User talk:MrOllie

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User:MrOllie)
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!

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)
There are 148,000 results for ["kiln code review"] which one would you like to use? Instead of being so harsh with your responses and edits, perhaps a small comment and some time to allow us to find a reference would be appropriate? Wikipedia doesn't need to be such a hostile place. Randyaa (talk) 13:51, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Most google hits are not suitable sources. I suggest you have a look at the notability and the sourcing guidelines and write the article first. - MrOllie (talk) 18:49, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
Would [Evolution, Part 1: DVCS as Code Review] & [Evolution, Part 2: From Prototype to Beta] work? they clearly discuss the fact that Kiln is a code review tool and describe how they came about. Randyaa (talk) 12:54, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
No, it is not independently written, and it is a self published blog, both of which disqualify it it terms of establishing notability. I strongly suggest that you read the guidelines I linked above, as well as our guideline on conflict of interest and Wikipedia's terms of use. - MrOllie (talk) 14:23, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

What's wrong with the reference I added? It's a published book. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garethx (talkcontribs) 19:08, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

It doesn't discuss the software in any detail - an entry in a bullet point list isn't sufficient. - MrOllie (talk) 19:53, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

You are clearly misinterpreting Wikipedia's policy on this matter. Read WP:LISTN in its whole entirety, it does not say that that every item needs to have an article, but that is just one form of selection criteria. You are purposely misinterpreting an optional style as a set rule, while such optional styles need to first be explicitly stated in an introduction to the list and only after a consensus is reached on the talk page WP:MOS#STYLEVAR. You seem to claim ownership of the page WP:OWN and instead of trying to finding a consensus, you are engaging in a slow edit war with other editors WP:EDITWAR. Dlpkbr (talk) 08:19, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

I am hardly alone in this 'misinterpretation', consider the contents of Wikipedia:Write the article first. - MrOllie (talk) 10:35, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Promote your approach here adversely affects the development and content publishing. The popularity of this case of fashion and glossy magazines. Opening Wikipedia we usually want to see the whole picture and not just a list of tools that could be mold. I wish you to look at the world in a new way with Wikipedia, and that in spite of its popularity it can also be covered with mold. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:23, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Re: dbForge Studio[edit]

Hi MrOllie,

My name is Jordan. I'd like to discuss the issue occured on this page - dbForge_Studio

According to the Wikipedia rules, software is notable if it has been recognized as having technical significance by reliable sources.

There is a review of dbForge Studio for SQL Server:

Though, self-published sources are largely not acceptable as sources, Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications.

Mr. Greg Low can be considered as expert and his review represents his own thoughts and opinion, but it's not Devart's promotional activity. As a proof, please, look at the references

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by JordanS22 (talkcontribs)

Looks like this article has since been deleted by someone else. - MrOllie (talk) 15:05, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Singleton External Links[edit]

I think a link to page should be listed in the External Links of the Singleton Pattern page. Dp4j is a Java tool for injecting Singletons' boilerplate code. It is the only Java tool that does this in Java for the Singleton design pattern as described in an ACM DL paper on the @Singleton annotation from Dp4j. It is a useful external link, if not directly discussed in a section of the page itself. Simpatico qa (talk) 12:54, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

External links on Wikipedia are for providing information to a general audience - articles about what a singleton is are appropriate. Tools, which would only be used by engineers who already know what a singleton is, are not really appropriate. - MrOllie (talk) 20:47, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

The page discusses different ways of implementing the singleton in Java. Shall we then also mention the @Singleton option there as well? I think this will be very consistent with the purpose and context of the page. Is not it? Simpatico qa (talk) 20:53, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

The page lists some multi language concept implementations which happen to have examples in Java. Java specific implementations aren't helpful. - MrOllie (talk) 15:07, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

There is a way to implement the Singleton Pattern that uses Java annotations since Java 5, and is described here. But you think it will be helpful and enriching for the reader to be aware of it in the external links at least? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simpatico qa (talkcontribs) 05:20, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

I can't be any more clear: No, that link does not belong on Wikipedia- - MrOllie (talk) 15:28, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Home automation software[edit]

Hi - you reverted my addition of openHAB to List_of_home_automation_software. I'm not sure that's right. I understand the article on openHAB was deleted last year; partly because of concerns about notability, and in part because the article had been written by one of the contributors to openHAB. I am not a contributor to openHAB (just someone thinking of installing the software). The notability concerns probably no longer hold - in the last year or so, openHAB has had a reasonable degree of coverage in the press (e.g. Fastcompany, Forbes). Also - and this may just be my ignorance - is the existence (or not) of an openHAB article relevant to whether openHAB is included in a list of open source home automation software? Particularly when QIVICON is already in the list, and QIVICON is based on the same underlying code base. LeContexte (talk) 17:01, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Most lists on Wikipedia are navigational aids and should link to other Wikipedia articles. The article on Openhab has been deleted four times in total, usually for being basically spam, most recently just a few months ago. If you want to write a new non-promotional version, that would be very welcome, but do keep in mind that any forbes ref you find that has /sites/ in the title is actually somebody's blog and won't help build the case for notability. - MrOllie (talk) 15:36, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
noted - thank you! I'll see what notable sources, if any, I can find LeContexte (talk) 17:56, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Reverts on Sciencescape[edit]

Hi! I noticed you reverted User:Soyuzman's contribution on Sciencescape, which changed company name to META. I'm guessing that was a revert due to the unsourced claim. In the future could a description be written explaining why you reverted the content, since it wasn't obvious vandalism? I think that would make it more obvious and clear for other editors to follow why content was removed. Thanks! Appable (talk) 17:58, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)