User talk:MrOllie

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Hello, welcome to my talk page!

If you want to leave a message, please do it at the bottom as a new section, for better formatting. You can do that by simply pressing the plus sign (+) or "new section" on the top of this page. And don't forget to sign your messages with four tildes, like this: ~~~~

Attention: I prefer to keep discussions unfragmented. If you leave a comment for me here, I will most likely respond to it on this same page—my talk page—as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there. Remember, we can use our watchlist to keep track of when responses are made. At the same time, feel free to send an alert to me on this page about a comment you have left elsewhere.

Thank you!


Why have "Distributed Reviews" been removed by you today from:


It would be helpful to understand which properties a Software must have to be published there.

Mstrap (talk) 18:13, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

'rm link spam' - arbitrary and unjustified[edit]

Your removal of several links to Neu seems unfair and arbitrary, e.g:

This is a multipurpose framework and it lives up to what the link captions described it as being. Basing a decision to remove based only on the number of links is not a good reason. The links were carefully added in places next to other software which do similar things so what is wrong with this? This framework is the result of several years of work and it is made available under a free BSD-style license. By removing all these links you are preventing many people from discovering this as a software solution. Please reconsider. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:0:680:15B:550E:8863:8CE9:CA26 (talk) 02:18, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

The purpose of Wikipedia is not to host a directory of links for people to discover. I suggest you list your project on a site that is such a directory - is a good one. - MrOllie (talk) 13:43, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

That is understandable in general, but certain Wikipedia entries are specifically designated as a listing of software projects and links, and that is where, and only where, I added my links, e.g:

[AI Multipurpose projects::software packages]

[Comparison of database tools]

There are several links on such pages – how are the many links here any different than mine?. I believe I am right in doing this and consistent with the Wikipedia guidelines. Why have you singled me as being 'link spam' while numerous software and links are 'allowed' to be listed here? Is there someone else I can talk to about this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:37, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Feel free to take this up at the external links noticeboard. - MrOllie (talk) 14:52, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

I spent some time reviewing the Wikipedia guidelines today. Your removal of my links and labelling them as ‘spam’ has little valid basis.

While it is true that Wikipedia in general is not a collection of links, there are several designated places where software links are listed, labeled ‘External Links’, or ‘List of Neural Network Software’, etc. It is not a sufficient reason to remove something simply on the basis of there being ‘too many links to it’. From what I can tell, this seems to be your reason main impetus for doing this and possibly how you have detected my so called ‘spam’ in some automated fashion. My framework was listed on several pages because it provides a valuable solution for many different purposes, e.g: neural networks, databases, artificial intelligence frameworks. My links were placed in a proper place alongside other similar software. Why are the other listings allowed there and not mine? My framework is high-quality, well-documented, and provides a genuine solution in these areas; it is free software available under a BSD license. Why do you want to prevent me from getting the word out about it? Honestly, what harm am I doing here and what gives you the authority to do this? Your reasons seem arbitrary and you seem to have singled me out for subjective reasons rather than looking at the facts and consistency of how other link listings existed on these pages. I am re-adding my links. Please try and look at this a little more objectively, you can refer to my documentation and code on github and verify that this is a valuable tool in many areas, thus many links, not ‘spam’. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:0:680:15B:550E:8863:8CE9:CA26 (talk) 01:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

No one is singling you out. I don't think WP is the best place to "get the word out" about your software. Dawnseeker2000 02:06, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

I've had some time to think about this and I am sorry for my initial reaction. I understand your point of view too. I still feel strongly that my framework should be allowed a spot in the 'external links' section and other places alongside other software which does similar things because I believe my framework provides a viable solution in these areas. If you'd ever reconsider I'd appreciate it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:38, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

external links[edit]

In April 2014 you removed a link to Sign Language Illustrated Dictionary) The link was added again recently and on Sunday 18th Jan when adding a new link to a university based free dictionary I removed the above only for it to be immediately reinstated by Sladen. Can I check if policy regarding external links to commercial sites has been changed please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:21, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

NuGet article - notability issues[edit]

Hello Mr Ollie - Can you clarify why you feel NuGet doesn't meet WP:NOTE? Teh klev (talk) 17:18, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

It references no independent sources. - MrOllie (talk) 10:51, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

List of code review tools[edit]

can you explain why you reverted my edit on List of tools for code review? Both tools I added are valid and I went through the process of digging through their websites to identify the list of repositories they support as well as languages and pre/post commit support for code reviews. I read the talk page there and someone else suggested that the page is only a list of 'notable code review tools' and while this may be true there is nothing on the article suggesting this and both systems I added are in wide use and notable they just don't have their own wikipedia page yet. Several weeks ago I was looking into possible code review tools and the first result in my research was always this wikipedia list page, however because it is incomplete I missed several possibilities that I could have investigated. This is what prompted me to add them to the list page. Thanks! Randyaa (talk) 22:10, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Allow me to quote the giant yellow text box that appeared when you edited that article: 'When editing this list bear in mind that the same notability criteria apply here as elsewhere in Wikipedia: entries with no reliable independent reliable sources listed either here or in other Wikipedia articles may not be notable, and are likely to be removed. The software developer's own website is not an independent source.' - MrOllie (talk) 15:14, 27 February 2015 (UTC)