User talk:MrOllie#Not supported by sources

File:Nuvola apps important.svg Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's harassment policy, you may be blocked from editing. Wikipedia aims to provide a safe environment for its collaborators, and harassing other users potentially compromises that safe environment.

After posting a suggested edit on a Wikipedia page with many editors, you joined an editor who singled me out and followed me, your target, from place to place on Wikipedia and deleted / reverted my entire content history.  This is known as [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:FOLLOWING&redirect=no WP:FOLLOWING], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:HOUNDING&redirect=no WP:HOUNDING] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:VAND&redirect=no WP:VAND]

After routine revision of the first article due to vandalism, you participated as a [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:MEATPUPPET&redirect=no WP:MEATPUPPET] as a proxy to avoid being flagged for [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:EDITWAR&redirect=no WP:EDITWAR] while knowingly engaged in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:HOUNDING&redirect=no WP:HOUNDING]

This disruptive behavior, may become a very serious matter and could result in blocks and other editing restrictions.

Wikihounding generally receive a warning and consider this a warning. If wikihounding persists after a warning, escalating blocks are often used, beginning with 24 hours.

This is Good Faith [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:DISPUTE&redirect=no WP:DISPUTE]. Please knock off your hounding as is bothering me. Thanks ScholarLoop (talk) 16:53, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

:I have blocked ScholarLoop for 31 hours for personal attacks and harassment. Cullen328 (talk) 17:03, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

::I was out of town for the weekend to attend a concert. Glad to see things have been going well in my absence. MrOllie (talk) 18:08, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

:::@MrOllie: I am not sure if I’m even that risky, but I’m so worried that I may cause further disruption to my further ban. 97.129.82.207 (talk) 19:21, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

::::What a strange sentence--you're worried about yourself? But far from disrupting your ban (block), you're likely strengthening it. Drmies (talk) 19:23, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Regarding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_square

Routine calculations

Shortcut

WP:CALC

Routine calculations do not count as original research, provided there is consensus among editors that the results of the calculations are correct, and a meaningful reflection of the sources.

The squares solved via algebra that I added (1x1) ... (6x6) are easily checked with basic math.

Please at least look at the results.

John Wilson — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.104.74.113 (talk • contribs)

:A routine calculation is 2+2 = 4. What you added was quite a bit beyond that. You'll need to cite a reliable source. - MrOllie (talk) 00:29, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

::Mathematical literacy may be necessary to follow a "routine" calculation, particularly for articles on mathematics or in the hard sciences. That would apply in this case, as magic squares are absolutely mathematical. 208.104.74.113 (talk) 00:40, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

:::And yet Wikipedia is built on reliable sourcing. You will not be able to just wave your hand, say 'Mathematical literacy', and add whatever you like. Cite sources or leave it out. - MrOllie (talk) 00:45, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

::::Whatever.

::::It was something that was easily verifiable and was of value to the topic.

::::I was not adding just "whatever I like". I added something that was based on mathematics and factually correct.

::::Cheers... 208.104.74.113 (talk) 00:56, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::That works for some place like stackexchange, but Wikipedia needs sources. MrOllie (talk) 01:00, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::Alright,

::::::Would it be ok to just post the 6x6 square, as is?

::::::In other words, for example, "Here is a 6x6 magic square: [ ... ]".

::::::That would be a simple factual statement, easily verified.

::::::I won't say anything about how I derived it, thus no "original research". 12.188.175.154 (talk) 19:29, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::::That would still require a citation. MrOllie (talk) 19:35, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::::https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-evidence#Mathematics 208.104.74.113 (talk) 00:45, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::And yet you will still have to comply with Wikipedia's content policies. MrOllie (talk) 01:19, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello and very sorry about this. We've got an assignment in our uni class to pick a page and update it on wikipedia and I chose the topic artificial intelligence. I certainly don't know what any of the affiliations are but I found some papers about AI and thought I would try to update the AI page with it. Sorry for the trouble! Briankirkundson (talk) 21:38, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

I know you've not exactly new here but just be mindful of the potential of the appearance of an edit war -- it might be worth it to warn them and/or report rather than revert continually. —tony^{st (talk)} 02:05, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

:Reverting vandalism and or WP:LTAs is an exemption from edit warring rules. They're reported as well. - MrOllie (talk) 02:09, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

::Aah, apologies, didn't realize the LTA. Take care! —tony^{st (talk)} 02:19, 25 May 2025 (UTC)