updated workflow and hence are visible and reversible. Shortcut WP:OSPOLWP:OSPOL This feature is approved for use in these cases: Removal of non-public personal...

delete redirect Wikipedia:R#KEPT, criteria for keep redirect Wikipedia:OSPOL, list criteria for oversight, a higher restrictions of redactions. This...

to this page. The result of the discussion was: delete. Suppressed under OSPOL, closing as moot. Vanamonde93 (talk) 03:03, 9 December 2024 (UTC) Draft:Rodmen...

themselves? No. Oversighting is only done in the circumstances described at WP:OSPOL. Adam9007 (talk) 17:44, 30 September 2020 (UTC) Understandable, have a great...

same thing as deletion. I don't see anything meeting WP:DEL-REASON or WP:OSPOL either. As it stands your nomination doesn't specify why you'd like the...

making such a disclosure (for example, minors). This is done in policy under OSPOL#1. A template like this which (currently) can only serve to identify individuals...

derivation of OSPOL is immediately obvious to the average editor, and so it should be made clear on-wiki. I've come to understand that OSPOL is a policy...

the IP's own edits. So per Wikipedia:Revision deletion/examples and WP:OSPOL probably not). Although this was clearly included attacks (and the editor...

derivation of OSPOL is immediately obvious to the average editor, and so it should be made clear on-wiki. I've come to understand that OSPOL is a policy...

MarkiPoli (talk) 11:27, 10 November 2023 (UTC) User:MarkiPoli, yes: WP:OSPOL, number 1. Folly Mox (talk) 12:55, 10 November 2023 (UTC) Yes, please ensure...

edge cases. — Mhawk10 (talk) 21:13, 15 March 2022 (UTC) Comment Per WP:OSPOL the problem goes beyond mentioning real name + username, since that policy...

editing suffices for run-of-the-mill copyvios or disruptive/insulting edits. OSPOL is very clear on the specific, limited instances when suppression is called...

the master and socks [5]) editing Frank Lovece, which appears to be more OSPOL-related trolling. Not sure what the oversight team's current stance there...

editing suffices for run-of-the-mill copyvios or disruptive/insulting edits. OSPOL is very clear on the specific, limited instances when suppression is called...

pretty straightforward. Zaathras (talk) 02:40, 18 June 2022 (UTC) See WP:OSPOL and WP:CRD. I'm pretty sure even with oversight you would still show as...

transparency, I have removed and suppressed the email addresses above per OSPOL#1. The overall context of the message has not been altered. ~TNT (she/they...

(UTC) I would as well, since I haven't seen any sort of communication with OSPOL-related emails... Primefac (talk) 17:09, 9 June 2021 (UTC) Courtesy ping...

in my view, and depending on the crime can also warrant oversight per WP:OSPOL #2 (though not in this case). GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 09:29, 8 June...

indefinitely on plwiki. Tempest (talk) 00:53, 30 July 2021 (UTC) Trimmed per OSPOL Primefac (talk) 10:09, 30 July 2021 (UTC) @Tempest: Sorry to hear that....

will. It's been used in the past on editor request but I don't think WP:OSPOL applies to voluntarily disclosed information that the editor doesn't want...

have removed a portion of FeralOink's statement and oversighted it per OSPOL#1. The overall meaning of the statement hasn't been changed. Many thanks...

agents are advised to forward such requests to WMF, but there is also WP:OSPOL. As an OTRS agent, I would not handle it myself, and it would depend on...

blindness. It's a common enough problem that it's mentioned specifically at WP:OSPOL. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 00:47, 8 September 2020 (UTC) Another option...

be purged as well. 331dot pointed you to requests for oversight, but WP:OSPOL has a strict list of criteria. The closest would be "Removal of non-public...

your IP address having been revealed, it can be hidden if you want (see WP:OSPOL), but it's not possible to reassign edits to your account. Cordless Larry...

like someone to corroborate whether this information was suppressed for WP:OSPOL reasons 2 or 4 as that is important for figuring which section I end up...

are not using his full name and thus the name would, to quote from WP:OSPOL, continue to be an example of a pseudonymous or anonymous individuals who...

non-public information - I have oversighted the above addition in line with WP:OSPOL#1. Please do not reinstate the content -- TNT (talk • she/her) 05:13, 8...

(talk) 22:13, 21 June 2022 (UTC) Endorse, but this should be oversighted: WP:OSPOL#1 makes clear that "non-public personal information" should be oversighted...

address ask for an Oversight on request, per bullet point 4, item 1, WP:OSPOL? If yes, is it a one-time opportunity? --2001:569:7B92:5500:417:8C85:BF60:A0B6...

Village pump Policy Technical Proposals Idea lab WMF Miscellaneous Village pump (policy) archive   This page contains discussions that have been archived...

one who was the victim of a crime, should usually be oversighted per WP:OSPOL #1. I've had that done here. Good job getting this taken care of quickly...

Village pump Policy Technical Proposals Idea lab WMF Miscellaneous Village pump (proposals) archive   This page contains discussions that have been archived...

not logged in: if you're worried about exposing your IP address, see WP:OSPOL. ColinFine (talk) 14:17, 4 January 2025 (UTC) Hey @The2gingerman If you...

21:29, 7 June 2023 (UTC) The policy for suppressing content is found at WP:OSPOL and you can request suppression at Special:EmailUser/Oversight. However...

Special:EmailUser/Oversight. I also don't think this specific situation qualifies under WP:OSPOL or even comes somewhat close. Elli (talk | contribs) 22:40, 2 April 2026...

know of that template until today, but from reading its documentation (WP:OSPOL via the template), I still don't see anything that would recommend its use...