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!

Archives

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6
Archive 7	Archive 8	Archive 9
Archive 10	Archive 11	Archive 12
Archive 13	Archive 14	Archive 15
Archive 16	Archive 17	Archive 18
Archive 19

This page has archives. Sections may be automatically archived by .

Links on Data Masking Page

Hi,

It seems you have deleted the links on the data masking page. However, you didn't delete the links from other vendors like IRI. Any particular reason? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mentis John (talk • contribs)

I didn't review all the links on the page, I was just dealing with the set that had been recently added, and which had been systematically spammed by two other user accounts previously. - MrOllie (talk) 16:14, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I understand the rules regarding the promotion of vendors. I just expect the rules to be the same for everyone. Just because someone did it previously doesn't make it right, does it? - --Mentis John (talk) 17:39, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Toe box

Hi MrOllie. I see you reverted my content move from Toebox to Toe box. I may have done this incorrectly, but if so, can you please arrange for the copy to be done in the proper manner? Thanks! Lambtron talk 15:29, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lambtron, I left a template explanation and instructions on your talk page. MrOllie (talk) 15:31, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't move Toebox to Toe box because Toe box already existed as redirect to Toebox. How to fix this? Lambtron talk 15:33, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lambtron, By following the instructions at requested moves as it says on your talk page. MrOllie (talk) 15:39, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's because MrOllie AKA Wikipedia bully is prejudiced Rahuldevnow (talk) 16:05, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

yts

@MrOllie:, i don't think I'm elevating anything to be honest as YTS.AG is by far one of the most popular torrent sites in existence already. So i believe it's fine. Jaconsarto (talk) 17:32, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jaconsarto, 'It's popular' is not a reason to change the sectioning of the article about the original group, especially in a way that is inaccurate to the text. Take it up on the article's talk page rather than edit warring. MrOllie (talk) 17:34, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@MrOllie:, should i start a talk page discussion or a RFC? Jaconsarto (talk) 17:54, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@MrOllie:, i guess I'll start an RFC tomorrow. Hope you will participate in it. Jaconsarto (talk) 17:54, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Paid Contributor

Recently several of my updates to the Electrical Transient Analyzer Program were reverted. My changes were simple updates to the general information about the company. An updated company logo, a new company building picture, etc. Really minor changes, just to bring the information up-to-date. Yes, I am an employee at ETAP and I am disclosing this info on my profile now. Can I go back and add the reverted information back? What is the best way to make sure new information is being considered? I looked at other company pages and they show pictures of their buildings, updated company logos etc. Please advise. Thanks Tnoack1 (talk) 21:00, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tnoack1, No, you should read WP:COI thoroughly and make edit requests on the article talk page for other users to review from now on. MrOllie (talk) 21:25, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ok, thanks, will do. Does this only apply to edits on ETAP or all of my edits on Wikipedia Tnoack1 (talk) 21:33, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tnoack1, Any edit that relates to your employer or that you otherwise have a conflict of interest about. MrOllie (talk) 21:43, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Would like to remove personal attack from archive

Hi Mr. Ollie,

I restored previous articles that were removed on the claim that they were "unproductive". You removed them again. It does not matter whether they were removed by archiving: mine was removed without my permission. Once I improve the main article ("Software Engineer") the way I promised in the "Talk" section of it, then it may be archived. However, until then I would like to restore my talk. Would you allow me to restore my discussion (i.e. "talk" section)? Else I will rewrite it anew.

Nevertheless, there was a personal attack posted in my section. This does not deserve to be archived. How may I remove it?

Thanks, Impediguy (talk) 17:58, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Impediguy, Inactive, old discussions (that one was months old) are routinely moved into the archives. If you have something new to say just start a new discussion, but don't simply cut and paste old comments back onto the talk page. I see no personal attacks in the archive. - MrOllie (talk) 18:03, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As usual, thanks for responding. The offending comments constituting a "personal attack" by the unidentified person were: 1) "Implicating [insert false narrative here] is foolish.", 2) "This whole thread feels like you are bent out of shape because you are either scared your defense-contracting company is going to lay you off, or you recently got laid off." (these accusation and this conjecture are offensive and correspondingly false), and 3) "The pretentiousness of the title "Engineering is a higher-level skill that software developers do not have" is incredible." (there is nothing pretentious about the title; it was substantiated in the text: E.G. "there is no amount of software that can make an airplane safe", for example, and my entry was meant to prompt the need to improve the "Controversy" section of the main article). Conversely, nothing in the offender's talk entry contributed anything to the improvement of the main article. Impediguy (talk) 19:22, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Impediguy, They're months old comments from an IP editor and in the archive, and whether they are personal attacks as Wikipedia would define them or vigorous disagreement is debatable - Wikipedia editors tend to define 'personal attack' rather narrowly. I would suggest you just ignore them and move on rather than draw additional attention to them. MrOllie (talk) 19:27, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I would like to contribute to the "Controversy" section some day, but am swamped at work. I may or may not post something on the talk page so that readers can re-review it before I do, but nevertheless, it has already been reviewed. BTW, I am writing a book on "Real Engineering" that was ironically inspired by "fake" (i.e. ineffective) engineering. Impediguy (talk) 20:45, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Monty Hall Problem

Hello, obviously I am new to Wiki and esp. to how to contribute. I noticed that the Monty Hall problem does not provide a clear solution, which is does have! And that is why I wanted to help with my own one. How can we include these personal contributions? The problem exactly is, that I do not know any sources that just know how to explain this problem for a layman and my own explanation, well it has not appeared in Nature yet, sorry. I thought Wiki was an open source page so why reject any additions that I am sure could be useful? Do let me know, my email is mvheeringen@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mvheeringen (talk • contribs)

The simple solution is located in the subsection titled Simple solutions. Wikipedia is open for everyone to edit, but it does have minimal content and sourcing standards, which you can find at WP:V and WP:NOR. If you want your edits to remain you must cite a source. It sounds like you're working backward - you should generally start with a source and summarize what it says, rather than simply writing from personal knowledge, which our readers will not be able to verify themselves. - MrOllie (talk) 20:36, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Problem regarding Multiple-criteria decision analysis

Dear Mr Ollie,

I hope you are doing well. I have a question regarding [decision analysis]. Recently, you told me that you will add those MCDM methods which are used widely by the scholars. Do you think the current list is correct based on this strategy? For example, do you think the Base-criterion method (BCM) method is used by the scholars widely? Do you think it is a new method (Model is the same with the BWM and it was published in a very low-quality journal)!? I'm looking forward to receiving your reply.

Best wishes — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amin.Mahmoudi.edu (talk • contribs)

I haven't reviewed the whole list, so I really wouldn't know. I'll put it on the to-do list. PS: You should never, ever edit someone else's talk page comment, as you did here, especially not to add a link to your own website. - MrOllie (talk) 13:46, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amin.Mahmoudi.edu (talk • contribs)

Please remember to sign your posts with four tilde characters (~). If you don't, and someone else adds an unsigned template, don't remove those. That is how we know who wrote what. See Wikipedia:Signatures if you're having trouble. - MrOllie (talk) 14:46, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Job Description

Dear Mr. Ollie,

I see that you rejected my edits to the article citing disruptive editing. I still believe that it should be noted that job descriptions and job postings are not the same. Often, people use the terms interchangeably. If you don't like the citation, then please find another of your liking. And please remove "Halogen Job description Builder" if you are wanting to remove references to providers.

Thank you, Asharobinson (talk) 16:38, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Breathalyzer page section Breathalyzer sensors and Invisibility page section Practical efforts

Hi, you have deleted my edits and reference in the Breathalyzer sensors section. Thank you for your efforts in keeping Wikipedia a great encyclopedia. You are right and I'm sorry, I didn't follow protocol. However, you also removed an old edit from the Invisibility page, section Practical efforts. For this edit, I followed ThatMontrealIP (who first removed my edit) instructions and Wikipedia protocol. There was a discussion on the article talk page, please see the page history. The edit was accepted until now. By removing old edits because of errors in new edits, this highly discourages Wikipedia contributors. Thank you. Jllheureux (talk) 16:56, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jllheureux, No, you re added it to the article yourself, that was not 'Wikipedia protocol'. You made a comment and no one agreed with it - that isn't a discussion demonstrating any sort of consenseus for inclusion. MrOllie (talk) 16:58, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop trolling my edits

Hi Mr. Ollie, I have made legitimate contributions to Wikipedia and yet you continue to bully me, especially on the DevOps page. The sources and contributions I have made are legitimate. Is your behavior directed at me because I am a Woman?