Your recent article submission toArticles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Pythoncoder was:
Your draft shows signs of having been generated by alarge language model, such as ChatGPT.Wikipedia guidelinesprohibit the use of LLMs to write articles from scratch. In addition, LLM-generated articles usually have multiple quality issues, to include:
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmitafter they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go toDraft:Barak Mori and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned andmay be deleted.
Hello,Eransharv!Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at theArticles for creation help desk. If you have anyother questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at theTeahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!—pythoncoder (talk |contribs)03:13, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent article submission toArticles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Pythoncoder was:
Your draft shows signs of having been generated by alarge language model, such as ChatGPT.Wikipedia guidelinesprohibit the use of LLMs to write articles from scratch. In addition, LLM-generated articles usually have multiple quality issues, to include:
I think you missed the point of the last decline. This looks like you fed the existing AI-generated article into ChatGPT and told it to rewrite it.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmitafter they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go toDraft:Barak Mori and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned andmay be deleted.
Your recent article submission toArticles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Monkeysmashingkeyboards was:
Your draft shows signs of having been generated by alarge language model, such as ChatGPT.Wikipedia guidelinesprohibit the use of LLMs to write articles from scratch. In addition, LLM-generated articles usually have multiple quality issues, to include:
There are citations marked as "Retrieved 6 December 2025." This draft was created on the ninth.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmitafter they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go toDraft:Barak Mori and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned andmay be deleted.
Hello Eransharv. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia'smandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category ofconflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests.Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies onneutral point of view and whatWikipedia is not and is an especially serious type of COI; theWikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin toblack-hat search-engine optimization.
Paid advocates are strongly discouraged from direct article editing and should instead propose changes on thetalk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through thearticles for creation process, rather than directly.
Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you arerequired by theWikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page atUser:Eransharv. The template{{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:{{paid|user=Eransharv|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case,do not edit further until you answer this message.331dot (talk)10:30, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @331dot and thanks for taking the time to review my edits.
I want to clarify that I don’t have any financial or professional stake in promoting this topic. I’m simply a long-time listener and fan of Barak Mori and the local jazz scene in Tel Aviv, and I’ve been trying to document his work using published sources.
The repeated resubmissions are just how I tend to approach a challenge: I keep iterating until I think I’ve understood and fixed the issues. I can see how that might look pushy or promotional from the outside, and that’s not what I intended.
I understand your concerns about conflict of interest and about biographies of living people, and I’ll be more careful to follow the guidance atWP:COI and related policies. I’m happy to adjust my approach - for example, by using the article talk page to suggest more limited, source-based changes rather than making large overhauls myself. But first, I want that an initial version of the article will be live.
If there are specific edits, phrases, or sources you see as the main problems, I’d really appreciate it if you could point to a couple of examples so I can avoid repeating the same mistakes.
So what is the next step? how can i advance this article from userspace to the main? to make it live? how can i delete the previous version that was rejected? I appreciate your help!Eransharv (talk)16:37, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
