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 when more than 4 sections are present.

MLOps

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)[reply]

Popularity on social media is not a reason to include something here, especially not something from an unreliable source like arxiv. MrOllie (talk) 14:52, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why is a well-cited arXiv paper with a rigour methodology less worth than a towardsdatascience article (which is listed in the sources)? 185.124.144.98 (talk) 17:25, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The first section of the article seems outdated:

- there is one blog post on AI trends from 2018, that is not retrievable anymore

- there is one Gartner study from 2020, that has been archived by Gartner themselves and is not retrievable anymore

The discipline evolves and the recent paper seems to provide a solid definition that was already discussed lengthy in the MLOps community on Twitter and LinkedIn. 2003:EE:1705:39AB:7C96:27A:D5AE:D172 (talk) 07:44, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Again, that something is popular on social media has nothing to do with Wikipedia. MrOllie (talk) 10:14, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

sorry

Didn't know you have already sent a warning (How to Make Money Selling Drugs). Cheers Uricdivine (talk) 11:45, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022

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)[reply]

@VS6507, is English your first language? You are edit warring to keep in grammatical errors. MrOllie (talk) 19:13, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MrOllie It is not my first language. However, I speak English fluently, I would be aware of a major grammatical error if there was one. Vs⁶ ₅⁰⁷ 19:14, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's clearly not true. Feel free to ask someone else if you don't believe me. MrOllie (talk) 19:15, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What bit is not true? That I don't speak English fluently; in which case I would take it as a ad hominem personal offense. Orrrr that there is not a major grammatical error on the page? Vs⁶ ₅⁰⁷ 19:17, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is an obvious error of grammar in the sentence you are edit warring back into the article, which you are clearly unable to recognize. MrOllie (talk) 19:18, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Well, another editor did manage to see it and has reverted, so I think we're done here. MrOllie (talk) 19:38, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@VS6507, an apology would be appropriate now. --Serols (talk) 17:49, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OTT media service

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)[reply]

You did not cite a reliable source. MrOllie (talk) 10:14, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why https://www.informa.com/ is not a reliable source? In the article, I indicated that the classification was developed by Informa Telecoms & Mediaruen. Iitsearcher (talk) 13:59, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, you did not include a citation. And even if you had, we don't promote businesses in that way - Sources should be independently published. MrOllie (talk) 14:11, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting

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)[reply]