This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Can you add this image, please? It is a newer, better one, with self-explanation (legend). I cannot edit visually anymore both articles. https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialeto_mineiro#/media/Ficheiro:Isoglossas_no_estado_de_Minas_Gerais._EALMG,_UFJF,_1977.png Gondolabúrguer ( talk) 22:08, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
That editor is definitely the same person as the IP. — SirDot ( talk) 14:46, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Do not revert a user attempting to discuss something with me on my talk page. There was no valid reason to do so. Hey man im josh ( talk) 00:26, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
I see that you have removed the "Examples of Danbooru-style imageboards" table under "WP:NOT" which creates more confusion than clarification, even considering you may have ment "WP:LINKFARM"
In this case I see fit that there should be a "Comparison of Imageboards" or "Comparison of Imageboard Software" do you think I should start drafting for such page or is it not Wikiworthy? Emircex ( talk) 14:27, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
Hello MrOllie, hope you're doing well. Reaching out to you regarding M. F. Husain's page. Firstly, I'd like to thank you for keeping an eye on the page and reverting the vandalism attempts in the recent past. Currently, it looks like the user Veersanatani (not tagging for obvious reasons) is determine to spoil the page, starting right form the name. When I reverted their edits, the user has added their hateful comments on my user page itself, instead of politely asking on my talk page. Just look at the stupidity. Hopefully some due action can be taken in this regard, because they only seem to target Husain's page in particular.
Also, I suggest adding some sort of protection to the page in order to prevent cases like these. It's really sad to see that Husain's incredible artistic career is overshadowed by his controversies, which is also the only thing mentioned on his Wiki page. I'll update the page in due course of time and make it more comprehensive, limiting the controversy part to how much is actually required. However, please do think about adding protection in the meantime. Otherwise, believe me, vandalism cases like these will keep happening from editors in India. The man is dead for years now, maybe we should let him rest in peace, quite literally. DesiBoy101 ( talk) 12:46, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
I'm curious about your reverting my edit to Mathematics of Sudoku. Please discuss. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PatmaxDaddy ( talk • contribs) 18:07, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Hello, hope you're doing great. This message is with reference to the edits you reverted in List of Muslim military leaders. As far as I can extrapolate, you have some problem regarding the grammatical syntax/linguistics, because questioning well-sourced facts is too trivial and irrational for a reputed Wikipedia member like you. Consequently, I would request you to mention those mistakes I committed in my edit, which engendered a revert, so that I can add the additional facts and, simultaneously adhere to the Wikipedia regulations. -- Snapthirsty110 ( talk) 13:31, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
I'm really sorry that I was added link directly without proper formatting. But, based on my knowledge the page is more relavant and helpful to the users. So, I request you to check it again and help me to add that article in external links. Please note, here my intention is not to add links into wiki. I want to share the best knowledge. Aditya3181 ( talk) 13:04, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
It's the content added value to learn more about artificial intelligence Tejasuvv ( talk) 05:59, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
This user, Special:Contributions/136.57.191.25, just told me to stop making pointless edit summaries. My edits are not pointless. So could you please tell him to stop sending me messages about that? AdamDeanHall ( talk) 14:13, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
re: this. I love living rent free in the heads of trolls and ne'er-do-wells. Clearly I'm so humiliated. PRAXIDICAE🌈 15:01, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
You keep deleting my revision on this article. But the text is a rephrase of the text obtain from the recent edition of the RecSys handbook: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-0716-2197-4_1
here is the original text:
" Recommender systems (RSs) are software tools and techniques that provide suggestions for items that are most likely of interest to a particular user. The suggestions usually relate to various decision-making processes, such as what items to buy, what music to listen to, or what online news to read. “Item” is the general term used to denote what the system recommends to users. An RS normally focuses on a specific type of item (e.g., movies or news articles) and accordingly, its design, its graphical user interface, and the core recommendation technique used to generate the recommendations are all customized to provide useful and effective suggestions for that specific type of item. RSs are primarily directed at individuals who lack sufficient personal experience or competence to evaluate the potentially overwhelming number of items that a website may offer. " 84.229.167.218 ( talk) 21:47, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi MrOllie. I saw a note from you on my page:
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 21:13, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
But I did include a summary.
Panorama is about products and services, so it doesn't need its own header. The documentary talks about TerraCycle for all of five minutes, then moves on to the greenwashing conversation about plastic-producing companies "not doing enough." 81.187.88.97 edits remain slanted, rife with conflict, and bizarre and at best a misleading promotion of the "documentary."
The "dispute" on the page surrounds IP editor 81.187.88.97, who asserts ownership of the page, and has been IP banned from the page before, which limits the editability to experienced users. That IP editor markets the Panorama documentary, as much as possible. It is undue weight.
At a minimum, the headers don't logically follow, and a "criticism" header isn't warranted where there is a clear 2019, 2021, and 2022 chronology.
I'm asking you to undo your reversion of my edit. 47.198.242.207 ( talk) 21:21, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I have added info that was conducted in a study. Embrace You Health is like Healthline, and a study is in the process if being published. The current pcos articke provided little information on supplements for pcos and does not list all the info on the low GI diet. I realize you feel that the link is spammy, and I may have to contact Wikipedia, to get more info.
Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juliesmith45458 ( talk • contribs) 13:10, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
I noticed they had some medical studies and others have linked to them.
Did you create this article on PCOS? To help you, I can go through and remove some of the links that are not directly linking to verified medical sources. It might help. I will also contact Wikipedia and get clarification on citing. Thank you Juliesmith45458 ( talk) 13:54, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi MrOllie, I'd like to ask for your help to revert vandalism edits by Mlayu on several articles, namely:
Currently I do not have the privilege of reverting multiple edits at once.
It seems that the user has deliberately make factual errors and omit info pertaining Malaysia to promote Indonesian nationalistic bias.
Thank you in advance for your help. Azuru79 ( talk) 07:01, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
Please do not revert factual information without good cause as you did at the page for Abortion. It’s an indisputable fact that the fetus dies during the abortion and it’s an indisputable fact that it would not make sense for someone to claim they successfully conducted over 1300 illegal abortions without a single fatality, unless you clarify that the fatality count does not include the aborted fetus. None of this is a political position. It’s just a fact. I made no effort to state whether or not I think that such a thing as good. Only to state what occurs. It’s important that Wikipedia be factual and so I would ask you not to revert productive edits in a manner that only suppresses the truth.
Thank you Annfrankenstein ( talk) 12:45, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
No. Not true. Whether a fetus dies during an abortion or whether an abortion involves at least one death (the fetus) is not a political position. Whether this is okay, good, bad, or whether it should be legal is a political position. Please don’t falsely accuse people of pushing political opinions when it’s obvious they aren’t. Such a thing can be considered a personal attack. Annfrankenstein ( talk) 15:50, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
Why have you erased Mustafa Khanbhai's linkage of the article on Vallathol to an internet page on Kathakali which explains what he did to preserve and promote that art form? NRPanikker ( talk) 11:58, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Pardon me, but who are you? Are you a Singaporean? And do you know I state my reasons while editing? Manwë986 ( talk) 16:28, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
I do not see any agreement of using this present revision in the article tale page. And the only ones engaged discussion about Singapore are the Singaporean Wikipedians, and there are also administrators among them. And besides the infoboxes of articles about countries don't have any minor languages. Please check the articles like United States, China, or France if they have minor languages section within infoboxes.-- Manwë986 ( talk) 16:45, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
What on earth are you talking about? Who are these multiple other editors? And are you an administrator? -- Manwë986 ( talk) 16:52, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, but the one made the edit did not even get permission to do so, the one who reverted me do not know the full details. And as you, I can only say that I am following the Wikipedia guidelines. The articles about countries don't have minor languages in infoboxes, please feel free to check. And if you're not an admin, then I'm done my talk with you, but you should be discussing with the Singaporean Wikipedian administrators about this, not me. And until the administrators of Singaporean Wikipedians made their decision, the article shall be reverted to the original version as the other articles about countries per Wikipedia guidelines. -- Manwë986 ( talk) 17:18, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
It is not my permission. And the administrators of Singaporean Wikipedians know information about Singapore more than you do. And the one who made the edit do not even discussed in the talk page.-- Manwë986 ( talk) 17:27, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Stop accusing me of "reverting on spurious grounds". I ask you one last time, are you an administrator or not?-- Manwë986 ( talk) 17:32, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
I'm done here. So stop accusing me of "keep reverting on spurious grounds like this".-- Manwë986 ( talk) 17:55, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
It's not about nationality, it's based on the infobox rules.-- Manwë986 ( talk) 18:04, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
the articles about Singapore were handled by us Singaporean Wikipedians.and 2) If there is some 'infobox rule' that was violated, it is up to you to link to the rule, and to explain what the violation was, on the article talk page. - MrOllie ( talk) 18:16, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Fine then.-- Manwë986 ( talk) 19:08, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at International Science Olympiad shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Iterresise ( talk) 11:23, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
Why are you reverting adding Roblox Studio to the application of CSG? You justify the revert by mentioning that it is not sourced, while usage of CSG in Quake, Unreal and other engines mentioned are not referenced either. This argument lacks coherence, even though it's excessively easy to find sources that it is a core philosophy for Roblox (on the developer's documentation and create documentation on Roblox's parts, although roblox.com's domain is blocked from wiki) with parts being "Roblox's primary building block". You also mention Roblox is not a major engine. Roblox studio is by far a more important engine today than Quake Engine (15 games), Torque (Last stable release 5 years ago) and Hammer (proprietary engine, 50 games) in number of games developped with it, activity and users (over 40 million games/experiences as of Q2 2022 and 9.5 million developpers using Roblox Studio as of Q1 2022). Beammyup ( talk) 16:31, 13 July 2022 (UTC)Beammyup
I argued the reasons you gave in the edit above because I am under the impression they are incoherent and biased by your personal opinions (which is what I explain above). Your additionnal argument that Roblox is not important to the industry as a whole is also a personal opinion and not factual. That there are "vocal fans devoted to mentioning it everywhere" doesn't change that CSG is as relevant in application, if not more, to Roblox Studio than the other engines mentioned. That you may be annoyed some people are trying to mention Roblox everywhere doesn't justify a biased reaction when it is actually relevant to mention the engine. Whether you like Roblox Studio personnally doesn't change the fact that it's one of the most used engines in the world and that it's producing research published in top-tier graphics conferences. It is industry-impactful at least currently, and historically would depend on one's definition. Arguing on your talk page won't accomplish getting the change accepted, but I do hope for more coherence and less personal opinions in your justifications. Beammyup ( talk) 18:14, 13 July 2022 (UTC)Beammyup
Hi editor, I have modified a paragraph to improve the accuracy of representing the academic sources, like this:
In the history of psychiatry, religious experience was considered as delusional, but it is a challenge for modern psychiatry to differentiate nonpsychopathological religious/spiritual/transpersonal experiences from those that are caused by disorders.
If there is any problem with this edit, then discuss it. Lightest ( talk) 19:19, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
Can you please revert the OnePlus Wikipedia page to an earlier version, as it has been heavily vandalised now? I have no idea how to do that myself. 103.70.199.52 ( talk) 13:37, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
I am incredibly sorry if I have violated any guidelines of Wikipedia by any means. First, let me clarify that I am not associated with the website or its parent body. I work for the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals and got the reference for this organization from the United Nations Civil Society organizations' list. I follow the non-profit organizations working for SDGs and want to enhance the Wikipedia encyclopedia with relevant, trusted, authentic, original content. The external link that I have added to Fatehpur Sikri is pertinent and provides correct information about the direct descendants of Hazrat Salim Chisti, the 15th-century saint for whom Fatehpur Sikri is famous. There are some pages on Wikipedia which is filled with misleading information about the descendants of the saint and Fatehpur Sikri while not mentioning the real people who are also accredited by the Government of India, which I came to know while studying the pre-colonial history of the British colonies in my fellowship studies of the Rockefeller Foundation in the association of UNESCO. The Hazrat Salim Chisti Foundation lobbied with the UNESCO and United Nations to get the UNESCO world heritage site status of Fatehpur Sikri. I have witnessed many Wikipedia pages and references, which is a gross violation of all the Wikipedia guidelines, including primary referencing. However, they are still actively present in the encyclopedia. Still, in this case, my impartial and authentic contribution is discarded, which I'll bring to the notice of UNESCO and the organization I work for. If you see the referencing of any article from the point of view of promoting that website or organization from which the article is generated, in that case, more than 80% of Wikipedia pages violate the guidelines. Suppose this is the policy of Wikipedia in my case. In that case, I'll stop wasting my time from today onwards in contributing to this encyclopedia for which I used to fight with my professors in my college days when they discouraged all our classmates from citing Wikipedia articles as references. Please forgive me if I have hurt you personally in any way. I never intended to, but it feels terrible when the precious time you invested in a noble cause without any profit motive gets wasted. Victor4SDGs ( talk) 22:46, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
Ypolyakov ( talk) 20:26, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi editor,
Could you explain why you deleted many libraries that were on the Homomorphic Encryption page for years? These libraries have existed for many years and are well-known in the FHE community. I only added one library and can understand why this library may be too early to add. But others should stay there in my mind (they were added by other authors).
Ypolyakov ( talk) 20:26, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
Ypolyakov ( talk) 02:16, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
Similar to the comment below for PALISADE, I want to point out that I previously wrote a lot of text for the Homomorphic Encryption article not because of some virtual "paid" interest but because I am one of the leading researchers in Homomomorphic Encryption (again see Google Scholar and dblp). Your comments will discourage me from writing anything else on the fields where I am an expert.
Ypolyakov ( talk) 01:53, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
Dear MrOllie,
I find your comments very discouraging. As an active member of HomomorphicEncryption.org standardization initiative, a member of open-source community, and a researcher, I have been updating the Homomorphic Encryption article for several years. If you look carefully at my revisions for this article, you will notice I always used a neutral tone and often corrected statements that were too biased. I strongly believe that articles on technical topics should be written/reviewed by experts, otherwise they may be highly inaccurate and their quality can strongly suffer. This is how prior encyclopedias have often been written. In academia, there is a peer review process that controls the quality of papers, and biased comments can be removed. I found your sarcasm about "well-recognized researcher" very inappropriate for a respected Wikipedia editor (you can easily verify this statement) - I never saw such behavior in academic peer review process and was deeply surprised that such behavior is tolerated in the Wikipedia community. I also never saw such comments in the history of this article. If you believe a certain statement is biased, please correct/revise. But simply removing an entry about an open-source library that was developed by authors of three libraries that have Wikipedia pages based on the grounds that it is promoting a business seems groundless to me.
Ypolyakov ( talk) 02:16, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
Dear editor,
I feel that my contributions are not being treated fairly. For instance, if you look at the PALISADE article, you will see that it was not created by me, and you will see that my updates are primarily about updating the preview and stable versions of the library. I also added technical details on what versions include. Everything I wrote was written in the neutral way. Why is there a problem with updating the version number or writing text in a neutral way?
I want to point out that I am well-recognized researcher (18 years after getting my PhD) in this field. See, for example, https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=zuMwV7QAAAAJ or https://dblp.uni-trier.de/pid/172/1695.html (or just Google me). Any content I add, including more than 100 academic papers that I have authored over the years, is written in a neutral way, including the updates for the PALISADE library. I feel some discrimination in your remarks. It is not hard to see that any content I added today to this article or a different one was written in a neutral way. Ypolyakov}} I would like you to reconsider your remarks in view of what I wrote. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ypolyakov ( talk • contribs)
Ypolyakov ( talk) 01:53, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
I find your comment inappropriate for a Wikipedia editor. I also strongly believe that technical papers have to be written/edited by experts. For instance, if I add an article about a topic of ballet that I know nothing about, I should not be writing about it in Wikipedia. I should only write about things I know well about, which in this case, is homomorphic encryption. This article about an open-source library has existed for a long time and my updates were of purely informational nature (not biased or selling some business). I am a scientist, and my reputation is important for me - this is why I used the account that spells my name. Another expert can revise my edits through a regular peer review process of Wikipedia. I am really saddened by this experience, and discouraged from writing articles for Wikipedia in the future, regardless the topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ypolyakov ( talk • contribs)
Didn't know you have already sent a warning (How to Make Money Selling Drugs). Cheers Uricdivine ( talk) 11:45, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
Dear MrOllie, my contribution to Over-the-top media service article was reverted without any comment. Could you explain why you deleted it? what was wrong with this information? Iitsearcher ( talk) 07:30, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I'm VS6507. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Thought (disambiguation) have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Vs6 507 19:12, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
As someone who is a native English speaker and as I suppose interested in this field of science you appear to have a very low frustration tolerance. Vs6 507 19:34, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
I have asked someone about a potential major error of grammar, and they were not able to see it. Vs6 507 19:36, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
Why did you undo revision 1097729680? My intention was to contribute, not to vandalize or self-advertise. 186.137.76.153 ( talk) 15:13, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi! Why was the MLOPs page reverted as user 103.70.199.52 suggested? The included paper is very popular in the MLOps community on LinkedIn and has already gained multiple citations. It is a great overview and should be used there as it provides a solid definition of the term. As an MLOps expert, I would ask you to please look into that carefully. 185.124.144.98 ( talk) 13:21, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi! I would like to know if I could somehow edit Subjective Datasets table, which was posted on Subjective video quality page, to level out any discrepancies with the Wikipedia formatting rules (overlong list of external links). May be I should reduce it or just add additional columns such as «Databases official websites» (like it was presented here)? And thanks for your work on improving the quality of Wikipedia articles. Supremum of tilt ( talk) 13:33, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I have written an article/blog on react native security practices which I have posted on my official website. That blog is performing really well on Google SERP. Now I thought to publish the same article on wikipedia so that it can provide more value to the reader and can be helpful for the reader community. I have tried multiple times but everytime I got the massage that my article is voilating the copyright policy. I am not able to understand why this is happening. That is my own article which I have written which I am trying to write here again. Can you please look into this matter can help me out.
It would be great if I get a help in the matter.
Thanks is advance.
Mayank Mayank1695 ( talk) 12:23, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
My edit was a simple extension of the current content - there was nothing wrong with it. So why was it rejected? KeepOnHiking ( talk) 14:27, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for opening that. I figured one of us was going to have to do it eventually. User indef'ed before I even got to comment in the ANI. Meters ( talk) 19:45, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
I have added information about the European Association of Distance Teaching Universities in Distance education. Is a new article about it better? --Tiberio Feliz 00:02, 25 July 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tfeliz ( talk • contribs)
Many sites have links to books relating to the material. Such as Kevin Rusby for Libertalia, or 2021 novel entitled The Law of the Sea for the Flor de la Mar, I will limit where I reference this information so kindly stop deleting my posts or I will take this to an administrator. Mamabear1331 ( talk) 15:01, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
The current [[Emplifi]] page is almost completely unsourced promotion and tags. I disclosed a COI and proposed [[[Emplifi]] /info/en/?search=User:JordanJulian19/draft a replacement] that is just a few paragraphs long and summarizes all the biggest press articles about the company. I was hoping you might be willing to review the draft as an impartial editor with no affiliation to verify whether the overhaul would be an improvement for Wikipedia and its readers. Best regards. <span data-dtsignatureforswitching="1"></span> JordanJulian19 ( talk) 13:54, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
Lingvanex is one of the players in the translation market. I wrote an article about it. /info/en/?search=Draft:Lingvanex_Translator. Why this information "not notable"? Why does the comparison not include all players? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SergKrasius ( talk • contribs) 14:46, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
Many thanks for the role that you play. I'm writing because I'm wondering why the design thinking lead was simply reverted rather than edited? I can see the dangers of overcitation and self-citation and fixing that seems admirable. I'm really happy for us to remove the citation to my own work and perhaps reduce the references.
I just want to draw your attention to the fact that the edits on the lead have a history. I found the lead on the page to be misleading and so I started a conversation about this with Nigel Cross which is on the Talk page of Design Thinking and we went back and forth to find something that works.
I'm all for others (such as yourself) improving on that by removing self-cites and reducing citations but shouldn't there be some kind of discussion around the lead? I found the act of simply reverting to be a bit reductive and against my understanding of how wikipedia functions. I ask that not to try and say how things should be but from a position of naivety as I'm new to this whole editing thing--I'm asking for you to please explain to me why that was the action taken and how I ought to have incrementally worked with others to improve the lead on this article (which is what I thought I was doing over a duration of nearly a year). Alternatively, if the answer is that this is a closed page that can't be edited then I'm happy for that to be the answer. Many thanks. NickKellyResearch ( talk) 03:13, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello Mr. Ollie, I see you recently rolled back some recent problematic but (I think) good faith edits in the article Dream from a user with 19 edits total. The user in question is continuing to make edits on the page, and I'm not entirely sure how to address the situation. They are trying to cite their claims, but not everything is cited, and the edits are also breaking the formatting of the page. Is another rollback the answer? The chances are they will continue to try to edit the page, and I'm unsure of how to proceed from here. Thanks! Johnson524 ( Talk!) 19:21, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi MrOllie. I made some edits to Marsha Stern Talmudical Academy yesterday which I see you reverted. I'm new to Wikipedia, and I didn't realize that external links should not be inline. I put the links (which are reliable - they're the high school's website, where archives of The Polis are stored, and a web databse of Yeshiva University, where archives of Shema Koleinu are stored. I also redid a couple of grammar corrections I assume you had no issue with, like changing "Art work" to "artwork." Please let me know if there's still a problem - I'd appreciate if you replied before reverting my edits, if you still feel a need to do so for any reason. Thanks! BullMoose4 ( talk) 15:24, 18 August 2022 (UTC) hi mrollie, it is i, overjoyed scooby. It appears that you have ondone my changes. who do you think you are. you are most definitley a short man.have a good day, not so overjoyed scooby
Dear Mr. Ollie - I appreciate the sensitivity on conflicts. I was involved in developing biotechnology legislative recommendations when in the Federal government during the Clinton Administration, and was interested in reforming the way it way regulated. These references I've suggested relate to that. I have never worked in or for that sector and have offered this addition so that the history will be remembered. I am going to leave this where it is for now and perhaps you might help me to reinstate the reference. Pelucidity ( talk) 12:42, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi, MrOllie. Thanks for your feedback on the edit to the Demographics of the Philippines page. As I tried to summarise, the content I deleted was quite clearly unjustified (no sources or weak/biased sources) and unrelated to the topic of the page (i.e. national demographics versus religious history or individual cases of behaviour by Catholic priests). This - and other - content on the referred page had already been deleted on 14 August, by another editor. I would also point out that other "Demographics of..." pages on Wikipedia do not usually contain this sort of content. I would appreciate your consideration. AqFla AqFla ( talk) 15:52, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Hey. I have added the required disclosements of affiliations to my profile. Is there a reason why my edits have not been added back? Qulizard ( talk) 07:57, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello Mr. Ollie,
I want to get in touch about the reversal of changes I have made on the microblading page. I understand that spam links are not allowed. However, the links I have provided to replace broken links are highly relevant, informative and educational. They are by no means commercial pages, in fact, they are from the most comprehensive platform related to the content. I ask you to review the links once again, as well as the content I had added to expand the page. The changes had been previously accepted by another moderator. Please note that reverting the changes means that multiple broken links are now listed as references once again, which is, you will agree, not helpful to the readers and makes this page less reliable.
~~~~Wewannagetlisted Wewannagetlisted ( talk) 08:13, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello Mr.Ollie,
Thanks for your edit and comment - I only added my own site to the External Links section (without a link to my homepage) because most of the links I checked there were not working, and my own pitch-class set calculator works. Not trying to blow my own horn or anything. If you would consider undoing your edit I would appreciate it, but if you keep it off I won't argue, I very rarely edit anything on Wikipedia more significant than minor grammatical errors. In fact I'm not even sure I'm doing this comment correctly! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Staylor71 ( talk • contribs) 23:26, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
I add only BSE official website link to Wikipedia because that is very important and related to NSE why you removed it Pavanpadghan ( talk) 01:07, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
Yes I understand but why Wikipedia add external link of NSE to it Pavanpadghan ( talk) 01:58, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
Mr. Ollie, why are you erasing the important language on the meaning of the term "independent"? I provided sources for my edit and yet you keep undoing it without justification. MrsBaker1 ( talk) 01:22, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
dear Mr. Ollie, can I ask you, why you deleted my contribution at electric fencee article? ewerything i descibed was based on an articles that contain true informations confirmed by users experiences. I thought it could be interesting to introduce people, that there are new possibilities of using electric fences. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Natálie Pecháčková ( talk • contribs) 13:37, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
Can you give a solid reason why the breakdown of the times/time CANNOT be on the page. It has been on there for several years and was a good source if information especially for people taking fitness test. USAF has been using this cart for members who are taking the new test to see if this test or the old run test would be better. To be quite frank, the only person who seems to have a problem with this being on here is you. The chart does have 2 sources so unsourced cannot be the reason. 144.51.249.5 ( talk) 18:55, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for reverting Jinnifer's sock edit's on my talk page. Magnatyrannus ( talk | contribs) 03:46, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Mr Ollie, why is it not acceptable to seperate animation studios and independent animators in the independent animation category? Why is that "damage"? MrsBaker1 ( talk) 20:32, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
YourAdventure ( talk) 13:28, 4 September 2022 (UTC) PRISM Break used to be a great website and resource for privacy software, but it's last minor update was over a year ago ( https://gitlab.com/prism-break/prism-break/-/commits/master) and many entries of the website are out-dated. The addition of PrivacyTools.io provides Wikipedia readers with an up-to-date recommendation list, that was last updated yesterday: https://forum.awesomealternatives.org/t/privacytools-changelog
Was the information I added deleted due to inaccuracy? I personally felt like Long Halloween was a somewhat important development in the relationship between Bruce Wayne and Poison Ivy or was it deleted from a purely technichal reason as I'm aware I damaged the article due to an inexperience with wikipedia editing. Sorry for any inconvenience I may have caused Ooneill2000 ( talk) 08:18, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
It is completely absurd to say Wikipedia doesn't have product images, especially ones of previous generation electronics to show visual comparison between the old, really old, and newer-ish ones to aid in visual recognition of specific models. Just look at the articles for Apple Inc (which has many pictures showing the older AND newer stuff to help readers recognize the older models, and Nokia (which has loads of photos of the newer stuff as well as the older stuff). I don't see how the gallery could be perceived as an advertisement considering 1. Most people aren't eligible for cochlear implants (but are likely to see them at some point and be like "what the heck is THAT? I should look it up on wikipedia") 2. All but one of the things in the gallery is discontinued (only the Neptune is still on the market, but having a picture of the funny-looking/unusual modern body-word processor will help people understand what the heck it is when they come to look it up); the other stuff in the gallery is just to help provide recognition of the devices that some people still wear/recognize what is what. The old 1990's ones are obsolute AF and go to show how cochlear tech has evolved; the harmony and early Naida models are still used by some people so readers of Wikipedia will be helped having pictures of them in a gallery. Would you feel better about it if the pictures aren't in a horizontal gallery per se, but were scattered in the article? Because you are being very strange here. I've NEVER seen a rule against having pictures of older and new-ish electronics for stuff like this.-- RespectCE ( talk) 13:58, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I was making a bunch of subsequent edits, and wanted to let you know, that I did not initially realize you reverted me until after I reverted that edit. Sorry about that, my mistake! Prcc27 ( talk) 16:00, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
This user:103.141.159.244 continuously removing official website at [ Pakistan Junior League] and adding his personal advertising website. The Orignal Website pjlt20.com was added by Wikipedia. This User is continuously Adding his personal website to misguide the User and wikipedia. Google is also showing Misleading Site notifications on his site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Faisalmunir987 ( talk • contribs) 09:26, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Note: The Site was added by Wikipedia itself during article creation, Now this user:103.141.159.244 is trying to take the advantage of having a similar domain. I request the Wikipedia Officials to check both websites ages.
Dear MrOllie, I hope you are having a great time. Please inform this user ( Vegansolo) about Wikipedia rules. It tries to add self-citation. Thank you. Scholartop ( talk) 09:54, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Please check this user as well ( Hydrolox) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scholartop ( talk • contribs) 16:12, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
Hi @ MrOllie,
I have seen your notes about paid contribution terms on the talk page of my marketing colleagues. It is not clear to me: is it allowed for me to update the page of the company I work for, when it is not part of my job to promote my company (therefore I would not say I am paid for my edits)?
-- Torzsmokus ( talk) 08:00, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
Those claims on block evasion for North Macedonia-NATO Relations page are false, that was someone else who was undoing those edits, not me. Please stop with the false accusations when I have a static IP, not a dynamic one. Don't believe me, then use an IP locator to find out. Creepershark77 ( talk) 20:17, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
Hello @ MrOllie,
I appreciate your work to maintain the Humanoid robot page. As a quality 3rd party author, I hope you might be interested in helping to create a page for Agility Robotics. I work for Agility and as such don't think I can be an impartial author. I believe Agility has enough notoriety to warrant a page and I can help share articles written by 3rd party media that would reinforce that. No harm if you aren't interested, it just seemed like you might have some experience in the humanoid robotics space. Thanks for considering. Keganator ( talk) 01:05, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Hello @ MrOllie Thank you for your efforts in maintaining the knowledge in so many fields of science. Recently, two additions that I have made to "Ageing" and "DNA damage theory of ageing" were deleted. Perhaps I should have suggest the edit with the: {{request edit}} template.
A new paper that me and my colleagues wrote is considered to be important to its contributions to the science of aging, not only by the authors, it was also acknowledged by top scietific journal "Nature Metabolism" and by independent important scientist that studies aging for long time. <<cut and paste removed>> — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orrl ( talk • contribs)
The Purple Barnstar | ||
This subject line qualifies as "undue hardship" in my book, so it entitles you to this. JoJo Anthrax ( talk) 18:45, 20 September 2022 (UTC) |
Hi Ollie, Hope you are good! Why are you against the quotation here ? I am not a troll buddy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andreabrugiony ( talk • contribs)
Dear Mr.Ollie,
The controversial development plans edit I made on the Auroville wikipedia page were cited with resources that included court verdicts and legal documents, FIRs, including requesting newcomers to speak to community members to form their own opinions.
I resonate wholeheartedly with your view to maintain neutrality but Auroville is being taken over by the might of a government. If you could please send me at least what I had managed to write, I'd be happy to try to rephrase it and would be grateful for your feedback on the same, but please understand that we don't have what "they" have. At all. Nowhere. They have thugs, millions of rupees lining the pockets of I don't even know how many higher ups, and we have a computer.
In gratitude
`````canwetalkaboutwhatsgoingon Canwetalkaboutwhatsgoingon ( talk) 01:49, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
IDK why I'm here but looks like my edit was removed for external links, its ok if you remove the links but I don't understand who and why would someone remove the information. The page I tried to edit was not not even 10% complete. I'm new so... Harikumarthapamagar ( talk) 12:42, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
Dear Mr. Ollie. Sorry if I have to edit the article on Wikipedia. I always contribute to making articles on Wikipedia. on the condition, why I am editing the article because I have created an article for my website with research and using a lot of my time, I think if my article is good, can be accountable, like no campaign, and I don't get money from the article, I think I can get the link from Wikipedia. I need to get the link for my website to make people thrust when reading my article on the website. I make sure the link I enter is related to the context.
I have 2 times edit the article, but I'm having trouble editing it. So, if I can edit again and get the link. I will say thanks to you. But if Wikipedia can't give the link to my website. I am disappointed.
Thanks for inviting me to the discussion.
best regards, Gtech insight team Egi sahril sam ( talk) 06:01, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I’ve started a dispute page where we can hopefully resolve this quickly.
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Accountability_software Keithgreenfan ( talk) 01:34, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
Evolutionary algorithm: I added three citations for the sentence "seemingly simple EA can solve often complex problems" replacing the remartk "citation needed" and improved some existing references by DOIs and the like in the section "Bibliography". You removed that completely. Why? What is wrong with that?
--~~~~ Wilfried Jakob ( talk) 12:50, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
First off, I want to thank you for the sharp eye you use to keep link spam off the Enterprise Architecture page. I was going through yesterday and removing a bit of self promotion (by one of my esteemed colleagues in the EA field) and reviewed a series of edits and reverts you had made. I agree with almost every one. I did have a question about one, though, and wanted to ask you about it.
On July 29, 2021, In the article on Enterprise Architecture, you removed a section that had been added to the page that contained a list of Enterprise Architecture tools. The list cited analyst reports from Forrester and Gartner, two independent analyst firms who, on an annual basis, each put out lists of the major software vendors for hundreds of different needs. Analyst firms are commercial firms, as are most sources (like newspapers or magazines), but they are paid by their readers to refresh their articles every year with new information. Typically these "reports" are used to both describe different software products and to rank them (Gartner coined the term "magic quadrant" as a way of ranking the companies they review). While they are far from perfect, the reports are written from a neutral point of view and are often quite useful for the people and companies involved in purchasing software. They have their own guidelines for notability of software packages, and have extremely tight editorial control.
The edit in question is linked here: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Enterprise_architecture&oldid=1036075579
I searched and could not find a mention of the use of computing analyst reports, either for or against their use as a reliable source. Personally, I think they are more reliable, more carefully edited, and more tightly controlled than magazine articles in ZDNet or Computerworld (both of whom are listed in Wikipedia as reliable sources for technology).
I did not restore your edit for two reasons. 1) I am not a full time Wikipedia editor and do not have the experience that you bring. 2) I think having a list of tools in that article is a bad idea all around. It distracts from the topic and invites link spam.
I wanted to ask you with respect to edits in general: "Do you believe that analyst reports from firms such as Gartner, Forrester, IDC, and the Cutter Consortium to be unreliable sources?"
I believe that the meet all the criteria for reliability but I'd like to know your opinion. Nickmalik ( talk) 15:57, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
This user:Faisalmunir987 continuously removing [3] official website at Pakistan Junior League and adding personal advertising website
This user use account only for advertising on wikipedia and already received multiple warnings. 103.141.159.244 ( talk)
Sir who said to you this meaningless thought Oscar doesn't belong to cult film, please search. These movies are already considering as modern cult movies and but you're denying the fact for the viewers. I already gave links to even you can search yourself what's cult movies and why these are considering Shahriar776 ( talk) 16:54, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
I cited my claims. I would like you to tell me how I am not being impartial. You need to explain yourself because its my time you are wasting when you decide to take down my contributions. Thomas Sowell isn't a conservative, by the way. You wouldn't know that because you have a particular bias. Classical Liberalism almost unanimously objects to CRT, so why did you remove those impartial facts. It's like you want only one side to be heard. AndrushkaA ( talk) 16:43, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
How is the information below as it pertains to ACADEMIC CRITICISM biased?
Academic criticism
Despite what popular themes may suggest, criticisms of CRT is not something unique to the Right, but both sides of the political spectrum. Classical Liberals, such as John McWhorter, James Lindsay, Helen Pluckrose, Steven Pinker, Jonathan Haidt, Stephen Hicks, Thomas Sowell, Christina Hoff Sommers, have all criticized CRT for its very strong illiberal overtones. In The Coddling of the American Mind, renowned sociologist Jonathan Haidt and former president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education Greg Lukianoff, argues that CRT promotes a “common enemy” mindset that replaces the long-standing liberal tradition in education that we share a “common humanity.” He further emphasizes the dangers of focusing on impact over intent. Mathematician, cultural critic and father of the Grievance studies affair, James Lindsay sums up CRT in a few points saying, "First, critical race Theory is centrally concerned with power, which it holds in higher regard than truth. Second, it distinguishes itself from “traditional” civil rights and instead favors identity politics (in the radical sense). Third, it is not interested in progress but revolution. Fourth, it calls into question “the very foundations of the liberal order, including equality theory, legal reasoning, Enlightenment rationalism, and neutral principles of constitutional law.” Fifth, it is anti-Western and, in the narrower context in which it arose and mostly applies, anti-American". AndrushkaA ( talk) 16:54, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for your review on my changes. I understand the fact that having broken links/pages is not great but it is not the only existing entry that has that problem (see Joram). Even so, in my edit there was another entry (Jahia) that does exist, could we just restore that one ? I can take care of it if you agree. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhillou ( talk • contribs) 15:42, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
I appreciate your concern for the edits I made on the infodemic, infodemiology, and misinformation pages, however, I don't think your reversions of my edits are in the best interest of these pages. I’d like to work with you to enhance Wikipedia to recognize the new science of Cognitive Immunology. Could you please further explain the why you reverted the edits I made to these pages?
First, there are a few specific points I'd like to address though.
- My addition of inoculation theory on misinformation seems quite valid considering the already existing mention of inoculating minds (i.e. "Another approach is to "inoculate" against it by delivering weakened misinformation that warns of the dangers of the misinformation.") Similarly, the addition of the sentence about Cognitive Immunology seemed quite warranted as the topic related directly to prevention of the spread of misinformation and I included a reputable source (the foundation book) on the topic.
- You marked my addition of information about Cognitive Immunology to infodemic as a neologism, which seems pretty ironic given that "infodemic" is itself a neologism. There's nothing inherently wrong about neologisms, especially when they are used to refer to something that is truly a new development, which is true in the case of infodemic and Cognitive Immunology and is supported by the sources I included about Cognitive Immunology.
- Finally, in the case of my edits on infodemiology, I improved the introductory sentence on the topic by providing a more accurate definition of the field as described by the academic who coined the term. And, again, my addition of the mention of cognitive immunology seems quite reasonable given the obvious relation between these two fields.
I'm new to contributing to Wikipedia but I did my best to read up on the rules of the platform and I thought my edits to these pages were all quite fair and I'm not convinced your complete reversion of each of them was fair and would appreciate further explanations. Meletao ( talk) 23:30, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
I saw where you reverted my edit to Kmart, saying that we need to wait for a source. The source is literally in the article. This is the source. GamerKiller2347 ( talk) 22:49, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi @ MrOllie, I see you've got OmniVision Technologies on your radar. The company has going through a reorganization and the current page is no longer accurate, however as I am an employee of its marketing agency, I'm not allowed to make any edits to the page. So I put a request on the OmniVision Technologies "Talk" page, with the required disclosure statement. There are a lot of changes and additions, and I included citations. I realize you may not make all of them. But the main issue is that the company is now OMNIVISION. Someone did up date the logo, but that's all so far. I think a new pages has to be created? Please let me know if this is something you can do, and what changes can be made. I appreciate your input. Thank you! StellaBean ( talk) 20:50, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
Hey there. Not that I have any problem with the reversion, but if you're going to remove this as an unreliable source from KMart, you'd better also remove it from Sears on the same basis. I think it's been in use there for a while now. All the best, Skybunny ( talk) 00:14, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
I came to leave you a message and I guess you are choosing to be anonymous since you have redirected your User Page as a Talk Page which is your right.
:::::When appropriate,
protection levels are automatically sensed, described and categorized.
See the next note
Bbachrac (
talk)
00:23, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
@ User:MrOllie Per your request, I am sending this note here.
Medicine is a Science, the Practice of Medicine is an Art which is why Complementary and Integrative Health has been adopted by Medicine.
Thanks for your perspectives.
Bbachrac (
talk)
00:42, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
The Caribbean is a region of the Americas that consists of the Caribbean Sea, its islands and the surrounding coasts. The region is southeast of the Gulf of Mexico and the North American mainland, east of Central America, and north of South America. Enlightened105747 ( talk) 19:14, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
Not an offense, I see that you reverted my edit on some articles. Can you explain please? -- 2601:205:C001:EA0:35D7:C35:ECF9:D53 ( talk) 00:14, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
First off, I do not understand why my edits I just made were so terrible. I was just moving the accusations to one section vs. muddying up the whole story of Simufilam. People aren't responding on the talk page. I think both cassava and simufilam should be reworked to have the story told without all the accusations, then we use the accusations in their own section. Right now they both have very repetitive language throughout of all the accusations that becomes the story. It is a drug and a company that has followed research protocols and has a phase 3 trial executing right now. Short sellers of the stock that benifit from the decline in the stock caused all of these accusations. How do you suggest I got about getting these pages reformatted so they tell the story of the drug and the company? Until it is fairly moderated and the content is balanced it represents a FALSE narrative on the page and you will just keep getting people coming to try to fix it. Mnachtrab ( talk) 00:56, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
The requested edits backlog is very high. Please be extremely patient.- you proceeded to wait a day, and then you whitewashed the article. Your inability to understand why this is a problem is exactly why we discourage people with conflicts of interest from editing. You will find that Wikipedia editors do no care a whit about what the stock market is doing. If we
just keep getting people coming to try to fix it., we will run sockpuppet checks on the new editors, and probably protect the article from editing if we continue to have problems with attempted whitewashing. I suggest you do not try to get the pages "reformatted" - trying to move all criticisms into a separate section to hide them below the fold is a common tactic of POV pushers, common enough that we have statements in our guidelines and policies that prevent it. This will be my only comment on this on my talk page. MrOllie ( talk) 01:05, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
there is another browser on the page without a wiki article on the browser (JioBrowser, which links to Jio's list of apps), and several without a link at all. i think vanadium is the same as JioBrowser, as vanadium is in GrapheneOS' list of apps. thank you Omilc ( talk) 02:20, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I see you reverted/deleted a section that I added to AI, artificial intelligence? I'm simply adding in some sales functionality related to AI. It's a valid function of AI and is being used in the industry by multiple CRM companies. Browardauthor ( talk) 15:22, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is τλ:δρ. Thank you. User:Shirt58 ( talk) 🦘 00:49, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello,
I am a home care expert without a commercial interest, and I decided to make some edits to the page. In my initial round of edits, I cited sources and added references to make robust changes that were supported by government and established industry organizations. Those edits were removed due to "irrelevant" external links, which would be factually incorrect. Because the original version was restored for that reason, I went back through and added my edits without the links and those edits were removed because the information I added wasn't supported by references or links, so quite frankly, I'm at a loss for words. I'm simply trying to help families make an informed decision and can't win whether you spit facts (with resources) or not.
Please advise,
thanks! JenniferLagemann ( talk) 02:28, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
I added the wage information back with a citation, is that appropriate? JenniferLagemann ( talk) 02:50, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
Okay, and wanted to clarify for my own account safety that I am in no way affiliated with any of those businesses. I am trying to help families make an informed decision when trying to find home care for a loved one. Thanks! JenniferLagemann ( talk) 02:53, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I see you reverted/deleted an edit to biographical page on Saurabh Bagchi. This had mention of cybersecurity of critical infrastructures and referred to a third-party source from a reputed publication that covers government and cybersecurity regulation.
https://www.govinfosecurity.com/should-public-utilities-get-paid-to-secure-power-grid-a-20216
Can I request you to allow this addition?
Techphile ( talk) 02:48, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
Articles that represent scientific work done by a person is valid for a person's Wikipedia entry. I am going to put that material back there.
There are many single purpose editors on Wikipedia. So I hope that is not reason enough to reject my objective edits. Techphile ( talk) 23:57, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for your work, MrOllie. Bishonen | tålk 14:53, 18 October 2022 (UTC).
Thanks again for your input MrOllie. Question: I have occasionally seen questions about page text inserted directly onto the page, usually parenthetically, by editors, usually only one question. Is there a WP rule that can be articulated about that, for future reference? I realize that my questions re: the WSJ quote are probably too numerous to place in a parenthetical expression. Thanks again, 2600:4040:780C:6F00:F8F7:CC7A:42BD:19B2 ( talk) 12:39, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi MrOllie. Please don't just revert good-faith comments on Talk pages like this one: [4] New editors often put comments in the wrong place. It's best to move the comment instead of reverting it. Take care, Clayoquot ( talk | contribs) 16:06, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello. As I see you are reverting all my edits for no reason. I ask you an explain of why you are reverting my edits (Including already acceped ones) because this is
1. Annoyng.
1.1 You're not giving reason 2.2 You don't have why do this
2. Unnecesary
2.1 I'm not vandalizing anything 2.2 Those where ALREADY ACCEPTED edits
Thank you. 190.114.36.177 ( talk) 21:15, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Michael.C.Wright ( Talk/ Edits) 16:12, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
Greetings! I was surprised to see that you had deleted the mention of enema as a weapon. The fact has a serious proof, the patent of US Patents Bureau. Meanwhile, nobody is ashamed of keeping info about it's usage for BDSM, punishment and drug intoxication, but it's usage for self defence was labeled as undue. I supppose that the fact deserves a mention. ForTheHellOfIt ( talk) 16:26, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
YouTube is a completely valid source for Wikipedia, in my opinion. 117.215.48.119 ( talk) 13:46, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
This is an attempt to address perceived disruptive editing of the biography for Martin Kulldorff.
WP:BLP states the following:
All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be supported by an inline citation to a reliable, published source. Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—must be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion. Users who persistently or egregiously violate this policy may be blocked from editing.
WP:RSP states the following:
Context matters tremendously, and some sources may or may not be suitable for certain uses depending on the situation.
Even when a source such as WP:SBM is considered generally reliable, that does not mean it is considered universally or unquestionably reliable.
As stated in Kulldorff's talk page, the statement you reinserted "In reality, influenza had been responsible for one child death in that two year period..." is factually inaccurate according to the source provided by the SBM article. A two year period would include two influenza seasons (2019-2020 and 2020-2021). During those two periods, there were 200 total deaths. Therefore the statement is factually inaccurate. The only influenza season with only 1 child death was 2020-2021, which is not two years, according to how the CDC tracks influenza seasons. [5]
The overall paragraph is in contention by other editors, not just myself. Therefore it is better to hash this out in talk without disruptively editing a living person's biography.
I hope we can come to a consensus in the appropriate talk page. See you there.
Michael.C.Wright ( Talk/ Edits) 17:10, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
I hope we can come to a consensus in the appropriate talk page. See you there.
No matter how much I present the source, you will not accept it. You are obliged to explain each specific reason in detail. I want you to stop destroying baseless articles. You shouldn't be making your own decision here, and you should bring in multiple experts to discuss this.-- Neotesla ( talk) 00:40, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
There's something that I told you which you didn't answer. This is the CiNii Research's database of Japanese papers and literature [6]. Several magazine articles which written by me are also registered. Please answer whether the references from the articles registered in this database are valid. I added it as a reference in the Wikipedia article I mentioned. And it was also included which you removed.-- Neotesla ( talk) 23:55, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
I'm so tired of the incessant POV, OR and trivia on retail store/mall articles... thanks for your work on this. Meters ( talk) 20:23, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi iii, what's problem with my image, I am know religion educations. So don't touch my edits. I am have very many books. Okay? Andrewler ( talk) 04:06, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello MrOllie, regarding you qusetion in User talk:Yaniv unger, here is you can see a facebook profile of Yaniv Unger from Tel Aviv, work as SEO. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:ED0:530B:1500:CD90:DFF2:B11A:60B4 ( talk) 14:47, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi, perhaps you can help make this article better contextualized than I can, since I am a newbie at editing Wikipedia articles and you seem to have edited this one. Between Le Texier's "Debunking the Stanford Prison Experiment" and Rutger Bregman's chapter on it in "Humankind" I do not think the article should present it as an unequivocally legitimate experiment in the first few paragraphs as it currently does. I think it should say straight at the top that the very legitimacy of the experiment has been refuted. The "volunteer" guards were not volunteers and their treatment of the "prisoners" was directed from above. Even the famous plea of one of the prisoners to leave was staged. I fear the article as it is structured, even though it calls the experiment into question further down, helps perpetuate the narrative that it proved anything about human behavior, which it didn't. The BBC Prison study mentioned lower down was more realistic, and also deserves mention in the opening paragraph as a refutation of the manipulated results at Stanford. DrStevenJKlein ( talk) 09:32, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello Mr Mollie, may you please help me to Interlanguage link the English articles and isiZulu articles of the same title. I noticed you have removed all the local links I created, and thank you for correcting my error. But that hasn't resolved that the links to Zulu translation of the same article is missing. I don't wanna see this articles becoming orphan articles, because usually Zulu readers start with English articles and then check for their Zulu translation.
thank you Fongcwele ( talk) 11:20, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
My purpose in discussing the link between classical music and IQ is to establish a non-causal relation. I am satisfied that although smart and learned people are more likely to gravitate toward classical music, especially in chamber music with generic titles that say little about the music. Such qualities are not what IQ tests are intended to measure, like formal learning (more a connection to opportunity than to intelligence), taste (consider how awful many Top 40 tunes are -- really, this is undeniable for many of them), a taste for formalism and irony, and a tolerance for deferred gratification (so the climax of a fugue comes after ten or fifteen minutes instead of two. Even if those traits correlate with intelligence they do not define it.
Classical music fans are probably smarter than the average, but even classical music fans can recognize virtuosity and imagination in other formats. IQ has validity as a predictor of ability, but hardly of results in personal life, including cultural experiences. Classical music making one smarter than country or rap? Probably not? Jazz or folk? Both can hold many of the characteristics of classical music -- extended length, formality, irony, and exposure to a culture not one's own. The pianism of Oscar Peterson (jazz) and the repertory that Claudio Arrau played (entirely classical) would seem to have much the same effects upon a human mind.
You tell me -- do big businesses commonly inflict classical music upon employees so that those employees can make smarter and wiser decisions or have more mental flexibility on the job? Some might, but it would be insulting to those who despise classical music for whatever reasons. Multitudes hate classical music, and they are not reliably stupid. It might even be an undue distraction in a workplace.
Do I have a bias? Sure. I love classical music, including works with generic titles that give no hint of what to expect. But I also know that multitudes thoroughly hate it.
I wish to refine my position so that it can stick to the discussion page. Pbrower2a ( talk) 01:23, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
why are you changing my addition to the gun control, it clearly says in the graph that the US has the highest levels of gun ownership and gun deaths, also the comment about the good guy with gun is right above the graph where it shows that bystanders stopping active shooters are statistically insignificant, so neither is unsourced.
I'm just going to write it again and put references this time. Rabbo375 ( talk) 21:52, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
Please explain why did you remove today the addition to "Flash Fiction". This is an article written by Prof. David Fishelov Davidgute ( talk) 17:08, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
Ursid burglaries are real, and ursid burglars are generally as dangerous as human ones. These appear in the news in some areas (especially the Rocky Mountain West.
Bears are obviously not looking for gold jewelry to pawn for food; they are interested in the food itself. Technically the cartoon character "Yogi Bear" is a burglar and (as one can expect of talking critters in cartoons) highly anthropomorphic. They are clever; they are powerful. They can use their paws like hammers or crowbars as would human burglars. They are also extremely dangerous.
Due to extreme damage to property (broken windows and containers, destruction of vehicles, damage to sheds), bears are a legitimate concern for wildlife enforcement.
Oddly, dogs can also be burglars, although it is more technically going where they would never be welcome (like grocery stores). I have seen video of dogs going behind a butcher's display (if a customer did that without employee consent that would constitute burglary) to grab meat. Dogs of course are voracious eaters, and they can eat up a large amount of highly-valuable meat. Keeping dogs out is obviously easier than keeping bears out, and dogs pose much less danger than do bears.
Not all burglars are human. Pbrower2a ( talk) 01:39, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
Bears are typically relocated or destroyed for encounters with humans or for destruction of property, so in effect they are treated as criminals without human rights.
MrOllie - you have made a most unwelcoming experience for me as a first-time editor of Wikipedia. You indiscriminately removed my edits to an article for "promotional" content, even though some of the edits merely updated anchor links and citations. I updated the article again, this time linking to a third party authority affirming my contribution. You removed it again without explanation. You could have helped me in my obviously genuine attempt to improve the article (I even asked for help on my Talk page), but instead deflated all enthusiasm about participating in the Wiki community by way of your unemphatic attitude. 67.168.186.226 ( talk) 22:12, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
Why did you remove my addition to materials when it needed more information? Desiledbetter ( talk) 15:07, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
Some are notable, will add them after creating articles Fostera12 ( talk) 17:36, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
An article that has some content that is written like an advertisement, with a promotional tone and style, but whose subject does qualify for an article (under WP:N, the Notability guideline) should not be deleted, but instead be marked {{ ad}}, notifying others to change the writing style to give it a neutral tone. WP:DOUBT 65sugg ( talk) 13:45, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
Can you please tell me why you removed by addition of DDS as a protocol for IIoT. IIC is listed and the IIC recommendation DDS as an IIoT protocol. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nyhnpya ( talk • contribs) 13:20, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello,
While this page caters to important information about off-roading, the page lacks information regarding the requirement of a License while off-roading.
As a regular off-roader, I think it is essential to convey the relevant information regarding license requirements while off-roading.
I want to add a few lines as below:
"As I see, while the legislation for a license varies from state to state (or across countries), there is the license mandate in many regions.
Off-roading is different from a usual driving activity involving regular motor vehicles; some newbies drive them after 18. It is a specialized activity – although it is all-time fun – yet it has some rules and some types of equipment that must be in vehicles to perform off-roading.
According to the Government of Canada and the USA Transport Department, every driver operating any off-road vehicle must have a driver's license only if they bring the vehicle onto the road, highways, and forest service roads. The license is not mandatory if you drive on private properties."
Source: [https://offroadhandbook.com/can-you-drive-off-road-without-a-license/ Can You Drive Off-Road Without a License? Know in Detail]
-- Dasgupta Surya ( talk) 13:46, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
Appears that seven new editors recently made an edit or edits to Planning, all essay-like in style and with refs not correctly formated. All have been reverted. Given that one owned up to being in a PhD class, I left a message on each talk page asking if this was a class assignment, and borrowed your wording about education projects. There were also a few entries to Communication not currently reverted. As ref formating was similar across all, I suspect the instructor is not well versed in Wikipedia. David notMD ( talk) 14:16, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
Why did you delete my entry. You sight "lacks reliable sources". Did you actually do your own research? Did you actually visit the quoted source? Do you actually realise that the Wayback Machine is cited in Prior Art Patent cases as the primary source for first use case. Do you know what Prior Art means? If you don't please visit this wiki page /info/en/?search=Prior_art for a definition of Prior Art and maybe you'll find some stuff to delete there too. If you are unable to contest the entry with proper evidence please don't go around deleting other peoples entries because you're unable to accept their sources. This entry was made with proper legal due diligence I am going to restore the entry. If the World thinks its incorrect, let them provide the evidence beyond what I have provided. BabsOje ( talk) 08:07, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
Patrick here, after you sent me the message (You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you insert a spam link. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines)
All of my website traffic has gone to zero! I am now earning no money from my website because of this! You sent me that message on the 24th of October and on the 25th all of my site traffic was gone. Did you make this happen? Patricksblog ( talk) 08:52, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi Ollie, I have been asked by my high school's alumni association and the school management to update the list of notable alumni. I am 70 + retired alumni in New Zealand trying to help the school. I have just become an editor on Wikipedea. I am in the process of learning the various features. I am getting relevant reference from the internet and linking them. Please help me to update the pages of my school which is India. seven and a half hours behind us in time zone,
Thanks Expatelian ( talk) 02:18, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi, could you kindly explain why the open para is not an improvement I have a decade of experience in the field, keen to understand you POV? Robidy ( talk) 22:57, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I saw your contribution there, I provided reliable secondry sources and nothing is from my original research. India have a huge fantacy gaming industry, some states have banned them. So don't revert anything without discussing on talk page, your welcome to contribute. As you know 3 revert rule, you already did 2 reverts, now please Talk, discuss on Talk page there. I have left a message for you there. Rock Stone Gold Castle ( talk) 13:09, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi, You shouldn't entir well sourced edits without discussing on talk page. If you think my writing was awaful the please give one chance to fix it but you reverted. See what you replied when someone did thing like you did to me [7], Just reverting well sourced content is not right thing according to me. Rock Stone Gold Castle ( talk) 14:03, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
MrOllie sir please be civil. You should behave politely with rookie editors. Rock Stone Gold Castle ( talk) 18:36, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
This is an AP News Article about Dpoofing Device fingerprinting and the the link is for AP NEWS, is AP News promotion link? APNewsSecurity ( talk) 16:26, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
Hey. When you post an {{ ani-notice}}, especially to inexperienced users, please consider also adding the thread= parameter. That way, they could get to the thread in question with ease. Cheers! El_C 20:15, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
Dude, it’s factual that a group is trying to legalize it. I will even link two 3 articles. Loverofwomen91 ( talk) 13:07, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
Having now read about the Wikipedia threshold for notability, I do not claim that the Metricool company that I just created an article for is notable. Feel free to delete the article at any time. Thanks! (FWIW, this is the second article I've created. The first, C++20, was certainly notable.)
Dotyoyo ( talk) 21:15, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
I wonder, why exactly you have deleted my edit here: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Strategy_video_game&oldid=prev&diff=1122459235 Аргскригициониец ( talk) 18:33, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
I made an innocent update on the Louis Vuitton article and saw that you reverted. I'm unsure if what I did was wrong or maybe I did not reference right. I would appreciate it if you could help me understand the problem. The update I made has been trending online in the last 24 hours. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kelmaa ( talk • contribs) 22:59, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
I tried to add info on 2020s article with sources cited, but you reverted my edit. Here is what I showed you: https://en.wikipedia.org/?diff=1123240808&oldid=1123239119&title=2020s
But I wanted to know why you reverted my edit. Would you explain? -- 2601:205:C001:EA0:DD9D:F980:1B2C:6117 ( talk) 21:59, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
This goal of development is literally described in the source Materie34 ( talk) 13:33, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
I saw that there were some formatting problems. Would you accept the mods if those were solved? If not, why not.
To explain my motive: I'm a committer over at ruby-lang.org, working mostly with the documentation. I wanted to be able to link to the added headers. BurdetteLamar ( talk) 23:14, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
I see my addition to web frameworks was made not notable. I am not sure what exactly why, but if you search "vely c framework" on google, duckduckgo etc, there's plenty there. I found it on hackernews. I use Vely, and I understand that doesn't make it notable, but it's a nice web framework that's been around for a year or so. As far as I know, also the only C web framework. Danwatkins1 ( talk) 04:56, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
(You probably didn't see the ping because they misspelled your name. The drama seems to be over as the original poster has been usernameblocked, but I thought you might want to know about this regardless.) — David Eppstein ( talk) 05:19, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
I’m Iranian and I’m from Iran I have master card, and I never can use my card everywhere Right? Or not?! 2.147.143.84 ( talk) 22:51, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
I mean: In Iran, it is mostly used to bypass foreign sanctions and internal restrictions. It’s some way to use VPN for people! 2.147.143.84 ( talk) 22:57, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
It’s big lie to human But ok, tell me where can I explain this information for tourist and foreign people?! SepehrMomayezAdel ( talk) 23:38, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
It seems unclear why you have decided to remove the change I made for the Quadratic Programming section. Could you precise your action? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:CB04:80:E500:D85:876A:1E38:969D ( talk) 21:10, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Is there a metric that you would consider as meeting the threshold of notability?
Echo Prof is young but (in my opinion) the amount of work that has been done on it is surely deserving of some note.
David d12345 ( talk) 17:47, 28 November 2022 (UTC) David d12345 ( talk) 17:47, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
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)
00:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi, you've just reverted the Myprotein page back to remove all my edits for promo editing and whitewashing. I've got to politely object as I've done exactly the opposite.
You've re-added lines such as "In 2020, Myprotein won the Lausanne Index Prize - Silver Award." Which seems like promo editing to me, which I had removed.
As for whitewashing, I removed the controversy section because both parts seem to be unencyclopedic. One part is a Japanese tweet. I tried to find a reliable reference to go along with this such as a newspaper article but found nothing.
The second 'controversy' is a story which turned out to be untrue and the newspaper references withdrew the story. Again, to me this seems unencyclopedic.
And then you've removed the logo. I don't understand your logic. Dgp4004 ( talk) 00:49, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
You may not have seen this as your talk page was edited by a bot after I posted it. Or you may not have had a moment to read it yet.
I don't want to start an edit war if you passionately want to retain something I removed or disagree with something I added? If you find the content of the controversies section valuable, I disagree but perhaps you can find a better source for the tweet part at least if you want to keep it?
I'm disappointed that you went straight for a full revert of all my edits though. I put a fair effort into those edits and I suspect you didn't actually read what you were reverting to if I'm honest. No talk post, nothing. Dgp4004 ( talk) 16:47, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Fair enough, I've tried to engage you. I'll add a discussion to the Wiki page with my suggested changes if you later change your mind and want to engage there. Dgp4004 ( talk) 21:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello Mr. Ollie,
Thanks for being so observant to notice that I have made a major overhaul of the Nextflow article draft. I see, why this edit might raise some concerns regarding undisclosed payments, but rest assured that I have not received any payments or other benefits in exchange for this edit.
Please allow me to elaborate on my background and the motivation for working on this article: While I do not have a user page on the English Wikipedia, I do have one on the German Wikipedia as well as on Wikimedia Commons. I have been contributing to both since 2007, when I was an undergrad student at the university. I have mostly ceased from contributing to Wikipedia due to time constraints by now, but of course continue to cherish the project.
When I learned that an academic collaborator of mine wanted to add an article for Nextflow to Wikipedia, I was thrilled. It had never occurred to me, but I was immediately convinced that this is a good idea, because it is a very important tool for our research work and students might want to look it up when it is mentioned e.g. in the method section of scientific publications. However, I had to agree with @ Onel5969, that the article in its previous form was written too promotional and partly incomprehensible. So I sacrificed a free afternoon (and unintentionally also the evening) to fix the (in my opinion) most blatant issues. Admittedly, it was way more work than what I initially wanted to put into the edit, but I also couldn't stop halfway through either, since I eventually ended up changing the entire structure. Major revision so to speak. ;-)
I have tried to incorporate the criticisms expressed to the best of my ability, but agree that there should be an external review to ensure that haven't been too sympathetic with the subject.
Conflict of interest statement: I am employed by the Swedish National Genomics Infrastructure, which co-founded the nf-core community. Phil Ewels is a former colleague of mine, and I have met other core Nextflow/nf-core contributors at scientific conferences. I work with Nextflow daily, and it is fundamental for my work. However, I have not received any payments or other benefits for editing the article, and it was my own decision to devote my spare time to edit. I have no investments in or affiliations with Sequera, the spin-off company that maintains Nextflow. My real name is Matthias Zepper, which you can use to verify this information.
-- Curnen ( talk) 18:24, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi,
Just wondering what 'trim spammed site' actually means. The excised links still work as expected and contain a lot of useful information from an expert source that is not available elsewhere in Wikipedia.
If this is something that can be fixed by them I will contact the owners of the linked site to alert them.
Thanks 51.9.236.176 ( talk) 09:39, 28 November 2022 (UTC) 51.9.236.176 ( talk) 09:39, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
useful to others researching the topicis not a reason to add a link since Wikipedia is not a link directory. MrOllie ( talk) 12:33, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
That seems to me decidedly unhelpful to the potential reader. Neither 'E.J. Coates' nor 'retroactive notation' have entries in Wikipedia though I could of course create them with reference to the ISKO entries and some personal knowledge. Since these links were intended essentially as footnotes is it permissible to create footnotes that accommodate them instead? 51.9.236.176 ( talk) 12:57, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
And you can sue these people here for exposing you. You're not a villain.
https://www.reddit.com/user/The_NSA_Here_To_Help/comments/
Ascertain2022 ( talk) 03:41, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
Nope, sorry, not interested in allowing you to waste my time as you have wasted more than a little of Mr. Ollie's. Our policy in this regard is explained at links in the message that editor originally left on your Talk page. You can take the time to read it, or not. In the mean time, you may want to address the report concerning your violation of our edit warring policy. ("Our" refers to the community of editors here committed to the project of building an encyclopedia, which assumes that we will educate ourselves about and follow certain policies, or be separated from the project, either temporarily or in extreme cases permanently.) General Ization Talk 04:26, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi MrOllie! Wondering if you would be able to take a look at Bquast's request for autopatrolled and weigh in given that you have had recent interactions and appear familiar with them? TheSandDoctor Talk 06:56, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
MrOllie,
I have read many Wikipedia articles that have included the reference [citations needed]. My intent is to add the citations and my hope would be that others would as well. That would be in the spirit of Wikipedia. Please do not come in and edit out my work before it is completed. I'm new to this editing and if I need to do something else, or do it in a different way, please advise me on my talk.
PeterJ99 PeterJ99 ( talk) 17:34, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Dear MrOllie,
together with other editors on Wikipedia, I created a section on Primitive Rye at the bottom of the Wikipedia page "Rye". You have deleted this section multiple times without explanation. Is there a reason for your action? There should be a section on the multicaule variation on rye in the "Rye" article, and there is reliable sources (as cited in the section) to show that. I have tried talking to you on the talk page of "Rye" but have so far not received an answer. Please let me know your thoughts! Looking forward to hearing from you!
All the best, Plantsforlife ( talk) 10:46, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
Dear Mr. Ollie, I added links at several lemma with results/chapters from F+F 1971, a research project at Zurich University of the Arts on the F+F School for Art an Design in Zurich. I also corrected some old links. You reverted all my contributions. I try to keep these articles actual, and I'm sorry it wasn't accepted. Could you help me to improve? Thank you so much. Toptenseniororg ( talk) 17:45, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
Don't be a fool reverting others contribution just because the content is not linked with an English wikipedia page. Wikipedia is not your life partner and I can definitely create one to bypass that requirement, but what's the point? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.87.100.165 ( talk) 15:45, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
Can you tell me about this edit you made? I don't understand how it is COI or citespam. thanks! UtherSRG (talk) 15:54, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
I see you made a similar deletion for the same reason at Physical therapy. Please provide evidence for your claims of a COI and the exact diffs (plural) for the additions of the content in both articles. -- Valjean ( talk) ( PING me) 19:47, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
I don't get it? Is peer reviewed science really "COI citespam"? So you have these PhD. professors who have been publishing on their field of expertise in international, peer reviewed science journals for 25 years, and these are the people we don't want contributing to Wikipedia? It is not considered a conflict of interest to cite your own publications in peer reviewed journals. People have been doing it for 200 years. WiLaFa ( talk) 22:03, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
At Wikipedia, it is NOT true that "It is not considered a conflict of interest to cite your own publications in peer reviewed journals." It is a clear violation of WP:COI to do so.
OTOH, it is okay to use the talk page to suggest one's own publication as a source. Then other editors can add it if they deem the source appropriate to use. This is standard practice. We have banned a Nobel Prize laureate for refusing to back down on this issue, so we take this very seriously. -- Valjean ( talk) ( PING me) 23:54, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
I get it, I did wrong by overusing the self-cite. But now you have cleaned all my contributions to science off Wikipedia, which I feel is overdoing the gate-keeping. Yes, self-citing is self promotion. But in this case it is also sharpening up the information on Wikipedia. PzychoPat ( talk) 09:09, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
MrOllie,
I saw that you deleted most of my creation on the page. It was not a simple copy and paste. I addressed the feedback some previous editors raised including the content was not strong enough to form a separate page and potential copyright infringement. I rewrote and adjusted most of the content and merged it to the existing page. With what reason this content was deleted?-- MagellanAquarium ( talk) 16:36, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi MrOllie,
I saw you undid an addition to the red pill and blue pill article. Your message was "Rv blog posts, again." Are you objecting to the usage because it comes from a blog? It's not clear to me why a usage appearing on a blog should bar it from inclusion, given it is both authentic and relevant. As you may know, the "red pill" is a common term used in political discussion, especially on the internet. I might go so far as saying its main way the term is used today. I think it is therefore worth including how the term crossed over into political discussions. The information you removed was just that. The source provided was a Vox article stating "Yarvin was the first to popularize the analogy from The Matrix of being “redpilled” or “-pilled,” suddenly losing your illusions and seeing the supposed reality of the world more clearly, as applied to politics. Provided this information is true, which I have not found cause to doubt, its inclusion seems important, regardless of the fact it is froma blog. What is your view on this? Scamperton ( talk) 01:29, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
hello
I am editing on immunoflurescence article, it is my master class project, can you stop editing my work please.
Yasemin-alkassem ( talk) 14:14, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
Should All-Out Avengers and Secret Invasion Vol #2 be considered for bolding members of the team. Jacob Wilkerson ( talk) 00:58, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
I am concerned you deleted my link. It was a genuine contemporary Golden Dawn order. Please explain. Thank you. Tehuti-scribe ( talk) 00:27, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
So how do I reflect on the page that there are a variety of contemporary Golden Dawn orders out there and give some examples. I am concerned that the readers will only think there are two recent contemporary orders. There are probably over 100, but only one or two larger and more established. Advice appreciated. Tehuti-scribe ( talk) 03:23, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
MrOllie,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (
talk)
00:43, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Abishe ( talk) 00:43, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
MrOllie,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
—
Moops ⋠
T⋡
01:53, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
— Moops ⋠ T⋡ 01:53, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
HI, I was trying to update an article, Graduate Management Admission Test, and got a a message back saying "Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia." However, if you look at two links currently used as sources (citations 36 & 37) for best GMAT prep, one is the company itself (self promotion- Menlo) and the other is affiliate links. I was just trying to put out some honest student reviews that ranked GMAT companies.
Please advise id this is not possible- thank you & HNY!
Gradswm (
talk)
20:43, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
2603:3020:BB8:D000:EDDD:5E78:603D:6200 - LTA, Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Brad Watson, Miami Off-topic, FTN can be an unpleasant place to post. Doug Weller talk 16:29, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
A bit drastic but it's basically only Brad Watson, Miami who uses an IP address there. Doug Weller talk 12:00, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi I was wondering why you got rid of the "In popular culture" section for the article titled " Popular culture." After all, the article for " In popular culture" (a different article) has an "In popular culture" section, and the concept of "popular culture" is sometimes referenced in pop culture. Cookie The Amazing Cat ( talk) 00:53, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
Why you deleted the pics on the Scottish fold article? There aren’t reason dude Ansrea ( talk) 21:06, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
It’s not my cat by the way Ansrea ( talk) 21:18, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
The image was a clear, punctual example of the species Ansrea ( talk) 21:19, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
You’re making a mistake. This isn’t in the Wikipedia rules, it’s just uncorret Ansrea ( talk) 21:23, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Your decision is clearly subjective so that’s against the rules, it’s simple. WIKIPEDIA IS NOT A SUBJECTIVE SITE, YOU CANNOT DELETE SOMETHING ONLY FOR YOUR WILL OR PRESUNCTION Ansrea ( talk) 21:30, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
if I’ve violated the rules delete the image but without a reason you are making a mistake Ansrea ( talk) 21:31, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Why u deleted the clarification on the Italian passport’s page? Wtf you are deleting all my changes dude. I’m gonna to report u Ansrea ( talk) 21:09, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
I’ll definitely make a report Ansrea ( talk) 21:35, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Check the New Zeland Passport page. Bye Ansrea ( talk) 21:38, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
You still have not provided a valid reason for removing this one line entry from the Beer Festival page. You cite Advertising, but there is no advertising in this entry: "In Quito, Ecuador, a yearly beer festival called VIVA Cerveza! takes place. The first was in 2016. It is listed as the 3rd largest festival in South America."
Yet, that same page is LITTERED with advertising from international brands and corporations, yet, you do nothing of deleting those entries. Perhaps because they are from 1st world countries and these are large corporate brands? Do you have a prejudice?
You state the following violation: "Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion."
Again, my single line entry does no such thing. Vivacerveza ( talk) 02:23, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
"A driver safety program called the Driver Example Program was developed in 1964 by Chris Imhoff of the (US) National Safety Council." this is a promotion / primary source (reference 3) and on top of this, this Wikipedia page/article is linking to a page that no longer exists, it links to a page not found.
Alonso-gomez-avila ( talk) 21:24, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
Rather than just saying predatory journal and remove two other journals which have nothing to do with "predatory" as you say discuss that edit before you do that, also don't just revert an entire edit without thinking of the other citations which have nothing to do with that source which you do not like. Therefore, i will revert your edit, but will replace that predatory journal as you say. CtasACT ( talk) 20:16, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wizardman's talk page regarding an abuse of editing powers by user MrOllie. The thread is entitled Calling MrOllie to your attention regarding an ANI. Thank you. GabeTucker ( talk) 03:59, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi MrOllie assuming Astor's reference is okay will I encourage Ireland to do something of a similar quality? He told me it would be months before he can get a paper out on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Todd Unctious ( talk • contribs) 02:12, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Can you add this image, please? It is a newer, better one, with self-explanation (legend). I cannot edit visually anymore both articles. https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialeto_mineiro#/media/Ficheiro:Isoglossas_no_estado_de_Minas_Gerais._EALMG,_UFJF,_1977.png Gondolabúrguer ( talk) 22:08, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
That editor is definitely the same person as the IP. — SirDot ( talk) 14:46, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Do not revert a user attempting to discuss something with me on my talk page. There was no valid reason to do so. Hey man im josh ( talk) 00:26, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
I see that you have removed the "Examples of Danbooru-style imageboards" table under "WP:NOT" which creates more confusion than clarification, even considering you may have ment "WP:LINKFARM"
In this case I see fit that there should be a "Comparison of Imageboards" or "Comparison of Imageboard Software" do you think I should start drafting for such page or is it not Wikiworthy? Emircex ( talk) 14:27, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
Hello MrOllie, hope you're doing well. Reaching out to you regarding M. F. Husain's page. Firstly, I'd like to thank you for keeping an eye on the page and reverting the vandalism attempts in the recent past. Currently, it looks like the user Veersanatani (not tagging for obvious reasons) is determine to spoil the page, starting right form the name. When I reverted their edits, the user has added their hateful comments on my user page itself, instead of politely asking on my talk page. Just look at the stupidity. Hopefully some due action can be taken in this regard, because they only seem to target Husain's page in particular.
Also, I suggest adding some sort of protection to the page in order to prevent cases like these. It's really sad to see that Husain's incredible artistic career is overshadowed by his controversies, which is also the only thing mentioned on his Wiki page. I'll update the page in due course of time and make it more comprehensive, limiting the controversy part to how much is actually required. However, please do think about adding protection in the meantime. Otherwise, believe me, vandalism cases like these will keep happening from editors in India. The man is dead for years now, maybe we should let him rest in peace, quite literally. DesiBoy101 ( talk) 12:46, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
I'm curious about your reverting my edit to Mathematics of Sudoku. Please discuss. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PatmaxDaddy ( talk • contribs) 18:07, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Hello, hope you're doing great. This message is with reference to the edits you reverted in List of Muslim military leaders. As far as I can extrapolate, you have some problem regarding the grammatical syntax/linguistics, because questioning well-sourced facts is too trivial and irrational for a reputed Wikipedia member like you. Consequently, I would request you to mention those mistakes I committed in my edit, which engendered a revert, so that I can add the additional facts and, simultaneously adhere to the Wikipedia regulations. -- Snapthirsty110 ( talk) 13:31, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
I'm really sorry that I was added link directly without proper formatting. But, based on my knowledge the page is more relavant and helpful to the users. So, I request you to check it again and help me to add that article in external links. Please note, here my intention is not to add links into wiki. I want to share the best knowledge. Aditya3181 ( talk) 13:04, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
It's the content added value to learn more about artificial intelligence Tejasuvv ( talk) 05:59, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
This user, Special:Contributions/136.57.191.25, just told me to stop making pointless edit summaries. My edits are not pointless. So could you please tell him to stop sending me messages about that? AdamDeanHall ( talk) 14:13, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
re: this. I love living rent free in the heads of trolls and ne'er-do-wells. Clearly I'm so humiliated. PRAXIDICAE🌈 15:01, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
You keep deleting my revision on this article. But the text is a rephrase of the text obtain from the recent edition of the RecSys handbook: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-0716-2197-4_1
here is the original text:
" Recommender systems (RSs) are software tools and techniques that provide suggestions for items that are most likely of interest to a particular user. The suggestions usually relate to various decision-making processes, such as what items to buy, what music to listen to, or what online news to read. “Item” is the general term used to denote what the system recommends to users. An RS normally focuses on a specific type of item (e.g., movies or news articles) and accordingly, its design, its graphical user interface, and the core recommendation technique used to generate the recommendations are all customized to provide useful and effective suggestions for that specific type of item. RSs are primarily directed at individuals who lack sufficient personal experience or competence to evaluate the potentially overwhelming number of items that a website may offer. " 84.229.167.218 ( talk) 21:47, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi MrOllie. I saw a note from you on my page:
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 21:13, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
But I did include a summary.
Panorama is about products and services, so it doesn't need its own header. The documentary talks about TerraCycle for all of five minutes, then moves on to the greenwashing conversation about plastic-producing companies "not doing enough." 81.187.88.97 edits remain slanted, rife with conflict, and bizarre and at best a misleading promotion of the "documentary."
The "dispute" on the page surrounds IP editor 81.187.88.97, who asserts ownership of the page, and has been IP banned from the page before, which limits the editability to experienced users. That IP editor markets the Panorama documentary, as much as possible. It is undue weight.
At a minimum, the headers don't logically follow, and a "criticism" header isn't warranted where there is a clear 2019, 2021, and 2022 chronology.
I'm asking you to undo your reversion of my edit. 47.198.242.207 ( talk) 21:21, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I have added info that was conducted in a study. Embrace You Health is like Healthline, and a study is in the process if being published. The current pcos articke provided little information on supplements for pcos and does not list all the info on the low GI diet. I realize you feel that the link is spammy, and I may have to contact Wikipedia, to get more info.
Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juliesmith45458 ( talk • contribs) 13:10, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
I noticed they had some medical studies and others have linked to them.
Did you create this article on PCOS? To help you, I can go through and remove some of the links that are not directly linking to verified medical sources. It might help. I will also contact Wikipedia and get clarification on citing. Thank you Juliesmith45458 ( talk) 13:54, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi MrOllie, I'd like to ask for your help to revert vandalism edits by Mlayu on several articles, namely:
Currently I do not have the privilege of reverting multiple edits at once.
It seems that the user has deliberately make factual errors and omit info pertaining Malaysia to promote Indonesian nationalistic bias.
Thank you in advance for your help. Azuru79 ( talk) 07:01, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
Please do not revert factual information without good cause as you did at the page for Abortion. It’s an indisputable fact that the fetus dies during the abortion and it’s an indisputable fact that it would not make sense for someone to claim they successfully conducted over 1300 illegal abortions without a single fatality, unless you clarify that the fatality count does not include the aborted fetus. None of this is a political position. It’s just a fact. I made no effort to state whether or not I think that such a thing as good. Only to state what occurs. It’s important that Wikipedia be factual and so I would ask you not to revert productive edits in a manner that only suppresses the truth.
Thank you Annfrankenstein ( talk) 12:45, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
No. Not true. Whether a fetus dies during an abortion or whether an abortion involves at least one death (the fetus) is not a political position. Whether this is okay, good, bad, or whether it should be legal is a political position. Please don’t falsely accuse people of pushing political opinions when it’s obvious they aren’t. Such a thing can be considered a personal attack. Annfrankenstein ( talk) 15:50, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
Why have you erased Mustafa Khanbhai's linkage of the article on Vallathol to an internet page on Kathakali which explains what he did to preserve and promote that art form? NRPanikker ( talk) 11:58, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Pardon me, but who are you? Are you a Singaporean? And do you know I state my reasons while editing? Manwë986 ( talk) 16:28, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
I do not see any agreement of using this present revision in the article tale page. And the only ones engaged discussion about Singapore are the Singaporean Wikipedians, and there are also administrators among them. And besides the infoboxes of articles about countries don't have any minor languages. Please check the articles like United States, China, or France if they have minor languages section within infoboxes.-- Manwë986 ( talk) 16:45, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
What on earth are you talking about? Who are these multiple other editors? And are you an administrator? -- Manwë986 ( talk) 16:52, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, but the one made the edit did not even get permission to do so, the one who reverted me do not know the full details. And as you, I can only say that I am following the Wikipedia guidelines. The articles about countries don't have minor languages in infoboxes, please feel free to check. And if you're not an admin, then I'm done my talk with you, but you should be discussing with the Singaporean Wikipedian administrators about this, not me. And until the administrators of Singaporean Wikipedians made their decision, the article shall be reverted to the original version as the other articles about countries per Wikipedia guidelines. -- Manwë986 ( talk) 17:18, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
It is not my permission. And the administrators of Singaporean Wikipedians know information about Singapore more than you do. And the one who made the edit do not even discussed in the talk page.-- Manwë986 ( talk) 17:27, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Stop accusing me of "reverting on spurious grounds". I ask you one last time, are you an administrator or not?-- Manwë986 ( talk) 17:32, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
I'm done here. So stop accusing me of "keep reverting on spurious grounds like this".-- Manwë986 ( talk) 17:55, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
It's not about nationality, it's based on the infobox rules.-- Manwë986 ( talk) 18:04, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
the articles about Singapore were handled by us Singaporean Wikipedians.and 2) If there is some 'infobox rule' that was violated, it is up to you to link to the rule, and to explain what the violation was, on the article talk page. - MrOllie ( talk) 18:16, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Fine then.-- Manwë986 ( talk) 19:08, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at International Science Olympiad shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Iterresise ( talk) 11:23, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
Why are you reverting adding Roblox Studio to the application of CSG? You justify the revert by mentioning that it is not sourced, while usage of CSG in Quake, Unreal and other engines mentioned are not referenced either. This argument lacks coherence, even though it's excessively easy to find sources that it is a core philosophy for Roblox (on the developer's documentation and create documentation on Roblox's parts, although roblox.com's domain is blocked from wiki) with parts being "Roblox's primary building block". You also mention Roblox is not a major engine. Roblox studio is by far a more important engine today than Quake Engine (15 games), Torque (Last stable release 5 years ago) and Hammer (proprietary engine, 50 games) in number of games developped with it, activity and users (over 40 million games/experiences as of Q2 2022 and 9.5 million developpers using Roblox Studio as of Q1 2022). Beammyup ( talk) 16:31, 13 July 2022 (UTC)Beammyup
I argued the reasons you gave in the edit above because I am under the impression they are incoherent and biased by your personal opinions (which is what I explain above). Your additionnal argument that Roblox is not important to the industry as a whole is also a personal opinion and not factual. That there are "vocal fans devoted to mentioning it everywhere" doesn't change that CSG is as relevant in application, if not more, to Roblox Studio than the other engines mentioned. That you may be annoyed some people are trying to mention Roblox everywhere doesn't justify a biased reaction when it is actually relevant to mention the engine. Whether you like Roblox Studio personnally doesn't change the fact that it's one of the most used engines in the world and that it's producing research published in top-tier graphics conferences. It is industry-impactful at least currently, and historically would depend on one's definition. Arguing on your talk page won't accomplish getting the change accepted, but I do hope for more coherence and less personal opinions in your justifications. Beammyup ( talk) 18:14, 13 July 2022 (UTC)Beammyup
Hi editor, I have modified a paragraph to improve the accuracy of representing the academic sources, like this:
In the history of psychiatry, religious experience was considered as delusional, but it is a challenge for modern psychiatry to differentiate nonpsychopathological religious/spiritual/transpersonal experiences from those that are caused by disorders.
If there is any problem with this edit, then discuss it. Lightest ( talk) 19:19, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
Can you please revert the OnePlus Wikipedia page to an earlier version, as it has been heavily vandalised now? I have no idea how to do that myself. 103.70.199.52 ( talk) 13:37, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
I am incredibly sorry if I have violated any guidelines of Wikipedia by any means. First, let me clarify that I am not associated with the website or its parent body. I work for the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals and got the reference for this organization from the United Nations Civil Society organizations' list. I follow the non-profit organizations working for SDGs and want to enhance the Wikipedia encyclopedia with relevant, trusted, authentic, original content. The external link that I have added to Fatehpur Sikri is pertinent and provides correct information about the direct descendants of Hazrat Salim Chisti, the 15th-century saint for whom Fatehpur Sikri is famous. There are some pages on Wikipedia which is filled with misleading information about the descendants of the saint and Fatehpur Sikri while not mentioning the real people who are also accredited by the Government of India, which I came to know while studying the pre-colonial history of the British colonies in my fellowship studies of the Rockefeller Foundation in the association of UNESCO. The Hazrat Salim Chisti Foundation lobbied with the UNESCO and United Nations to get the UNESCO world heritage site status of Fatehpur Sikri. I have witnessed many Wikipedia pages and references, which is a gross violation of all the Wikipedia guidelines, including primary referencing. However, they are still actively present in the encyclopedia. Still, in this case, my impartial and authentic contribution is discarded, which I'll bring to the notice of UNESCO and the organization I work for. If you see the referencing of any article from the point of view of promoting that website or organization from which the article is generated, in that case, more than 80% of Wikipedia pages violate the guidelines. Suppose this is the policy of Wikipedia in my case. In that case, I'll stop wasting my time from today onwards in contributing to this encyclopedia for which I used to fight with my professors in my college days when they discouraged all our classmates from citing Wikipedia articles as references. Please forgive me if I have hurt you personally in any way. I never intended to, but it feels terrible when the precious time you invested in a noble cause without any profit motive gets wasted. Victor4SDGs ( talk) 22:46, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
Ypolyakov ( talk) 20:26, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi editor,
Could you explain why you deleted many libraries that were on the Homomorphic Encryption page for years? These libraries have existed for many years and are well-known in the FHE community. I only added one library and can understand why this library may be too early to add. But others should stay there in my mind (they were added by other authors).
Ypolyakov ( talk) 20:26, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
Ypolyakov ( talk) 02:16, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
Similar to the comment below for PALISADE, I want to point out that I previously wrote a lot of text for the Homomorphic Encryption article not because of some virtual "paid" interest but because I am one of the leading researchers in Homomomorphic Encryption (again see Google Scholar and dblp). Your comments will discourage me from writing anything else on the fields where I am an expert.
Ypolyakov ( talk) 01:53, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
Dear MrOllie,
I find your comments very discouraging. As an active member of HomomorphicEncryption.org standardization initiative, a member of open-source community, and a researcher, I have been updating the Homomorphic Encryption article for several years. If you look carefully at my revisions for this article, you will notice I always used a neutral tone and often corrected statements that were too biased. I strongly believe that articles on technical topics should be written/reviewed by experts, otherwise they may be highly inaccurate and their quality can strongly suffer. This is how prior encyclopedias have often been written. In academia, there is a peer review process that controls the quality of papers, and biased comments can be removed. I found your sarcasm about "well-recognized researcher" very inappropriate for a respected Wikipedia editor (you can easily verify this statement) - I never saw such behavior in academic peer review process and was deeply surprised that such behavior is tolerated in the Wikipedia community. I also never saw such comments in the history of this article. If you believe a certain statement is biased, please correct/revise. But simply removing an entry about an open-source library that was developed by authors of three libraries that have Wikipedia pages based on the grounds that it is promoting a business seems groundless to me.
Ypolyakov ( talk) 02:16, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
Dear editor,
I feel that my contributions are not being treated fairly. For instance, if you look at the PALISADE article, you will see that it was not created by me, and you will see that my updates are primarily about updating the preview and stable versions of the library. I also added technical details on what versions include. Everything I wrote was written in the neutral way. Why is there a problem with updating the version number or writing text in a neutral way?
I want to point out that I am well-recognized researcher (18 years after getting my PhD) in this field. See, for example, https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=zuMwV7QAAAAJ or https://dblp.uni-trier.de/pid/172/1695.html (or just Google me). Any content I add, including more than 100 academic papers that I have authored over the years, is written in a neutral way, including the updates for the PALISADE library. I feel some discrimination in your remarks. It is not hard to see that any content I added today to this article or a different one was written in a neutral way. Ypolyakov}} I would like you to reconsider your remarks in view of what I wrote. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ypolyakov ( talk • contribs)
Ypolyakov ( talk) 01:53, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
I find your comment inappropriate for a Wikipedia editor. I also strongly believe that technical papers have to be written/edited by experts. For instance, if I add an article about a topic of ballet that I know nothing about, I should not be writing about it in Wikipedia. I should only write about things I know well about, which in this case, is homomorphic encryption. This article about an open-source library has existed for a long time and my updates were of purely informational nature (not biased or selling some business). I am a scientist, and my reputation is important for me - this is why I used the account that spells my name. Another expert can revise my edits through a regular peer review process of Wikipedia. I am really saddened by this experience, and discouraged from writing articles for Wikipedia in the future, regardless the topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ypolyakov ( talk • contribs)
Didn't know you have already sent a warning (How to Make Money Selling Drugs). Cheers Uricdivine ( talk) 11:45, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
Dear MrOllie, my contribution to Over-the-top media service article was reverted without any comment. Could you explain why you deleted it? what was wrong with this information? Iitsearcher ( talk) 07:30, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I'm VS6507. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Thought (disambiguation) have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Vs6 507 19:12, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
As someone who is a native English speaker and as I suppose interested in this field of science you appear to have a very low frustration tolerance. Vs6 507 19:34, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
I have asked someone about a potential major error of grammar, and they were not able to see it. Vs6 507 19:36, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
Why did you undo revision 1097729680? My intention was to contribute, not to vandalize or self-advertise. 186.137.76.153 ( talk) 15:13, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi! Why was the MLOPs page reverted as user 103.70.199.52 suggested? The included paper is very popular in the MLOps community on LinkedIn and has already gained multiple citations. It is a great overview and should be used there as it provides a solid definition of the term. As an MLOps expert, I would ask you to please look into that carefully. 185.124.144.98 ( talk) 13:21, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi! I would like to know if I could somehow edit Subjective Datasets table, which was posted on Subjective video quality page, to level out any discrepancies with the Wikipedia formatting rules (overlong list of external links). May be I should reduce it or just add additional columns such as «Databases official websites» (like it was presented here)? And thanks for your work on improving the quality of Wikipedia articles. Supremum of tilt ( talk) 13:33, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I have written an article/blog on react native security practices which I have posted on my official website. That blog is performing really well on Google SERP. Now I thought to publish the same article on wikipedia so that it can provide more value to the reader and can be helpful for the reader community. I have tried multiple times but everytime I got the massage that my article is voilating the copyright policy. I am not able to understand why this is happening. That is my own article which I have written which I am trying to write here again. Can you please look into this matter can help me out.
It would be great if I get a help in the matter.
Thanks is advance.
Mayank Mayank1695 ( talk) 12:23, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
My edit was a simple extension of the current content - there was nothing wrong with it. So why was it rejected? KeepOnHiking ( talk) 14:27, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for opening that. I figured one of us was going to have to do it eventually. User indef'ed before I even got to comment in the ANI. Meters ( talk) 19:45, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
I have added information about the European Association of Distance Teaching Universities in Distance education. Is a new article about it better? --Tiberio Feliz 00:02, 25 July 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tfeliz ( talk • contribs)
Many sites have links to books relating to the material. Such as Kevin Rusby for Libertalia, or 2021 novel entitled The Law of the Sea for the Flor de la Mar, I will limit where I reference this information so kindly stop deleting my posts or I will take this to an administrator. Mamabear1331 ( talk) 15:01, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
The current [[Emplifi]] page is almost completely unsourced promotion and tags. I disclosed a COI and proposed [[[Emplifi]] /info/en/?search=User:JordanJulian19/draft a replacement] that is just a few paragraphs long and summarizes all the biggest press articles about the company. I was hoping you might be willing to review the draft as an impartial editor with no affiliation to verify whether the overhaul would be an improvement for Wikipedia and its readers. Best regards. <span data-dtsignatureforswitching="1"></span> JordanJulian19 ( talk) 13:54, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
Lingvanex is one of the players in the translation market. I wrote an article about it. /info/en/?search=Draft:Lingvanex_Translator. Why this information "not notable"? Why does the comparison not include all players? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SergKrasius ( talk • contribs) 14:46, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
Many thanks for the role that you play. I'm writing because I'm wondering why the design thinking lead was simply reverted rather than edited? I can see the dangers of overcitation and self-citation and fixing that seems admirable. I'm really happy for us to remove the citation to my own work and perhaps reduce the references.
I just want to draw your attention to the fact that the edits on the lead have a history. I found the lead on the page to be misleading and so I started a conversation about this with Nigel Cross which is on the Talk page of Design Thinking and we went back and forth to find something that works.
I'm all for others (such as yourself) improving on that by removing self-cites and reducing citations but shouldn't there be some kind of discussion around the lead? I found the act of simply reverting to be a bit reductive and against my understanding of how wikipedia functions. I ask that not to try and say how things should be but from a position of naivety as I'm new to this whole editing thing--I'm asking for you to please explain to me why that was the action taken and how I ought to have incrementally worked with others to improve the lead on this article (which is what I thought I was doing over a duration of nearly a year). Alternatively, if the answer is that this is a closed page that can't be edited then I'm happy for that to be the answer. Many thanks. NickKellyResearch ( talk) 03:13, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello Mr. Ollie, I see you recently rolled back some recent problematic but (I think) good faith edits in the article Dream from a user with 19 edits total. The user in question is continuing to make edits on the page, and I'm not entirely sure how to address the situation. They are trying to cite their claims, but not everything is cited, and the edits are also breaking the formatting of the page. Is another rollback the answer? The chances are they will continue to try to edit the page, and I'm unsure of how to proceed from here. Thanks! Johnson524 ( Talk!) 19:21, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi MrOllie. I made some edits to Marsha Stern Talmudical Academy yesterday which I see you reverted. I'm new to Wikipedia, and I didn't realize that external links should not be inline. I put the links (which are reliable - they're the high school's website, where archives of The Polis are stored, and a web databse of Yeshiva University, where archives of Shema Koleinu are stored. I also redid a couple of grammar corrections I assume you had no issue with, like changing "Art work" to "artwork." Please let me know if there's still a problem - I'd appreciate if you replied before reverting my edits, if you still feel a need to do so for any reason. Thanks! BullMoose4 ( talk) 15:24, 18 August 2022 (UTC) hi mrollie, it is i, overjoyed scooby. It appears that you have ondone my changes. who do you think you are. you are most definitley a short man.have a good day, not so overjoyed scooby
Dear Mr. Ollie - I appreciate the sensitivity on conflicts. I was involved in developing biotechnology legislative recommendations when in the Federal government during the Clinton Administration, and was interested in reforming the way it way regulated. These references I've suggested relate to that. I have never worked in or for that sector and have offered this addition so that the history will be remembered. I am going to leave this where it is for now and perhaps you might help me to reinstate the reference. Pelucidity ( talk) 12:42, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi, MrOllie. Thanks for your feedback on the edit to the Demographics of the Philippines page. As I tried to summarise, the content I deleted was quite clearly unjustified (no sources or weak/biased sources) and unrelated to the topic of the page (i.e. national demographics versus religious history or individual cases of behaviour by Catholic priests). This - and other - content on the referred page had already been deleted on 14 August, by another editor. I would also point out that other "Demographics of..." pages on Wikipedia do not usually contain this sort of content. I would appreciate your consideration. AqFla AqFla ( talk) 15:52, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Hey. I have added the required disclosements of affiliations to my profile. Is there a reason why my edits have not been added back? Qulizard ( talk) 07:57, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello Mr. Ollie,
I want to get in touch about the reversal of changes I have made on the microblading page. I understand that spam links are not allowed. However, the links I have provided to replace broken links are highly relevant, informative and educational. They are by no means commercial pages, in fact, they are from the most comprehensive platform related to the content. I ask you to review the links once again, as well as the content I had added to expand the page. The changes had been previously accepted by another moderator. Please note that reverting the changes means that multiple broken links are now listed as references once again, which is, you will agree, not helpful to the readers and makes this page less reliable.
~~~~Wewannagetlisted Wewannagetlisted ( talk) 08:13, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello Mr.Ollie,
Thanks for your edit and comment - I only added my own site to the External Links section (without a link to my homepage) because most of the links I checked there were not working, and my own pitch-class set calculator works. Not trying to blow my own horn or anything. If you would consider undoing your edit I would appreciate it, but if you keep it off I won't argue, I very rarely edit anything on Wikipedia more significant than minor grammatical errors. In fact I'm not even sure I'm doing this comment correctly! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Staylor71 ( talk • contribs) 23:26, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
I add only BSE official website link to Wikipedia because that is very important and related to NSE why you removed it Pavanpadghan ( talk) 01:07, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
Yes I understand but why Wikipedia add external link of NSE to it Pavanpadghan ( talk) 01:58, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
Mr. Ollie, why are you erasing the important language on the meaning of the term "independent"? I provided sources for my edit and yet you keep undoing it without justification. MrsBaker1 ( talk) 01:22, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
dear Mr. Ollie, can I ask you, why you deleted my contribution at electric fencee article? ewerything i descibed was based on an articles that contain true informations confirmed by users experiences. I thought it could be interesting to introduce people, that there are new possibilities of using electric fences. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Natálie Pecháčková ( talk • contribs) 13:37, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
Can you give a solid reason why the breakdown of the times/time CANNOT be on the page. It has been on there for several years and was a good source if information especially for people taking fitness test. USAF has been using this cart for members who are taking the new test to see if this test or the old run test would be better. To be quite frank, the only person who seems to have a problem with this being on here is you. The chart does have 2 sources so unsourced cannot be the reason. 144.51.249.5 ( talk) 18:55, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for reverting Jinnifer's sock edit's on my talk page. Magnatyrannus ( talk | contribs) 03:46, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Mr Ollie, why is it not acceptable to seperate animation studios and independent animators in the independent animation category? Why is that "damage"? MrsBaker1 ( talk) 20:32, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
YourAdventure ( talk) 13:28, 4 September 2022 (UTC) PRISM Break used to be a great website and resource for privacy software, but it's last minor update was over a year ago ( https://gitlab.com/prism-break/prism-break/-/commits/master) and many entries of the website are out-dated. The addition of PrivacyTools.io provides Wikipedia readers with an up-to-date recommendation list, that was last updated yesterday: https://forum.awesomealternatives.org/t/privacytools-changelog
Was the information I added deleted due to inaccuracy? I personally felt like Long Halloween was a somewhat important development in the relationship between Bruce Wayne and Poison Ivy or was it deleted from a purely technichal reason as I'm aware I damaged the article due to an inexperience with wikipedia editing. Sorry for any inconvenience I may have caused Ooneill2000 ( talk) 08:18, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
It is completely absurd to say Wikipedia doesn't have product images, especially ones of previous generation electronics to show visual comparison between the old, really old, and newer-ish ones to aid in visual recognition of specific models. Just look at the articles for Apple Inc (which has many pictures showing the older AND newer stuff to help readers recognize the older models, and Nokia (which has loads of photos of the newer stuff as well as the older stuff). I don't see how the gallery could be perceived as an advertisement considering 1. Most people aren't eligible for cochlear implants (but are likely to see them at some point and be like "what the heck is THAT? I should look it up on wikipedia") 2. All but one of the things in the gallery is discontinued (only the Neptune is still on the market, but having a picture of the funny-looking/unusual modern body-word processor will help people understand what the heck it is when they come to look it up); the other stuff in the gallery is just to help provide recognition of the devices that some people still wear/recognize what is what. The old 1990's ones are obsolute AF and go to show how cochlear tech has evolved; the harmony and early Naida models are still used by some people so readers of Wikipedia will be helped having pictures of them in a gallery. Would you feel better about it if the pictures aren't in a horizontal gallery per se, but were scattered in the article? Because you are being very strange here. I've NEVER seen a rule against having pictures of older and new-ish electronics for stuff like this.-- RespectCE ( talk) 13:58, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I was making a bunch of subsequent edits, and wanted to let you know, that I did not initially realize you reverted me until after I reverted that edit. Sorry about that, my mistake! Prcc27 ( talk) 16:00, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
This user:103.141.159.244 continuously removing official website at [ Pakistan Junior League] and adding his personal advertising website. The Orignal Website pjlt20.com was added by Wikipedia. This User is continuously Adding his personal website to misguide the User and wikipedia. Google is also showing Misleading Site notifications on his site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Faisalmunir987 ( talk • contribs) 09:26, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Note: The Site was added by Wikipedia itself during article creation, Now this user:103.141.159.244 is trying to take the advantage of having a similar domain. I request the Wikipedia Officials to check both websites ages.
Dear MrOllie, I hope you are having a great time. Please inform this user ( Vegansolo) about Wikipedia rules. It tries to add self-citation. Thank you. Scholartop ( talk) 09:54, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Please check this user as well ( Hydrolox) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scholartop ( talk • contribs) 16:12, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
Hi @ MrOllie,
I have seen your notes about paid contribution terms on the talk page of my marketing colleagues. It is not clear to me: is it allowed for me to update the page of the company I work for, when it is not part of my job to promote my company (therefore I would not say I am paid for my edits)?
-- Torzsmokus ( talk) 08:00, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
Those claims on block evasion for North Macedonia-NATO Relations page are false, that was someone else who was undoing those edits, not me. Please stop with the false accusations when I have a static IP, not a dynamic one. Don't believe me, then use an IP locator to find out. Creepershark77 ( talk) 20:17, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
Hello @ MrOllie,
I appreciate your work to maintain the Humanoid robot page. As a quality 3rd party author, I hope you might be interested in helping to create a page for Agility Robotics. I work for Agility and as such don't think I can be an impartial author. I believe Agility has enough notoriety to warrant a page and I can help share articles written by 3rd party media that would reinforce that. No harm if you aren't interested, it just seemed like you might have some experience in the humanoid robotics space. Thanks for considering. Keganator ( talk) 01:05, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Hello @ MrOllie Thank you for your efforts in maintaining the knowledge in so many fields of science. Recently, two additions that I have made to "Ageing" and "DNA damage theory of ageing" were deleted. Perhaps I should have suggest the edit with the: {{request edit}} template.
A new paper that me and my colleagues wrote is considered to be important to its contributions to the science of aging, not only by the authors, it was also acknowledged by top scietific journal "Nature Metabolism" and by independent important scientist that studies aging for long time. <<cut and paste removed>> — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orrl ( talk • contribs)
The Purple Barnstar | ||
This subject line qualifies as "undue hardship" in my book, so it entitles you to this. JoJo Anthrax ( talk) 18:45, 20 September 2022 (UTC) |
Hi Ollie, Hope you are good! Why are you against the quotation here ? I am not a troll buddy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andreabrugiony ( talk • contribs)
Dear Mr.Ollie,
The controversial development plans edit I made on the Auroville wikipedia page were cited with resources that included court verdicts and legal documents, FIRs, including requesting newcomers to speak to community members to form their own opinions.
I resonate wholeheartedly with your view to maintain neutrality but Auroville is being taken over by the might of a government. If you could please send me at least what I had managed to write, I'd be happy to try to rephrase it and would be grateful for your feedback on the same, but please understand that we don't have what "they" have. At all. Nowhere. They have thugs, millions of rupees lining the pockets of I don't even know how many higher ups, and we have a computer.
In gratitude
`````canwetalkaboutwhatsgoingon Canwetalkaboutwhatsgoingon ( talk) 01:49, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
IDK why I'm here but looks like my edit was removed for external links, its ok if you remove the links but I don't understand who and why would someone remove the information. The page I tried to edit was not not even 10% complete. I'm new so... Harikumarthapamagar ( talk) 12:42, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
Dear Mr. Ollie. Sorry if I have to edit the article on Wikipedia. I always contribute to making articles on Wikipedia. on the condition, why I am editing the article because I have created an article for my website with research and using a lot of my time, I think if my article is good, can be accountable, like no campaign, and I don't get money from the article, I think I can get the link from Wikipedia. I need to get the link for my website to make people thrust when reading my article on the website. I make sure the link I enter is related to the context.
I have 2 times edit the article, but I'm having trouble editing it. So, if I can edit again and get the link. I will say thanks to you. But if Wikipedia can't give the link to my website. I am disappointed.
Thanks for inviting me to the discussion.
best regards, Gtech insight team Egi sahril sam ( talk) 06:01, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I’ve started a dispute page where we can hopefully resolve this quickly.
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Accountability_software Keithgreenfan ( talk) 01:34, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
Evolutionary algorithm: I added three citations for the sentence "seemingly simple EA can solve often complex problems" replacing the remartk "citation needed" and improved some existing references by DOIs and the like in the section "Bibliography". You removed that completely. Why? What is wrong with that?
--~~~~ Wilfried Jakob ( talk) 12:50, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
First off, I want to thank you for the sharp eye you use to keep link spam off the Enterprise Architecture page. I was going through yesterday and removing a bit of self promotion (by one of my esteemed colleagues in the EA field) and reviewed a series of edits and reverts you had made. I agree with almost every one. I did have a question about one, though, and wanted to ask you about it.
On July 29, 2021, In the article on Enterprise Architecture, you removed a section that had been added to the page that contained a list of Enterprise Architecture tools. The list cited analyst reports from Forrester and Gartner, two independent analyst firms who, on an annual basis, each put out lists of the major software vendors for hundreds of different needs. Analyst firms are commercial firms, as are most sources (like newspapers or magazines), but they are paid by their readers to refresh their articles every year with new information. Typically these "reports" are used to both describe different software products and to rank them (Gartner coined the term "magic quadrant" as a way of ranking the companies they review). While they are far from perfect, the reports are written from a neutral point of view and are often quite useful for the people and companies involved in purchasing software. They have their own guidelines for notability of software packages, and have extremely tight editorial control.
The edit in question is linked here: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Enterprise_architecture&oldid=1036075579
I searched and could not find a mention of the use of computing analyst reports, either for or against their use as a reliable source. Personally, I think they are more reliable, more carefully edited, and more tightly controlled than magazine articles in ZDNet or Computerworld (both of whom are listed in Wikipedia as reliable sources for technology).
I did not restore your edit for two reasons. 1) I am not a full time Wikipedia editor and do not have the experience that you bring. 2) I think having a list of tools in that article is a bad idea all around. It distracts from the topic and invites link spam.
I wanted to ask you with respect to edits in general: "Do you believe that analyst reports from firms such as Gartner, Forrester, IDC, and the Cutter Consortium to be unreliable sources?"
I believe that the meet all the criteria for reliability but I'd like to know your opinion. Nickmalik ( talk) 15:57, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
This user:Faisalmunir987 continuously removing [3] official website at Pakistan Junior League and adding personal advertising website
This user use account only for advertising on wikipedia and already received multiple warnings. 103.141.159.244 ( talk)
Sir who said to you this meaningless thought Oscar doesn't belong to cult film, please search. These movies are already considering as modern cult movies and but you're denying the fact for the viewers. I already gave links to even you can search yourself what's cult movies and why these are considering Shahriar776 ( talk) 16:54, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
I cited my claims. I would like you to tell me how I am not being impartial. You need to explain yourself because its my time you are wasting when you decide to take down my contributions. Thomas Sowell isn't a conservative, by the way. You wouldn't know that because you have a particular bias. Classical Liberalism almost unanimously objects to CRT, so why did you remove those impartial facts. It's like you want only one side to be heard. AndrushkaA ( talk) 16:43, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
How is the information below as it pertains to ACADEMIC CRITICISM biased?
Academic criticism
Despite what popular themes may suggest, criticisms of CRT is not something unique to the Right, but both sides of the political spectrum. Classical Liberals, such as John McWhorter, James Lindsay, Helen Pluckrose, Steven Pinker, Jonathan Haidt, Stephen Hicks, Thomas Sowell, Christina Hoff Sommers, have all criticized CRT for its very strong illiberal overtones. In The Coddling of the American Mind, renowned sociologist Jonathan Haidt and former president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education Greg Lukianoff, argues that CRT promotes a “common enemy” mindset that replaces the long-standing liberal tradition in education that we share a “common humanity.” He further emphasizes the dangers of focusing on impact over intent. Mathematician, cultural critic and father of the Grievance studies affair, James Lindsay sums up CRT in a few points saying, "First, critical race Theory is centrally concerned with power, which it holds in higher regard than truth. Second, it distinguishes itself from “traditional” civil rights and instead favors identity politics (in the radical sense). Third, it is not interested in progress but revolution. Fourth, it calls into question “the very foundations of the liberal order, including equality theory, legal reasoning, Enlightenment rationalism, and neutral principles of constitutional law.” Fifth, it is anti-Western and, in the narrower context in which it arose and mostly applies, anti-American". AndrushkaA ( talk) 16:54, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for your review on my changes. I understand the fact that having broken links/pages is not great but it is not the only existing entry that has that problem (see Joram). Even so, in my edit there was another entry (Jahia) that does exist, could we just restore that one ? I can take care of it if you agree. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhillou ( talk • contribs) 15:42, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
I appreciate your concern for the edits I made on the infodemic, infodemiology, and misinformation pages, however, I don't think your reversions of my edits are in the best interest of these pages. I’d like to work with you to enhance Wikipedia to recognize the new science of Cognitive Immunology. Could you please further explain the why you reverted the edits I made to these pages?
First, there are a few specific points I'd like to address though.
- My addition of inoculation theory on misinformation seems quite valid considering the already existing mention of inoculating minds (i.e. "Another approach is to "inoculate" against it by delivering weakened misinformation that warns of the dangers of the misinformation.") Similarly, the addition of the sentence about Cognitive Immunology seemed quite warranted as the topic related directly to prevention of the spread of misinformation and I included a reputable source (the foundation book) on the topic.
- You marked my addition of information about Cognitive Immunology to infodemic as a neologism, which seems pretty ironic given that "infodemic" is itself a neologism. There's nothing inherently wrong about neologisms, especially when they are used to refer to something that is truly a new development, which is true in the case of infodemic and Cognitive Immunology and is supported by the sources I included about Cognitive Immunology.
- Finally, in the case of my edits on infodemiology, I improved the introductory sentence on the topic by providing a more accurate definition of the field as described by the academic who coined the term. And, again, my addition of the mention of cognitive immunology seems quite reasonable given the obvious relation between these two fields.
I'm new to contributing to Wikipedia but I did my best to read up on the rules of the platform and I thought my edits to these pages were all quite fair and I'm not convinced your complete reversion of each of them was fair and would appreciate further explanations. Meletao ( talk) 23:30, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
I saw where you reverted my edit to Kmart, saying that we need to wait for a source. The source is literally in the article. This is the source. GamerKiller2347 ( talk) 22:49, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi @ MrOllie, I see you've got OmniVision Technologies on your radar. The company has going through a reorganization and the current page is no longer accurate, however as I am an employee of its marketing agency, I'm not allowed to make any edits to the page. So I put a request on the OmniVision Technologies "Talk" page, with the required disclosure statement. There are a lot of changes and additions, and I included citations. I realize you may not make all of them. But the main issue is that the company is now OMNIVISION. Someone did up date the logo, but that's all so far. I think a new pages has to be created? Please let me know if this is something you can do, and what changes can be made. I appreciate your input. Thank you! StellaBean ( talk) 20:50, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
Hey there. Not that I have any problem with the reversion, but if you're going to remove this as an unreliable source from KMart, you'd better also remove it from Sears on the same basis. I think it's been in use there for a while now. All the best, Skybunny ( talk) 00:14, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
I came to leave you a message and I guess you are choosing to be anonymous since you have redirected your User Page as a Talk Page which is your right.
:::::When appropriate,
protection levels are automatically sensed, described and categorized.
See the next note
Bbachrac (
talk)
00:23, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
@ User:MrOllie Per your request, I am sending this note here.
Medicine is a Science, the Practice of Medicine is an Art which is why Complementary and Integrative Health has been adopted by Medicine.
Thanks for your perspectives.
Bbachrac (
talk)
00:42, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
The Caribbean is a region of the Americas that consists of the Caribbean Sea, its islands and the surrounding coasts. The region is southeast of the Gulf of Mexico and the North American mainland, east of Central America, and north of South America. Enlightened105747 ( talk) 19:14, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
Not an offense, I see that you reverted my edit on some articles. Can you explain please? -- 2601:205:C001:EA0:35D7:C35:ECF9:D53 ( talk) 00:14, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
First off, I do not understand why my edits I just made were so terrible. I was just moving the accusations to one section vs. muddying up the whole story of Simufilam. People aren't responding on the talk page. I think both cassava and simufilam should be reworked to have the story told without all the accusations, then we use the accusations in their own section. Right now they both have very repetitive language throughout of all the accusations that becomes the story. It is a drug and a company that has followed research protocols and has a phase 3 trial executing right now. Short sellers of the stock that benifit from the decline in the stock caused all of these accusations. How do you suggest I got about getting these pages reformatted so they tell the story of the drug and the company? Until it is fairly moderated and the content is balanced it represents a FALSE narrative on the page and you will just keep getting people coming to try to fix it. Mnachtrab ( talk) 00:56, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
The requested edits backlog is very high. Please be extremely patient.- you proceeded to wait a day, and then you whitewashed the article. Your inability to understand why this is a problem is exactly why we discourage people with conflicts of interest from editing. You will find that Wikipedia editors do no care a whit about what the stock market is doing. If we
just keep getting people coming to try to fix it., we will run sockpuppet checks on the new editors, and probably protect the article from editing if we continue to have problems with attempted whitewashing. I suggest you do not try to get the pages "reformatted" - trying to move all criticisms into a separate section to hide them below the fold is a common tactic of POV pushers, common enough that we have statements in our guidelines and policies that prevent it. This will be my only comment on this on my talk page. MrOllie ( talk) 01:05, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
there is another browser on the page without a wiki article on the browser (JioBrowser, which links to Jio's list of apps), and several without a link at all. i think vanadium is the same as JioBrowser, as vanadium is in GrapheneOS' list of apps. thank you Omilc ( talk) 02:20, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I see you reverted/deleted a section that I added to AI, artificial intelligence? I'm simply adding in some sales functionality related to AI. It's a valid function of AI and is being used in the industry by multiple CRM companies. Browardauthor ( talk) 15:22, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is τλ:δρ. Thank you. User:Shirt58 ( talk) 🦘 00:49, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello,
I am a home care expert without a commercial interest, and I decided to make some edits to the page. In my initial round of edits, I cited sources and added references to make robust changes that were supported by government and established industry organizations. Those edits were removed due to "irrelevant" external links, which would be factually incorrect. Because the original version was restored for that reason, I went back through and added my edits without the links and those edits were removed because the information I added wasn't supported by references or links, so quite frankly, I'm at a loss for words. I'm simply trying to help families make an informed decision and can't win whether you spit facts (with resources) or not.
Please advise,
thanks! JenniferLagemann ( talk) 02:28, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
I added the wage information back with a citation, is that appropriate? JenniferLagemann ( talk) 02:50, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
Okay, and wanted to clarify for my own account safety that I am in no way affiliated with any of those businesses. I am trying to help families make an informed decision when trying to find home care for a loved one. Thanks! JenniferLagemann ( talk) 02:53, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I see you reverted/deleted an edit to biographical page on Saurabh Bagchi. This had mention of cybersecurity of critical infrastructures and referred to a third-party source from a reputed publication that covers government and cybersecurity regulation.
https://www.govinfosecurity.com/should-public-utilities-get-paid-to-secure-power-grid-a-20216
Can I request you to allow this addition?
Techphile ( talk) 02:48, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
Articles that represent scientific work done by a person is valid for a person's Wikipedia entry. I am going to put that material back there.
There are many single purpose editors on Wikipedia. So I hope that is not reason enough to reject my objective edits. Techphile ( talk) 23:57, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for your work, MrOllie. Bishonen | tålk 14:53, 18 October 2022 (UTC).
Thanks again for your input MrOllie. Question: I have occasionally seen questions about page text inserted directly onto the page, usually parenthetically, by editors, usually only one question. Is there a WP rule that can be articulated about that, for future reference? I realize that my questions re: the WSJ quote are probably too numerous to place in a parenthetical expression. Thanks again, 2600:4040:780C:6F00:F8F7:CC7A:42BD:19B2 ( talk) 12:39, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi MrOllie. Please don't just revert good-faith comments on Talk pages like this one: [4] New editors often put comments in the wrong place. It's best to move the comment instead of reverting it. Take care, Clayoquot ( talk | contribs) 16:06, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello. As I see you are reverting all my edits for no reason. I ask you an explain of why you are reverting my edits (Including already acceped ones) because this is
1. Annoyng.
1.1 You're not giving reason 2.2 You don't have why do this
2. Unnecesary
2.1 I'm not vandalizing anything 2.2 Those where ALREADY ACCEPTED edits
Thank you. 190.114.36.177 ( talk) 21:15, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Michael.C.Wright ( Talk/ Edits) 16:12, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
Greetings! I was surprised to see that you had deleted the mention of enema as a weapon. The fact has a serious proof, the patent of US Patents Bureau. Meanwhile, nobody is ashamed of keeping info about it's usage for BDSM, punishment and drug intoxication, but it's usage for self defence was labeled as undue. I supppose that the fact deserves a mention. ForTheHellOfIt ( talk) 16:26, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
YouTube is a completely valid source for Wikipedia, in my opinion. 117.215.48.119 ( talk) 13:46, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
This is an attempt to address perceived disruptive editing of the biography for Martin Kulldorff.
WP:BLP states the following:
All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be supported by an inline citation to a reliable, published source. Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—must be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion. Users who persistently or egregiously violate this policy may be blocked from editing.
WP:RSP states the following:
Context matters tremendously, and some sources may or may not be suitable for certain uses depending on the situation.
Even when a source such as WP:SBM is considered generally reliable, that does not mean it is considered universally or unquestionably reliable.
As stated in Kulldorff's talk page, the statement you reinserted "In reality, influenza had been responsible for one child death in that two year period..." is factually inaccurate according to the source provided by the SBM article. A two year period would include two influenza seasons (2019-2020 and 2020-2021). During those two periods, there were 200 total deaths. Therefore the statement is factually inaccurate. The only influenza season with only 1 child death was 2020-2021, which is not two years, according to how the CDC tracks influenza seasons. [5]
The overall paragraph is in contention by other editors, not just myself. Therefore it is better to hash this out in talk without disruptively editing a living person's biography.
I hope we can come to a consensus in the appropriate talk page. See you there.
Michael.C.Wright ( Talk/ Edits) 17:10, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
I hope we can come to a consensus in the appropriate talk page. See you there.
No matter how much I present the source, you will not accept it. You are obliged to explain each specific reason in detail. I want you to stop destroying baseless articles. You shouldn't be making your own decision here, and you should bring in multiple experts to discuss this.-- Neotesla ( talk) 00:40, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
There's something that I told you which you didn't answer. This is the CiNii Research's database of Japanese papers and literature [6]. Several magazine articles which written by me are also registered. Please answer whether the references from the articles registered in this database are valid. I added it as a reference in the Wikipedia article I mentioned. And it was also included which you removed.-- Neotesla ( talk) 23:55, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
I'm so tired of the incessant POV, OR and trivia on retail store/mall articles... thanks for your work on this. Meters ( talk) 20:23, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi iii, what's problem with my image, I am know religion educations. So don't touch my edits. I am have very many books. Okay? Andrewler ( talk) 04:06, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello MrOllie, regarding you qusetion in User talk:Yaniv unger, here is you can see a facebook profile of Yaniv Unger from Tel Aviv, work as SEO. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:ED0:530B:1500:CD90:DFF2:B11A:60B4 ( talk) 14:47, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi, perhaps you can help make this article better contextualized than I can, since I am a newbie at editing Wikipedia articles and you seem to have edited this one. Between Le Texier's "Debunking the Stanford Prison Experiment" and Rutger Bregman's chapter on it in "Humankind" I do not think the article should present it as an unequivocally legitimate experiment in the first few paragraphs as it currently does. I think it should say straight at the top that the very legitimacy of the experiment has been refuted. The "volunteer" guards were not volunteers and their treatment of the "prisoners" was directed from above. Even the famous plea of one of the prisoners to leave was staged. I fear the article as it is structured, even though it calls the experiment into question further down, helps perpetuate the narrative that it proved anything about human behavior, which it didn't. The BBC Prison study mentioned lower down was more realistic, and also deserves mention in the opening paragraph as a refutation of the manipulated results at Stanford. DrStevenJKlein ( talk) 09:32, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello Mr Mollie, may you please help me to Interlanguage link the English articles and isiZulu articles of the same title. I noticed you have removed all the local links I created, and thank you for correcting my error. But that hasn't resolved that the links to Zulu translation of the same article is missing. I don't wanna see this articles becoming orphan articles, because usually Zulu readers start with English articles and then check for their Zulu translation.
thank you Fongcwele ( talk) 11:20, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
My purpose in discussing the link between classical music and IQ is to establish a non-causal relation. I am satisfied that although smart and learned people are more likely to gravitate toward classical music, especially in chamber music with generic titles that say little about the music. Such qualities are not what IQ tests are intended to measure, like formal learning (more a connection to opportunity than to intelligence), taste (consider how awful many Top 40 tunes are -- really, this is undeniable for many of them), a taste for formalism and irony, and a tolerance for deferred gratification (so the climax of a fugue comes after ten or fifteen minutes instead of two. Even if those traits correlate with intelligence they do not define it.
Classical music fans are probably smarter than the average, but even classical music fans can recognize virtuosity and imagination in other formats. IQ has validity as a predictor of ability, but hardly of results in personal life, including cultural experiences. Classical music making one smarter than country or rap? Probably not? Jazz or folk? Both can hold many of the characteristics of classical music -- extended length, formality, irony, and exposure to a culture not one's own. The pianism of Oscar Peterson (jazz) and the repertory that Claudio Arrau played (entirely classical) would seem to have much the same effects upon a human mind.
You tell me -- do big businesses commonly inflict classical music upon employees so that those employees can make smarter and wiser decisions or have more mental flexibility on the job? Some might, but it would be insulting to those who despise classical music for whatever reasons. Multitudes hate classical music, and they are not reliably stupid. It might even be an undue distraction in a workplace.
Do I have a bias? Sure. I love classical music, including works with generic titles that give no hint of what to expect. But I also know that multitudes thoroughly hate it.
I wish to refine my position so that it can stick to the discussion page. Pbrower2a ( talk) 01:23, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
why are you changing my addition to the gun control, it clearly says in the graph that the US has the highest levels of gun ownership and gun deaths, also the comment about the good guy with gun is right above the graph where it shows that bystanders stopping active shooters are statistically insignificant, so neither is unsourced.
I'm just going to write it again and put references this time. Rabbo375 ( talk) 21:52, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
Please explain why did you remove today the addition to "Flash Fiction". This is an article written by Prof. David Fishelov Davidgute ( talk) 17:08, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
Ursid burglaries are real, and ursid burglars are generally as dangerous as human ones. These appear in the news in some areas (especially the Rocky Mountain West.
Bears are obviously not looking for gold jewelry to pawn for food; they are interested in the food itself. Technically the cartoon character "Yogi Bear" is a burglar and (as one can expect of talking critters in cartoons) highly anthropomorphic. They are clever; they are powerful. They can use their paws like hammers or crowbars as would human burglars. They are also extremely dangerous.
Due to extreme damage to property (broken windows and containers, destruction of vehicles, damage to sheds), bears are a legitimate concern for wildlife enforcement.
Oddly, dogs can also be burglars, although it is more technically going where they would never be welcome (like grocery stores). I have seen video of dogs going behind a butcher's display (if a customer did that without employee consent that would constitute burglary) to grab meat. Dogs of course are voracious eaters, and they can eat up a large amount of highly-valuable meat. Keeping dogs out is obviously easier than keeping bears out, and dogs pose much less danger than do bears.
Not all burglars are human. Pbrower2a ( talk) 01:39, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
Bears are typically relocated or destroyed for encounters with humans or for destruction of property, so in effect they are treated as criminals without human rights.
MrOllie - you have made a most unwelcoming experience for me as a first-time editor of Wikipedia. You indiscriminately removed my edits to an article for "promotional" content, even though some of the edits merely updated anchor links and citations. I updated the article again, this time linking to a third party authority affirming my contribution. You removed it again without explanation. You could have helped me in my obviously genuine attempt to improve the article (I even asked for help on my Talk page), but instead deflated all enthusiasm about participating in the Wiki community by way of your unemphatic attitude. 67.168.186.226 ( talk) 22:12, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
Why did you remove my addition to materials when it needed more information? Desiledbetter ( talk) 15:07, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
Some are notable, will add them after creating articles Fostera12 ( talk) 17:36, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
An article that has some content that is written like an advertisement, with a promotional tone and style, but whose subject does qualify for an article (under WP:N, the Notability guideline) should not be deleted, but instead be marked {{ ad}}, notifying others to change the writing style to give it a neutral tone. WP:DOUBT 65sugg ( talk) 13:45, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
Can you please tell me why you removed by addition of DDS as a protocol for IIoT. IIC is listed and the IIC recommendation DDS as an IIoT protocol. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nyhnpya ( talk • contribs) 13:20, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello,
While this page caters to important information about off-roading, the page lacks information regarding the requirement of a License while off-roading.
As a regular off-roader, I think it is essential to convey the relevant information regarding license requirements while off-roading.
I want to add a few lines as below:
"As I see, while the legislation for a license varies from state to state (or across countries), there is the license mandate in many regions.
Off-roading is different from a usual driving activity involving regular motor vehicles; some newbies drive them after 18. It is a specialized activity – although it is all-time fun – yet it has some rules and some types of equipment that must be in vehicles to perform off-roading.
According to the Government of Canada and the USA Transport Department, every driver operating any off-road vehicle must have a driver's license only if they bring the vehicle onto the road, highways, and forest service roads. The license is not mandatory if you drive on private properties."
Source: [https://offroadhandbook.com/can-you-drive-off-road-without-a-license/ Can You Drive Off-Road Without a License? Know in Detail]
-- Dasgupta Surya ( talk) 13:46, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
Appears that seven new editors recently made an edit or edits to Planning, all essay-like in style and with refs not correctly formated. All have been reverted. Given that one owned up to being in a PhD class, I left a message on each talk page asking if this was a class assignment, and borrowed your wording about education projects. There were also a few entries to Communication not currently reverted. As ref formating was similar across all, I suspect the instructor is not well versed in Wikipedia. David notMD ( talk) 14:16, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
Why did you delete my entry. You sight "lacks reliable sources". Did you actually do your own research? Did you actually visit the quoted source? Do you actually realise that the Wayback Machine is cited in Prior Art Patent cases as the primary source for first use case. Do you know what Prior Art means? If you don't please visit this wiki page /info/en/?search=Prior_art for a definition of Prior Art and maybe you'll find some stuff to delete there too. If you are unable to contest the entry with proper evidence please don't go around deleting other peoples entries because you're unable to accept their sources. This entry was made with proper legal due diligence I am going to restore the entry. If the World thinks its incorrect, let them provide the evidence beyond what I have provided. BabsOje ( talk) 08:07, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
Patrick here, after you sent me the message (You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you insert a spam link. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines)
All of my website traffic has gone to zero! I am now earning no money from my website because of this! You sent me that message on the 24th of October and on the 25th all of my site traffic was gone. Did you make this happen? Patricksblog ( talk) 08:52, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi Ollie, I have been asked by my high school's alumni association and the school management to update the list of notable alumni. I am 70 + retired alumni in New Zealand trying to help the school. I have just become an editor on Wikipedea. I am in the process of learning the various features. I am getting relevant reference from the internet and linking them. Please help me to update the pages of my school which is India. seven and a half hours behind us in time zone,
Thanks Expatelian ( talk) 02:18, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi, could you kindly explain why the open para is not an improvement I have a decade of experience in the field, keen to understand you POV? Robidy ( talk) 22:57, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I saw your contribution there, I provided reliable secondry sources and nothing is from my original research. India have a huge fantacy gaming industry, some states have banned them. So don't revert anything without discussing on talk page, your welcome to contribute. As you know 3 revert rule, you already did 2 reverts, now please Talk, discuss on Talk page there. I have left a message for you there. Rock Stone Gold Castle ( talk) 13:09, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi, You shouldn't entir well sourced edits without discussing on talk page. If you think my writing was awaful the please give one chance to fix it but you reverted. See what you replied when someone did thing like you did to me [7], Just reverting well sourced content is not right thing according to me. Rock Stone Gold Castle ( talk) 14:03, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
MrOllie sir please be civil. You should behave politely with rookie editors. Rock Stone Gold Castle ( talk) 18:36, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
This is an AP News Article about Dpoofing Device fingerprinting and the the link is for AP NEWS, is AP News promotion link? APNewsSecurity ( talk) 16:26, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
Hey. When you post an {{ ani-notice}}, especially to inexperienced users, please consider also adding the thread= parameter. That way, they could get to the thread in question with ease. Cheers! El_C 20:15, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
Dude, it’s factual that a group is trying to legalize it. I will even link two 3 articles. Loverofwomen91 ( talk) 13:07, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
Having now read about the Wikipedia threshold for notability, I do not claim that the Metricool company that I just created an article for is notable. Feel free to delete the article at any time. Thanks! (FWIW, this is the second article I've created. The first, C++20, was certainly notable.)
Dotyoyo ( talk) 21:15, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
I wonder, why exactly you have deleted my edit here: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Strategy_video_game&oldid=prev&diff=1122459235 Аргскригициониец ( talk) 18:33, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
I made an innocent update on the Louis Vuitton article and saw that you reverted. I'm unsure if what I did was wrong or maybe I did not reference right. I would appreciate it if you could help me understand the problem. The update I made has been trending online in the last 24 hours. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kelmaa ( talk • contribs) 22:59, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
I tried to add info on 2020s article with sources cited, but you reverted my edit. Here is what I showed you: https://en.wikipedia.org/?diff=1123240808&oldid=1123239119&title=2020s
But I wanted to know why you reverted my edit. Would you explain? -- 2601:205:C001:EA0:DD9D:F980:1B2C:6117 ( talk) 21:59, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
This goal of development is literally described in the source Materie34 ( talk) 13:33, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
I saw that there were some formatting problems. Would you accept the mods if those were solved? If not, why not.
To explain my motive: I'm a committer over at ruby-lang.org, working mostly with the documentation. I wanted to be able to link to the added headers. BurdetteLamar ( talk) 23:14, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
I see my addition to web frameworks was made not notable. I am not sure what exactly why, but if you search "vely c framework" on google, duckduckgo etc, there's plenty there. I found it on hackernews. I use Vely, and I understand that doesn't make it notable, but it's a nice web framework that's been around for a year or so. As far as I know, also the only C web framework. Danwatkins1 ( talk) 04:56, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
(You probably didn't see the ping because they misspelled your name. The drama seems to be over as the original poster has been usernameblocked, but I thought you might want to know about this regardless.) — David Eppstein ( talk) 05:19, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
I’m Iranian and I’m from Iran I have master card, and I never can use my card everywhere Right? Or not?! 2.147.143.84 ( talk) 22:51, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
I mean: In Iran, it is mostly used to bypass foreign sanctions and internal restrictions. It’s some way to use VPN for people! 2.147.143.84 ( talk) 22:57, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
It’s big lie to human But ok, tell me where can I explain this information for tourist and foreign people?! SepehrMomayezAdel ( talk) 23:38, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
It seems unclear why you have decided to remove the change I made for the Quadratic Programming section. Could you precise your action? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:CB04:80:E500:D85:876A:1E38:969D ( talk) 21:10, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Is there a metric that you would consider as meeting the threshold of notability?
Echo Prof is young but (in my opinion) the amount of work that has been done on it is surely deserving of some note.
David d12345 ( talk) 17:47, 28 November 2022 (UTC) David d12345 ( talk) 17:47, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
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)
00:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi, you've just reverted the Myprotein page back to remove all my edits for promo editing and whitewashing. I've got to politely object as I've done exactly the opposite.
You've re-added lines such as "In 2020, Myprotein won the Lausanne Index Prize - Silver Award." Which seems like promo editing to me, which I had removed.
As for whitewashing, I removed the controversy section because both parts seem to be unencyclopedic. One part is a Japanese tweet. I tried to find a reliable reference to go along with this such as a newspaper article but found nothing.
The second 'controversy' is a story which turned out to be untrue and the newspaper references withdrew the story. Again, to me this seems unencyclopedic.
And then you've removed the logo. I don't understand your logic. Dgp4004 ( talk) 00:49, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
You may not have seen this as your talk page was edited by a bot after I posted it. Or you may not have had a moment to read it yet.
I don't want to start an edit war if you passionately want to retain something I removed or disagree with something I added? If you find the content of the controversies section valuable, I disagree but perhaps you can find a better source for the tweet part at least if you want to keep it?
I'm disappointed that you went straight for a full revert of all my edits though. I put a fair effort into those edits and I suspect you didn't actually read what you were reverting to if I'm honest. No talk post, nothing. Dgp4004 ( talk) 16:47, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Fair enough, I've tried to engage you. I'll add a discussion to the Wiki page with my suggested changes if you later change your mind and want to engage there. Dgp4004 ( talk) 21:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello Mr. Ollie,
Thanks for being so observant to notice that I have made a major overhaul of the Nextflow article draft. I see, why this edit might raise some concerns regarding undisclosed payments, but rest assured that I have not received any payments or other benefits in exchange for this edit.
Please allow me to elaborate on my background and the motivation for working on this article: While I do not have a user page on the English Wikipedia, I do have one on the German Wikipedia as well as on Wikimedia Commons. I have been contributing to both since 2007, when I was an undergrad student at the university. I have mostly ceased from contributing to Wikipedia due to time constraints by now, but of course continue to cherish the project.
When I learned that an academic collaborator of mine wanted to add an article for Nextflow to Wikipedia, I was thrilled. It had never occurred to me, but I was immediately convinced that this is a good idea, because it is a very important tool for our research work and students might want to look it up when it is mentioned e.g. in the method section of scientific publications. However, I had to agree with @ Onel5969, that the article in its previous form was written too promotional and partly incomprehensible. So I sacrificed a free afternoon (and unintentionally also the evening) to fix the (in my opinion) most blatant issues. Admittedly, it was way more work than what I initially wanted to put into the edit, but I also couldn't stop halfway through either, since I eventually ended up changing the entire structure. Major revision so to speak. ;-)
I have tried to incorporate the criticisms expressed to the best of my ability, but agree that there should be an external review to ensure that haven't been too sympathetic with the subject.
Conflict of interest statement: I am employed by the Swedish National Genomics Infrastructure, which co-founded the nf-core community. Phil Ewels is a former colleague of mine, and I have met other core Nextflow/nf-core contributors at scientific conferences. I work with Nextflow daily, and it is fundamental for my work. However, I have not received any payments or other benefits for editing the article, and it was my own decision to devote my spare time to edit. I have no investments in or affiliations with Sequera, the spin-off company that maintains Nextflow. My real name is Matthias Zepper, which you can use to verify this information.
-- Curnen ( talk) 18:24, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi,
Just wondering what 'trim spammed site' actually means. The excised links still work as expected and contain a lot of useful information from an expert source that is not available elsewhere in Wikipedia.
If this is something that can be fixed by them I will contact the owners of the linked site to alert them.
Thanks 51.9.236.176 ( talk) 09:39, 28 November 2022 (UTC) 51.9.236.176 ( talk) 09:39, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
useful to others researching the topicis not a reason to add a link since Wikipedia is not a link directory. MrOllie ( talk) 12:33, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
That seems to me decidedly unhelpful to the potential reader. Neither 'E.J. Coates' nor 'retroactive notation' have entries in Wikipedia though I could of course create them with reference to the ISKO entries and some personal knowledge. Since these links were intended essentially as footnotes is it permissible to create footnotes that accommodate them instead? 51.9.236.176 ( talk) 12:57, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
And you can sue these people here for exposing you. You're not a villain.
https://www.reddit.com/user/The_NSA_Here_To_Help/comments/
Ascertain2022 ( talk) 03:41, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
Nope, sorry, not interested in allowing you to waste my time as you have wasted more than a little of Mr. Ollie's. Our policy in this regard is explained at links in the message that editor originally left on your Talk page. You can take the time to read it, or not. In the mean time, you may want to address the report concerning your violation of our edit warring policy. ("Our" refers to the community of editors here committed to the project of building an encyclopedia, which assumes that we will educate ourselves about and follow certain policies, or be separated from the project, either temporarily or in extreme cases permanently.) General Ization Talk 04:26, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi MrOllie! Wondering if you would be able to take a look at Bquast's request for autopatrolled and weigh in given that you have had recent interactions and appear familiar with them? TheSandDoctor Talk 06:56, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
MrOllie,
I have read many Wikipedia articles that have included the reference [citations needed]. My intent is to add the citations and my hope would be that others would as well. That would be in the spirit of Wikipedia. Please do not come in and edit out my work before it is completed. I'm new to this editing and if I need to do something else, or do it in a different way, please advise me on my talk.
PeterJ99 PeterJ99 ( talk) 17:34, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Dear MrOllie,
together with other editors on Wikipedia, I created a section on Primitive Rye at the bottom of the Wikipedia page "Rye". You have deleted this section multiple times without explanation. Is there a reason for your action? There should be a section on the multicaule variation on rye in the "Rye" article, and there is reliable sources (as cited in the section) to show that. I have tried talking to you on the talk page of "Rye" but have so far not received an answer. Please let me know your thoughts! Looking forward to hearing from you!
All the best, Plantsforlife ( talk) 10:46, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
Dear Mr. Ollie, I added links at several lemma with results/chapters from F+F 1971, a research project at Zurich University of the Arts on the F+F School for Art an Design in Zurich. I also corrected some old links. You reverted all my contributions. I try to keep these articles actual, and I'm sorry it wasn't accepted. Could you help me to improve? Thank you so much. Toptenseniororg ( talk) 17:45, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
Don't be a fool reverting others contribution just because the content is not linked with an English wikipedia page. Wikipedia is not your life partner and I can definitely create one to bypass that requirement, but what's the point? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.87.100.165 ( talk) 15:45, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
Can you tell me about this edit you made? I don't understand how it is COI or citespam. thanks! UtherSRG (talk) 15:54, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
I see you made a similar deletion for the same reason at Physical therapy. Please provide evidence for your claims of a COI and the exact diffs (plural) for the additions of the content in both articles. -- Valjean ( talk) ( PING me) 19:47, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
I don't get it? Is peer reviewed science really "COI citespam"? So you have these PhD. professors who have been publishing on their field of expertise in international, peer reviewed science journals for 25 years, and these are the people we don't want contributing to Wikipedia? It is not considered a conflict of interest to cite your own publications in peer reviewed journals. People have been doing it for 200 years. WiLaFa ( talk) 22:03, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
At Wikipedia, it is NOT true that "It is not considered a conflict of interest to cite your own publications in peer reviewed journals." It is a clear violation of WP:COI to do so.
OTOH, it is okay to use the talk page to suggest one's own publication as a source. Then other editors can add it if they deem the source appropriate to use. This is standard practice. We have banned a Nobel Prize laureate for refusing to back down on this issue, so we take this very seriously. -- Valjean ( talk) ( PING me) 23:54, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
I get it, I did wrong by overusing the self-cite. But now you have cleaned all my contributions to science off Wikipedia, which I feel is overdoing the gate-keeping. Yes, self-citing is self promotion. But in this case it is also sharpening up the information on Wikipedia. PzychoPat ( talk) 09:09, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
MrOllie,
I saw that you deleted most of my creation on the page. It was not a simple copy and paste. I addressed the feedback some previous editors raised including the content was not strong enough to form a separate page and potential copyright infringement. I rewrote and adjusted most of the content and merged it to the existing page. With what reason this content was deleted?-- MagellanAquarium ( talk) 16:36, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi MrOllie,
I saw you undid an addition to the red pill and blue pill article. Your message was "Rv blog posts, again." Are you objecting to the usage because it comes from a blog? It's not clear to me why a usage appearing on a blog should bar it from inclusion, given it is both authentic and relevant. As you may know, the "red pill" is a common term used in political discussion, especially on the internet. I might go so far as saying its main way the term is used today. I think it is therefore worth including how the term crossed over into political discussions. The information you removed was just that. The source provided was a Vox article stating "Yarvin was the first to popularize the analogy from The Matrix of being “redpilled” or “-pilled,” suddenly losing your illusions and seeing the supposed reality of the world more clearly, as applied to politics. Provided this information is true, which I have not found cause to doubt, its inclusion seems important, regardless of the fact it is froma blog. What is your view on this? Scamperton ( talk) 01:29, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
hello
I am editing on immunoflurescence article, it is my master class project, can you stop editing my work please.
Yasemin-alkassem ( talk) 14:14, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
Should All-Out Avengers and Secret Invasion Vol #2 be considered for bolding members of the team. Jacob Wilkerson ( talk) 00:58, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
I am concerned you deleted my link. It was a genuine contemporary Golden Dawn order. Please explain. Thank you. Tehuti-scribe ( talk) 00:27, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
So how do I reflect on the page that there are a variety of contemporary Golden Dawn orders out there and give some examples. I am concerned that the readers will only think there are two recent contemporary orders. There are probably over 100, but only one or two larger and more established. Advice appreciated. Tehuti-scribe ( talk) 03:23, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
MrOllie,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (
talk)
00:43, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Abishe ( talk) 00:43, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
MrOllie,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
—
Moops ⋠
T⋡
01:53, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
— Moops ⋠ T⋡ 01:53, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
HI, I was trying to update an article, Graduate Management Admission Test, and got a a message back saying "Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia." However, if you look at two links currently used as sources (citations 36 & 37) for best GMAT prep, one is the company itself (self promotion- Menlo) and the other is affiliate links. I was just trying to put out some honest student reviews that ranked GMAT companies.
Please advise id this is not possible- thank you & HNY!
Gradswm (
talk)
20:43, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
2603:3020:BB8:D000:EDDD:5E78:603D:6200 - LTA, Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Brad Watson, Miami Off-topic, FTN can be an unpleasant place to post. Doug Weller talk 16:29, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
A bit drastic but it's basically only Brad Watson, Miami who uses an IP address there. Doug Weller talk 12:00, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi I was wondering why you got rid of the "In popular culture" section for the article titled " Popular culture." After all, the article for " In popular culture" (a different article) has an "In popular culture" section, and the concept of "popular culture" is sometimes referenced in pop culture. Cookie The Amazing Cat ( talk) 00:53, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
Why you deleted the pics on the Scottish fold article? There aren’t reason dude Ansrea ( talk) 21:06, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
It’s not my cat by the way Ansrea ( talk) 21:18, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
The image was a clear, punctual example of the species Ansrea ( talk) 21:19, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
You’re making a mistake. This isn’t in the Wikipedia rules, it’s just uncorret Ansrea ( talk) 21:23, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Your decision is clearly subjective so that’s against the rules, it’s simple. WIKIPEDIA IS NOT A SUBJECTIVE SITE, YOU CANNOT DELETE SOMETHING ONLY FOR YOUR WILL OR PRESUNCTION Ansrea ( talk) 21:30, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
if I’ve violated the rules delete the image but without a reason you are making a mistake Ansrea ( talk) 21:31, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Why u deleted the clarification on the Italian passport’s page? Wtf you are deleting all my changes dude. I’m gonna to report u Ansrea ( talk) 21:09, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
I’ll definitely make a report Ansrea ( talk) 21:35, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Check the New Zeland Passport page. Bye Ansrea ( talk) 21:38, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
You still have not provided a valid reason for removing this one line entry from the Beer Festival page. You cite Advertising, but there is no advertising in this entry: "In Quito, Ecuador, a yearly beer festival called VIVA Cerveza! takes place. The first was in 2016. It is listed as the 3rd largest festival in South America."
Yet, that same page is LITTERED with advertising from international brands and corporations, yet, you do nothing of deleting those entries. Perhaps because they are from 1st world countries and these are large corporate brands? Do you have a prejudice?
You state the following violation: "Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion."
Again, my single line entry does no such thing. Vivacerveza ( talk) 02:23, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
"A driver safety program called the Driver Example Program was developed in 1964 by Chris Imhoff of the (US) National Safety Council." this is a promotion / primary source (reference 3) and on top of this, this Wikipedia page/article is linking to a page that no longer exists, it links to a page not found.
Alonso-gomez-avila ( talk) 21:24, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
Rather than just saying predatory journal and remove two other journals which have nothing to do with "predatory" as you say discuss that edit before you do that, also don't just revert an entire edit without thinking of the other citations which have nothing to do with that source which you do not like. Therefore, i will revert your edit, but will replace that predatory journal as you say. CtasACT ( talk) 20:16, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wizardman's talk page regarding an abuse of editing powers by user MrOllie. The thread is entitled Calling MrOllie to your attention regarding an ANI. Thank you. GabeTucker ( talk) 03:59, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi MrOllie assuming Astor's reference is okay will I encourage Ireland to do something of a similar quality? He told me it would be months before he can get a paper out on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Todd Unctious ( talk • contribs) 02:12, 16 January 2023 (UTC)