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 and topic subscriptions 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!

It was an unpleasant experience, interacting with you

I must say that the interaction with you was by far the most unpleasant experience I have had in Wikipedia for years. You have deleted---in a very rude way---the absolutely correct information about Mistral AI chatbot used by zillions of people around the world because you personally decided that it was not important for the readers of Wikipedia. Looking at your "contribution" list it seems that this is actually what you do -- you delete things. Is it the power to delete that drives you? What a miserable life you must have. Anyway, I hope I will never interact with you again, Sincerely, Dmt137 (talk) 11:22, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

You added completely unsourced material about a nonnotable chatbot, in plain violation of both Wikipedia's content policies and the inclusion criteria for that list. You should expect other people to resist when you blatantly ignore site policies. MrOllie (talk) 12:27, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

What are the requirements for being a "notable chatbot"?

Hi, I would like to know which are the requirement to be a notable chatbot, thank you, Sam

(p.s. the project Cheshire Cat AI has 2.6K stars on GitHub) Sambarza (talk) 23:31, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

That's a list of chatbots with preexisting Wikipedia articles. Social media likes (such as GitHub stars) are easily gamed and mean precisely nothing. MrOllie (talk) 23:32, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

clear thanks Sambarza (talk) 23:37, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

trailer (vehicle) sub-category tagged as "product placement"

Greetings, I'm still fairly knew to the whole wiki editor role and was curious what tipped off my writing as "product placement". Are there any changes I can make to the piece I wrote to make it be within compliance? Thank you for your time

Cornbredphilospher (talk) 19:29, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Cornbredphilospher (talk) 19:28, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Cornbredphilospher (talk) 19:27, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

It was a completely unsourced section with a adverty image. I suggest you don't add it at all - we do not need a list of various types of things that might be found on top of a trailer. Every other trailer type of that sort on the page is anchored by a link to another Wikipedia article. MrOllie (talk) 20:14, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Ugh.... and now I'm back to square one. I was told by user 331dot to post it in the trailer section as a subcategory. My original article has taken down for not having enough high quality sources. But no such source exists. There are PLENTY of corporations and other for profit companies that have articles or blog posts detailing what a cable reel trailer is... but nothing from the academia world. I feel stuck and frustrated. That's not your problem, just venting. Cornbredphilospher (talk) 20:27, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

If no source exists, per WP:V policy requires that we leave it out, I'm afraid. MrOllie (talk) 20:28, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

The WP:V policy page was helpful. Thank you. Cornbredphilospher (talk) 20:31, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Mariewan

So back in October/November 2024, you had some dealings with this user (link to their talk page), who was prolifically adding/replacing references, overlinking, and trying to copyedit articles (with various levels of success). I'm not sure if you ever knew what happened next because you'd never commented on it, but I've been curious about your opinion for a while: after I noticed this user, I ended up indefblocking them in a remarkably poorly communicated and executed way during my admin recall discussion (the first ever), leading me to lose my adminship in a subsequent reconfirmation RFA. The above links are rather long; the TL;DR version is this Signpost story and my dedicated user subpage. As noted on Mariewan's talk page, I swiftly undid my block on them but they haven't edited since. I just wonder what your thoughts are on all this. I would've asked you privately but you don't have email enabled. As part of the fallout of Mariewan's block, I did a watchlist purge and therefore don't find/fix anywhere near as much disruptive editing as I used to, which has been a good thing for me. Graham87 (talk) 12:29, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

I hadn't seen any of that before - I don't follow RFA or the signpost. It is very unfortunate that all of that happened. My initial read is that it's an example of a long standing problem on Wikipedia, which is that it is difficult to get a lot of folks to sit still long enough to understand that edits that look superficially like good ones can actually be bad ones. MrOllie (talk) 13:48, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Sourcing

Why I need source for known info for website such as language and website content I mean how do i even get sources for this info XJUBA (talk) 00:15, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

You need them because that is how Wikipedia is written - sources are required by core policies here. See WP:V, WP:NOR, and WP:RS for a start. If you can't find sources for it, you should not add it to Wikipedia. - MrOllie (talk) 00:22, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

You did not understand my question why you need source for very obvious info like the website language is English or the website type is forums or so i don't get it XJUBA (talk) 01:37, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Click on the links in my message, your answers lie therein. MrOllie (talk) 01:46, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Unreasonable responses to suggestion for inclusion

Dear MrOllie

I am following due protocol and requesting that you reconsider the arguments made on the Talk:Circumcision page. Your responses to my request thus far have been dismissive to say the least. I do not believe that my suggestion was unreasonable, irrelevant or extreme and so to respond in the way you have seems unwarranted. I do not see why this cannot be addressed in a reasonable way.

Sincerely

Mangi89

Mangi89 (talk) 15:29, 1 February 2025 (UTC)