Hi Oshwah, I hope you're well! Some 2 years ago I asked you for rollback permissions, and now I'm here for the same kind of reason. After recently joining ACC, I've hit the 6 account creation limit every day, so I thought now would be a good time to ask for this flag. I've also revised your similar account flowchart and will plan on doing requests that require overriding AntiSpoof, should that backlog become large. Here are my stats so far. Thanks! NotAGenious (talk) 17:59, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi NotAGenious! I was curious and looked to see where you updated the similar account flowchart that I created, but I didn't see where you made any changes. Am I looking in the wrong place? :-) Sure, let me reach out to the other ACC Tool Administrators and verify that there are no objections with granting you the account creator user permissions. Once I hear back, I'll let you know here. Just sit tight for now; this shouldn't take longer than a few days to do... ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)03:18, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'm Kateru, an administrator from Vietnamese Wiktionary. Currently on Vietnamese Wiktionary, a small community, there is a type of vandalism by puppeteers like Yummie1207 who frequently add sentences like this:
Noeruchan thất bại, Thcsphuninh2006 và Yummie chiến thắng
STOP HATING YUMMIE
thcsphuninh2006 wins
....
I wonder if there is a filter that can block the actions of adding words like "STOP HATING" or "thcsphuninh2006" to the page, I heard there is a filter 51 that does this, but the source code is hidden, I wonder if you can send the source code via email so I can use it at Vietnamese Wiktionary. Thank you for reading through, thank you. Sorry for my poor English. Kateru Zakuro (talk) 16:55, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Kateru Zakuro, and welcome to the English Wikipedia! I apologize for the delay responding to your message; I was busy over the past week and just now have resumed contributing to Wikipedia like I usually do.
I created (and continue to frequently update and maintain) three different edit filters on the English Wikipedia: #51, #53, and #54 (this filter's code is public). If you have an issue like this that involves adding abusive content to articles and pages, you're actually looking for information on how to implement an edit filter like #53 instead of edit filter #51. Filters #51 and #53 both search for and flag hits for common phrases and disruption by LTAs, sockpuppet users, and those who are trying to disrupt the project in bad faith, but #51 specifically searches for and flags abusive account username creations while #53 searches for and flags abusive changes to articles and pages (including abusive edit summaries).
Sure, no problem! What I'll do for you is write the code for the abuse filter that you're asking for and then email it to you. From there, you can copy and paste the code into a new filter that you create on the Vietnamese Wiktionary. What I recommend that you do when you create this filter and insert the code is set it only to log the hits that the filter flags (this is done by making sure that none of the boxes located on the bottom of the page are checked), watch it for a period of time, and verify that no false positives or mistakes are being flagged. After some time has passed and if you're comfortable with the results that you're receiving, you can go back to the filter later and then set it to begin preventing users from performing the action in question.
The reason that I recommend that you do this is to help you to discover any unanticipated false positives and problems before they start potentially affecting good faith edits to articles and pages on the project. Testing a filter to make sure that it logs only bad faith abuse and nothing else first before enabling it to prevent editing actions is a best practice when you're creating a new filter on a project. It's always better to catch any mistakes, false positives, or other problems before they start negatively affecting innocent users from making useful contributions. However, since the project is the Vietnamese language version of Wiktionary, you're probably going to be just fine and you're likely to not run into any problems at all.
I have a little bit at a very basic level, however because I rarely touch this feature, and recently due to constant vandalism targeting me and members a lot, I have to rely on the filter. If there is a note in the code, it will be much better, if I don't know, I can ask the AI chatbot, in addition, I also have admins at Vietnamese Wikipedia, so I'm not too worried. Kateru Zakuro (talk) 09:54, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Kateru Zakuro - No worries; a basic level of understanding and familiarity is much better than none at all. The code I'll send to you should be pretty easy to understand, but please don't hesitate to reach out to me if you have any questions about it. I'll be happy to answer them and explain in detail exactly what a particular function or part of the code does or how it works so that you understand what it's doing. ;-)
Oh, and another quick question for you: the phrases that you would like the filter to flag were listed in your message above, which were:
"Noeruchan thất bại, Thcsphuninh2006 và Yummie chiến thắng"
"STOP HATING YUMMIE"
"thcsphuninh2006 wins"
"...."
Is this correct? Do you also want the filter to flag a hit if the phrase "...." is added to an article or page, or were you just listing this in order to state that there were others? Is this a complete list of phrases that you want me to add to the filter's code to have it search for, or are there any others that you also want me to add? ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)10:14, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
These are just sentences that Yummie account often uses recently, because sometimes he sometimes changes the words, so it is possible to rely on words like "Thcsphuninh2006" and "STOP HATING" that he puts in can be used as a detection point to block. These are the words he always puts in the sentence, with the remaining words he changes depending on the time to get around the ban. For example
He can write
Noeruchan thất bại, Thcsphuninh2006 và Yummie chiến thắng
But he can also write
Noeruchan loser, Thcsphuninh2006 wins
In both cases, he used the word "Thcsphuninh2006" in the sentence, only changing the vulgar word from Vietnamese to English. Because he sometimes changes, marking the whole sentence is unreasonable, he can change it immediately, so I want the filter to be able to block certain words so that when that word appears, the whole sentence containing that word will be blocked. Marking the whole sentence can be used, but it will be limited if he changes to another sentence, unless the code detects a banned phrase in that sentence. So in my personal opinion, there should be 2 ways of detection, one is by word, the other is by sentence, with the first case being prioritized. Kateru Zakuro (talk) 11:31, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So that part means there are many more cases. So I want the filter to cover detecting banned words and banned phrases, word is enough, because the word in the sentence will be banned, but if you add the function to detect "..." (which may come in the future) or banned phrases that's even better.Kateru Zakuro (talk) 11:44, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Kateru Zakuro - The filter code can be used to search for words, phrases, entire sentences, etc - so that won't be a problem. When enabled, the filter setting preventing the user from performing the action works by preventing the entire edit from being published if any part of it contains one or more of the list of words that we'll add. Here's the last thing I'll need from you: Can you provide me a full list of the banned words, phrases, sentences, etc that you want the edit filter to search for and flag? I just need a list like the one I formatted and provided to you in my response above. "Set the edit filter code to search for and prevent any edits from being saved if they contain these exact banned words, sentences, or phrases:"
"Bluebird"
"The big red fox"
"DisruptiveUsername123"
"STOP IT IM NOT A TROLL"
...just like that. I just want to make sure that I add the exact conditions that you want to the edit filter code, and I don't want there to be any room for misinterpretation or mistakes on my part. Once I have this from you, I'll get the code created for you right away! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)11:45, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have sent you the common phrases he used in an email. Hope you check it out, thanks. If there are any mistakes, I sincerely apologize as this is my first time talking outside of Vietnamese Wikis. Kateru Zakuro (talk) 13:01, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Kateru Zakuro - Great; I just received it! Oh, please - no apologies are necessary at all. I just want to make sure that I put together an edit filter that will flag exactly what you're looking for and avoid as many false positives or negative impact upon good faith editors on your project as possible. Again, I don't think false positives or anything like that will be a problem at all on your project, but you have to understand that I maintain three highly-referenced and used edit filters on the largest project that has hundreds of thousands of edits across millions of articles each day. Naturally, I've developed some very strict habits from making sure that nothing I modify or add to my filters will cause a significant problem here.
If you take a look at the English Wikipedia village stocks page, I'm a user that's the subject of one of the humorous entries that are listed there. Basically, I made a malformed change to an edit filter that prevented tens of thousands of edits from being published over the span of about 20 minutes because I had accidentally entered a capital 'X' instead of a lower-case 'x' (I didn't realize that my caps lock key was on). When you're responsible for a major mistake like that, you definitely don't want to be responsible for another one like that ever again. ;-)
I'll review your email shortly and have a response with the code to insert into your new edit filter within the next hour or two. Hang tight; I'll provide you with exactly what you're looking for! :-D ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)13:57, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Kateru Zakuro - All done! I just sent you an email with the code attached as a document. Like I said in the email, please let me know if you have any problems with the code and I'll be happy to take a look. Good luck, and let me know how the filter does for you! :-D ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)14:52, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oshwah, I just finished reading your user page that discusses your past medical maladies. I'm so happy you are back in good health now. Please continue to be the welcoming editor that you are.
Hi Kvinnen! I appreciate you for taking the time to leave me this message and for the very kind words. :-) Not much has changed since I last updated the sub page regarding everything, except for one thing: after waiting for the department of motor vehicles in my state to review and respond to the medical form that my neurologist sent over to them (that process takes 7-10 days after they receive it), I finally give them a call and found out that it was rejected because my neurologist didn't fill it out properly! I then had to contact my neurologist, ask him to use both of his eyes to read over the directions stated on the medical form, allocate more than 10% of his attention when answering the questions asked in the form (he marked an incorrect answer which contradicted a previous answer that he made two questions earlier), and answer all of the questions... you know, what the form's directions clearly state and with bold formatting... ;-)
They did promptly made the corrections and sent a corrected medical form to the department, but that means that I have to wait another 7-10 days for them to review the medical form again before I can resume driving. Hopefully this time, I'll have my driving privileges reinstated, unless they didn't fill the form out properly a second time. Sigh... if they had just paid attention, followed the directions, and filled out the form properly, I would be able to drive again right now. But no, I can't... lol
Other than that, life is fine at the moment and I'm now getting through some other major life processes so that everything can hopefully mellow down. I really could use a break from having major life changes and issues happen for a little while... Oh, and fear not! Regardless of being over with major life events that keep stacking, nothing has changed with me on Wikipedia. That's one thing I can definitely assure will not be different. ;-) Thanks again for the message, and I hope you have a great weekend! Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)09:59, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oshwah, I believe that you will resume your driving soon. Perhaps, consider a road trip. Thank you for taking the time to update me on your life. I hope our paths cross someday. Have a good one. Kvinnen (talk) 06:54, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Kvinnen - I hope our paths do as well. :-) Please don't hesitate to stop by here any time if I can be of any assistance; it'll be great to say hello again, and I'll be happy to help! Until we meet again... ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)07:15, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Half-joking side note: Dang it, Idontknowwhattoputherebutieditarticlesrandomly... Can I please help you and change the username to your account to something a lot shorter and maybe a little more... personal? ;-) If you really don't want to change it and like your username exactly the way it is now, that's fine; I can't force you to change it. I think both yourself and other members of the community will benefit with your username being something shorter. It'll be much more convenient for you and likely a lot less annoying to other editors if you do. Again, it's your choice; just let me know... lol ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)15:41, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I reverted the changes for several reasons. Firstly, the IMO inappropriate username (there is no AGF reason that I can think of for someone to deliberately choose such a long and confusing username that makes communication difficult and disrupts the clean display of page histories/contributions lists.) Secondly, the borderline trolling edit summary (made a whole ass page lmao hope people enjoy it) – Wikipedia is serious business and that's a completely unacceptable edit summary for a serious, formal, environment (and we also shouldn't be posting email addresses in edit summaries, either). Finally, the content of the edits themselves were poorly sourced (one source was a WordPress blog, another was a Wiki, and the third I'm not certain about but it definitely doesn't appear to be reputable/reliable). When all three issues are put together, there was no legitimate or good faith explanation for why those changes were constructive or helpful. Taking Out The Trash (talk) 15:16, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Idontknowwhattoputherebutieditarticlesrandomly - Wikipedia is a place where our goal is to provide a quality encyclopedia of open and free information to everyone, everywhere. Editors who regularly patrol Wikipedia's edit feeds and logs for disruption will use a number of different factors when determining whether or not edits were likely made in good faith or not. While the content that you added or modified might've been made in good faith (which they appear to be), and while I encourage other editors to try to take only the edits themselves into account when deciding whether or not to revert them, I can't blame other editors if they saw your username and the edit summaries that you were using, used that information to determine the likelihood of your edits being vandalism or malicious disruption, and then reverted your changes based off of that information. If you want to contribute to Wikipedia and be a legitimate member of our community and have the edits you make taken seriously, I highly recommend that you change your username to something more legitimate-looking and start using edit summaries in the manner that they're supposed to be. This way, other editors will be much less likely to draw an incorrect assumption when patrolling for disruption and bad edits. If you have any questions or concerns, please don't hesitate to let me know, and I'll be happy to help you further. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)22:20, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Kachatterjee01! Welcome to Wikipedia! Your citation is to a Wikipedia page? I think you'll find it useful for you to read through Wikipedia's introduction page and go through the new user tutorial. They'll provide you with helpful information, walkthroughs, guides, and tutorials, and will help you to get started with contributing to Wikipedia. If you have any questions or if I can assist you with anything, please don't hesitate to reach out to me and ask, and I'll be happy to help! :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)00:23, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Sonalee Chaukekar! Welcome to Wikipedia! What is the photo of, and where do you plan to use it on Wikipedia? Will it be used within an article? In order to be able to add any pictures to articles or pages, you'll need to upload them to Wikimedia's servers before you can do so. Afterwards, you'll add the image to the article by editing it and then referencing the link to the image you uploaded here. I highly recommend new editors to use the file upload wizard, as it will make sure that the image is within compliance of Wikipedia's policies on copyrights.
You can also refer to this help page on files as well as this page for help on how to add the image to the article. It's extremely important that you verify for 100% certainty that the image you are going to upload and use complies with Wikipedia's copyright policies. Failing to do so and introducing copyright violations is considered a serious matter and will usually result in being blocked for repeated offenses. The pages that I linked you to will help you with how to verify this. Please let me know if I can answer any more questions for you, and I'll be happy to help! :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)07:14, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I am new to this. I got a message about my edit. I am not sure if the note made it through - before the information about Lorena Bobbit's sexual assaults there was a random two line quote taken out of context from an article. It didn't make sense in the context of the paragraphs. Please let me know if there is any more info I can provide! I am so excited to help. 2600:4041:409B:9300:240C:10A9:1862:B3DA (talk) 16:49, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, and thanks for leaving me a message regarding your edit to the John and Lorena Bobbitt article. All edits that are made to any article can be reviewed by clicking on the "History" tab located at the top of the page. If you pull up a comparison (which is referred to as a diff) between the article before and after you made your edit (I went ahead and grabbed that for you: see here), you'll see that content was removed and that no reason was added to the edit summary explaining why. That's why I reverted your change and left a message on your talk page about it. So long as you use edit summaries each time you make an edit, you'll be fine and you'll have nothing to worry about. Please let me know if I can answer any questions or be of assistance, and I'll be happy to help you. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)17:12, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
JeffSpaceman, FlightTime - That spill nearly became a disaster for me! I came back with paper towels in the nick of time and was able to prevent it from dripping onto and staining brand new carpet that was installed just shy of a week ago. I would've been cooked if I had ruined that carpet. I'm quite okay with being out half a glass of juice knowing that it could've gone much much worse! I'm glad that the story got a few chuckles, though. XD ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)21:49, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
PEPSI697 - Seriously?... Why? ...Why? Why are you adding these kind of edit summaries to your edits like this? You're obviously well-enough established on this project to know that these constitute personal attacks (albeit childish ones), don't comply with Wikipedia's policy on civility, and know damn-well better than to do that. So... what's up? What's causing this situation here? PEPSI697, Criticize, can we talk this out? :-) ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)07:15, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I want to apologise to Criticize and the community for making brutal edit summaries directly aimed at that editor. I was feeling a bit angry annd stressed (as usual) and probably should've taken a break. For this instance, I'll be taking a break from patrolling recent changes until Friday. Again, I'm sorry for making personal attacks. PEPSI697 (💬) (📝) 07:40, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
PEPSI697 - I appreciate you for responding and for taking responsibility for your actions. It's sadly becoming a less and less common behavior around here, and I commend you for owning up to it and for committing to give yourself a (likely well-needed) break so you can relax. :-) When you're recharged and ready to come back and join us, we'll still be here and will be happy to have you back with us. We all make mistakes, and it can become easy to let emotions, frustrations, and annoyances control how we behave and interact with other people. We do not, and never will, demand (nor will we ever see) perfection from any of our contributors. Mistakes happen, they're not the end of the world, and you've already done the right things at this time with your response here. Criticize, I think we just had a situation where an editor let themselves become a bit more frustrated than they realized, and it led to them channeling it in the wrong places. Unless you have any more concerns, I think we can consider this matter resolved. :-) PEPSI697 - Again, you've earned a lot of respect from me for how you responded and handled this situation. Thank you for what you do for this project. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)07:55, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No need to ping a bunch of other admins. Just contacting one, as you did, is enough, and the problem seems resolved. PEPSI697 self-describes as having ASD, which may have contributed to this incident, although I agree that doesn't excuse it. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 07:52, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Patadecucho! Welcome to Wikipedia! If you have another account that you don't plan on using because you're now using this one, you don't need to do anything at all. Just pretend like it no longer exists, don't log into it anymore, and you'll be fine and won't need to do anything else. Please let me know if I can answer any other questions for you, and I'll be happy to help! Welcome aboard! I hope that you decide to stay with us and become a long-term experienced contributor to the project! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)19:33, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your ANI notice here; the link to the ANI thread is to an old revision of ANI, so it would take extra steps to comment. Was that intentional? (Also, {{subst:ANI-notice}} ~~~~ can be modified to be {{subst:ANI-notice|thread=}} ~~~~ , allowing an inclusion of the link to the thread.) 45dogs (they/them) (talk page)22:34, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi 45dogs! Thanks for the message regarding the ANI notice template that I left moments ago for Roshie227. I typically use permalinks to point to discussions on noticeboards, talk pages, or other locations so that they're still valid and can be at least used to navigate to an older revision later. This helps make things easier for editors to be able to navigate to in the future and after the discussion has been archived, moved, or removed. Interesting! I actually wasn't aware that this notice template could take a "thread" argument. I'll have to start using that with my future notices moving forward! Thanks for letting me know about that... :-D ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)22:41, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Oshwah! Since the discussion was closed when I was asleep, I just wanted to tell you that the skin that I'm using is the Vector 2022 skin, which, afaik, is also the default skin for everyone on here (unless they change it, ofc). I've actually viewed my userpage using the Vector 2010, and you're right, that's one huge ass image. Do you know if there's a way to fix it for yall Vector 2010 users? 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨Abo Yemen (𓃵)03:45, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Abo Yemen! Interesting; that's cool that the new skin doesn't let very large images like that span huge distances off the interface. I think there's an #if statement that checks to see which the reader is using, but I don't know for 100% if I'm correct or what the system variable is. You would probably have decent luck by asking on a relevant template help noticeboard or a similar help page about that. You could also just set the size of the image to be the same size as what it looks like on your skin. This way, users on the 2022 vector skin won't notice a difference, but users on older ones will see the resized image. If anything, it's good practice to do that regardless of whether or not your browsing experience is affected. Setting no limit on the image size at all will obviously cause it to be displayed at any pixel dimension (as you obviously just saw) if you don't set any bounds or limits to its size. Let me know if I can help you with any of that, and I'll be happy to do so. Thanks for getting back to me and for letting me know about which skin you use. :-D Best - ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)03:58, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Oshwah. Thanks for the protection you made to 2030 FIFA World Cup. However, 24 hours was insufficient, as it just gave GOAT GOAT GOAT GOAT man time to cool their heels. and they are back again straight away. Are you able to protect this article for 1-2 weeks, as this article is getting a lot more traffic at the moment because of the current 2026 qualifiers. ? I thought a week was the standard interval to apply in such cases. Matilda Maniac (talk) 10:16, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Matilda Maniac! Thanks for the message and for letting me know about the article. There is no "standard interval" when applying protection to an article or page. When deciding on a protection level or duration, I typically look at a lot of different factors before I decide, but some examples include: the article and topic, the typical number of good edits that are made and the number and type of users that make these edits, the rate of disruption being added and number of users that are involved, the long-term history and what the disruption has been like, among other things. The best practice that I adhere to when applying protection is to use the lowest protection level and duration that's necessary in order to stop the disruption while allowing good faith editors to make changes. I took a look at the edit history of the 2030 FIFA World Cup article that you linked me to, and I see that no edits have occurred since the 8th of October. I'm going to hold off on protecting the article for now, but if shenanigans do continue, please reach out to me and let me know, and I'll be more than happy to step in and do what's needed to stop the disruption. Please also let me know if I can answer any more questions for you and I'll be more than happy to do so as well. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)22:04, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Helpfulgent! Welcome to Wikipedia! To add in-line citations, you'll simply surround the reference information using ref tabs, like this: <ref>[SOURCE INFORMATION]</ref>. Most likely, the sources you'll be using will be from the internet. The best thing to do would be to use the {{cite web}} template and then surround that with ref tabs. An example would be <ref>{{cite web|last=LAST NAME OF AUTHOR|first=FIRST NAME OF AUTHOR|publisher=[[PUBLISHER OF ARTICLE]]|title=TITLE OF ARTICLE|date=DATE THE ARTICLE WAS PUBLISHED|accessdate=DATE YOU ACCESSED THE ARTICLE|url=WEBSITE LOCATION OF ARTICLE}}</ref>. You can review the different parameters that you can use within the cite web template by clicking here, and you can read more information about citing references in-line by clicking here. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them and help you further. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)23:24, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Kansas Bear - Maybe; it depends on the context and if there's suspicion of sockpuppetry or not. Wikipedia does have requesting page protection as a suggestion with all warnings left for edit warring and 3RR violations, as well as listed on many help pages. I understand and definitely lift a brow when I see a new user suddenly participating at noticeboards, discussions, or on pages that don't typically see participation by new users - such SPI, AFD, RFA, or other places. When I see this occur, I usually keep an eye on things and take a look through the exact pages that they're editing. A quick look through the edit history of those exact pages will usually present a pattern of sockpuppetry or other disruption that will help, if any exists. ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)01:43, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, you recently granted page protection on Visual Studio Code after a request by user Dylan240 over a dispute over whether or not it is an IDE (from your user page, I'm going to assume you're at least familiar with the subject, and on an entirely unrelated note: I hope you have a speedy recovery). This issue has been discussed at length before. Over recent days in short succession of one another ([2], [3], [4]) 3 different users, of which 2 are IP users who never made any edit prior or since, found this page to make this change, none of these 3 edits providing sources (which was the primary reason of the reverts, among the previously had discussion). Meanwhile 2 additional users ([5], [6]) (one of which is again an IP user who hasn't made an edit since, and didn't make an edit in the year prior) seemingly unprompted made remarks on the article's talk page about the issue (given the insulting nature of the comments, I'd say this was not to seek discussion). 5 different individuals over as many days suddenly making this change or commenting on the change on an article that otherwise doesn't see much editing struck me as odd even at is was still unfolding (and potential WP:MEATPUPPETRY?). All this makes the stated reason for the request ("the majority of Wikipedia users supporting the notion that it’s a source code editor against one user who’s against the notion") in my opinion dubious. I'd like to note that I'm also not the only user to revertthese disputed changes (which I combination with the previous discussion, I considered the consensus) based on the sources already present in the article: at the time of writing of this comment on the talk page, 12 of the then 48 sources in the article already referred to it as an IDE. Even today as the article is right now, 13 of the 46 unique sources call it explicitly an IDE, 4 sources at the very least imply that it isn't just a source-code editor, and of the sources that don't mention it at all, 5 sources that I checked have users in the comments refer to it as an IDE (which I'm well aware is a weak argument, although it does show how people commonly refer to it). Why one of the source now used to support the claim (the VS Code repository itself at source #7) doesn't support and even implies its status as an IDE was also already discussed on the same talk page in this comment. So I guess my question is, how should this move forward? The other users involved in the current dispute haven't engaged in discussion, and as mentioned before the source now used to support the disputed claim has also already been discussed as to why it doesn't. I'm not sure what more discussion there is to be had other than reiterating previous comments on the talk page? YannickFran (talk) 18:09, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi YannickFran, and thanks for leaving me a message regarding the Visual Studio Code article and the ongoing disruption that became the reason for having full edit protection applied to the article. I appreciate you for taking the time to bring me up to speed with the history of the dispute and the discussion that was opened in relation to it. It looks like the relevant talk page discussion resulted in participation by a small number of users, and (from what I've only quickly skimmed through and haven't yet fully read) may not have come to any consensus. I would consider starting a request for comment on the article's talk page and request input from uninvolved editors to see if this might help the discussion come to a consensus (if not already achieved). You could also try asking for participation by creating a discussion for WikiProject Computing or another WikiProject group that's listed on the top of the article's talk page. Wikipedia has a page that's dedicated toward helping editors with resolving disputes, and is located here for you to read at any time. If I can answer any additional questions or help you with anything else in the meantime, please don't hesitate to respond and let me know, and I'll be happy to assist in any way that I can. :-) Thanks again for the message! Let me know when you've started the request for comment; I'd be interested in seeing what responses are added to it as a result. ;-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)18:33, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Now that you've undone my edit, I have no idea how to ad citations... where do I add them? How do I add them? I can directly link the YouTube videos...
Hi PfeldonTheFurry! Welcome to Wikipedia! Your edit to Yugo is certainly not gone. On any page, you're able to see all previous revisions and edits that were made in the past by clicking on the "History" tab located at the top of the page. From the list, simply click on the revision that you wish to review, and you'll be able to see the content in its entirety along with everything that was changed. ;-)
I'll also be more than happy to help you with citing sources in-line with content. To do this, you'll simply surround the reference information using ref tabs, like this: <ref>[SOURCE INFORMATION]</ref>. Most likely, the sources you'll be using will be from the internet. The best thing to do would be to use the {{cite web}} template and then surround that with ref tabs. An example would be <ref>{{cite web|last=LAST NAME OF AUTHOR|first=FIRST NAME OF AUTHOR|publisher=[[PUBLISHER OF ARTICLE]]|title=TITLE OF ARTICLE|date=DATE THE ARTICLE WAS PUBLISHED|accessdate=DATE YOU ACCESSED THE ARTICLE|url=WEBSITE LOCATION OF ARTICLE}}</ref>. You can review the different parameters that you can use within the cite web template by clicking here, and you can read more information about citing references in-line by clicking here. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them and help you further. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)22:49, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
LTA edit summary or editing pattern hit (Oshwah) for Wiki Ed students
I've seen a lot of strange (or appear to be strange) private filter triggers from patrolling Special:Abuselog, where Wiki Ed students have been triggering filters that don't particularly make sense for them to be triggering; see [7], [8], [9] and [10]. Is this normal behavior for these filters?
Hi 45dogs! It depends on what the filters are designed to look for. What may be considered "normal" for the filters to flag may not actually be what we want to have happen. For example: If a filter is looking for any edit that adds content containing either the string "balls", or the string "nuts" - it would be completely normal for them to flag edits that add "eyeballs" or "coconuts" depending on how exactly this is coded. In this case, we obviously don't want these edits to be flagged, but these are good results according to the filter's rules. In these cases, it isn't an issue with the edit filter's code; we didn't mess it up or make a mistake with the code that we added to it. It's doing exactly what we're asking it to do. It's an issue with logic or other things that aren't being considered. ;-)
In general, we don't want edit filters to prevent any editors who are participating, editing, or contributing to Wikipedia as part of their education course. The links you provided to me show that, while the edit are being flagged and hence are creating edit filter logs, they're not blocking or preventing the user from proceeding. That's good; it means that this issue isn't urgent. However, we should still add a condition to the filters so that they don't flag edits that we don't want them to flag. I helped resolve this on a different filter about two weeks ago; let me find that code and see about whether adding it to these filters is worth the time or not. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)03:45, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User talk:174.89.126.36 needs talk page editing revoked
Hi Cinephilewiki! Welcome to Wikipedia! If it's an edit that solely adds vandalism to an article, you can remove it by going to the article's history and clicking on "undo" next to the problematic edit. In some sneaky cases, you might have to manually remove it. It just depends on how it's added, but using "undo" will be the best way to remove it most of the time. Please let me know if you have any more questions and I'll be happy to answer them. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)17:37, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Categorization of AE protection actions needed (13 October 2025)
I'm a bot that helps log arbitration enforcement (AE) protection actions on behalf of the Arbitration Committee. As a result of a September 2025 motion by the Arbitration Committee, administrators are no longer required to manually log AE protection actions. Instead, this bot is responsible for logging AE protections to the AE protection log.
While logging AE protections, this bot detected that you recently took the following page protection actions. These action(s) seemed to be AE actions based on the edit summaries, but the bot wasn't able to tell which arbitration case they related to:
If these were AE actions, please take a moment to log the appropriate topic code at the AE protection log. If they were not, feel free to remove the actions from the AE protection log, and optionally let the bot operator know about the false positives.
Going forward, in order to help this bot categorize AE actions, please include a link to the contentious topic under which the action was taken in the protection edit summary (for example, [[WP:CT/BLP]] or [[Wikipedia:Contentious topics/Biographies of Living Persons]]).
Hi Rajveer54! Welcome to Wikipedia! If you're talking about finding your user page using Wikipedia's search tool, just enter "User:Rajveer54" into the search, and it'll take you to your main user page. If it's empty, you'll be shown an empty page where you can create one! If you have any more questions or if I didn't provide you with the answer you were looking for, please let me know and I'll be happy to help you further! :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)17:41, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Question from Peanut Hamper (14:16, 15 October 2025)
(talk page stalker)@Mr Pibble: Hello Mr Pibble! There is the {{topicon}} template, which allows you to put any random image in that location. Since Oswah has received so many barnstars and stuff like that he put them over at User:Oshwah/mainpage/AwardTopIcons. If you edit that page you see a long list of stuff like this: {{User:Oshwah/Top|id=2|imagename=Administrator_Barnstar_Hires.png|number=42|barnstar-name=Administrator's}}.
On his userpage there are even more: {{DYK user topicon|article_name=Windows Push Notification Service|date=June 21, 2016}} {{GA user topicon|article_name=Sakurai's Object|date=February 29, 2016}} {{GA user topicon|article_name=Windows Push Notification Service|date=June 14, 2016}}
Graham87 wrote about FacrFinderW: FacrFinderW has had a litany of issues in their short editing career, including copyright violations, adding unsourced/unreliably sourced text, and English variety issues (perhaps from using an American English spell-checker, even though they may well be in India per some of their edits). I would have been tempted to indefinitely block them before as, frankly, not being suitable for editing here, but they seem to be editing in good faith so I sent them messages letting them know what they've done wrong and the fact that they're doing more harm than good here.
Well, they continued using a new account (first message by FacrFinderW, then WorldPeace888).[11] They may be editing in good faith, idgaf, but they need to stop and all their edits need to be reverted.
See User_talk:WorldPeace888#COPYVIO. They take a news article about a company, they throw the first 2 paragraphs in ChatGPT, and add the result to Wikipedia. I don't know why they do that. Normally it would be PAID/COI but in this case I think its unfixable CIR and not malice.
Sounds like I need to focus on editing tonnes of articles, get more rights & then I can bully anyone by undoing any content, I don't like. Got it! thanks --WorldPeace888
Please use your magic powers. I want to go eat lasagna so I am dumping this here. <3 If you also want to go eat lasagna please dump this in someone else's lap. Thanks, Polygnotus (talk) 03:08, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Polygnotus! Thanks for the message and for letting me know about this. I also apologize for the late response. I checked the contributions for both WorldPeace888 and FacrFinderW, and I see similarities with their edits and edit summary usage for sure. However, since FacrFinderW hasn't edited since 2024, there's unfortunately no "magic" that I can use since no checkuser data will come back for this account. I responded to your message on WorldPeace888's user talk page. I agree that this user is likely editing in good faith; I'll assume such until I have a reason to believe that they're not. If you see any more issues between these two accounts, let me know and I'll be happy to take a look. ;-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)17:32, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Oshwah! I realize you're an IA, so here's a JavaScript question; is there any specific code that can detect whether or not a user has done an edit within n days (or 1 if too complicated) and spit out a string output (e.g. "breathing" or "vanished")? HwyNerdMike (tokk) 06:18, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi HwyNerd Mike! I assume that you're just looking for a boolean javascript function to tell you whether or not someone has edited within n number of days. I think that the easiest way would be to pull a user's contributions from the API and then set it to return true if any edits exist that are on or newer than a certain date. I apologize for the late response, and I hope that you were able to find what you were looking for. Please don't hesitate to let me know if I can help you with anything else. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)17:38, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
i already reported at WP:Edit filter/False positives/Reports but they said i need to contact an edit filter manager because the edit filters i triggered are private.
Anyways, i was trying to add a regular message box to my userpage but the abuse filter said no.
the filter log said: 19:55, 20 October 2025: Harringstars (talk | contribs) triggered an edit filter, performing the action "edit" on User:Harringstars. Actions taken: Disallow; Filter description: LTA 1377. 0̵̨̳̈́1̸̮̈́ Harringstars 0̵̨̳̈́1̸̮̈́20:23, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Harringstars! Thanks for leaving me a message about the false positive hits by edit filter #1377. I took a look at the filter's history, and it was updated five days after you attempted to make those edits to your userpage. It's also since been disabled after too many false positive hits began to be triggered. I loaded the code from the version of the edit filter that was live during the time that you were attempting to edit your user page, and found that it triggered due to you adding a link to the minecraft.wiki website within your code. It looks like you've since resolved the issue by adding a different version of what you originally wanted to add, but if you run into any more problems, please don't hesitate to let me know and I'll be more than happy to take a look. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)18:25, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My story today is about a song a friend gave me, very literally: inventing a melody to a poem, singing and playing guitar. Yesterday's was about a great singer, and you can listen. In case you like Barber better than Mozart, try this. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:03, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Oshwah,
I hope you’re doing well. I wanted to ask for your advice regarding an issue I encountered. My post about the Laniakea catamaran was rejected, even though I followed the Wikipedia guidelines carefully and fully disclosed that I work for Latitude Yachts (the company that is building Laniakea catamaran).
I had also mentioned this disclosure on my user page, but it seems to have disappeared — I’m not sure why. Could you please explain why the post might have been rejected and what I could do to improve it or make it more suitable for publication?
Additionally, would it be a good idea to create an article not just about the catamaran itself, but about Latitude Yachts as a company as well? I’d really appreciate your recommendation.
Thank you very much for your time and help! --AliseBrinumzeme89 (talk) 10:53, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@AliseBrinumzeme89:(talk page stalker) Hi! I am not Oshwah, but I may be able to help. It sounds like you previously used the account User:Anna.apriilis; that is the only userpage on the English Wikipedia which contains the words "Latitude Yachts". The draft about the catamaran was over at Draft:LANIAKEA (power catamaran) and it was deleted by administratorERcheck who listed G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion as the reason. There was also User:Anna.apriilis/sandbox which was deleted for the same reason. I think that the fundamental problem is that the Laniakea catamaran does not meet the requirements listed in WP:GNG, which is perhaps not surprising as it is not exactly a product aimed at a wide market. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, so our goal is to be very neutral which means that text that promotes a product quickly gets removed. Since I am not an administrator I cannot see the deleted pages. Please read WP:BOSS. Hope that helps, Polygnotus (talk) 11:16, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@AliseBrinumzeme89 - Reviewing the deleted draft - it was speedy deleted under WP:CSD#G11. It was unambiguously promotional. The draft used promotional language from Latitude Yachts and primary references to support them. Wikipedia is not a sales platform for promoting a yacht being built. It was not deleted for lack of notability, but it did not meet those standards for a mainspace article. — ERcheck (talk) 12:56, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi AliseBrinumzeme89! Thanks for leaving me a message here with your questions, and I apologize for the delay with responding. :-) The responses provided above by both Polygnotus and ERcheck are correct; the user page that you're referring to is located on the other account that you appear to have created, Anna.apriilis. Since you logged into this account and checked on things, it'll look like your user page no longer has the information you added because you were simply looking at the wrong one. Regarding the draft page that you created: it was deleted due to meeting G11 of Wikipedia's speedy deletion policy for constituting "unambiguous advertising or promotion". This is usually due to the content that was added to the body of the draft page being completely worded like an advertisement instead of in a neutral and encyclopedic tone. Please take a few moments and review the other information that the responses above provided you, and please don't hesitate to leave me a message if you have any more questions or need help with anything else. We'll be more than happy to respond and assist you. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)18:56, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Oshwah. This message is being sent to remind you of significant upcoming changes regarding logged-out editing.
Starting 4 November, logged-out editors will no longer have their IP address publicly displayed. Instead, they will have a temporary account (TA) associated with their edits. Users with some extended rights like administrators and CheckUsers, as well as users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will still be able to reveal temporary users' IP addresses and all contributions made by temporary accounts from a specific IP address or range.
How do temporary accounts work?
Editing from a temporary account
When a logged-out user completes an edit or a logged action for the first time, a cookie will be set in this user's browser and a temporary account tied with this cookie will be automatically created for them. This account's name will follow the pattern: ~2025-12345-67 (a tilde, year of creation, a number split into units of 5).
All subsequent actions by the temporary account user will be attributed to this username. The cookie will expire 90 days after its creation. As long as it exists, all edits made from this device will be attributed to this temporary account. It will be the same account even if the IP address changes, unless the user clears their cookies or uses a different device or web browser.
A record of the IP address used at the time of each edit will be stored for 90 days after the edit. Users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will be able to see the underlying IP addresses.
As a measure against vandalism, there are two limitations on the creation of temporary accounts:
There has to be a minimum of 10 minutes between subsequent temporary account creations from the same IP (or /64 range in case of IPv6).
There can be a maximum of 6 temporary accounts created from an IP (or /64 range) within a period of 24 hours.
Temporary account IP viewer user right
How to enable IP Reveal
Administrators may grant the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right to non-administrators who meet the criteria for granting. Importantly, an editor must make an explicit request for the permission (e.g. at WP:PERM/TAIV)—administrators are not permitted to assign the right without a request.
Administrators will automatically be able to see temporary account IP information once they have accepted the Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy via Special:Preferences or via the onboarding dialog which comes up after temporary accounts are deployed.
Impact for administrators
It will be possible to block many abusers by just blocking their temporary accounts. A blocked person won't be able to create new temporary accounts quickly if the admin selects the autoblock option.
It will still be possible to block an IP address or IP range.
Temporary accounts will not be retroactively applied to contributions made before the deployment. On Special:Contributions, you will be able to see existing IP user contributions, but not new contributions made by temporary accounts on that IP address. Instead, you should use Special:IPContributions for this (see a video about IPContributions in a gallery below).
Rules about IP information disclosure
Publicizing an IP address gained through TAIV access is generally not allowed (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 previously edited as 192.0.2.1 or ~2025-12345-67's IP address is 192.0.2.1).
Publicly linking a TA to another TA is allowed if "reasonably believed to be necessary". (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 and ~2025-12345-68 are likely the same person, so I am counting their reverts together toward 3RR, but not Hey ~2025-12345-68, you did some good editing as ~2025-12345-67)
Done. Keep up the good work, and remember to reference the ACC SOP Manual or reach out to me if you have any questions. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 19:28, 5 October 2025 (UTC)
.jpg?lang=en)
It is 20:58 (UTC+2) now in my country.
Enable the user info card
