User talk:LWG
WP:RETENTION: This editor is willing to lend a helping hand. Just ask.
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Hello, I just wanted to let you know I have edited my remarks, due to the fact I have substantilly expanded the article sourcing at The Sol Foundation. You may wish to read my update and if it has any relevance to your own remarks there, should they warrant updating or amending. -- Very Polite Person (talk) 01:38, 2 May 2025 (UTC)
May 2025
[edit]I have made the important changes in Ardhavatrao suggested by the reviewer and removed unrelated information, such as details about the Padhye family, which were not relevant to the article. Please review the article again and let me know if any further changes are needed. Morekar (talk) 15:11, 5 May 2025 (UTC)
- @Morekar: I don't want to talk to your AI chatbot. It's obvious that you just pasted my review into ChatGPT, updated the article, and pasted ChatGPT's response here. Don't do that. It's disruptive and can lead to your being blocked from this project. I'd rather you speak Marathi or Hindi or whatever version of English is comfortable for you - I am willing to put in the effort to cross language/culture barriers but I am not willing to have a conversation with your AI. The concerns that I described in my comment on the talk page have not been addressed and cannot be addressed by further chatbot writing. You need to read WP:LLM, especially WP:LLMCIR, and you need to make sure any LLM-generated text you post to Wikipedia in the future is marked with the LLM used to generate the text. Otherwise you are just wasting your time and ours by filling Wikipedia with content that someone will eventually have to come along and delete. -- LWG talk 15:49, 5 May 2025 (UTC)
Protestantism section in the article Fall of man
[edit]Hi LWG, thank you for your contributions! I see that you are currently busy with several cleanups, but could you please explain why this "hallucinated" content in particular has been removed? It didn't look like an original research to me, although that may be the case; I don't know who is the original editor to which you were referring to. GenoV84 (talk) 19:08, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
- @GenoV84: The user in question is Whirlingmerc, who was recently blocked for, among other things, a pattern of copy/pasting output from ChatGPT or similar into Wikipedia without checking that the content was accurate. As I worked through their contributions trying to verify sources, I discovered many cases where the cited sources did not contain anything resembling the claims they were attached to, including situations as egregious as "in book such-and-such, author so-and-so says [direct quotation]" when no such quotation exists in the book in question. Just as one example from the edits you mentioned, we had the claim "Bruce Waltke similarly notes that while "woman" reflects unity, "Eve" anticipates her role in salvation." cited to pages 95-96 of this book but nothing resembling that claim exists on those pages, or anywhere else in that book as far as I can tell. Given how frequently I have found errors this egregious in this user's contributions, I don't think it's a good use of my time to scour each edit and try to track down sources just in case some of it turns out to be acceptable: better to nuke it all from orbit and rewrite quality content from scratch. -- LWG talk 19:29, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
- Well, that was definitely unexpected... you did the right thing. Thank you again for your help, happy editing! GenoV84 (talk) 20:04, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
Region Oriental: removed Tifinagh
[edit]Have you seen that the same user reverted your edit again? Bananakingler (talk) 22:39, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- I believe that was a different user. I'm not super interested in getting involved in a dispute there since I don't have strong opinions on the matter, but there reverts definitely don't seem to fit with the consensus on the talk page. -- LWG talk 00:05, 28 June 2025 (UTC)
Wikifunctions & Abstract Wikipedia Newsletter #209 is out: Coverage of 1298
[edit]There is a new update for Abstract Wikipedia and Wikifunctions. Please, come and read it!
In this issue, we share a short essay from Denny about how Wikipedias cover articles about years, and we take a look at the latest software developments.
Want to catch up with the previous updates? Check our archive!
Also, we remind you that if you have questions or ideas to discuss, the next Volunteers' Corner will be held on July 7, at 17:30 UTC (link to the meeting).
Enjoy the reading! -- User:Sannita (WMF) (talk) 14:39, 4 July 2025 (UTC)