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 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!

Hello

How do I include the fact that there are platforms which support AI for Autism in the content ? Arthijaiswal86 (talk) 00:21, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

You don't, because Wikipedia is not a place to post advertising or link spam. MrOllie (talk) 00:25, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Unreliable source

Hello MrOllie, Hope you are doing well. i just want to know that how Wikipedia consider reliability of sources as many of my edits were deleted because of this. even though information was accurate. Kindly inform me about this.

Thanks

~~~ Kapil KapilBhardwajWiki (talk) 10:00, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

This is explained in on your own user talk page. But in a nutshell: Stop adding links to geeksforgeeks. MrOllie (talk) 12:47, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Removal of Legitimate Citations

I am sorry, but it seems that you are following my contributions and removing them on incorrect grounds. I would like a proper explanation of why legitimate references are being removed. Circus Bazaar Magazine is a pet Wiki project for me that I have been trying to get approved over a period of several years now. It is a well-established printed and globally distributed magazine based in Norway and Australia, yet for no apparent reason, you will not allow it to be referenced alongside its very well-established contributor base. Monsieur Loya (talk) 14:59, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

(by talk reader) @Monsieur Loya: So it seems that you are interested in advertising your own website (circusbazaar.com). When that got deleted, you started spamming other articles with circusbazaar.com as a citation because you're not here to write an encyclopedia. You can quit editing now or we can have you blocked. Which will it be? Chris Troutman (talk) 15:11, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

I actually do not think that I have any hope here. Circus Bazaar Magazine is a printed publication available in stores all over the Nordics, with a wealth of international contributors. Yes, I tried to produce a Wikipedia page for this, and to my great surprise (and after a lot of research), it came under complete attack and was taken down. I have made various contributions to many articles, but the creation of this page seems to be prohibited based on the assumption that I am somehow involved with the publication. Isn't it a mechanism of credibility, and with the hope to one day gain acceptance on this, that its authors reference it in their pages—as they do with other publications? I do not understand the moral landscape here. It seems unduly hostile. Monsieur Loya (talk) 18:49, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Long time editors have been on Wikipedia long enough to have seen patterns of editing. And when an editor writes a promotional article (which gets deleted) and also adds external links to the subject of that promotional article it almost always points to a conflict of interest. But whether you are being paid by them or not matters less than the pattern of promotional editing that is happening here.

If you were here help us build an encyclopedia (and not here to promote Circus Bazaar Magazine) I suggest you move on to something else, since repetitively adding links to their website is going to be viewed as linkspam. MrOllie (talk) 18:54, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

When one sees a clear gap in something that needs to be filled, one then takes on the task to fill it. Such is clearly the case here, trying to establish a perfectly notable publication as part of the Wiki project. Regarding things that matter less, I would have thought that both your points here would actually matter less than factual accounts of an author’s recent publishing history.

Such is the case with Michael Soussan’s recent article in Circus Bazaar Magazine on the Ukraine war.

Promotional language would suggest selling something, using exaggerated language, or genuine spamming. None of these definitions hold weight here, as the addition of utterly legitimate publishing history is none of these.

It is, in fact, nothing more than a true and legitimate statement of fact that adds to the richness of this platform and the depth of true bibliographic detail. Monsieur Loya (talk) 19:25, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

@Monsieur Loya: Your sophistry persuades no one. Chris Troutman (talk) 19:34, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Especially not Ponyo, who has now indeffed Monsieur Loya. Bishonen | tålk 20:14, 16 April 2024 (UTC).

The Mandela Catalogue

Hey do you mind keeping an eye on the article (and by extension the talk page) in case someone makes poorly or unsourced edits that violates BLP? Trade (talk) 20:25, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hi there, I just wanted to thank you for also keeping track of all those attempted COI edits on the "Polyvagal Theory" page. It's nice not to have to do it alone... Oleasylvestris (talk) 09:39, 18 April 2024 (UTC) Correction: I know there have also been others keeping an eye on this, this is not to undervalue their contributions. Oleasylvestris (talk) 09:41, 18 April 2024 (UTC)