Daniel.olsher

May 2023

Hello, I'm Acroterion. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Acroterion (talk) 10:24, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

And don't remove or edit the responses of other editors, or edit your original comments after others have replied. If you have something else to say, do so in a separate part of the thread. Acroterion (talk) 11:16, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

As invited, I've included a citation and re-added the content. Two other companies are listed here with cites to their Websites, so a similar cite appears proper here.

In addition, I updated my edits on the Talk page to maintain the original proposal that had already received a comment.

Thank you for your help and guidance - please do let me know if any further concerns... Daniel.olsher (talk) 12:13, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. MrOllie (talk) 12:22, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Daniel.olsher. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 11:55, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

In this specific case, it is necessary for me to make edits because we just launched this publicly and it will take time for knowledge to propagate. But we are engaging in a full and complex process with respect to the substantive edits, so any potential POI issues should be mitigated. Daniel.olsher (talk) 12:23, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

You may think it is necessary - but Wikipedia does not. You are plainly violating Wikipedia's policies. MrOllie (talk) 12:24, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Simply stating that there are violations of policies, and unilaterally determining that some companies can be listed, but others cannot, is not in keeping with the values and standards of Wikipedia. It is essential that you explain why it is not self-promotion for OpenAI and DeepMind to be listed on the AGI page, but it is if we are. Is your desire that you wish for someone else to insert the content? Daniel.olsher (talk) 12:28, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

OpenAI and DeepMind have extensive third party sourcing available, as well as Wikipedia articles of their own. Your company does not. Wikipedia is not a venue to spread information about new developments, see WP:NOTSOAPBOX. - MrOllie (talk) 12:35, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

We are also providing third party sourcing- with respect, what yardstick are you using to determine 'how much' sourcing is enough to be able to be listed as a company associated with this? It appears you may be applying a personal bias. Daniel.olsher (talk) 12:39, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

You have provided exactly zero independent sources. MrOllie (talk) 12:40, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

The cites provided for the other two companies are their Websites. Why isn't that same standard applicable here? Daniel.olsher (talk) 12:42, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

OpenAI and DeepMind have extensive third party sourcing available, as well as Wikipedia articles of their own. MrOllie (talk) 12:54, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

We also have extensive third party sourcing - the purpose of the AGI talk topic was to determine which path through this made the most sense for the forum. I'll continue to work this there... Daniel.olsher (talk) 13:24, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

And if the only claim being made is that we are a company associated with this, the cite is enough for that. Daniel.olsher (talk) 12:41, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

We don't list every company that is 'associated' with a field, we need a much higher bar than that since we are not the yellow pages. MrOllie (talk) 12:57, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

I've addressed this on the talk page for AGI - thank you. Daniel.olsher (talk) 13:22, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Use of talk pages

Talk page postings are meant to be a record of discussion as it happened. You should not be editing talk postings - even your own - after they have received replies. Under no circumstances should you edit or remove talk page postings made by someone else. MrOllie (talk) 12:14, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Yes, this was already addressed; the comment was related to an obsolete approach, but I've returned that approach and comment so as to retain the context. Daniel.olsher (talk) 12:21, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

You just edited an old post again, and deleted my talk page post at the same time. You must stop doing this. MrOllie (talk) 12:34, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Why can't I edit a talk page post if I don't remove previous comments and don't change the meaning? I'll put your self-promotion comment back and reply to it but it's improper for you to continue reverting all my edits. Daniel.olsher (talk) 12:37, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Read WP:TALK, everything is explained there. Just stop editing your existing post. If you want to write something new, add a reply. Please make some minimum effort to respect the Wikipedia community's practices. Thanks. MrOllie (talk) 12:39, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Paid-editing disclosure

Hi, Daniel.olsher, you might have missed this in the soup of links above, but please read WP:PAID. Editing done as part of your job, as you seem to be implying, must be disclosed according to those instructions, to be compliant with the Wikimedia Terms of Use, so please do what is necessary. Thanks. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 13:54, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for reaching out - I'm not really paid to do this per se - I'm the one who created this technology and am the foremost expert in it, so there's nobody better placed than me to talk about it...if necessary I can make that more clear but in my thinking I'm just writing about what I know - definitely not doing it on anyone else's behalf... Daniel.olsher (talk) 16:01, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

You still have a direct interest in the concept and other edits you're adding. "Not really being paid to do this per se " is a quibble and an evasion of that central issue. You must make a plainly-evident disclosure, and rigorously abide by the conflict-of-interest policy. See WP:COI. You can't sidestep this. Acroterion (talk) 16:32, 9 May 2023 (UTC)