User talk:MrOllie

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!

Polisport

Thanks for your work, MrOllie. Bishonen | tålk 14:53, 18 October 2022 (UTC).

How to raise in-text questions

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)

Editors should never insert their personal opinions or comments directly into an article. Not even one, and not even in parenthesis. - MrOllie (talk) 12:46, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you MrOllie, I did think the WSJ quote, which I had posted myself last night, was quite startling and questions seem inevitable. I didn't realize that questions could constitute personal opinions. Hopefully our society will be able to address these in the upcoming months in the court system- there are some interesting cases coming forward as we speak - and then maybe these questions can be more properly addressed via case ruling citations?

Thank you again,

2600:4040:780C:6F00:D527:23B9:E88:AF79 (talk) 18:19, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

I don't know how you could be startled by that quote, it looks to be standard stuff to me. VSafe is pretty boring technology wise. You also should not be using court documents or rulings as citations, see WP:PRIMARY. MrOllie (talk) 18:28, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Your talk page revert

Hi MrOllie. Please don't just revert good-faith comments on Talk pages like this one:[1] 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)

Enema

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)

It is trivia, and your citations weren't very reliable. We don't use self published materials or patents as sources. Are you associated with telhistory.ru in some fashion? - MrOllie (talk) 16:32, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Well, if the link on Russian site is not considered a serious proof of the fact, here is an American patent ("issued patent may be considered a reliable source for the existence of an invention, the names of the inventors") Wikipedia:PATENT

I was surprised to know about the strange usage of the implement, even though we've got a monument to enema in Russia. ForTheHellOfIt (talk) 08:17, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

I asked you a question, are you going to respond to it? MrOllie (talk) 12:05, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

At first you told me "citations weren't very reliable" and "We don't use self published materials or patents as sources", but "issued patent may be considered a reliable source for the existence of an invention, the names of the inventors") (Wikipedia:Reliable source examples#Are patents reliable sources?)

As for the question, I am Russian and I use Russian site to prove my point. Just like I use American, French, Polish and other sources.

If you don't like Russian site, I can make an entry with American patent only. ForTheHellOfIt (talk) 18:21, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

That's still not an answer to my question. If you read the whole policy you cited, you would see that patents are considered to be self published primary sources - which means that they should generally be avoided. MrOllie (talk) 18:28, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

OK, whatever. ForTheHellOfIt (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Youtube

YouTube is a completely valid source for Wikipedia, in my opinion. 117.215.48.119 (talk) 13:46, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Your opinion doesn't really matter here - Wikipedia's sourcing guidelines do. You can find them at WP:RS. - MrOllie (talk) 13:47, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

That's nonsense. I've had made edit on the burpees page and it's not possible that two pushup burpees variant, or other variants, do not exist just because there's no book written by "subject expert" on the topic. Although I do understand it's Wikipedia's guidelines, I find it hard to believe that something is dismissed as uncredible solely because it's not a book or whatever written by a subject expert.117.215.48.119 (talk) 13:52, 22 October 2022 (UTC)