Jump to content

User talk:MrOllie

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sonderbro (talk | contribs) at 00:14, 27 November 2012 (→‎Urban Planning: Planning Theories: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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!

First of all concerning a link to www.getnzb.com On you article usenet under See also you have all paid premium services and you leave the links without any problem. So just for fair competition leave all big usenet provider about whom you write your article and GetNZb is not a small one.

Now concerning the link www.nzbfriends.com. Usenet was always uncensored open sourced network and nzbfriends offers free indexing of the whole network, so it's very helpful for all customers who wish to see what usenet contains.

If you wish to be fair then be fair to all, please, cause wikipedia in my opinion is very qualitied site and I hope you work fair. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usenetfriend (talkcontribs) 17:44, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The see also section only has links to other Wikipedia articles. There are no links to usenet providers there. - MrOllie (talk) 18:11, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok is it possible to create an article about getnzb and what it is? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usenetfriend (talkcontribs) 18:20, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you can turn up multiple significant, independently written citations that meet our sourcing guidelines, it would be possible to create an article. - MrOllie (talk) 18:23, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

3D MindMapper (computer program)

DonSergos (talk) 21:23, 21 November 2012 (UTC) Dear Sir. We are happy to inform You, that we have already inserted the article for the link missed in the article List of concept- and mind-mapping software))). It had been created recently , but we are not keen on article-writing on Wikipedia. Thus we beg your pardon and Kind Regards.[reply]

Deletion of VirtualGeo information in several articles

Dear Mr Olly,

I was about to write an article about VirtualGeo virtual globe when I noticed you removed the mentions to the sofware in the articles Géoportail and VirtualGlobe. As a result, the Géoportail article no longer informs about the recently 3D visualisation services offered by the portal and ambiguously refers (in See also and External links sections) to other virtual globes softwares than the one streaming the Géoportail data ...

VirtualGeo is a virtual globe significantly used in Europe. With more than 30.000 users per day (even just considering IGN services and Geoconcept solutions), don't you think that we can reasonably consider that it is at least as worthy of notice as many of the virtual globe software listed in the VirtualGlobe article ?

I understand that Wikipedia is neither a place for advertising nor a collection of external links. As a newcomer to Wikipedia, I may have submitted my contribution in an unappropriate form for the encyclopedia. Could you kindly advice me in an acceptable way to proceed ?

Best regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by F Rouas (talkcontribs) 13:14, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

AMOS (programming language)

I noticed you removed the link to the emulation package for AMOS Professional. This consists of original freeware Amiga files, the Amiga emulator UAE (preconfigured by myself), and AROS/68k as a free AmigaOS replacement ROM (which had very recently been patched by Toni Wilen to work with AMOSPro), with a Windows installer created with the free Clickteam Install Creator. My only role was to package these pieces together into an out-of-the-box emulation package which many reported to be a very convenient solution, freely and legally getting the original AMOSPro up and running in under 30 seconds on a Windows PC.

I gave credit to Toni Wilen for his work on the free AROS ROM to make this possible (AMOS has been usable under UAE since 1998, but not packagable legally), so there is no question of COI here. I have also included all files which are required to repackage it with free software and create a new installer, and gave instructions to do so. Thus, the process I used to package this is in the public domain and not my intellectual property.

Therefore, I think the availability of the original software for Windows and Linux PCs (in the form of an emulation package) is relevant to the AMOS article, and a non-biased Wikipedian would consider this due weight for re-inclusion as a link below the article, so there are no grounds for using an ad hominem argument of COI against including a link to the emulation package, simply because I packaged it (it is not otherwise my work). This emulation package was also tried by Francois Lionet (the creator of AMOS) who was happy with it (and for it to be linked on Clickteam's forums).

The article links to Back To The Roots which contains ADF floppy images of the original AMOS and AMOSPro, however this takes considerable time to set up, swap floppy images, install to a virtual hard drive, update and install the compiler and all extensions, as well as configure the emulator and ROMs. The emulation package is a far more convenient solution as it installs everything in seconds like a native application (simply launching an emulator). I think on researching legacy software on Wikipedia, ways to run the software on modern PCs (including easy bundles) are relevant to the article(s) in question. Mequa (talk) 16:41, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WiseMapping removed from List of concept- and mind-mapping software

Dear Mr Olly, I noticed you removed the link to WiseMapping.org Open Source project from list of Free Projects: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_concept-_and_mind-mapping_software WiseMapping is a free project that can be installed by the users locally and even download the source code for collaboration. There is a side project that is WiseMapping.com that it's also a free online instance of the project sustained only based on adds Dont you feel that WiseMapping.org could part of this list ?.

Regards Paulo

Pveiga (talk) 12:35, 23 November 2012 (UTC)pveiga[reply]

No, that is a list of software that already has a Wikipedia article. You should not add external links to that list. - MrOllie (talk) 15:36, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mail art – References to 'Hairmail' and Astroturf

Hello again, those inappropriate references on the Mail art page to 'marketing Hairmail and Astroturf' (see your Talk page 13 November) have been restored by two moderators recently, I'd appreciate your help in removing them. Keithbates51 (talk) 15:52, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mobile device management

Thanks for your edit. You should keep an eye out because there is some serious COI and sockpuppetry going on by someone who either hates Gartner, or is seriously pissed at not being included in the big 5 list. An extra pair of eyes means it doesn't become a one-on-one edit war. --Biker Biker (talk) 19:45, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Urban Planning: Planning Theories

I'm sure you have your reasons, but how come you deleted the paragraph on "power theories of planning"? This paragraph seems both relevant and useful, using Wikipedia's own criteria, because it covers a strand of planning theory that is actually out there and is important, but is now not covered by Wikipedia. Sonderbro (talk) 00:14, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]