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 94.19.95.236 (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 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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: http://sqlblog.com/blogs/greg_low/archive/2014/08/25/3rd-party-tools-dbforge-studio-for-sql-server.aspx

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 [1], [2], [3], [4]

Thanks!

  1. ^ "MVP Spotlight Greg Low". Microsoft. 
  2. ^ "Greg Low Public Profile". Microsoft. 
  3. ^ "Dr. Greg Low Profile". DBTA. 
  4. ^ "Greg Low LinkedIn Profile". 

phpMyAdmin version[edit]

Hi, Can you tell me why you reverted 4.4.12 latest version to 4.4.11? The most recent version is 4.4.12 and you reverted to 4.4.11

Singleton External Links[edit]

I think a link to Dp4j.com/Singleton 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)

Ways to implement the Singleton in Java?[edit]

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)