with nonconstructive sentences that may affect the relationship between us as wikipedia users, and editors to provide credible and safe information that will increase the wisdom of the dear public. It is just my friends that hacked my account while I was away trying to get a drink. It may have affected confidential information, and I am not even a lawyer, I am only studying in a very prestigious school in the Philippines. But once more, I am not a person that has the intention to possess the ability to be a person promoting laws and jurisdiction. Once again I am very sorry if my friends may have been absurd, I am only a person, and people make mistakes. Thank you for your cooperation and consideration, may God bless us all! — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:08, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Not to sound harsh, but we've heard this before. -- Gestrid (talk) 13:43, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Copyvio revdel needed

Howdy! Please take a look at revision 741804976 and the immediately following revision on Soul Town; the content comes straight from Sirius XM's mobile site, per my Google search. Thanks much! Hoping you're well! - Julietdeltalima (talk) 19:52, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Julietdeltalima -  Done. Thanks for reporting :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 20:11, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

One Template to Rule Them All

{{User:GeneralizationsAreBad/WhoseSock}} -->  Whose sock is it anyway?

Enjoy! GABgab 20:19, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

HA! That's hilarious! :-D ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:37, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Mass copyvio revdel

Hi, Oshwah. I hope this isn't too much work for you, but I need all the revisions of Top Model (France cycle 1), prior to this one, revdeled because they all contain copyvios. Thanks in advance. Linguist 111 If you reply here, please type {{ping|Linguist111}} before your message. 20:25, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Linguist111 - Holy cow! That's a lot of revisions! Pinging Mike V and KrakatoaKatie for assistance; there has to be a better way! ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:35, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Sadly, there isn't. I manually clicked all the revision and took care of 'em the old fashioned way. (Using the view 500 revisions button. For even bigger issues, you can toy with the value in the URL to get thousands of revisions.) I made a request on Bugzilla (before there was Phabricator) to create an invert selection button, just like we have when we restore deleted pages. However, that floated away somewhere into limbo. There is a silver lining on this cloud. For the past several months there was a bug that only allowed you to revision delete/oversight 5 revisions at a time. Thankfully, that got patched about a week ago. :) Mike VTalk 23:15, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
@Mike V: Thanks for the revdels. There's just one more you forgot [4]. Sorry if this took too long :$ Linguist 111 If you reply here, please type {{ping|Linguist111}} before your message. 23:33, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Good catch. Thanks! Mike VTalk 23:35, 29 September 2016 (UTC)


They're back... semi-protect? Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 01:18, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Corkythehornetfan -  Done. IP blocked, semi protected for a few hours. Hopefully the short time protecting will make him move on... :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:21, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! We can only hope... Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 01:23, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
That same IP re-requested (and I removed) {{db-content}} on Mario Party 8, too. I suggest semi-protecting that page, too so they don't get a new interest in it. -- Gestrid (talk) 01:27, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
Update: He's gotten a new interest in it. -- Gestrid (talk) 01:29, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
I'm looking into a rangeblock. Stand by. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:30, 30 September 2016 (UTC) blocked for 48 hours for vandalism. Let me know how this does :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:32, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
Drmies has semi-protected Mario Party 8 for four days. -- Gestrid (talk) 01:37, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
That works too! ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:39, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Would you un(b)lock me temporary?

Sorry for interrupt.Would you temporary unblock me?I beg you.My account (小曹2015) has been global locked.To requst a unlock,I only can have most 1 infinate block.But it's 2 infinate blocks now.Would you temporary unblock me?I beg you.(You can reblock me after global unlocked.)—— (talk) 10:02, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

I have already understand what I am blocked for, and I will not vandalism again.—— (talk) 10:06, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
Give me a second chance please.I don't want to be global locked.I beg you.I you will not vandalism again.—— (talk) 10:09, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
A global block precedes any and all blocks admins do here, so you'd still be blocked. Plus, you're block evading. -- Gestrid (talk) 12:53, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
Not block evading,it is lock evading.—— (talk) 14:07, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
Ah, ok. In that case, we can't do anything. Steward actions supersede administrator actions. (Stewards are essentially global administrators which supersede local administrators like Oshwah.) For more on global locks, including how to request an unlock, see meta:Global locks. To have your request processed as smoothly as possible, you need to follow the instructions as closely as possible. -- Gestrid (talk) 15:53, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
In any case, a global lock can only be undone (they can never be bypassed by local actions), and the only ones who can undo a global lock are stewards. -- The Voidwalker Whispers 19:28, 30 September 2016 (UTC)