User talk:Oshwah

Let's chat

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

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

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

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

Table of contents

Alqosh

Some editors are keen on re-adding unsourced information. Can you take a look when you have time?[1] --Semsûrî (talk) 21:49, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Semsûrî! I went ahead and reverted the last edit made by Alextheedmond and warned the user for adding unsourced content to that article. I generally don't apply page protection to an article or page due to the disruptive editing by only one user (unless major sock puppetry is involved, of course). At this level, we should be educating, warning, or blocking the user instead of restricting the ability for all accounts of that level from being able to edit the article. If this user continues to add unsourced content to the article, please let me know and I'll be happy to take care of it. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:58, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Well, hate to say it but the editor already reverted you. --Semsûrî (talk) 22:00, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Semsûrî - Reverted and user blocked. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:26, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Need help

Hello Oshwah,
I have put myself in a difficult situation on Wikipedia. Editors on Talk:Main_Page#Requested_move_22_April_2020 have accused me of disruptive editing. I don't quite understand what I did that was disruptive. I understand that disruptive editing can lead me being in trouble on Wikipedia. I was in this situation before (see my block log). I'm not quite sure how to respond to this situation. Should I do nothing? Should I apologize for my actions? Your input is appreciated. Interstellarity (talk) 21:51, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Interstellarity! I took a look at the discussion for you. While what you're proposing doesn't make 100% sense to me (I only glanced though it without looking into your proposal in-depth), the reason that the participants in this discussion are expressing frustration and annoyance toward you is because of the fact that you've re-proposed the same idea and opened the same discussion more than two times over the last two weeks (making a total of three times over the last three weeks) and when things have not changed since the previous discussion before it (according to some of the participants). This can, understandably, cause some frustration with those who frequently participate in discussions like this. If you want my recommendation as to how to make this right, I would apologize to everyone in the discussion and state that you understand that your repeated re-creation of these discussions is causing frustration, I would withdraw your proposal so that the discussion can be immediately closed, and I would seek individual input and wait until quite some time has passed and significant changes made before proposing the idea again. :-) Just apologize, commit to doing the right thing, and follow through with it... You'll be okay! Just don't repeat the same behavior. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:14, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Hi Interstellarity, I've been in a similar situation at WT:OS before, proposing to rename the members of the "oversight" group to "oversighters". That didn't cause positive reactions.

Closing a request that you have started yourself can lead to criticism, and closing a "requested move" discussion isn't as easy as clicking a single button. Especially when you're uncertain, the easiest way to deal with the situation could be adding a message below the discussion, without a bullet point, that says something like "I'm sorry, I have misinterpreted the reasons for the previous rejection. I withdraw this request."

The page WP:RMCI contains technical advice, but an unbureaucratic withdrawal message below the discussion may well be sufficient.

Best regards,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:23, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Edit conflict: Oshwah was faster ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:23, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

I have closed the discussion and left a note in the closing statement. What I was trying to do is to either rename the Main Page itself to Main page or rename the sidebar link from sentence case to title case. The discussion for this one is here. As of April 22, there doesn't seem to be a consensus to rename the sidebar link. I hope this explanation helps and hopefully I handled the situation OK. Interstellarity (talk) 22:29, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

(@Interstellarity: looks fine to me, no worries!) ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:35, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Interstellarity - You did what many users on Wikipedia have a difficult time with doing, and what many users out-right refuse to ever do... which is seek help and feedback when you're aware that you're causing frustration but not sure why. You also owned up to your actions and mistakes, apologized, and committed to make things right and improve your actions and edits moving forward. That's a great and humbling skill to have that's unfortunately becoming less and less common to see around here. We all make mistakes; we're human, mistakes happen, and there's nothing we can do about that. It's what you do in response to those mistakes that separate you from the others and what others truly see in the end. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:49, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Oshwah and ToBeFree for helping me. There are some users that make mistakes, but don't care and some end up getting blocked. There are some that that realize their mistakes, but not sure what to do about it. I have truly proved that back in January 2019 when I was unblocked, that my heart was in the right place. I'm confident that if I continue doing what I'm doing, I will make this encyclopedia a better place and never be blocked again. I hope you both are doing well during this pandemic and you are staying healthy. :-) Interstellarity (talk) 22:59, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Untitled header

Hello, it was my mistake that i didn't explain why i made these changes and i apologize for that. The problem is that the the sourches at this point are contradictory between them (stats are very different). Also, according to https://www.gazzetta.gr/article/521539/ti-elavan-oles-oi-omades-sto-opadopsifisma-pics Panathinaikos is the most popular greek team. So i decide to follow whatever greek wikipaidia say about that : "According to researches and polls, Panathinaikos is one of the most popular football team in Greece. The club has million of fans inside Greece and millions of others in the [[Greek diaspora". I hope that i was clear and you will restore the changes that i have made. Thank you very much for your advice and sorry for my mistake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kosths (talk • contribs) 22:04, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Kosths, and thanks for leaving me a message regarding your edit and for explaining what happened. You're of course able to restore the edit by visiting the article, clicking on the "History" tab, and clicking on "undo" to revert the removal I made. Just make sure that you've cited reliable sources with your changes. Please let me know if I can answer any questions or help you with anything else, and I'll be more than happy to do so. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:44, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Half Barnstar
	I was looking for a barnstar you haven't received yet and have hopefully found one that even fits the situation. Per it's description text, it is awarded for excellence in cooperation. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:04, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi ToBeFree! Thank you for the barnstar and for the very kind words! I appreciate it very much, and I'm glad to have you around as a fellow member of the community! Keep up the great work! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:54, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/108.30.170.140

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/108.30.170.140. The edits are the same as the user you just blocked. can you take a look? {{u|wylie39}} {Talk} 00:45, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Wylie39 - Sure, easy peasy. I've blocked 170.146.220.0/23 as well as Soccerboy17. If any more IP users continue to disrupt this article, let me know and (if the users are coming from this range) I'll extend the range block. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:51, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks.{{u|wylie39}} {Talk} 00:55, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Wylie39 - You bet; always happy to lend a hand. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:56, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Padlock Barnstar
	Thnx for protecting Great Chicago Fire and blocking those vandals. Jerm (talk) 01:16, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Jerm! Thanks for the barnstar! I appreciate it very much, and it means a lot to me! I was purposefully leaving it open for a bit to see how much would flood in, but as soon as another range came driving by, I knew it was time to lock the gates. ;-) If you need anything else, you know where to find me. :-) Thanks again, and cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:53, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Page protected by you 24 hours ago vandalized

Hi! 24 hours ago I made a request that you assisted with, locking the page of Jeremy Soule . However a few hours ago a user (and persistent disruptive editor) came in and altered the page, even though it was protected. Furthermore the reason for their change violates wikipedia's bios of living persons policy. Wondering if I could use your help properly protect the page. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.202.132.71 (talk) 07:58, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for messaging me about this. The edits you're referring to is in relation to a content-related dispute, not an issue of vandalism, bad-faith editing, or maliciously violating Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy. The content is referenced and in compliance with the important aspects of the BLP policy, and the two discussions on the article's talk page show that no consensus has been reached regarding whether or not the content about the allegations should be included. So long as the editing doesn't become a war, I'm inclined to leave the article as-is. If it does, the proper action to take per Wikipedia's protection policy would be to fully-protect the article. I'll keep eyes on it, and I'm sure that other administrators are doing the same. However, as of the time of this writing, I don't have cause or reason to protect the article right now. Thanks again for the message. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:20, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

April 2020

Just a question, do you think the word tackle sounds funny to you? NicholasHui (talk) 22:57, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

NicholasHui - There are many words that, when I stop to think about them, their sound, and pronunciation - are funny to me in a way. Why is "plastic" called "plastic"? Why not "oisha" or something else? Etymology of words is a deep, deep, rabbit hole of history... lol ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:01, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

It's from Latin, which borrowed their word plasticus, "capable of being shaped", from a Greek word that meant "to mold". look, you start saying things about etymology, you have to expect linguists to emerge from the surrounding shrubberies! Or in other words: This is a job for... Etymology Man! --bonadea contributions talk 09:16, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Bonadea - HA! That's awesome! :-D ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:17, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

No subject

Hello,

I want to create a wikipedia page for my NGO which works with and for single parents in India. I havent understood the message that you sent to me. Kindly explain.

Thank you

Tran Life (talk) 10:27, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Tran Life, and welcome to Wikipedia! I don't believe that I've sent you any messages before, but I'll be happy to answer your questions here and help you. :-) It appears that you have a conflict of interest with the subject that you're trying to create an article for. This conflict of interest is problematic, as your possible relationship with this subject makes it nearly impossible to create an article and write content about them while remaining completely within compliance of Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. It's for these reasons that we heavily and highly discourage the act of creating an article about a subject that you have any kind of conflict of interest with. Also, if you're being paid or compensated in any way to edit Wikipedia, you must disclose this information by following these directions. The best way to have an article written about this subject is to request one. If the article subject is notable enough to have its own article, editors who don't have a conflict of interest with this subject will, without a doubt, be able and willing to write one. Since you're brand new to Wikipedia, I highly recommend that you go through and complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial before you make any edits or take on any major tasks around here. It will provide you with many helpful walkthroughs, guides, interactive lessons, and other information that will be very helpful to you. Most users who take this advice and complete the tutorial tell me later that it was significantly helpful to them and saved them hours of time and frustration they would've experienced otherwise. Please let me know if you have any more questions, and I'll be happy to answer them. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:35, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

ACC User

Hey Oshwah, we chatted a while ago about my joining the ACC team (I can't apply through ACI due to an initial error); however I never got an outcome from that, and got busy enough off wiki that I stopped annoying you about it :P. Any chance that you wouldn't mind looking into it again? Cheers, --Jack Frost (talk) 11:39, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Jack Frost! I apologize for the delayed response to your message here. Life has been keeping me busy as well. ;-) Sure, I'll be happy to do that for you. I'll put your request on my to-do list for sometime today or tomorrow, and I'll take a look at your ACC account status, any admin discussions that may have occurred, and nudge the admin team if the process is at a standstill somewhere. What error did you get exactly when you tried to apply? If you've applied before by creating an ACC account and going through the process, we'll have that account still - the system will spit back at you if you try to create the same account again. I'll just need to message the ACC admin team that you're re-applying so that they know, and I'll get back to you with any information, instructions, or updates. I apologize again for letting your request sit in limbo like this; I strongly dislike taking someone's request for my input, help, or actions and letting them fall through the cracks and without following completely through on them. I'll make sure that we get you down the right process. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:44, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Oshwah, I get the 'non-identified' error; which I now definitely am. Thanks, Jack Frost (talk) 05:46, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Jack Frost! I just checked the ACC site, and it looks like you've been approved as a ACC tool user! Welcome! I'm glad that you've joined and that you're a member of the project now! Please let me know if you have any questions of if you need help or if I can guide you with anything - I'll be more than happy to do so. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:30, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Hey Oshwah, thank you for your help! Jack Frost (talk) 11:32, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Jack Frost - You bet; always happy to help! ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:33, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Publication of an article

Hi friend, I wrote a new one, to speed up the process I decided to write to you, please check friend https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sergey_Skolskiy Spectr01 (talk) 19:21, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Spectr01! I'm sorry for taking so long to respond to your message and your request for me to take a look at the draft page you started. Life has been keeping me busy lately. ;-) It looks like you've requested the page to be deleted, which was completed under G7 of Wikipedia's speedy deletion criteria. Is there a particular reason that you asked for it to be deleted? I'm more than happy to help you with anything that you need; please don't hesitate to ask. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:46, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Request

I need to request you that please delete the revision [2] as RD3 as that revision was purely disruptive or delete as the reason WP:RD2 as it also violates a biography of a living person or delete as the reason "Vandalism" because that revision is not supposed to be visible. Thanks. 182.64.35.247 (talk) 06:44, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

182.64.35.247 I advise you to email Oshwah or a another admin, as if it is revdel materaial people could still see it here. The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (You Want To Know?)} 15:28, 29 April 2020 (UTC)The4lines

Hi there, and thanks for the message! The edit that you provided is not eligible for revision deletion because does not meet the required criteria.

For a revision or diff to be "grossly insulting, degrading, or offensive material" (RD2), it has to be maliciously-added content that's intended to be abusive, and to the level that it would reasonably cause either most readers who are directly targeted by the abusive content (such as a certain race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc), or most general readers (regardless of their association), to feel offended or disgusted by it. For content to be a "serious BLP violation", it has to be unreferenced or poorly referenced content regarding a living or recently-deceased person that's highly contentious in nature that, if it were to hypothetically be true for any similar person with the same notability and publicity, would directly impact their social standing with society or a typical general audience. For example, if someone adds "[this person] was caught cheating on their spouse on five different occasions" to a BLP article and without a reference, this would be something that violates Wikipedia's BLP policy, and would be considered something serious enough that, if it were to be true for someone similar, cause them to be thought of more negatively by society or by a significant percentage of typical people. That would be eligible for revision deletion under RD2.

For a revision to be "purely disruptive", it has to be maliciously disruptive and to the level that it causes significant impact upon readers, is a blatant policy violation, or detracts readers greatly from the project and its core values. Examples of content that would be "purely disruptive material" include threats of harm made toward Wikipedia readers or editors, allegations or harassment made toward editors and readers, links to websites that attempt to phish, offend, scam, or cause extreme hardship onto the victim and/or the security of their device or their browser (links to sites that contain or distribute viruses, malicious HTML or code, browser-crashing exploits, shock pages with grossly offensive content, content that's intended to disparage its intended subject or call upon their readers to harass them, or content that is illegal or violates US Federal and/or international laws), and other content that is to this level. Spam links are not considered "purely disruptive" simply because they're spam - it must fall under the examples above in order to be eligible for RD3.

I hope this response helps to clear things up and explain the common criteria that eligible content will fall under. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. Normally, I would ask that you email me requests for revision deletion instead of posting them here, but anonymous users don't have access to that functionality; you'd have to create an account in order to do so. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:11, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you!

I have joined the Oshwah fanclub and I would like to know where our ceremonial robes are. puggo (talk) 15:32, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Bug2266 - They're in my special ceremonial robe walk-in closet, of course! ;-) Thanks for the strawberries, and please accept my apologies for the delay responding to your very kind message here. Welcome to the "fan club" (I guess there's a fan club? lol...), and I hope you enjoy your stay! ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:14, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Monday wasn't a good day

Do you remember this thread? Just wanting to know how the hell do you manage to kill your SSD? --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 23:44, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Thegooduser! After a quick search of my archives, yes I indeed do! The SSD had issues that were caused either by a design flaw or a problem in the manufacturing process. It was caused by the manufacturer and I'm pretty sure that the issue impacted the entire production of that particular model (It was a Neutron XT model from Corsair), or at least a significant number of them. I had my Neutron XT SDD replaced three different times under warranty within the span of only a few months apart, and because each one ended up going through the exact same issue - it would suddenly "break" in a way where I could read from it just fine and use it without hurting any of the data, but I couldn't write or save any data to it - it either wouldn't write at all, or it would disappear when the drive was shut off or lost power. After they replaced my SSD a third time and when that one broke, they replaced it with a Neutron XTi model of the same capacity and specs (which I assume was made to rebrand and replace the Neutron XT because of their issues). I've had that Neutron XTi SSD ever since and I haven't had a problem with it... So they indeed found and fixed the problem! ;-) I might be removing that drive soon and putting it into another workstation that I own. I've since bought an M.2 SSD that's much faster, and I have an instance of Windows 10 on each one. I've slowly migrated to the new drive and made sure that the new copy of Windows 10 works and has all the settings and data I want and need, and I'm to the point where I can probably just retire that old copy. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:52, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

I use a san disk 3d 512 GB ssd, are those good? --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 15:16, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

So long as the SSD performs DRAM caching, it'll be fine. And I'm sure that Sandisk will have that on their line of SSDs. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:09, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Oh I asked a question at WP:RD/C about my oem win 10 hdd, could you help me there? --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 17:07, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

I can try... lol ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:52, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Oshwah! Am I correct to suppose you meant 'the span of only a few months', not 'the spam'...? --(talk page stalker) CiaPan (talk) - friendly but sometimes nitpicking, at 17:22, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

CiaPan - Aww, damnit! Good find! Fixed. ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:53, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

U.S. Army and CIA interrogation manuals revert

Hi. You deleted one my edits to the U.S. Army and CIA interrogation manuals page. I simply provided summary information in the introductory paragraph, for clarification and easy of use, that is discussed in detail and cited later in that same article. You suggested that the very relevant and helpful clarifying phrase should be deleted because it lacked citation. Your reasoning is unsound. If info in the intro is well documented in subsequent sections, it is perfectly legitimate to summarize it in the intro. The intro should not be overburdened, but provide the reader a quick and easy overview. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RH Swearengin (talk • contribs) 17:55, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hello RH Swearengin, I think the issue here is that you said that the manuals were "also known as the KUBARK torture manuals," but that name isn't mentioned anywhere else in the article, so it definitely needs a citation. creffett (talk) 18:01, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi RH Swearengin! I agree; If I removed content that you added to the summary paragraph of an article because it wasn't cited, but it was actually cited within the body of the article - you did nothing wrong, and I apologize for removing it. Please feel free to restore that content if what you're saying is indeed the case. Creffett appears to disagree, and he/she believes that the content does need a source. Regardless, if it was a mistake on my part, please accept my apologies. If you need my assistance with reviewing that content for issues, please let me know and I'll be happy to help. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:56, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	Thank you for keeping the wiki a safe and reliable resource! RichDiamondPlayz (talk) 11:19, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi RichDiamondPlayz! Thank you for the barnstar! It means a lot to me and I appreciate it greatly. I hope that you're doing well, and please remember that I'm available and more than happy to help should you ever need my input, thoughts, assistance, or other such matters. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:01, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

oops

I broke the search box in my simple English Wikipedia talk page archives, how can I fix it? --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 17:11, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Thegooduser I would ask someone else as Oshwah seems to be AFK. Or wait for a talk page stalker to answer. Your choice. The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 17:17, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

The4lines Sorry what does AFK mean, I'm autistic and It's hard for me to figure out what those words mean --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 17:58, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Thegooduser Oh it’s fine I don’t know what they mean either I have to look them up. I think it means Away from keyboard, or offline. Hope this helps, The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 18:14, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Got it! --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 18:15, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Cool, see you around! The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 18:20, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Thegooduser - Did you manage to resolve your issue on simple-en with your search bar? Or do you still need help? Do keep in mind that I'm neither an admin or an interface admin on simple-en; I'm limited by how much I can interactively help you with your code there... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:02, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

I don't know what I did, but I broke it... --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 15:17, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Article request

I'm trying to submit it to AFC (Articles for Creation), but I don't know what category to put it in. Could you or someone start an article about ProWritingAid? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.52.88.234 (talk) 17:23, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

This is the same user here; can you please respond to this talk page message? 209.52.88.122 (talk) 02:02, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi there! Sorry for the delay responding to your request here. What exactly is "ProWritingAid"? Is it a company, product, software? What is it? What categories are you having issues with including this draft page in? I'll be happy to help you once I have some more information about what you're writing... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:04, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

ProWritingAid is a professional proofreading software, and its website is at prowritingaid.com. It can correct many things such as word hyphenation (e.g. "in depth" → "in-depth") or the example on their website (e.g. "make an announcement" → "announced"). However, unlike a more popular professional proofreading software, Grammarly (which has more than ten million downloads in the Google Play Store), it also has a public API documentation as well—and in that documentation, you can choose between academic, formal, informal, business, neutral/general/etc. types of writing so that the software can give you the best results. I don't know exactly what "subcategory" in the so-called "computer/software" category to put it in AfC, but I do know that no one requested that in AfC at the time I wrote the initial message on your talk page. Feel free to use either the abovementioned link or Draft:ProWritingAid to start your article/draft. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.52.88.146 (talk) 14:54, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Elgin Marbles

Sorry about that Oshwah.

You did right to revert that edit; this IP Address is a school, and usually we're unable to do edits from here (E.g. Elgin Marbles).

Usually this IP address is blocked from making edits; has something gone wrong?

And if there has been a change, do you know of a way that we can expedite getting this IP blocked?

Thanking you in anticipation.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.242.7.13 (talk) 12:06, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for the message! We usually do not block users and IP addresses unless they've violated policy or have done something that warrants its implementation. We have honored a block request from a network / IT administrator in charge of a school that was submitted to our volunteer response team in the form of a ticket, but I don't believe that the subsequent action that the admin took (approving the request and applying the block) was in compliance with our blocking policy; the request should've been declined and the IP range left unblocked until such a block was actually warranted. I could be wrong, though... If you're concerned and would like to request a block, you are certainly welcome to request it by following the instructions on Wikipedia's contact page. Please know that your request will likely not be approved, at least not without submitting some information to us to review and verify (such as proof that you're an administrator of this network, etc). It's only happened once that I've seen, so please go forth with these expectations in mind. If you have any more questions, please let me know and I'll be happy to answer them. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:15, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	I give you this barnstar RichDiamondPlayz (talk) 12:29, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi RichDiamondPlayz! I appreciate the barnstars and your very kind messages, but I don't want to be given barnstars simply because "I don't have that particular one yet", or because someone is "just giving them out" or just "being generous" and without my actually doing something for them. ;-) I want to earn the barnstars I receive from other editors and because I actually did something that they noticed, that made a positive impact upon them or upon this project, and because they felt that my actions merited their kindness and because I deserved it. :-) Again, I appreciate your kind messages, your courteousness toward me, and your bright, awesome, and positive attitude and conduct - just remember to read about what barnstars (and other such things) are meant to be used or given out for, and before you start using them. It doesn't make them feel special if people simply gave them out with the same thought that people put into when they give out "likes" on Facebook comments and posts. :-P ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:26, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Resilient Barnstar
	I started fining barnstars you don't but should have and this is 1 RichDiamondPlayz (talk) 12:32, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

See my response to your barnstar above. My case in point: You gave this one to me simply because I haven't been awarded it by someone before. Give out barnstars to editors when they do something above-and-beyond and something that made a positive impact somewhere on Wikipedia... something that they did to earn it. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:28, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

New message from Hell in a Bucket

Hello, Oshwah. You have new messages at Hell in a Bucket's talk page.
Message added 22:58, 7 May 2020 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hell in a Bucket (talk) 22:58, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

BY email I meant sorry. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 22:59, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Hell in a Bucket! Thanks for letting me know; I'm getting caught up with my Wikipedia messages here, and I'll be checking my Wikipedia email afterwards. I'll get back to you once I do so. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:29, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

User:UBX/Oshwah

can I use this on simple wiki? I no longer edit here --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 00:02, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Thegooduser - Why don't you edit here any more? What made you interested and want to move over to the simple-wiki project? I'm just curious to know. :-) HAHAHA, if you want to... Sure. I believe that you'll need to create that page on simple-wiki if you wish to transclude it as a template. I know that you can link across projects, but I don't believe that you can template across them... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:34, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

I'll email you the reason I don't want to edit here anymore, one of the reasons is that Simple Wiki needs more editors there and I find it easier there to read the policies and the guidelines than here on the regular english Wikipedia, I get a huge headache reading a page on Wikipedia guidelines, it's too complex here than on Simple Wiki --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 15:18, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

I mean, there are some key differences between the two regarding policy, but underneath the surface - the policies are mostly the same. But hey, if simple-en is where you find yourself more comfortable and attracted to in regards to contributions, then by all means - you should absolutely volunteer where you enjoy doing so. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:35, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

I also find this Wikipedia too big and overwhelming to edit in, Simple English Wikipedia is much more relaxed and small, and only a small admin team, so there is not 100's of noticeboards of where to report things, just two, vandalism and admins noticeboard. And the pages are too long here to a point where I need to read them over and over again and get a headache doing so --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 18:49, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

A quick question about a move I made (which I probably shouldn't have)

Hey Oshwah, long time no see! I've been mostly off wikipedia lately, and I may have forgot some rules and guidelines. So, let's get to the topic: I moved Decommunization_of_Serbia back to Draft:Decommunization_of_Serbia after I noticed it failed AFC, but the creator moved it to mainspace anyway. Now, the more I think about it, the more I believe I shouldn't have done that, and should've went with AFD, but I'm not sure (and I also don't know if I should undo my move, or just let it be for now?). Would you (or any talk page watcher) be willing to make the decision or at least tell me what should I do about it? Thanks in advance! =) byteflush _Talk 02:48, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) (did someone call for a talk page watcher?) Byteflush, draftifying was an entirely reasonable thing to do to that article (and in fact was done half an hour before you by Flori4nk), seeing as it's entirely unsourced and possibly original research. My usual standard is that if I think that a page has at least some chance of surviving AfD (that is, I'm not prepared to say "this is definitely not notable) I'll draftify instead of AfD. In this case, I don't think there's any need to undo the draftify. creffett (talk) 02:56, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Creffett, really appreciate the input. Yes, that was my thought as well, however Flori4nk was the reviewer in the AFC process so I thought I went too far by moving it back to Draft as I was not involved in there (for full disclosure - I have been paying some attention to page creator's edits as there have been several source misuses in the past, but I don't think it amounts to WP:HOUNDING). byteflush _Talk 03:01, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

I just have to notice that the said article/draft is nonsensical. It title is "Decommunization in/of Serbia" (which would be an interesting topic), but there is nothing about decommunization in the text. It's all about ambitious economic projects of the Serbian Government. Vanjagenije (talk) 11:16, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Byteflush! It's been a long time, indeed! I hope that you're doing well, and I'm happy to see that you're back! :-) Other than the small bit of information here, I don't believe that there's an actual policy or in-depth guide on when or when not to "draftify" a page (AKA taking an article and moving it to the draft space). I've done so a few times in circumstances where I believe that the article likely has notability and has promise, but where the creator is very new and would benefit from having the time and space to build the article slowly and where I can protect that user from being bitten or left frustrated.

I often notice that some new page patrollers will quickly tag newly-created articles for speedy deletion - often when they've been published less than a few minutes ago. Many of these creations were performed by brand new users in good faith, and where the article and/or its subject has promise and is likely notable. Of those articles that quickly get slapped with a CSD tag, I've noticed that the patrolling admin will delete it and within a timeframe where you know that they didn't examine the content and/or subject carefully first - they couldn't have. The admin deletion part is much more rare; most will do their part and their due diligence, but it has happened before. This is what I try to protect new users from when I move an article into the draft space; it's in situations where I believe that this is likely going to happen for one reason or another.

Just keep in mind that the section I linked you to above says that "draftifying" an article should not be performed as a backdoor alternative or a way to get around the deletion process. If an article needs to go through that process, then we must put it through that process when appropriate. Other than that, there isn't much text in the form of policy - it's pretty open to your judgment, and the trust that you'll do it for good reasons that benefit the project. ;-) I hope that I answered your question, even though it's likely been answered above... lol ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:53, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Lucian Plane

Good evening,

You have contacted me to say you have removed my edit; sadly, you have the wrong person.

I edited (my first) Wikipedia page in respect of the actor Adam James as there was an omission in his list of TV shows. He appeared in an episode of 'Endeavour' as a writer by the name of Kent Finn. Can't remember the epi off the top of my head. I did this about a month ago, not 2018 as ascribed to Lucian Plane, whoever he is.....

Perhaps you can track down the correct person now, but it's an interesting name, nonetheless. As is yours.

Love Wikipedia and will continue to use it. Keep safe all of you.

Sincerely,

Beverly F

88.106.37.157 (talk) 22:13, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi there! You likely received a message or warning from an edit you didn't make - most likely because your IP address is shared between more than one person, or because you were given an IP address from your network after someone had used it to edit. If you didn't make the edit, you have nothing to fear and you can ignore the message. This issue and potential confusion can be resolved by creating an account. This way, by using an account to edit, you won't receive warnings and messages for edits you didn't make. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:11, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Re-adding unsourced info

Hello. Can you check a look at this Ardalani dialect page?[3] One user keeps re-adding unsourced info and potential OR. I've pinged the user on the talk-page for clarification but to no prevail. There seem to be counterfactual info as well and I've advocated for a redirect to Sorani. Thanks in advance. --Semsûrî (talk) 09:12, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Semsûrî! I apologize for the delay responding to your request for assistance here. I took a look through the page history, and I agree that the content Alijamal1357 has been adding to the article is mostly unsourced, possible original research, and also has some neutral point of view and other issues as well. I also discovered that he/she added content that was copied straight from an external website, which I've since removed and warned them for that. Unless multiple users are edit warring over this content dispute (usually 4+ users is where I base my "line"), I don't resort to fully protecting the article - I'll step in and deal with the problematic users themselves, but only the disruption is currently happening and it continues despite the involved users being given a warning and asked to stop edit warring.

I think that what you're doing is right; you're asking for references and citing Wikipedia policies and guidelines when questioning the content, and you're attempting to reach out to the user on the article's talk page. Just be careful in regards to back-and-fourth reverting; don't get sucked into the "edit warring pitfall", and remember to stick to the three-revert rule regardless of how correct and in-the-right you feel. File a report on this noticeboard if Alijamal1357 breaks that rule and if warning them about edit warring does nothing... Just don't cross that line yourself. ;-) It doesn't look like you two have broken 3RR over this issue, but it looked as if you two were on track toward doing so on May 9 if things had been allowed to continue. You don't wanna do that and find yourself in the same "penalty box" as Alijamal1357. ;-)

Please let me know if I can help you with anything else. This user appears to have been editing this article for some time, so I'm sure that we'll likely have to handle this beyond just today. If you haven't messaged the user directly about the talk page discussion, I'd recommend doing so and asking that the user participate and respond. Explain your concerns, and be positive and civil. This might poke the user into taking a look and responding. :-) Keep me updated, and let me know how things go. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:26, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

RevDel

There is a phone number on a vandal's edit at the "2017 deaths" category [[REDACTED - OSHWAH] here] and I think RevDel will work here. (I initially put this at WP:AN but didn't read the top; I thought I would get a comment faster than contacting an admin but here I am) I'm not perfect but I'm almost (talk) 19:47, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi I'm not perfect but I'm almost - I've gone ahead and suppressed that diff and the information, since it definitely qualifies as personal identifiable information. Thanks for messaging me about this; I saw that you came back and deleted it after another admin had rev del'd it, but I wanted to pull the message "out of the grave" and let you know what I did.

Also, make sure that any issues or requests that involve rev del or suppression are emailed to me instead of left here publicly. I'm sure that you've heard of the Streisand effect; leaving messages here notifies everyone who has my user talk page on their watchlist - which is just over 1000 people. Many people, upon being notified of the change on their watchlist and seeing that the message involves something that they're soon not going to be allowed to view or see, will rush over to view the message and view the content before it gets hidden from public viewing. Leaving messages here about rev del or suppression-related matters will always result in the opposite effect than what we need to achieve, which is to draw as little attention to the information as possible. ;-) Don't worry or feel bad; it happens, and I was able to resolve the matter relatively fast - we just want to make sure that private matters are communicated on private channels is all. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:01, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Question regarding watchlists

Hi, Oshwah. I hope you are doing well. Thank you for previously providing me with helpful information about how IP addresses work (that was a little over my head and I still need to learn more about). You seem to know a lot about how Wikipedia architecture works, and I was wondering there was a way to have my watchlist not sort by individual days, and instead just list all changes in the filter range together? I've tried looking for a way, but without any success. If you know of anything, that would be wonderful. Thanks. – wallyfromdilbert (talk) 04:30, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Wallyfromdilbert! You're very welcome! I'm happy that I was able to try and help you by explaining how all that stuff works. ;-) If you're not fond of how the results are arranged, they have to be arranged by newest-to-oldest. If it wasn't, it would create an absolute mess as far as understanding and viewing the data. A result pointing to an older change to a page might get listed above another result pointing to a newer change to that same page, and you can probably see from there how that would cause all sorts of confusion with timeline, which edit came before which, and what-not.

If you're only concerned with how your results are grouped (you just don't want to see them separated by day, but just listed), I don't believe that this can be modified - at least not at this time. :-) You can elect to have your results grouped by page so that multiple results can be expanded under one entry, but the overall grouping of the results by day still occur. If you locate the settings box on the right side and underneath the drop-down where you change how results are filtered and highlighted (it has a gear icon and will be labeled with something like "250 changes, 7 days"), you can expand that to see what you can change.

There are two different scripts that you can try out that will add various enhancements to your watchlist - the first one might give you what you're looking for. I haven't tried them out myself, so I can't tell you for sure. The first script is UncleDouggie's "smart watchlist" script, and the other is Evad37's script. Try the first script out and see if it might have what you're looking for. The second script adds unrelated enhancements, but you might like it nonetheless. ;-)

As your watchlist grows and you add more pages to it, and hence more changes get added to your watchlist results - you'll notice this grouping-by-day less and less. It seems annoying now, but when your watchlist grows to be as big as mine, you'll learn to appreciate that grouping when you cross over from one day to the next - especially when you're going trough numerous entries... ;-)

Good luck, and I hope that I was able to point you in the right direction. Let me know if that script gives you the options that you're looking for. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:52, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

As always, thank you for your thoughtful explanation. My main goal is to make the "since last visit" option not be limited to a 24-hour period. I'm not sure if those those scripts can do that yet, but I will check them out more when I have time, since they seem to have a lot of options. I really appreciate your help. Take care. – wallyfromdilbert (talk) 21:07, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Wallyfromdilbert - You bet; always happy to help! Please don't hesitate to reach out to me if I lend you a hand with anything else. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:19, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello

Hello It’s been a while since I last messaged you about something. I decided to fully return to Wikipedia today. My question is how do you put your YT channel description in the

This user has an account on YouTube as {{{1}}}.

. Anyways if you know I would appreciate it. Thanks A.R.M. 19:02, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi ARMcgrath! Welcome back! I'm always happy to see people return and want to continue contributing with us! :-) I would highly advise that you not link your user page to your YouTube channel. Aside from the fact that it could present the image to other editors that it's there in order to advertise or promote it, when you start linking your user page (or other pages in your user space) to external information about yourself, you're starting to open the door for possible doxxing, harassment, and other threats and intimidation. This user box will link viewers to a page where they could locate information about you in one level or another, even if it's only a small amount - and use that to find more information about you, and so on...

Please take a look at this essay so that you have a better understanding of what I'm talking about - I added to this significantly, and I think that it's important that you know about this before you decide to post this information. If, after giving it some thought, taking my recommendations to mind, and after reading through that essay - you decide that you still wish to add that user box and include a link to your YouTube channel, you can do so by simply modifying the template and including the information that it needs (see the directions here). Basically, you do this: {{User:UBX/YouTube|put-your-youtube-username-here}}

Please let me know if I can answer any more questions or help you with anything else, and I'll be more than happy to do so. Again, welcome back! I'm happy to see that you're here! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:15, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

@Oshwah: Thanks, got it. A.R.M.talk, 22:00, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

ARMcgrath - Always happy to help! ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:07, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Interface-protected edit request on 13 May 2020

The following CSS contains the following errors:

• Error: Unexpected token '/' at line 1, col 1.
• Error: Unexpected token '/' at line 2, col 1. 2604:3D08:6282:E800:CB0:9B4C:9D5A:B476 (talk) 19:56, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Silly Oshwah, no line comments in css! Galobtter (pingó mió) 20:08, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Galobtter - HA! That's hilarious! Wow, I must've been really tired or something... lol... Fixed! ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:00, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Im not able to search my page

FYI: I have added the section title to separate this from the contents above. (talk page stalker) CiaPan (talk) 14:25, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Im not able to search my page on Wikipedia in new tab, by username ( hussian.ahmed.007) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hussian.ahmed.007 (talk • contribs) 01:08, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Pages created correctly???

Hello Oshwah, you've been so very helpful in the past. I think I may have done something wrong, and hope that you can shed some light. I recently created a few new pages (Santa Maria del Canneto (Pula, Croatia) and Antonio Maria Zanetti (the younger)). The pages seem to work, but they're not showing up as suggestions in the search box. Let me try to explain. As you know, whenever you start to type something in the search box, various suggestions come up, and they become more refined as you type more. In the case of these two pages, they never show up as suggestions. So, if you type the titles exactly (or follow a link from another page) you can get there ... otherwise not. Other pages that I've created (e.g. Manuscripts in the Biblioteca Marciana) show up fine in the search box. Did I do something wrong? Thank you in advance.Venicescapes (talk) 11:16, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Venicescapes! You likely did nothing wrong if these pages are published to the mainspace. It takes time for newly created articles to become indexed and part of search suggestions like that. While part of the reason is because there's a system that has to pull a big list of data in order to find what should be indexed and added (it takes some time to get done), I also believe that the delay is set to be a bit longer on purpose, so that any new pages that are malicious, abusive, or grossly-violate policy don't get a chance to make it to the search as a suggestion before an admin has a chance to delete it. How long ago did you create these articles? Did you recently rename or move them at all? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:36, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Good Morning Oshwah, as always, thank you for the speedy and kind reply. The pages were created on 9 and 13 May. So, as you point out, it may simply be too soon. It's almost as if they're ghost pages at present. They sort of exist, but not fully. The important thing is that I apparently didn't do anything wrong ... for a change. I'll wait for a while to see what happens. Have a nice day.Venicescapes (talk) 06:55, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Oshwah. Nothing yet. Neither Santa Maria del Canneto (Pula, Croatia) nor Antonio Maria Zanetti (the younger) show up in the search box as suggestions. Is it still too early to panic?Venicescapes (talk) 17:54, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

(by talk reader) @Venicescapes: I'm not sure exactly what the problem you describe is and I'm curious if you have a conflict of interest here. I typed santa maria del canneto in Wikipedia's search window and the article you wrote came up as a suggestion. Further, when I searched the same term in Google, the article about it came up although not at the very top. Is this to what you refer? Chris Troutman (talk) 18:09, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

No conflict of interest. I'll try to explain in greater detail. Type just 'Antonio Maria Zan' in the search box. The only suggestion is Antonio Maria Zanetti and NOT Antonio Maria Zanetti (the younger). They are two different people. The same thing occurs if you type just 'Santa Maria del Ca'. There is no suggestion for Santa Maria del Canneto. You have to type it fully.Venicescapes (talk) 18:17, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying! That's not my user experience. When I type Antonio Maria Zan I get both suggestions. When I type Santa Maria del Ca the article you wrote is the fourth suggestion; below two del Carmines and a del Ca. I can't explain why you get the results you do; it may have something to do with your browser or your preferences. I would be confident that other Wikipedia readers are finding what you wrote. You can use {{Graph:PageViews}} or other such template to observe your readership. Chris Troutman (talk) 18:28, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for verifying. It might be my browser. The important thing is that readers can find it even if they don't type exactly the full article name.Venicescapes (talk) 18:35, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Possible RfA?

Hello Oshwah,
I hope you are doing well. I have a question I have been very hesitant to ask. I am thinking about doing a possible RfA in about the next 6-12 months. To be clear, I am OK with being an administrator and I am also OK with staying a non-admin. I just want to serve Wikipedia well regardless of whether or not I am an admin. I don't think it is a smart move to go start an RfA without consulting an admin first because it could fail miserably. I thought about putting myself out there at WP:ORCP, but I feel more comfortable consulting with individual editors first. Right now, I don't feel I could pass right now since I think WP:NOTQUITEYET applies to me at this time. I think the administrative tools would be helpful because as a vandal fighter and new page patroller, I could help with blocking those who break our rules and deleting articles according to the CSD criteria especially vandalism and spam. I would like to know your thoughts on what an RfA could look like. Interstellarity (talk) 19:36, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Interstellarity! I think you're doing the right thing by inquiring about the process and getting general input about your ideas and possible plans with others. I can definitely share with you my general thoughts based on my experience with both participating and reading other users' RFAs, as well as having barely survived (lol) my RFA. If you're interested in running for the toolset in the somewhat-near future, you should keep in mind there's much more that I (and many others) look for in good candidates than just having a record of solid dedication to recent changes patrolling. Passing an RFA solely (or even mostly) on your level of experience and dedication toward recent changes patrolling and reverting vandalism is extremely rare. I was able to pass mine on that basis because I was, at the time, one of the largest patrollers of all-time, and I came into that RFA process with years of experience and where I was well-known to the community for my work in that area. Had I been any less experienced with vandal-fighting, I'm damn sure that I wouldn't have even come close to passing.

The community looks for many other important strengths, experience, and involvement in the applications that they feel would make good administrators. You'll want to make sure that you can demonstrate a high level of Wikipedia policy knowledge, experience and understanding of consensus and process, as well as good communication skills and dedication toward helping new editors and those who are finding themselves in need of guidance. Good administrators also have near-infalliable knack for remaining civil toward other editors - even in situations where someone is (figuratively) spitting in your face and telling you in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS that you'd be better off dead and that you should go kill yourself. Remember that, aside from having the knowledge and competence to use those tools properly and within compliance of policy, you're also someone who sets the example for how editors should edit, comment, and behave on this project when you hold those tools. ORCP isn't a bad place to go to if you're not planning on running for adminship soon, but have that as a long-term goal or in your planbook within the next year. Just take the responses and input in a "take the meat and leave the bones" kind of manner. While you should take any opinions and analogies that one editors might make there with a grain of salt, you should definitely take the collective feedback that multiple participants touch on and agree with in their individual evaluations as a good representative of where you stand.

I think that if you build yourself and your experience in areas where you're explaining and elaborating on policy often (such as AFD for example), and you spend time helping new users and demonstrating your patience, willingness to help, and your ability to effectively communicate with other users - that you'll be on the right track for having community support and at least standing in an RFA with a fair chance of passing and where you'd (worst case scenario) have a fair RFA turnout and result, and where it doesn't sink to the bottom like the Titanic like where we've often seen happen with many RFAs. :-) I hope that my response helped to at least give you a sense of what the community will look for and expect in good candidates, and give you a starting point to where you can set some goals and do well with meeting them during the 6-12 month timeline that you said was when you might consider running. Please let me know if you have any questions or if I can provide you with any more input or thoughts, and I'll be happy to do so. :-) Keep me posted, and let me know what you decide will be your long-term plans and goals. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:23, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello Oshwah, Thank you for your response. I do understand that there is more to being an administrator than just reverting vandalism. I also have experience helping others at the Teahouse where I started out as a newbie asking for help there. I have participated in AFD discussions and have closed a few AFDs and RMs which call for evaluating consensus. I have had new users come to my talk page why their articles got declined at AFC. I try to explain to them what was it that got the article declined. I try to communicate with users and evaluate their concerns and seek help whenever I need it. I don't think my experience is there yet, but I hope it will get there. Interstellarity (talk) 11:55, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

And while your here, I know I’m not close to a RFA soon but what do you think I should improve. Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 14:15, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

(by talk reader) @The4lines: Please focus on being a good Wikipedian and the rest will sort out. You're still learning about NPP. All three articles you ever created were deleted. Keep contributing everyday for the next five years and other editors will ask you. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:30, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

@Chris troutman: Ok, thanks for your input. I am still welcome to Oshwah input too. Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 15:36, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Interstellarity, if you don't mind, I have a couple suggestions. If you want more, drop me a talk page message. I'd focus on some content work. You do good work, but there will be !voters who want to see that you can handle writing to the encyclopedia. I'd write a GA/FA or two, which will detract anyone with this mindset (recently CaptainEek passed, but probably wouldn't have done for not having worked on Cactus Wren.) Having good experience working in wikipedia mainspace, no history of abuse and a need for the tools is usually enough for most people. You might have issues with tenure (your account is very old, but you've been editing consistently since 2019), and editcount, but both of these things will be helped by getting some content created. I hope some of this is helpful. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:46, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Interstellarity - Echoing what Lee Vilenski said above, I also consider one's experience with article creation and expansion when I make a decision in an RFA. I don't need to see a decorated array of GA's or FA's under your belt, but I do like to see that they have enough demonstrable evidence of creation or expansion to where I feel confident that you understand Wikipedia's important and various policies, guidelines, and etiquette. I'll tell you this from experience: Demonstrating a good grasp on these very concepts when it comes to recent changes patrolling and vandal-fighting is one thing, but demonstrating that same level of knowledge when you're actually writing and expanding content and contributing to discussions that directly involve what you're creating or expanding is absolutely another. When I first became an admin, I felt 100% confident and comfortable with my knowledge of when you should report users to AIV and hence when those users should be blocked... Or at least I thought I felt that way, until I went to start exercising my knowledge of these policies in the position of a user who was actually going to be pushing the block button - something that I was completely new at doing. I found myself double-and-triple-checking everything, re-reading the blocking policy in a somewhat-unique situation with a report at AIV - even though I've read through it forwards and backwards 40+ times in the past, and looking through the reported users' edits more than once - even in somewhat-blatant cases - before I'd block the user.

What's my point in telling you all of this? To explain why I look at content creation and expansion in RFAs. I wasn't going so slowly and carefully because I didn't understand the relevant policies and had no knowledge of them at all. It's because I had never exercised that knowledge while in the position of being the blocking admin before, and I to build my confidence and experience with the knowledge and understanding of these policies from a completely different position. Good knowledge of policy is shown by one's ability to cite them in situations when asked and apply them in one's contributions to a certain area. What I want to see in a candidate is that they are comfortable applying that knowledge in more than one major area or position of this project, because I know that you're capable of slowing down, doing what's needed to do things right, and that you don't get overconfident take your knowledge of policy and charge into a new area at full-blast without checking yourself. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:38, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

@Lee Vilenski and Oshwah: Thank you both for your responses. I have no doubt that I can always improve as a Wikipedia editor. My ultimate goal is to make Wikipedia a better place for readers and our editors. I do have some experience with content creation. The latest article I created was Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on hospitals. I believe I have a lot of potential to become one of our best editors in the future. I will continue to improve my skills by learning from my mistakes. Don't forget to stay safe and stay healthy!! :-) Interstellarity (talk) 21:47, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Help regarding IP address and internet usage

Last May 9, 2020 (Philippine Standard Time), the modem of my home internet got broken. So I had use to mobile data of my cellphone service in order to edit articles. Fast forward to May 11, 2020, I couldn't edit anything in Wikipedia not even my talkpage because the IP that I was using was ranged blocked. I checked my block log, I wasn't blocked but the IP that I was under was blocked for editing. I'm messaging you because I don't want my account to be blocked because of IP hopping. I didn't even know there's such a thing regarding IP hopping. Now, my home internet got a new modem and now I can edit again here in Wikipedia using my home internet connection. Is there anyway you could help me, that my account wouldn't get in trouble because If incase I used a different internet connection and different IP address? And I am specifically asking you, because your name was attached to the blocked notice to the IP adress I was using. TheHotwiki (talk) 10:07, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Hotwiki, and thanks for the message! I'll be happy to answer your questions and address your concerns. :-) Unfortunately, range blocks made to mobile networks that cover a wide number of IP addresses is not an uncommon occurrence at times. It's easy for people to change their IP address (both purposefully and unintentionally) on these networks due to the fact that the mobile providers have to accommodate for the mobility and travel of their users. Mobile ISPs have to allocate IP addresses with large subnet addresses and with the ability for them to change often. This is because people travel and move, go from tower to tower, area to area, drop in and out of connectivity as they switch to WiFi networks and go unto tunnels, and do all sorts of different daily tasks that make it hard to force each mobile device to keep one IP address only. When someone uses a mobile IP to cause vandalism, disruption, or abuse on Wikipedia, and at a very large scale or severity - and when the evidence is clear that they're quickly changing IP addresses and continuing to cause the disruption, administrators at many times have to apply a block to the network range in order to stop it. It's not their choice; they don't do that for fun. :-)

That being said, it doesn't mean that you're automatically guilty of causing vandalism, abuse, or disruption simply because you happened to try and edit using an IP address under a range that's currently blocked. So long as you're actually not participating in the disruption, you have nothing to worry about. If you happen to come up as part of a search or investigation by checkusers, they have access to data outside of just the IP address you used to edit (your user agent being an example). Rest assured, they have the proper tools, knowledge, and training in order to investigate each matter thoroughly and carefully, and make the right decision as far a blocking goes. Like I said, if you haven't actually done anything abusive or malicious, you need not worry at all. :-)

Please let me know if I can answer any questions or address any further concerns, and I'll be happy to do so. :-) Thanks again for the message, and I wish you a great day and happy editing. :-D Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:44, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks a lot for your response! I appreciate it.TheHotwiki (talk) 10:48, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Hotwiki - No problem; always happy to help! ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:56, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Naturopathy page

Hello, I was wondering about protecting pages. The naturopathy page seems to be regularly protected but it’s clearly being protected with such a biased and derogatory description that I don’t understand how someone could let that stand. Who makes such decisions? And who is responsible for checking this content for accuracy?

Thanks. Almarune (talk) 21:48, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

@Almarune: You should check out WP:GEVAL and WP:FRINGE to understand why the page is protected. In short: "Neutral" doesn't mean that we give false balance in favor of a concept rejected by mainstream academia. If a concept is rejected by mainstream scientific sources, then that's the "side" we take. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:01, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Almarune, and thanks for messaging me with your questions and concerns. I highly recommend that you read Ian.thomson's response above, as these pages will help you to understand the reason behind the decision to add protection to this article at the time. I am slightly confused though; this article was last protected back in March 2020 (about two months ago) - is there a particular reason that you're bringing these concerns to me now? I see that your first edit was with your message here. Have you edited Wikipedia before? I'm just trying to figure out the context of the situation and where your thoughts are coming from. :-) Thanks - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:25, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi,

No, I’ve never edited Wikipedia before. I’m not sure I’m responding in the right place now as this is all new to me. Apologies if I’m putting things in the wrong place. I was just shocked when I came across the inflammatory and biased tone of this entry about naturopathy. I‘ve always found Wikipedia to seem neutral, encyclopedic and informative. To its credit, I’ve never come across an article that made me notice or think about the author. This one was just so out of step with the regular balanced tone of Wikipedia that it surprised me. It seemed so personal and angry that it made me question the process - so I wrote in to ask. Thanks for your previous response. Almarune (talk) 21:13, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Almarune! No worries, and welcome to Wikipedia! Since you're brand new here, I recommend that you go through and complete Wikipedia's new user tutorial. t will provide you with many helpful walkthroughs, guides, interactive lessons, and other information that will be very helpful to you. Most users who take this advice and complete the tutorial tell me later that it was significantly helpful to them and saved them hours of time and frustration they would've experienced otherwise. If you run into any questions, concerns, or issues (such as this), please don't hesitate to reach out to me and let me know. I'll be happy to take a look and help you. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:29, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

BAN on wiki for my username!

Hi, i am a Bulgarian photographer, my ph pages are called COCAINE VISION. I got ban bc of my name! FIX IT! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Damyan Dechev (talk • contribs) 12:36, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

(by talk reader) @Damyan Dechev: No. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. People register accounts in order to contribute to our articles. We are not an advertising platform and you have no right to your preferred promotional name. Chris Troutman (talk) 13:32, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Damyan Dechev. Your username was in violation of Wikipedia's username policy for multiple reasons. You're welcome to use this account to edit, but the other account cannot be unblocked unless the username is changed and it complies with the username policy. I'm sorry if this frustrated you, but (as said above) we are an encyclopedia, and we're here to build and contribute to it. If accounts violate policy with the username they chose, or the user violates policy with their edits or behaviors, they can be blocked in order to prevent disruption. Please let me know if you have any questions about Wikipedia's policies, and I'll be happy to answer them. Thank you - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:10, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello Sir I need some help to write articles easily and i want to become like you

Hello I want to write an article on YouTube vs TikTok which is currently a controversy running in our country India by which TikTok is now a low rated app in India. Many popular news articles covered this topic and tv channels too. Now the TikTok rating app is 1.2 well before controversy it was the top-rated app like up to 4.5 but everything changed by a small war between YouTube and TikTok creators which makes controversy. So I studied all the articles and talk to the persons who knows everything and covered everything on this current happenings. I just want to know whether I can write an article on this issue or not and I just want your help to get started. Hope I 'll get help from you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chanduyelga9 (talk • contribs) 20:32, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Chanduyelga9, and welcome to Wikipedia! I advise going through and completing the new user tutorial before you start making any edits. It will provide you with many important walkthroughs, guides, interactive lessons, and other information that will be very helpful to you. Most users who take this advice and complete the tutorial tell me later that it was significantly helpful to them and saved them hours of time and frustration they would've experienced otherwise. I highly advise that you read this help page before you get started, as it will help you avoid typical issues and pitfalls when creating your first article. Afterwards, I advise using the articles for creation page to help you create the article as a draft. This will give you all the time that you need to build, expand, and get the article ready before you publish it. This also gives you easy access to help from experienced editors should you need assistance with anything. If you run into any questions, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be happy to help. Again, welcome to Wikipedia! I hope that you enjoy your stay with us; take off your jacket and have a seat. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:48, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Question

Can you provide a documentation of your QuickBlockScript, along with a screenshot of QuickBlockScript in action, please? --107.242.113.52 (talk) 02:43, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 May 2020

There's a swear word which is too violent than the other words. It's also more bad than the N-word. It's called the S-word (not "s**t", "stupid". Please replace with "silly". The secret weapon for the account Denimbabel 16:08, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The secret weapon for the account Denimbabel, For which page? Wikipedia is not censored, so as long as the swear word isn't attacking a person, or is a not threat, it's generally fine --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 16:33, 27 May 2020 (UTC)