Jump to content

User talk:82.27.252.215

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Your submission at Articles for creation: L-H transition (November 9)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Compusolus was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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 resubmit after they have been resolved.
Compusolus (talk) 23:22, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, 82.27.252.215! 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 the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Compusolus (talk) 23:22, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 2023

[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm CodeTalker. I noticed that you recently removed content from Hallucination (artificial intelligence) without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. CodeTalker (talk) 14:36, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
Thanks for attempting to improve Wikipedia; however, to clarify, Wikipedia's purpose is to summarize what reliable sources have previously published (see WP:V and WP:RS). Ars Technica is considered a reliable source (see WP:RSP). So if you believe the source is incorrect, you must either find another reliable source that has published your viewpoint, or convince Ars Technica to retract their previous statement. A single editor cannot unilaterally declare a reliable source to be incorrect, even if they are correct in doing so. This would lead to chaos, as no one would have any way to verify that any particular statement in Wikipedia is true or not. CodeTalker (talk) 14:41, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]