Hi Dlaska! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Happy editing! -- Ipigott ( talk) 13:02, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
MrOllie. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a
neutral point of view. Your recent edit seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thank you.
MrOllie (
talk)
17:12, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hello @
MrOllie. My intention was to remove all the irrelevant, obsolete and clearly false parts. I also extended the description of the application context and features. I tried to adhere to the objectivity principle. If you think that you can further improve the new content, please do so, instead of reversing it to the previous version. Thank you.
Dlaska (
talk)
17:30, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- You clearly replaced the existing article with an obviously promotional one. Reverting to the old version of the article was an improvement - when an article takes such an obvious step towards promotionalism, it is not up to others to fix the problems you created.
MrOllie (
talk)
17:36, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- I am a LabPlot team member and I want to base the content exclusively on easily verifiable facts. Please, describe clearly what parts of the article are, in your opinion, 'obviously promotional', and require further edition. On your request I can provide all relevant references.
Dlaska (
talk)
18:01, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Have a read of
WP:COI, then. As a team member you should not have been editing the Wikipedia article in the first place.
MrOllie (
talk)
18:14, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- I have edited the article again to remove all disputable phrases and the external links.
Dlaska (
talk)
20:09, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- You should not be editing the article. You definitely should not be logging out to edit war as an IP editor and make personal attacks.
MrOllie (
talk)
20:23, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm logged in all this time and I have not made any personal attacks. Please, let's focus on the quality of the article. Thanks to your remarks I have redacted it to remove all the potentially ambiguous or disputable content.
Dlaska (
talk)
20:28, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- No, the text you added is promotional from top to bottom. The reason Wikipedia has
guidelines on conflict of interest is to prevent exactly the edits you are making. Please respect Wikipedia and its policies on this.
MrOllie (
talk)
20:30, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Please, have a look at e.g. this page about JASP:
/info/en/?search=JASP. All applications of this type provide a description of its feature set. This is certainly no promotional content, but rather some basic information about the application that readers are interested in. Otherwise all applications would have the same description. Using 'argumentum ad personam' leads nowhere.
Dlaska (
talk)
20:42, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- The difference is that that article isn't full of promotional content added by someone with an obvious conflict of interest. There are substantive differences in content and tone between 'basic information' and the promotion you've been adding. To be clear: you plan to continue ignoring
WP:COI?
MrOllie (
talk)
20:43, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- MrOllie, just to be clear: are you interested in the quality of the article that is definitely in line with other articles published for other applications of the same type? The previous version contained false information. Now the content is up-to-date, relevant and all the facts are easily verifiable with the provided references.
Dlaska (
talk)
20:53, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not interested in answering your questions while you ignore mine.
MrOllie (
talk)
20:57, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- I openly disclosed that I'm a team member that had to step in to update the content of the article because it hasn't been updated for a very long time despite the fact that it contained a lot of false information! Using my intellectual honesty as an argument against accepting the new content doesn't seem reasonable. The current content certainly meets the standard of the articles for other applications of this type, it's relevant, up-to-date and more complete. Dlaska ( talk) 21:03, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not interested in answering your questions while you ignore mine.
MrOllie (
talk)
20:57, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- MrOllie, just to be clear: are you interested in the quality of the article that is definitely in line with other articles published for other applications of the same type? The previous version contained false information. Now the content is up-to-date, relevant and all the facts are easily verifiable with the provided references.
Dlaska (
talk)
20:53, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- The difference is that that article isn't full of promotional content added by someone with an obvious conflict of interest. There are substantive differences in content and tone between 'basic information' and the promotion you've been adding. To be clear: you plan to continue ignoring
WP:COI?
MrOllie (
talk)
20:43, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Please, have a look at e.g. this page about JASP:
/info/en/?search=JASP. All applications of this type provide a description of its feature set. This is certainly no promotional content, but rather some basic information about the application that readers are interested in. Otherwise all applications would have the same description. Using 'argumentum ad personam' leads nowhere.
Dlaska (
talk)
20:42, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- No, the text you added is promotional from top to bottom. The reason Wikipedia has
guidelines on conflict of interest is to prevent exactly the edits you are making. Please respect Wikipedia and its policies on this.
MrOllie (
talk)
20:30, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm logged in all this time and I have not made any personal attacks. Please, let's focus on the quality of the article. Thanks to your remarks I have redacted it to remove all the potentially ambiguous or disputable content.
Dlaska (
talk)
20:28, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- You should not be editing the article. You definitely should not be logging out to edit war as an IP editor and make personal attacks.
MrOllie (
talk)
20:23, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- I have edited the article again to remove all disputable phrases and the external links.
Dlaska (
talk)
20:09, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Have a read of
WP:COI, then. As a team member you should not have been editing the Wikipedia article in the first place.
MrOllie (
talk)
18:14, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- I am a LabPlot team member and I want to base the content exclusively on easily verifiable facts. Please, describe clearly what parts of the article are, in your opinion, 'obviously promotional', and require further edition. On your request I can provide all relevant references.
Dlaska (
talk)
18:01, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- You clearly replaced the existing article with an obviously promotional one. Reverting to the old version of the article was an improvement - when an article takes such an obvious step towards promotionalism, it is not up to others to fix the problems you created.
MrOllie (
talk)
17:36, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
MarksmanRifle. I noticed that you recently
removed content from
LabPlot without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate
edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use
your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks.
MarksmanRifle (
talk)
20:12, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- I edited the article to remove any potentially promotional phrases and the external links. Dlaska ( talk) 20:16, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Can you undo your reversion, please? Dlaska ( talk) 20:22, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- You need to realize that Wikipedia is a collaborative project, and that there are methods by which to resolve content disputes. As a team member of LabPlot, you have an undisputable conflict of interest (COI). Your proximity to the article's subject impairs your ability to write from the required neutral point of view. The prescribed method for COI editors is to use the article's talk page to make edit requests, which can be evaluated by independent editors.
- If you disagree with the results of the assessment, then there are further dispute resolution channels which can be employed. However you must realize that no single editor has any right of ownership or control over article content. You are one among equals here, and the goal is to reach consensus. -- Drm310 🍁 ( talk) 02:48, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible
conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you.
MrOllie (
talk)
21:04, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- My sole intention was to make the old content true and to provide an up-to-date description of the project similar to the articles for other projects mentioned e.g. on /info/en/?search=List_of_information_graphics_software. However, taking into account your comments, I will certainly not edit the existing article, even if it contains any false information. Thank you for your collaboration. Dlaska ( talk) 09:12, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi Dlaska! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Happy editing! -- Ipigott ( talk) 13:02, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
MrOllie. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a
neutral point of view. Your recent edit seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thank you.
MrOllie (
talk)
17:12, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hello @
MrOllie. My intention was to remove all the irrelevant, obsolete and clearly false parts. I also extended the description of the application context and features. I tried to adhere to the objectivity principle. If you think that you can further improve the new content, please do so, instead of reversing it to the previous version. Thank you.
Dlaska (
talk)
17:30, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- You clearly replaced the existing article with an obviously promotional one. Reverting to the old version of the article was an improvement - when an article takes such an obvious step towards promotionalism, it is not up to others to fix the problems you created.
MrOllie (
talk)
17:36, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- I am a LabPlot team member and I want to base the content exclusively on easily verifiable facts. Please, describe clearly what parts of the article are, in your opinion, 'obviously promotional', and require further edition. On your request I can provide all relevant references.
Dlaska (
talk)
18:01, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Have a read of
WP:COI, then. As a team member you should not have been editing the Wikipedia article in the first place.
MrOllie (
talk)
18:14, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- I have edited the article again to remove all disputable phrases and the external links.
Dlaska (
talk)
20:09, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- You should not be editing the article. You definitely should not be logging out to edit war as an IP editor and make personal attacks.
MrOllie (
talk)
20:23, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm logged in all this time and I have not made any personal attacks. Please, let's focus on the quality of the article. Thanks to your remarks I have redacted it to remove all the potentially ambiguous or disputable content.
Dlaska (
talk)
20:28, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- No, the text you added is promotional from top to bottom. The reason Wikipedia has
guidelines on conflict of interest is to prevent exactly the edits you are making. Please respect Wikipedia and its policies on this.
MrOllie (
talk)
20:30, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Please, have a look at e.g. this page about JASP:
/info/en/?search=JASP. All applications of this type provide a description of its feature set. This is certainly no promotional content, but rather some basic information about the application that readers are interested in. Otherwise all applications would have the same description. Using 'argumentum ad personam' leads nowhere.
Dlaska (
talk)
20:42, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- The difference is that that article isn't full of promotional content added by someone with an obvious conflict of interest. There are substantive differences in content and tone between 'basic information' and the promotion you've been adding. To be clear: you plan to continue ignoring
WP:COI?
MrOllie (
talk)
20:43, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- MrOllie, just to be clear: are you interested in the quality of the article that is definitely in line with other articles published for other applications of the same type? The previous version contained false information. Now the content is up-to-date, relevant and all the facts are easily verifiable with the provided references.
Dlaska (
talk)
20:53, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not interested in answering your questions while you ignore mine.
MrOllie (
talk)
20:57, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- I openly disclosed that I'm a team member that had to step in to update the content of the article because it hasn't been updated for a very long time despite the fact that it contained a lot of false information! Using my intellectual honesty as an argument against accepting the new content doesn't seem reasonable. The current content certainly meets the standard of the articles for other applications of this type, it's relevant, up-to-date and more complete. Dlaska ( talk) 21:03, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not interested in answering your questions while you ignore mine.
MrOllie (
talk)
20:57, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- MrOllie, just to be clear: are you interested in the quality of the article that is definitely in line with other articles published for other applications of the same type? The previous version contained false information. Now the content is up-to-date, relevant and all the facts are easily verifiable with the provided references.
Dlaska (
talk)
20:53, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- The difference is that that article isn't full of promotional content added by someone with an obvious conflict of interest. There are substantive differences in content and tone between 'basic information' and the promotion you've been adding. To be clear: you plan to continue ignoring
WP:COI?
MrOllie (
talk)
20:43, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Please, have a look at e.g. this page about JASP:
/info/en/?search=JASP. All applications of this type provide a description of its feature set. This is certainly no promotional content, but rather some basic information about the application that readers are interested in. Otherwise all applications would have the same description. Using 'argumentum ad personam' leads nowhere.
Dlaska (
talk)
20:42, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- No, the text you added is promotional from top to bottom. The reason Wikipedia has
guidelines on conflict of interest is to prevent exactly the edits you are making. Please respect Wikipedia and its policies on this.
MrOllie (
talk)
20:30, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm logged in all this time and I have not made any personal attacks. Please, let's focus on the quality of the article. Thanks to your remarks I have redacted it to remove all the potentially ambiguous or disputable content.
Dlaska (
talk)
20:28, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- You should not be editing the article. You definitely should not be logging out to edit war as an IP editor and make personal attacks.
MrOllie (
talk)
20:23, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- I have edited the article again to remove all disputable phrases and the external links.
Dlaska (
talk)
20:09, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Have a read of
WP:COI, then. As a team member you should not have been editing the Wikipedia article in the first place.
MrOllie (
talk)
18:14, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- I am a LabPlot team member and I want to base the content exclusively on easily verifiable facts. Please, describe clearly what parts of the article are, in your opinion, 'obviously promotional', and require further edition. On your request I can provide all relevant references.
Dlaska (
talk)
18:01, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- You clearly replaced the existing article with an obviously promotional one. Reverting to the old version of the article was an improvement - when an article takes such an obvious step towards promotionalism, it is not up to others to fix the problems you created.
MrOllie (
talk)
17:36, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
MarksmanRifle. I noticed that you recently
removed content from
LabPlot without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate
edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use
your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks.
MarksmanRifle (
talk)
20:12, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- I edited the article to remove any potentially promotional phrases and the external links. Dlaska ( talk) 20:16, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Can you undo your reversion, please? Dlaska ( talk) 20:22, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- You need to realize that Wikipedia is a collaborative project, and that there are methods by which to resolve content disputes. As a team member of LabPlot, you have an undisputable conflict of interest (COI). Your proximity to the article's subject impairs your ability to write from the required neutral point of view. The prescribed method for COI editors is to use the article's talk page to make edit requests, which can be evaluated by independent editors.
- If you disagree with the results of the assessment, then there are further dispute resolution channels which can be employed. However you must realize that no single editor has any right of ownership or control over article content. You are one among equals here, and the goal is to reach consensus. -- Drm310 🍁 ( talk) 02:48, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible
conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you.
MrOllie (
talk)
21:04, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- My sole intention was to make the old content true and to provide an up-to-date description of the project similar to the articles for other projects mentioned e.g. on /info/en/?search=List_of_information_graphics_software. However, taking into account your comments, I will certainly not edit the existing article, even if it contains any false information. Thank you for your collaboration. Dlaska ( talk) 09:12, 29 July 2024 (UTC)