Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that you made a change to an article,Fiction, but you didn't provide areliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like toinclude a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see thereferencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you!Ruyter (talk •edits)06:37, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created,Template:Purpose of fiction, was tagged as a test page undersection G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use thesandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at thewelcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you maycontest the nomination byvisiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line withWikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact thedeleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a requesthere.DannyS712 (talk)23:35, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed onDraft:Escape theory requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done undersection G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguouscopyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy fromhttps://psychology.iresearchnet.com/social-psychology/social-psychology-theories/escape-theory/. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source ofinformation, but not as a source ofsentences. This part is crucial:say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violatorswill beblocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then youmust verify that externally by one of the processes explained atWikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, seeWikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look atWikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a questionhere.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you maycontest the nomination byvisiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line withWikipedia's policies and guidelines.GirthSummit _(blether)07:43, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just reverted a series of edits you made toMechanics, because they mostly consisted of direct copying from an online resource. Please read and understandWP:COPYVIO - you absolutely must not copy material directly from sources. CheersGirthSummit _(blether)11:00, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition toKottayam district has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have addedcopyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence ofpermission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please readWikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source ofinformation, but not as a source ofcontent, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously and persistent violators of our copyright policywill beblocked from editing. SeeWikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. —Diannaa 🍁 (talk)19:32, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The articlePostmodern psychotherapy has beenproposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This term is insufficientlynotable for a stand-alone Wikipedia article. The term can be mentioned in the mainPsychotherapy article, but this article should be deleted.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may bedeleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the{{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in youredit summary or onthe article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing{{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop theproposed deletion process, but otherdeletion processes exist. In particular, thespeedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, andarticles for deletion allows discussion to reachconsensus for deletion.Biogeographist (talk)13:15, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articlePostmodern psychotherapy is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according toWikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should bedeleted.

The article will be discussed atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Postmodern psychotherapy until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.Biogeographist (talk)16:36, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created,Finland, Cultural Lone Wolf, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations fromreliable,independent sources.(?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is ofcentral importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft todraftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia'sgeneral notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.Megan Barris(Lets talk📧)09:46, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)03:00, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jaravedr. It has been over six months since you last edited theArticles for Creation submission orDraft page you started, "Finland".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopediamainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simplyedit the submission and remove the{{db-afc}},{{db-draft}}, or{{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions atthis link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia!UnitedStatesian (talk)15:19, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Before writing short descriptions, please readWP:SHORTDESC (specificallyWP:HOWTOSD). Short descriptions need to begin with a capital letter andshould be brief: the guidelines ask to aim for fewer than 40 characters.Sdrqaz (talk)16:28, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently editedSuijin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageSerpent. Such links areusually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles.(Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)06:17, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)00:52, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jaravaredr. Today you deleted 3,067 characters from our article onElastic energy. See yourdiff. You marked the deletion "m" which means you consider it a minor edit. Your edit summary stated you were improving the lead.

Deletion of 3,067 characters is a substantial edit to any article. It will always be inappropriate to label a deletion of this size "m" for minor. Your deletion has removed many sentences and ideas that I consider are relevant to the topic and add value to the article. I have reverted your deletion.

If you consider the lead is in need of improvement in a way that can be achieved by removing such a large amount of text, it would be helpful if you start a new topic on theTalk:Elastic energy page and describe the problems you think currently exist in the lead, and how you think you can improve it. This will allow other interested Users to see why you are deleting so much text, and decide whether they agree with your deletion. Other Users will then have the opportunity to engage in communication with you and other interested Users. The objective is always to achieve some degree of consensus on how the article can be improved. It is rare that an article can be improved by deleting a substantial amount of text that has been assembled over many years by the efforts of multiple Users.Dolphin(t)12:34, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You marked your edit to the Vietnam War as minor, when it clearly wasn't.PhilKnight (talk)01:26, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i think it is minor edit to add simplicity to the existing content. i dont have problem you reverting it. but i do disagree if you think 'simplicity for the extremely long technical jargon filled war article is unnecessary'. i dont want to engage in edit war with anyone. it wastes my time and doesnt add real value to wikipedia.Jaravedr (talk)15:33, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions toTheological disagreement. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time becauseit consists of machine-generated text.I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information atHelp:Unreviewed new page.When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back.Alpha3031 (t •c)08:08, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing the draft. I’d like to clarify:

Is AI-assisted content, if human-edited and backed by strong, reliable sources — considered unacceptable under Wikipedia policy?

I’ve aimed to follow all content guidelines, and I’d appreciate it if you could point me to any specific policy that prohibits such content.

Thank you for your time and guidance.Jaravedr (talk)14:29, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more ofyour recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made toMontana PBS, did not appear to be constructive and have beenreverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with ourpolicies and guidelines. You can find information about these at ourwelcome page which also provides further information aboutcontributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please useyour sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message onmy talk page. Thank you.Mvcg66b3r (talk)17:02, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jaravedr: Your chatbot prompt is not generating MOS-compliant introductions. Especially the bolding is all over the place. Please go through your recent edits and fix them before doing a massive amount of additional intro expansions.Jähmefyysikko (talk)15:51, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

okay, thanks for the suggestions. I'll review all the leads.Jaravedr (talk)15:57, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, please also considerWP:MEATBOT.Jähmefyysikko (talk)16:02, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

its better to have no bold at all in any of the articles?Jaravedr (talk)16:08, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

These are mostly list articles, so seeMOS:THISISALIST for how to write the first sentence.MOS:LEAD contains more instructions.Jähmefyysikko (talk)16:12, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

right now, ill unbold all bolds, then i try to format using correct formatting later?Jaravedr (talk)16:15, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can't advice more atm, but if you find the length ofMOS:LEAD intimidating, you can try feeding it to your chatbot. It may or may not produce better results. You can also self-revert the bulk of your edits temporarily, and practice first on couple of articles until you are sure that they are MOS compliant.Jähmefyysikko (talk)16:26, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i appreciate it, i'll refine my prompt to write or generate compliant introductions.Jaravedr (talk)16:27, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I appreciate you attempting to resolve the lead issues, but please make sure you are checking what you are adding. As you are using a LLM to generate leads, please be sure the lead can be cited to reliable sources. I find it hard to believe that you are able to check the quality of an edit, and check that it matches the references, in less than 5 minutes, which you have done many times. Any information that does not appear in the body needs to be cited. For example, what are your sources for your lead expansion ofMandaue City Council orHIV/AIDS in Guinea? Also, some unnecessary bolding still remains on articles you have edited (ex.Icarus (journal)).ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!}18:45, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1. I fixed the bolding problem in almost all articles after a wikipedian told me, i dont how i missed this one. now i fixed it.Icarus (journal), i appreciate that you pointed out to me.
2. almost all my lead sections are written using existing information within a article. i use a a llm prompt and the article link to generate lead.

Any information that does not appear in the body needs to be cited. - i will fix this. i will make sure 'almost all my lead sections are written using existing information within a article' and if new information is in the lead section, i'll add sources'. i appreciate that you pointed out to me.

Mandaue City Council - i refined this article. i am giving you example of how i generate leads. below is a example. lead section is generated using existing information within article.

TheMandaue City Council (Filipino:Sangguniang Panlungsod ng Mandaue) is the unicameral legislative body of [[Mandaue]], a highly urbanized city in [[Cebu]], [[Philippines]]. Formed under the Mandaue City Charter and the [[Local Government Code of the Philippines]], it consists of ten councilors elected at large via plurality‑at‑large voting, plus two ex‑officio members—the presidents of the [[Association of Barangay Captains]] and the [[Sangguniang Kabataan]] (Youth Council)—with the vice mayor serving as presiding officer (en.wikipedia.org). Members serve three‑year terms and may be re‑elected for up to three consecutive terms, aligning with term limits set by national legislation (en.wikipedia.org). The council is empowered to enact city ordinances, approve resolutions, and oversee the annual budget—such as the ₱4.5 billion appropriation for 2025—and plays a central role in municipal governance, infrastructure development, and public service delivery (en.wikipedia.org).

what are your sources for your lead expansion ofMandaue City Council orHIV/AIDS in Guinea? - i will check other articles and improve my prompt and output. i appreciate feedbacks. if you think i am violating any policy, give me feedback, i will appreciate it.Jaravedr (talk)14:59, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

if you have any additional feedback, i am open to hear.

1. i'll make sure the lead is generated using existing information within an article or i cite sources. (thing i learned from your current feedback)

Jaravedr (talk)15:04, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently editedPeople's Party for Freedom and Democracy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageFreedom Party.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk)19:57, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

thank you, ill fix it nowJaravedr (talk)13:26, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion atWikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.Polygnotus (talk)19:03, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jaravedr did you use AI to help generate this update?[1]NicheSports (talk)14:25, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I partially used AI to help refine my writing and assist in finding sources. However, I personally verified all information and ensured that everything added is backed by reliable references before publishing.Jaravedr (talk)14:55, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any problem with any of my recent edits on 'references section'? I appreciate feedbacks.Jaravedr (talk)15:02, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Right now i am adding references or removing unsourced content (for which reliable sources isn't found). I do use tools (search engine, AI tools, etc... to find sources, fact check content, refine my writing, etc...). Is there any problem?https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=27_Club&diff=prev&oldid=1310949119 My edit summary is pretty messed up but not the internal edit. Is there any problem with the internal edit?Jaravedr (talk)15:16, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there are significant issues with this edit. It is low quality AI puffery that does not make sense in the context of the article. The edit should be reverted entirelyNicheSports (talk)15:34, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I added two references and rewrote the line to avoid starting with 'because.' I don’t see how this amounts to puffery. If you feel the edit is low quality, feel free to revert it, and we can continue the discussion on the article’s talk page.Jaravedr (talk)15:51, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"I didn’t generate or add new content, I only supplied references, removed the 'citation needed' tag, and rewrote the passage into a more formal, encyclopedic tone."Jaravedr (talk)15:53, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t understand why you’re calling my edit 'AI puffery.' I didn’t exaggerate or hype anything, I just improved the tone and added references. If you believe the edit is low quality or should be removed, I recommend we continue the discussion with other editors on the article’s talk pageJaravedr (talk)15:58, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You may not have intended to, but you did. The word "phenomenon" has two quite distinct definitions. One is "a fact or situation that is observed to exist or happen, especially one whose cause or explanation is in question." Another is "a remarkable person, thing, or event."

You may have meant to imply the first, but the phrase "cultural phenomenon" typically implies the second definition. This is how the AI puffery ended up in your edit. If you do not revert it I will take this to ANI.

Also, you clearly are having a difficult time using LLMs in a policy-compliant manner. I would strongly advise you to no longer use AI tools in your editing. If you make any more edits that have clear signs of AI misuse I will open another ANI case regarding your edits.NicheSports (talk)16:39, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

acultural phenomenon means:

• Definition: A practice, trend, idea, or event that becomes widely recognized and shared within a culture or society.
• Key traits:
  • Itcaptures public attention and spreads broadly.
  • It issymbolic orrepresentative of certain values, fears, or fascinations in society.
  • It mayinfluence art, media, or everyday behavior, or become part of cultural memory.
• Examples:
  • The27 Club (mythologizing artists who died at 27).
  • TheBeatlemania craze of the 1960s.
  • Internet memes (like the “Rickroll”).
  • Fashion or lifestyle movements (like punk culture).

So when we say the27 Club is a cultural phenomenon, it means it’s not just a list of musicians who died young — it’s themyth, fascination, and social narrative that has grown around that coincidence.Jaravedr (talk)13:44, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=27_Club&diff=prev&oldid=1310949119 here's the diff.

Your reasoning doesn’t make sense to me. If you believe this is a serious issue, please take it to ANI or bring in experienced editors who can give me a reasonable explanation. I have no problem with escalation I just want clarity.

To be clear:

• I have stopped generating lead sections.
• I am now adding references for "citation needed" tags.
• I rewrote a sentence that began with "because" for grammar and readability (under the identifiedmembers section in27 club)
• I did use digital tools, but nothing inappropriate.

What exactly is the problem with my edits? Unless I receive a reasonable explanation, I will wait until20 September 2025.

In the previous discussion, a few editors gave me reasons to stop generating leads with LLMs. I admitted I was wrong and stopped. (All my edits were reviewed, not blind or bot-like.)

Now, if no logical reason is given, if no ANI is started, and if no experienced editor provides a good explanation, then I will continue contributing in the way I believe is best for Wikipedia and humanity.Jaravedr (talk)14:03, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I opened a new ANI thread - see notice below. ThanksNicheSports (talk)14:39, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion atWikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.NicheSports (talk)14:39, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have beenblockedindefinitely from editing certainnamespaces ((Article)) for repeateddisruptive use of LLMs bythe consensus of the Wikipedia community. As this is a community-imposed block, any unblock request will have to be presented to the community atWP:AN. Note that any unblock request will need to be written in your own words, as any further use by you of AI/LLMs will be very dimly viewed by the community.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia'sguide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page:{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  The Bushranger_{One ping only}05:42, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]