User talk:Tigers1984

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Welcome!

[edit]

Hi Tigers1984! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! —Bagumba (talk) 16:35, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

July 2025

[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Waxworker. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Scalextric (video game), but you didn't provide a reliable source. On Wikipedia, it's important that article content be verifiable. If you'd like to resubmit your change with a citation, your edit is archived in the page history. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Waxworker (talk) 09:42, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thank you so much for flagging. All my edits were drawn from the existing citations already listed on the page. I didn't conduct new original research. Rather, I just expanded upon the existing section in an attempt to make for a more substantive reading experience for users viewing that article. Please let me know if additional action is still needed. Thank you again! Tigers1984 (talk) 19:57, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In-line citations are needed so it's clear what references the content added is sourced from - the 'Development' section added was unsourced. Waxworker (talk) 09:16, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Got it, thanks Tigers1984 (talk) 13:12, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Re. your additions to Evelyn Waugh, can I suggest that you discuss on the article Talkpage, before making major amendments. The article has gone through a thorough review process and, while it is as susceptible to further improvement as is any other article, the additions you're making don't seem, to me at least, to bring an overall improvement. I should also say that the prose style you use seems rather forced - is it a summary of another source, or generated in some other way? KJP1 (talk) 20:42, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey -- certainly a reasonable request. However, everything I included you should be able source in Waugh's Britannica entry, the Evelyn Waugh Society website, and the book "Evelyn Waugh: A Life Revisited" which came out in 2016. I believe the prose style I've used is neutral and clinical with some deal of descriptiveness for readability, which I understand to be preferable in an encyclopedic context. While I am fairly new to editing on Wikipedia, I have copy editing experience professionally. I am also from the U.S., and am therefore probably naive to some of the English literary customs, which only reinforces your point about utilizing the Talk Page. My feeling about the Waugh page was that it could stand to benefit from further segmentation and some contextual passages concerning style and biographical experiences. Again, I do see now that this should have been addressed in the Talk Page before taking such actions. Fair and helpful feedback. Tigers1984 (talk) 14:19, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AI

[edit]

Hi, are you using AI tools for your edits here? If so, can you mention:

  • What tool(s) you are using, and what versions
  • The process: what features, prompts, etc
  • What review you are doing of the output

Thank you. Gnomingstuff (talk) 21:39, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I often run my edit drafts through an LLM for copy editing and assistance conforming language to neutral, encyclopedic style. The only one I've experimented with is ChatGPT 4o and ChatGPT 5. I almost always include third-party sourcing and cite Wikipedia editing doctrine but I apologize for any errors. What do you recommend? Tigers1984 (talk) 01:21, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]