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!

Not faced by anyone your view

Hello MrOllie. Despite making detailed revisions and citing highly credible sources with strong social implementation as you suggested, I've been troubled by your abrupt revert. Please refrain from reverting without reading the content. Kindly review the edits made with great effort and make appropriate edits in line with the content. Please respond on the talk page as well.--Neotesla (talk) 00:57, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

I am going to guess at what you're trying to say, since this message is barely comprehensible English. I have read all the content, and I disagree with it. You know this, because it is not the first time we have discussed it. Your edit warring is not a fix for the numerous policy problems that have been explained to you. MrOllie (talk) 00:58, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

No-Code Development

Dear MrOllie,

I am writing in regards to my recent edit to the No-code development platform page that was removed by you without any explanation. I am hoping to understand why my edit was removed and to find a resolution to this issue.

As a Wikipedia editor, I understand that accuracy and reliability are crucial to maintaining the integrity of the platform. However, I do believe that my edit was relevant, well-researched, and contributed positively to the page.

I would appreciate it if you could kindly explain why my edit was removed and provide any constructive feedback that could help me improve my contributions to the platform in the future.

Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. Themdfarhan (talk) 18:07, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

I listed the relevant policy in my edit summary: WP:ELNO. Wikipedia isn't a link directory and your list of external links didn't belong on the article. - MrOllie (talk) 18:12, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt response. I appreciate your dedication to maintaining the accuracy and reliability of Wikipedia.

I understand your concern about the links not belonging to the article. However, I believe that the event links I included were relevant to the topic and provided additional information that would be useful to readers.

If there are specific guidelines or policies that I should follow when adding external links to Wikipedia, please let me know. I am always open to constructive feedback and learning how to improve my contributions to the platform. Themdfarhan (talk) 18:19, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Please explain your connection to the company Quixy and/or the events you're trying to list on the page. MrOllie (talk) 18:20, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your follow-up question. I must disclose that I am affiliated with Quixy, and my edit was made in the interest of providing accurate and relevant information to the page's readers. However, I understand the importance of maintaining objectivity and avoiding conflicts of interest when contributing to Wikipedia. As such, I have taken great care to ensure that the information I provided is unbiased. As no-code evangelist I still think these event add great value and if you check all the events they don’t belong to a single organisation. I request you check the links again.

Thanks Themdfarhan (talk) 18:27, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

You're violating Wikipedia's terms of use as outlined in WP:PAID, and you absolutely should not be adding external links to sites affiliated with Quixy. MrOllie (talk) 18:28, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

I want to clarify that my edit includes events from multiple companies, not just Quixy.

I understand Wikipedia's guidelines on conflict of interest state that "paid or unpaid, editors with a conflict of interest are strongly discouraged from directly editing an affected article". My intention in adding these links is to provide additional information to readers that is not already included in the article. Themdfarhan (talk) 18:36, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Just stop adding mentions of Quixy, and stop adding spammy links. Your intentions may be good but you are obviously violating our guidelines and policies. Thanks. MrOllie (talk) 18:44, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

CO2 coalition

I edited the CO2 Coalition to accurately reflect what it is they do, specifically explaining the benefits of CO2 in the atmosphere. You removed my edit without explanation, and reverted the page to the inaccurate description of the CO2 Coalition as a 'climate denier'. There is no such thing as 'Climate Denial' except in the political debate arena. Scientifically changes in climate are well known and accepted by every scientist. What is lacking in today's discussion is an explanation of well known benefits of CO2 such as plant fertilization. Yet you deleted without explanation my edits. Wikipedia exists to crowd source human knowledge and your political editing detracts from Wikipedia's mission. Please take your discussion to a 'climate denial' page and cease from inaccurately censoring other contributors speech. Thank you. Had3Mel (talk) 21:22, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

You whitewashed the article by removing well-sourced content, creating a massive neutrality problem. Repairing such a problem is not 'censoring other contributors speech.' If you must follow up on this, do so at the article's associated talk page, not my personal talk page. But I firmly suggest you have a read of WP:FRINGE and drop it. MrOllie (talk) 21:38, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

No thanks, I'm done with Wikipedia. It has become an unreliable and horribly biased playground for ideologues. Not fixable. Had3Mel (talk) 15:07, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Microbiome

In the article Microbiome, you deleted what seems to me an entirely relevant addition, an addition which I would assess as appropriate. Your edit summary says enigmatically "citespam", without any indication of what you might mean by that. What am I missing? — Epipelagic (talk) 01:46, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

It was added by a sock account, part of a set of socks that systematically adds citations to a small group of academics. If you think it benefits the article feel free to put it back. MrOllie (talk) 01:50, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

This addition is important for Wikipedia community. It took me a long time to read the literature and update this value. Levyitau (talk) 10:46, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Which is the "last account" you refer to on their user page? SmartSE (talk) 17:19, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Don't worry - I found it. Orrl (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) SmartSE (talk) 17:25, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, that's the one time I was able to get some talk page engagement. There are more, the oldest one I found goes back to 2011 or so. MrOllie (talk) 17:51, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

It is very nice to see the conspiracy.

I am not related to any of the sock accounts that you have mentioned.

I am a researcher at Yale University and I am an expert on network science and ecology and its applications, and I am very surprised by your decisions, when cutting my text.

I was citing more than a dozen of scientist.

I completely understand your point, and I saw what you mention as sock puppets, but you are wrong about me.

I fully disagree with your decision that hurts the community of Wikipedia readers (as you saw for example in Human Microbiome).

It seems that we will not agree on this case, that you delete my contributions. Neither one of us will give up on his truth, thus I would like to appeal to a third party.

Could you please tell me what is the recommended procedure in this case?

Best regards,

Levyitau Levyitau (talk) 19:06, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

And yet you have made identical edits to the socks. MrOllie (talk) 19:08, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Dear MrOllie,

It is not accurate. In some of my edits I adopted prior versions. In many others, I written the text from scratch.

I understand the issue that you are raising, and I don't have any better solution, besides focusing on the scientific community which I am a part of.

The text I wrote is beneficial to the good of all. I am following the Wikipedia rules and I am writing about many scientific studies and contributing to a wide range of values, that benefits from the science of complex systems.

There was no rational reason to erase my text on biological networks, aging, microbiome and more.

Thus, I kindly ask you to reconsider your decision, or could you please tell me what is the recommended procedure to appeal in this case? Levyitau (talk) 19:14, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

I do not believe that you decided to do this independent of the many sock accounts that have been spamming this stuff. I decline to be your tutor on Wikipedia procedures, as I believe it would be to the detriment of the community to assist you in wasting the community's time. MrOllie (talk) 19:17, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

The identical edits that were made, were to scientific publications with more than 3000 citations. Levyitau (talk) 19:18, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Just stop spamming us. MrOllie (talk) 19:19, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

You are being rude. I will ignore that.

I see that you are not responding to my questions.

Are you willing to allow me to undo what you erased?

Or can you please tell me if I should appeal your decisions instead? Levyitau (talk) 19:21, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

No, I am not willing to allow you to continue spamming. Don't post on my user talk page again, you are no longer welcome here. MrOllie (talk) 19:25, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

OK.

I will not give up. Wikipedia is bigger than MrOllie.

Instead of making true arguments, you spam and misuse your power, and disrespect the community of new editors.

I will find the way to appeal without your help.

Don't worry - I will not write here anymore. Levyitau (talk) 19:31, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

No account for "User talk:MrOllie"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/User_talk:MrOllie "User talk:MrOllie" is not registered on this wiki. Please check CentralAuth to see if it is registered on other wikis. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAuth/User_talk:MrOllie There is no global account for "User talk:MrOllie" Novalis69 (talk) 16:29, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Huh? Why are you posting nonsense on my talk page? MrOllie (talk) 16:31, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

I also notice that User:Novalis69 had one edit in the past 8 years before today, and that they previously edited many of the same articles that User:Eklir has recently been editing. Looks very ducky to me. Donald Albury 16:35, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Looks like a SPI was filed. I'm guessing you're right, but we'll see what the official results are. MrOllie (talk) 16:52, 14 April 2023 (UTC)