User talk:OsFish

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, OsFish! Thank you for your contributions. I am WeijiBaikeBianji and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{help me}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 12:09, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just out of curiosity, what does suggestbot suggest?

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Views/Day	Title	Tagged with…
618	Cognitive science (talk)	Add sources
22	Isoko people (talk)	Add sources
90	Smarta Tradition (talk)	Add sources
105	Neuroscience of sex differences (talk)	Add sources
28	Rural King (talk)	Add sources
59	Kamba people (talk)	Add sources
317	Jerky (talk)	Cleanup
167	Ethnic religion (talk)	Cleanup
908	Design thinking (talk)	Cleanup
14	Osaka Restoration Association (talk)	Expand
88	Fire worship (talk)	Expand
30	Irving Singer (talk)	Expand
28	Seungsahn (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
40	Dievturība (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
36	Applied aesthetics (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
28	Women and religion (talk)	Merge
74	Indian aesthetics (talk)	Merge
1,365	Confirmation bias (talk)	Merge
46	Polynesian narrative (talk)	Wikify
64	Criticism of evolutionary psychology (talk)	Wikify
49	Reverence (emotion) (talk)	Wikify
3	Lateral computing (talk)	Orphan
1	Aichi University of Technology Automotive Junior College (talk)	Orphan
1	Anantasagar (talk)	Orphan
4	Shoin University (talk)	Stub
6	Japanese School of Beijing (talk)	Stub
10	Aliran kepercayaan (talk)	Stub
7	Taipei Japanese School (talk)	Stub
3	Osaka University of Economics and Law (talk)	Stub
2	Taichung Japanese School (talk)	Stub

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 04:43, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, OsFish. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:47, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New suggestions

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Views/Day	Title	Tagged with…
354	Grammar–translation method (talk)	Add sources
68	Makoto Fujimura (talk)	Add sources
114	Giuseppe Chiara (talk)	Add sources
217	Multiple discovery (talk)	Add sources
2,572	Italian language (talk)	Add sources
81	Sacha Hamilton, Duchess of Abercorn (talk)	Add sources
24	ISO TC 279 (talk)	Cleanup
113	Language pedagogy (talk)	Cleanup
1,186	Problem solving (talk)	Cleanup
136	Catholic Church in Japan (talk)	Expand
458	Christianity in Japan (talk)	Expand
1,074	Nagasaki (talk)	Expand
99	Human rights in Tibet (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
297	Teaching English as a second or foreign language (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
137	Serfdom in Tibet controversy (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
138	Real-time locating system (talk)	Merge
353	Narnia (world) (talk)	Merge
125	Narnia (country) (talk)	Merge
672	Digital transformation (talk)	Wikify
66	Darren Jones (politician) (talk)	Wikify
10	Campus of Kyushu University (talk)	Wikify
19	Exnovation (talk)	Orphan
7	Pharmaceutical innovations (talk)	Orphan
8	Patsy M. Lightbown (talk)	Orphan
188	Semantic Scholar (talk)	Stub
5	Iōjima, Nagasaki (talk)	Stub
68	Dictogloss (talk)	Stub
7	Junnosuke Yoshiyuki (talk)	Stub
5	Theatre Royal, Wakefield (talk)	Stub
5	Nishisonogi District, Nagasaki (talk)	Stub

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:35, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OrphanReferenceFixer: Help on reversion

Hi there! I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. Recently, you reverted my fix to Russians in Korea.

If you did this because the references should be removed from the article, you have misunderstood the situation. Most likely, the article originally contained both <ref name="foo">...</ref> and one or more <ref name="foo"/> referring to it. Someone then removed the <ref name="foo">...</ref> but left the <ref name="foo"/>, which results in a big red error in the article. I replaced one of the remaining <ref name="foo"/> with a copy of the <ref name="foo">...</ref>; I did not re-insert the reference to where it was deleted, I just replaced one of the remaining instances. What you need to do to fix it is to make sure you remove all instances of the named reference so as to not leave any big red error.

If you reverted because I made an actual mistake, please be sure to also correct any reference errors in the page so I won't come back and make the same mistake again. Also, please post an error report at User talk:AnomieBOT so my operator can fix me! If the error is so urgent that I need to be stopped, also post a message at User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/OrphanReferenceFixer. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:44, 15 July 2021 (UTC) If you do not wish to receive this message in the future, add {{bots|optout=AnomieBOT-OrphanReferenceFixer}} to your talk page.[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:40, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:TIMSSScores2015

Template:TIMSSScores2015 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Izno (talk) 05:41, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Toasting fork

On 30 October 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Toasting fork, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that extendable marshmallow toasting forks were cited as an example of how glamping has "ruined" camping? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Toasting fork. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Toasting fork), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 12:02, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently been editing gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them which has been designated a contentious topic. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;

comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;

follow editorial and behavioural best practice;

comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and

refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:33, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:46, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, OsFish. Thank you for your work on Civil Information and Education Section. North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 20:50, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Creativity and mental health, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Seneca. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Referring to your post

I am posting this to directly inform you that I have referenced one of your comments at the conflict of interest notice board WP:COIN. Difs [1]. duffbeerforme (talk) 15:12, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of close challenges

I realize I was probably more aggressive than I needed to be at AN, so let me expand a bit here. The entire purpose of the review is to have uninvolved editors look at the close and determine if it was a reasonable reading of consensus. You'll notice that the section for participants is already spiraling down into more of the same arguments. A close review isn't the venue to argue about that again, so there's really no reason to notify all of the people who took part in the discussion. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:54, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arbcom notice

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Transgender health care misinformation on Wikipedia and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, Raladic (talk) 00:16, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The World Destubathon

Hello. You're invited to participate in The World Destubathon. We're aiming to destub a lot of articles and also improve longer stale articles. It started today on Monday June 16 and will run until Sunday July 13. There is over $3300 going into it, with $500 the top prize. If you are interested in winning something to save you money in buying books for future content, or just see it as a good editathon opportunity to see a lot of articles improved for subjects which interest you, sign up on the page in the participants section if interested. Even if you can only manage a few articles they would be very much appreciated and help make the content produced as diverse and broad as possible! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:13, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Imane Khelif

Hi OsFish. You've now made a number of personal comments on the talk page for Imane Khelif that I've found offensive and unnecessary, namely the following (emphasis added):

"In other words, you know that World Boxing apologised for any implication that Khelif was specifically barred, but you still want to put into the article that Khelif was specifically barred. This is disruptive editing. You made a comment earlier about feeling oppressed for not being able to make the edits you wanted. If being asked to adhere to honest sourcing of content is oppressive to you, may I suggest that Wikipedia is not the best use of your energies."
You have cited material that says the requirement is not specific to her. It is not a specific bar for her. You know this, yet you continue to make to the false claim that she specifically has been barred. Again, are you sure that Wikipedia, a project based on faithful representation of sources, is the right place for you? This comment section began with you suggesting the inclusion of material sourced to a link that not only made it clear the content was based on a falsification, it also stated it was the subject of legal action. So I’m really not confident you should be editing."
"You’re posting articles that you know are from before the apology by World Boxing. That looks to me to be a clear case of trying to deceive other Wikipedia editors. Would you like to explain yourself?"
"Yet you haven’t provided a source that states she is barred for the Olympics. You keep misrepresenting what sources say."

I've already responded about the substance of those comments on the article's talk page (e.g. your misrepresentations of my proposals, my interpretations of the sources, and so on), so there's no need to revisit that. I am here only to request a bit more civility going forward, and fewer snide comments about my integrity and my mental competence. For your information, I make a living as a lawyer, and self-evidently have no trouble interpreting text or researching/citing source material.

I would be also be grateful if you would be willing to strike the comments I've mentioned above, but if that seems like a faff then don't worry about it. It's more important to me to ask you to take a different approach from this point on. Clicriffhard (talk) 17:33, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am far from the only editor who has said you are editing disruptively. You have made general attacks on editors who disagree with you as being “oppressive”. Perhaps you should go through and strike those. Anyway, if you’re a lawyer, perhaps you can explain why you suggested including material as “unverified” that was sourced to a link that said the material was based on a falsification and was the subject of legal proceedings. How is that in line with BLP policy? OsFish (talk) 22:23, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

With respect, it is completely untrue that I've called editors "oppressive". As you well know, I said that the atmosphere around that article was "intimidatingly oppressive", and everyone was too polite to point out that the phrase is actually "oppressively intimidating". I can't force you to change your approach, but I had hoped for a slightly more constructive response than that. Anyway, I've made the request, and I'm asking you to take it on board so that we can avoid the need for any tedious escalation.

If you want to discuss the contents of the article, we can do that on the the article's talk page. As I've already said, that's not what I'm here for. Clicriffhard (talk) 22:39, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have a problem with me saying your approach has been inappropriate. My response was to ask you to explain an example of what looked like disruptive editing - one which other editors have also called disruptive. This was an opportunity for you to provide an explanation about how I have made a mistake in my judgement. A constructive response to that would have been to answer that question directly. In general, a good way to de-escalate is to follow BLP policy, and stop accusing editors of creating an “oppressively intimidating” atmosphere for disagreeing with you.OsFish (talk) 23:10, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've been clear that I have a problem with you repeatedly insulting me, misrepresenting me, accusing me of deception (rather than disagreement), and so on. I have nothing more to say on the matter unless further insults or aspersions follow. Clicriffhard (talk) 23:31, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]