Some editors argue that inclusion is inappropriate because documented university-level teaching begins only in the 1820s. Others argue that, consistent with existing table precedent (founding versus charter versus formal university status, e.g., Harvard, which is included based on founding and charter despite later formal university status), UNB may be included with a clarifying Note reflecting charter authority and documentation limits, without asserting undocumented instruction.

For clarity, multiple draft phrasings of the proposed Note have been discussed above; the RfC concerns whether UNB should be included at all with a clarifying Note of this type, not endorsement of a specific final wording.

Input is sought on howWP:V,WP:BURDEN, and table precedent should be applied.Tinterest (talk)00:00, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

The new draft guideline defines an LLM, strongly advises editors not to use LLMs to add content to Wikipedia, and describes how to handle LLM-generated content that is already present.

This follows on from the RFCBEFORE discussion atWikipedia talk:Writing articles with large language models#Further amendment proposal #2: qcne, where several alternative drafts were discussed.qcne(talk)11:28, 4 December 2025 (UTC)

The RfC closer forWP:NEWLLM stated that a community consensus on identifying AI-generated text would be necessary in order for that guideline to be properly enforced.

The question for this RfC is thus: should this proposal be accepted as a supplementary essay toWP:NEWLLM (and future AI-restricting guidelines) to serve as a consensus standard for how to identify AI-generated text?Athanelar (talk)00:19, 28 November 2025 (UTC)