Cannabis Ruderalis

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!

MNIST database[edit]

Thanks for your work keeping the article clean. Would it be possible to use edit summaries in cases where the removed text isn't obviously problematic, such as here? Enterprisey (talk!) 02:39, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey MrOllie! Wanted to reach out regarding my recent contribution to the MNIST database page, wanted to understand what caused the issue, since I'm new to contributing. I do not represent Zalando, but it's one of the most popular datasets and I do know from very extensive experience with open-source datasets that users often confuse it with MNIST, so it felt appropriate to mention, especially since E-MNIST was also mentioned in the text.
If the issue was with linking to [https://docs.activeloop.ai docs.activeloop.ai], please let me know -> it is a link to the documentation for Hub, an [https://github.com/activeloopai/Hub open-source dataset format for AI], and a free to use and (increasingly) popular project.
Thanks a lot! Mikayelh (talk) 01:34, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
forgot to sign the message hehe ~~~~ Mikayelh (talk) 01:36, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The self published links as citations were certainly a part of it (see WP:RS, such sites and github pages aren't generally used as sources) we also should not be building a list of datasets that are sort of like MNIST, that is not the purpose of the Wikipedia article, even if their progenitors did decide to give them very confusing names. - MrOllie (talk) 01:42, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Always provide an edit summary[edit]

Hello. Your deletions at Precious Plastic [1] were difficult to review, because you gave no explanation. In future, please https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Edit_summary#Always_provide_an_edit_summary. -- Yae4 (talk) 12:30, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Socionics sources [1] [2][edit]

Your explanation of "We don't second guess reliable sources in this way" does not address the issue at hand. Both sources upon translation show a complete lack of explanation and reference to any falsifying evidence to corroborate the pseudoscience status; they simply list socionics in an x,y,z format next to other proclaimed pseudoscience.

This is an appeal to authority fallacy. Please revert the omissions back.

ThanksCirrosky54 (talk) 00:27, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We don't require reliable sources to show their work or explain all their evidence. 'Appeal to authority' is a common objection to Wikipedia's policies, but that is indeed how they are structured: see WP:V and WP:RS. MrOllie (talk) 00:29, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It appears as though Wikipedia does indeed allow such unfortunate styles of claims support. Ultimately the burden of intellectual honesty seems to be placed on the admins of the page. In this case appeal to authority is very blatant and is as bad as claiming socionics to be scientific by merit of an otherwise respected committee claiming it to be such (without referenced falsifying evidence). Cirrosky54 (talk) 00:45, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proxying for banned users.[edit]

First of all, thank you for warning me about performing proxy edits at the request of banned users. And second, speaking of banned users, could you please ban this user (https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/MwiqdohTheThird) and any other user from asking me to perform any more proxy edits? AdamDeanHall (talk) 16:03, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a wikiquote admin. I believe the place to report that kind of thing is here. - MrOllie (talk) 16:12, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

what I have to do to get an agreement ?[edit]

Check my contributed history, I have done all I could. Updated everything on the talk page. What should I do when people dont acknowledge that ? Neha.thakur75 (talk) 21:39, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If talk page discussions don't lead to an agreement, you don't get to make the changes. MrOllie (talk) 21:52, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stream of consciousness[edit]

Hi MrOllie, I'm puzzled by this recent edit: [2]. Can you please clarify. On the surface this looks like a suitable title for inclusion in the bibliography. Thanks. Rwood128 (talk) 14:22, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Every reference to Tumanov on Wikipedia was added by a single user, who has been ignoring COI warnings for years. Here's a short COIN thread about it from a few years ago. - MrOllie (talk) 14:35, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Leave a Reply