Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 01:02, 26 April 2023

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!

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19 Archive 20

This page has archives. Sections may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

American primacy

Earlier you removed my addition on the Polarity (international relations) page under American primacy for focusing on primary sources. Why was it removed? I'm confused because everything else in this section seems to focus on primary sources too.Yaboijoshy (talk) 21:51, 16 April 2023 (UTC) Yaboijoshy (talk) 21:33, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Your additions seem to be particularly focused on adding opinions by those two economists to the article. Are you associated with them in some way? MrOllie (talk) 21:55, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

I am not associated with them. I recently found their work and thought it would be a good addition to the page. I am also new to editing Misplaced Pages and am still learning. The reason all of my edits focus on them is because those are the only edits I have made on all of Misplaced Pages to date. Yaboijoshy (talk) 22:00, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

I am an undergraduate and wrote a paper (not published to the internet) about this topic in economics. I was offered extra credit for using what I learned through my research to edit a Misplaced Pages page with a sizeable entry (150+ words) and have that entry stay up for 3 weeks. My motive and personal views are irrelevant, though. I did not delete the information of any other contributors and a reader of the page could come to any number of conclusions by reading the section. I presented the information I had learned in a similar tone to the rest of the section and the larger article. Yaboijoshy (talk) 22:32, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Please direct your instructor to Misplaced Pages:Student_assignments. Your grade should not be contingent on text remaining in the article for some period of time, that has proven to lead to bad outcomes for everyone involved. MrOllie (talk) 23:30, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Regardless, my sources for my contribution were on-par with and similar to the other ones on the page. Since I fully intend on continuing to edit Misplaced Pages outside of the classroom setting, it would be helpful if you could tell me what I did wrong so I can learn from the experience. I understand that some of the discussion points are controversial. But, Misplaced Pages articles display information from sources with a variety of views. If I were to mention the ideologic bias of the economists would that make my addition acceptable? Yaboijoshy (talk) 01:43, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I can't speak to what might or might not be acceptable to everyone who edits that page, that's the sort of discussion you should be having on the article talk page. Since you expect to get credit for this, be sure to mention the conflict of interest if you decide to open a discussion. MrOllie (talk) 01:45, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't expect anything from my contribution. Do you know what "extra credit" means? I have no problem with my contributions being removed if an adequate reason is provided. You said your reason for removing my work was for "undue reliance on primary sources". Despite this, all of the information in the American primacy section seems to also come from books written by the authors they mention. Following this logic, why was my contribution removed while everyone else's is fine? Yaboijoshy (talk) 18:25, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Do you know what "extra credit" means? I know it means you have a reason other than improving the encyclopedia involved in your editing, which is what the WP:COI guidelines are all about. I take no position on other stuff in the article - there may well be other problems. That doesn't mean that you should add more problems. MrOllie (talk) 18:53, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

deleting my edits

ok, my edit on gpus, was kinda off, but my edit on Nintendo switch lite was perfect why were you supposed to change it Accensions (talk) 12:11, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

We don't put minor trivia in the lead sections of articles. MrOllie (talk) 12:19, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

well i had to add it, since it wasnt in the rest of the page. not text nor atleast an image Accensions (talk) 12:22, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

1) The lead summarizes the body of the article - nothing should be in the lead without being in the article body and 2) See WP:V and WP:RS, everything you add must be supported by a citation to a reliable source. - MrOllie (talk) 12:23, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

well, a reliable source is the Nintendo switch website itself, and about "1" okay ill add a paragraph about the colors and the release date of each color, please let me do it... I really want to do an actual wikipedia edit, since im new to wikipedia editing Accensions (talk) 12:27, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

That's already in the article, we don't need the same information twice. MrOllie (talk) 12:33, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

that shouldnt be in the "release" section, you should add a "colors" section Accensions (talk) 12:35, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

It's good where it is. If you're just looking for an edit to make, pick something off the list at Category:Articles_needing_cleanup and make some fixes. MrOllie (talk) 12:53, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

List of environmental organizations

added the organization ParaLaNaturaleza to the Environmental Organizations list for Puerto Rico and you removed it. It is a very large organization and I referenced their webpage. Why is it removed? (talk) 10:00, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

That is a list of organizations with preexisting Misplaced Pages articles. - MrOllie (talk) 11:59, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Olfactory art

Hello MrOllie, Why have you deleted the additional information and links about Perfumed Art and Olfactory which is in direct relation with the olfactory art thematic, bringing more references in this field? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hermes1968 (talk • contribs)

Misplaced Pages is not a link directory, it is not a place to dump lists of links. See WP:NOT and WP:ELNO. It is also not a place to post opinionated essays, see WP:NPOV and WP:NOR. - MrOllie (talk) 20:30, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

It is additional information and absolutely not post opinionated essays, it is the source of information completing the previous incomplete list about olfactory art. Are you specialist in this domain and how you could cut the information withouts understanding? Hermes1968 (talk) 20:35, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is not an indiscriminate collection of information, it is an encyclopedia and essays expressing opinions are off topic here. I understand your 'information', I simply disagree that it belongs on this web site. MrOllie (talk) 20:36, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Your opinion is discriminative because you are mentioning (" I simply disagree that it belongs on this web site").

and writing by separate e-mail:

("If you continue to disrupt Misplaced Pages, you may be blocked from editing". MrOllie (talk) 17:39, 23 April 2023 (UTC))

Creative or Corrupt? How Wikipedians decide if a new contribution is "good" or "bad" - ref: Ethics.harvard.edu Hermes1968 (talk) 20:18, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Both are true: if you keep adding material that violates Misplaced Pages's content policies, you will probably be blocked. MrOllie (talk) 20:21, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

The material which I am adding is an additional and new information in this field and you even don’t know the context because you are deleting the information immediately 2 min after every edition i.e. you are even not reading and not analysing, just deleting. You are a troublemaker in a useful Misplaced Pages community. Hermes1968 (talk) 19:26, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

It plainly violates Misplaced Pages's content policies. I have read it. It does not belong here. Making personal attacks on me will not change that. MrOllie (talk) 20:23, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Where are the violations in this below text?

<redacted> Hermes1968 (talk) 20:44, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

The whole thing, from top to bottom, is a violation of WP:NPOV and WP:ADVERT. - MrOllie (talk) 20:50, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Report for vandalism

{{subst:Uw-delete2|article=MrOllie|content=Your behavior on Misplaced Pages is unacceptable and against Misplaced Pages's policies. You have been repeatedly vandalizing articles and stalking my edits in order to delete them. This is not only unproductive but also disruptive to the community. Your continued behavior of adding vague comedic replies such as "No thanks" or "Not really" to my edits is not funny and will not be tolerated. I am reporting you for vandalism, and this report will be reviewed by administrators. Please see the following sources for evidence: , , and .}} Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Misplaced Pages without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. IT Photography (talk) 12:17, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Reverting your additions of inappropriate images is not vandalism - Misplaced Pages is not a product showcase. MrOllie (talk) 12:24, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Reading your answer it is very clear that you have not even bothered to take a look at the articles in which you have been reverting my edits. Your behaviour is suspicious for using automation programs or apps in order to perform wikipedia edits. I would recommend you to read an article before reverting an edit, and to put a minimum ammount of effort. We can discuss this in a civilized matter, or I can prepare a more serious report for your suspicious automoderation actions, and the use of spam/automation tools.

I am not aware of your intentions, but preventing wikipedia users from upgrading the old images that have been laying around in Misplaced Pages is odd and suspicious. If my images were from the same brand or product I would understand your concern, however, providing your instant actions and stalking of my edits it is clear that your actions differ from your words and unfunny vague statements. IT Photography (talk) 12:34, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

You should go ahead and put in that report now, I don't discuss with people who are engaged in making empty threats about such things. MrOllie (talk) 12:35, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Let me understand something. If I photoshop away the logos of the computer monitors, webcams, and etc, would you keep deleting them or what is your problem? IT Photography (talk) 12:39, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Right now, my problem is a newbie user who came on my talk page to make baseless threats. MrOllie (talk) 12:51, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

I would recommend you to answer questions unironically. What is the problem with the images and how could that be fixed? Before you reply, I suggest you to let sarcasm or jokes aside this time, absolutely no one finds them funny. IT Photography (talk) 13:00, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Make the report. Do not post on my talk page again. MrOllie (talk) 13:03, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

... and note that the jokes are funny. - Roxy the dog 15:28, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Linus Pauling/Vitamin C section

Why did you revert my addition of recent work showing that high dose IV vitamin C can enhance the anti-tumor response of immunotherapy? There was no prior discussion of how high dose IV VitC affects immunotherapy, only chemotherapy. It is a very promising finding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.252.154.2 (talk) 21:10, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

See WP:MEDRS. We don't report on mouse studies. Misplaced Pages is not the place to try to argue with mainstream medical science on this. - MrOllie (talk) 21:12, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

In no way did I "argue with medical science" nor does the edit include medical advice. The research is from the highly regarded translational journal Science Translational Medicine. I did not argue, nor do I think, that the high dose vitamin C treatment is at the point of being clinically ready. However, the Linus Pauling article so far only mentions studies about direct effects of vitamin C on tumors, or interactions with chemotherapy. Immunotherapy, which has shown incredible promise in the last 15 years, should be mentioned. There is a chicken and egg problem in the very fact that Vitamin C is controversial slows down any clinical trials, so it will be a while until we have clinical confirmation of results. However, the recent study is one of the first quality studies which suggests that early claims made by Linus Pauling may not have been as off the mark as some may think, and is thus relevant to the Linus Pauling page. This is not a clinical page, it's about Linus Pauling. Note, I have not made edits to the Vitamin C page itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pazimzadeh (talk • contribs)

The guidelines outlined in WP:MEDRS are very stringent, most peer-reviewed journal articles do not meet them. Those guidelines also apply to any biomedical claim on any article in Misplaced Pages. Please read and understand the guideline, and then follow it going forward. Misplaced Pages is fine taking a long time, we have no deadline and by design we do not write about bleeding edge medical studies. - MrOllie (talk) 21:32, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

PS: You should be taking this to the article talk page. If you keep edit warring in stuff that fails MEDRS you're probably going to get blocked. MrOllie (talk) 21:35, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

That the edit fails WP:MEDRS is your personal opinion. WP:MEDRS mentions 'in vitro' studies and does not mentioned translational or 'in vivo' mouse studies. You either did not read, or did not comprehend the article that I linked, since I did not make any biomedical claim, and neither does the source. You should take the time to read the article before unilaterally deciding whether it is fringe or not. If you find flaws in the article or find that I have not represented it accurately, you are free to clarify. If you do not have the credentials or understanding of biology, then perhaps you should refer to someone who does, or defer until you have done so. While the Linus Pauling article mentioned direct effects of VitC on tumors and on chemotherapy, immunotherapy is never mentioned. Immunotherapy has been extremely promising over the last 15 years and should not be ignored. Blocking me is not an effective way of having a conversation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pazimzadeh (talk • contribs) 21:49, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

in vitro or animal studies obviously means either, not both at the same time. We simply do not cover recent findings based on single animal studies. I'm not going to block you, but if you keep edit warring I'd have to refer the matter to an administrator who certainly will. At any rate, please refer any followup to the article's associated talk page. Perhaps someone will agree with you there, though I would be very surprised. MrOllie (talk) 21:55, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

WP:MEDRS States "avoid over-emphasizing single studies, particularly in vitro or animal studies." You should read the article that I cited, and let me know specifically in what way I have over-emphasized anything within it, or its implications. I specifically mentioned that the results are "pre-clinical" which is what WP:MEDRS recommends.

The Science Translational Medicine paper is also not a small-scale study, which WP:MEDRS frowns upwon, as several different kinds of immunotherapy were tested. I am not sure if you know that, since there is no way that you have had the time to read the paper in the 3 minute time period before you reverted my edit. Note that in addition to primary literature, which is not what WP:MEDRS prefers, my original edit also included a reference to a review-like article from the National Cancer Institute (https://www.cancer.gov/research/key-initiatives/ras/ras-central/blog/2020/yun-cantley-vitamin-c) which is more recent (2020) than the review article linked in the Linus Pauling page (2015). This is in line with the emphasis on up-to-date information in WP:MEDRS. Furthermore, the content of the review agrees with my edit, specifically saying that "a growing number of preclinical studies are showing how high-dose vitamin C might benefit cancer patients. Importantly, these preclinical studies provide a clear rationale and potential biomarkers that may help personalize the therapeutic approach and identify patient populations that are likely to respond to high-dose vitamin C therapy."

Finally, it is clear to anyone who reads biology articles that there are many Misplaced Pages article which refer to single animal studies when there is no clinical data to refer to. For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/Interleukin_17#Role_in_psoriasis. (see all the sentences with single references). Just because a topic has been controversial in the past does not mean new data about it should not be published.

If you wish to re-phrase the wording of my edits to bring it into further compliance with WP:MEDRS then you should do that, instead of unilaterally rejecting up-to-date and sensible statements and repeatedly making strong declarative statements which misrepresent what I wrote. Specifically, you need to support your claim that the edits are "profringe", that the WP:MEDRS violation is "blatant," and that somehow what I wrote "argues with mainstream medical science," given the source material that I have cited.

If you continue to demonstrate unwillingness to read the content and/or source material that you are supervising/editing, then I will refer you to an administrator. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pazimzadeh (talk • contribs) 22:29, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't take well to empty threats. Just file the report now. MrOllie (talk) 22:31, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

And yet you take to making them. I have other things to do, I will file the report once I learn how to do it properly, since I don't live on wikipedia and have other work to attend to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pazimzadeh (talk • contribs) 22:34, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Great. Don't post here again until you do. MrOllie (talk) 22:35, 25 April 2023 (UTC)