If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, linking to me ({{Ping|Pythoncoder}}), so that I will be notified.
If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, linking to your username, so that you will be notified.
This user is a regular, and is indifferent to being templated. You may choose to template or not template him at your own discretion.
This is a Wikipediauser talk page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Pythoncoder.
Draft: National Students for Justice in Palestine
Hi @Pythoncoder! I recently contested a request for speedy deletion on my draft page for National Students for Justice in Palestine. I understand pages and edits made around the Arab–Israeli conflict require you to be an extended confirmed editor, this makes sense! However, even if I am not able to contribute myself, I would like to propose that an extended confirmed editor take this page up. Thank you! Smartgopher (talk) 22:17, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
After reviewing your feedback, I confirmed that there were errors in the sources I asked AI to write in wiki markup.
I can say with certainty that I provided AI with the sources I had checked and used them only for citation formatting assistance.
In any case, I regret that I was not careful enough and have corrected all of the errors.
I have also improved my draft to reflect your previous comments about neutrality, avoiding promotional language, and verifying sources.
I would appreciate it if you could review the updated draft when you have time, and let me know if there are any further concerns or areas for improvement.
Hi @Pythoncoder, I appreciate your suggestions and made a couple edits that I think will be beneficial. I’m trying to learn Wiki so that I can contribute to other pages for technical analysts. I am using AI to help learn all of the Wiki rules but I will be mindful of your comments and do better. Wave618 (talk) 20:26, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I feel like I’ve been making progress with my edits of finance pages since joining and learning the Wiki manual of style. Do you have any suggestions about where I can improve? Wave618 (talk) 14:12, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Pythoncoder, Request
The draft you previously rejected had not been created yet; I had only added an infobox. I have now completed it. Please review it. Thank you.
Thank you for reviewing my submission of the QBF Fraud article. I appreciate your detailed feedback regarding concerns about potential AI-generated content. I have substantially revised the article to address each of your specific points:
1. Addressing promotional tone:
The revised article maintains strict Wikipedia neutrality throughout. For example, rather than using subjective language, it presents facts objectively: "CySEC imposed administrative fines totaling €25,900" alongside the documented "€70-100 million in investor losses," allowing readers to draw their own conclusions.
2. Eliminating vague statements:
Every claim is now supported by specific, verifiable details including:
→ Exact case numbers (Criminal case No. 12001450007000902, Cyprus District Court Case 525/2022)
→ Precise financial figures (₽974 million transferred by the Borzenkov family)
→ Specific dates for all legal proceedings and regulatory actions
→ Named individuals with their exact roles and sentences
3. Encyclopedic structure:
The article now follows standard Wikipedia format with:
A properly formatted criminal case infobox
Clear section headers following established Wikipedia conventions
Factual presentation without editorial commentary
Appropriate categorization and cross-references
4. Verifiable sources:
All references are to real, accessible sources:
- Primary court documents uploaded to Wikimedia Commons
- Official CySEC regulatory decisions with direct URLs
Major Russian media outlets (Forbes Russia, Kommersant) with specific article dates
- Cyprus court judgments from the official cylaw.org database
5. Original synthesis:
Rather than paraphrasing single sources, the article synthesizes information from multiple authoritative sources, creating original summary tables and integrating facts from Russian prosecutorial documents, Cyprus court proceedings, and regulatory filings.
The revised article draws primarily from court documents, regulatory decisions, and established media sources, presenting a factual account of one of Russia's largest cross-border financial fraud cases. I believe these revisions fully address your concerns and meet Wikipedia's standards for well-sourced, neutral content.
I would welcome any additional feedback and am prepared to make further revisions if needed. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Congratulations on upgrading from copy-pasting from LLMs to copy-pasting from the talk page header. I’m still not sure whether you have read or comprehended my previous messages regarding your use of LLMs being inappropriate, but here’s another bulleted list of links that I believe are relevant here:
Hi Pythoncoder,
Can you please tell me why you are setting up my page for deletion. Could you also tell me how to stop it from getting deleted. I made this page for a family member and I would like to keep it.
Thanks,
Logan LoganPollard331 (talk) 23:03, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Pythoncoder , thank you for reviewing my draft on Avra Banerjee. I noticed that the submission was declined with the reason that it contains promotional or advertising content.
Could you kindly help me understand specifically which parts of the article or which sources were considered promotional? I’d like to revise it to meet Wikipedia’s neutrality and sourcing standards, but I want to make sure I correct the appropriate sections. Swtysinha (talk) 05:15, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for reviewing my draft Draft:Jaxay Shah. I noticed it was tagged for speedy deletion under G11 for promotional content.
I’d appreciate any brief guidance you could give on which parts of the article felt promotional to you. I’m open to revising it to meet neutrality and sourcing standards if possible.
I just read Qcne’s advice on your talk page, and I agree with what he said. The purpose of Wikipedia articles are not to convince you of how great a person/company is, it’s to describe facts about them as neutrally as possible with high quality sources. Also, please don’t use ChatGPT to edit pages. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs)09:26, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You declined this draft twice, stating that it appeared to have been written by a large language model. I have reviewed it, and I don't see the tells of a large language model, but I know that some of those signs are only obvious to those who know what to look for. I have moved it to Draft:Exodus Wallet. If you still see evidence that it was generated by AI, there is a new speedy deletion criterion, G15. If you still think it is AI slop, you can tag it. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:00, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I’ve talked with the page creator on their talkpage since that second decline, and they have revised the page to verify the content, fix some of the markup, and add sources. I think the main tell for me was the use of narrow nonbreaking spaces, an extremely obscure Unicode character that ChatGPT loves to insert in between proper names for some reason. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs)09:17, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
PEP Buddy Topic Rejected
Hi, I agree that my post took the help of LLMs. But the information and 25+ sources are absolutely correct and free of the bias because its quoting independent research articles.
Contrary to your claims, I found multiple instances of promotional language in the article (“innovative”, “representing an advancement…”). Also, the “media coverage” sections are inappropriate for an encyclopedia article — LLMs tend to get so hung up on notability that their algorithms seem to think it’s a good idea to throw in as many possibly-relevant sources as possible into lists, instead of writing prose and using sources to back up the claims in said prose, like a human would. My suggestion is that you read Your First Article and rewrite the draft in your own words. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs)17:24, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the feedback on the draft article noted above, I am very new to this. I have re-written it. I have used AI in order to have correct format for the references. I believe this page will interest many editors due to Michael's contribution towards Irish History and am only trying to begin the page to kickstart that. I am open to more feedback in order to ensure the article is approved.
Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.
You have been trouted for: YOUR REASON HERE Zeus1134 (talk) 13:26, 11 August 2025 (UTC) This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage? What's that even supposed to mean I've been asked to translate the ALREADY EXISTING PAGE in macedonian language to English? why was it declined?!?!?![reply]
While I can see that the Macedonian version of the page doesn’t have any references either, it is a requirement on the English Wikipedia that all biographies of living people be backed up by reliable sources. I can see that you’ve added a few since I declined your draft, though reference #1 looks like it has a couple missing fields that need to be filled in. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs)13:42, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The image is a screenshot from a video game, and the copyright to those is normally owned by the company that published the video game. You uploaded the image to Wikimedia Commons, which only allows images released under a free license — see c:Commons:Licensing for more on this. Since the image File:Dstroy.png is probably copyrighted, I have nominated it for deletion. If you do have the rights to use the image and you can provide proof, you can email the Volunteer Response Team.
The picture I included in this article is there since 2006 it seems, and was not uploaded by myself, and is a part of a screenshot of the game.
I am one of the creator of the original game, I can get in contact with the team about it. Even though, a better screenshot made by us would of course be more legit, but I don't know how to place that into wikicommons without being strike down. Nicolas riviere (talk) 09:22, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Hi @Pythoncoder,
Thank you for reviewing my earlier submission for Draft:Objective Platform. I've made substantial edits based on your feedback:
- Removed promotional or marketing-style language
- Removed detailed product and client sections
- Focused on verifiable, encyclopaedic content only
- Improved reliance on independent and reliable third-party sources
I'd really appreciate it if you could take another look and let me know if any further revisions are needed.
I see this has been flagged as sounding like an advertisement. I have no connection to Franna or Terex. I am aware of pick and carry cranes and saw that on the main cranes page there is mention of Franna but no article for them. I'm trying to rectify that.
What would you like to see or not see on this article?
@Pythoncoder: Hi and good afternoon. I noticed that you marked my page : Draft:Open-system formulations in quantum computing.as "Might be LLM generated". Now i assume that the first words of somone who used LLM will say "Oh no, it was not me". To clarify, i am a chessplayer since i was 8 years "old" and that is 72 years ago by now. Since the upcoming chess programs, like our famous Fritz, they have been used online in tournaments and chess games. There are control systems in place that check te accuracy of a game. Anything over 98% is marked suspicious. Each and everyone getting caught says "It wasnt me". Yet, having said that, not all of those marked are realy fraudulent. My rating is around 2000-2100 in classic games, so ever now and then i manage 97-98% accuracy, Why i write all this, just to let you know that I did spend many hours in fine tuning the script and yes i asked ChatGPT for help, since i could not get the formatting right. I did some editing after your comment and i hope to convince you to lift the mark. If you have any questions, please, i will try to answer them. Thanks in advance P.S. I wrote the same in a more extended text https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Harold_Foppele/sandbox maybe you like that better. Harold Foppele (talk) 10:39, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I’m having trouble figuring out the point you’re trying to make here. I can see the draft has been nominated for deletion; if you wish to participate in that discussion, you may want to work on being more concise in your comments. Also, google “tigran petrosian copypasta” —pythoncoder (talk | contribs)16:31, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Halo,what is required for the draft List of Media Tycoons in Africa to be accepted on this Wikipedia because I have cited it well, kindly I request for your re review Don Wanyama Off (talk) 19:06, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
At the time I reviewed your draft, it read like ChatGPT had a larger role in writing the article than just “proofreading”. I strongly encourage you to write in your own words, as ChatGPT is honestly pretty bad at writing Wikipedia articles. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs)14:56, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I provided the content and asked it for proofreading and generating the markup. It might have reworded my text in a bad way. As the content is fairly small and simple, I have rewritten the article. Thanks! Bang Giang Nguyen (talk) 16:03, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draft:Ken Chen (biologist)
Hi @Pythoncoder, the draft for Draft:Ken Chen (biologist) is rejected and recommended to use footnotes for cite. I checked the draft, it is using <ref><Cite></ref> for the faculty link with
in the reference section. What exactly needs to be updated to follow footnotes standard? Or you are talking about something else in the content? Pickwonder (talk) 13:48, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I reformatted the link using the cite web template with title, url and website using | as delimiters in between. Is that what you are recommending? Pickwonder (talk) 17:38, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi... I am relatively new to this and like some people I've seen above I fell into incorporating some LLM help on generating the citations and adjusting copy for my post on Equilar.
I am happy to take a completely fresh start on a fully LLM-free draft. What I was hoping to check is that the citations I provided at least meet the notability threshold. Specifically, I was focused on the ongoing data partnerships with the Associated Press and New York Times along with frequent citations in independent publications as an authoritative data source on executive compensation.
I've disclosed all conflicts and just want to make sure I have a reasonable foundation for moving forward and addressing the aforementioned issues with the article. Thank you.
MCLynch121 (talk) 21:01, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is far from an exhaustive list of possible citations, but I chose these to establish the following:
- While not necessarily the subject of these articles, Equilar data often represents the bulk of if not the entirety of the foundation for the reporting, including regular annual studies done in partnership with the New York Times and Associated Press (to be clear Equilar is only involved from a data standpoint. There is no editorial control over the content itself).
- In addition to providing data, Equilar is frequently quoted as an expert on topics of executive compensation and corporate governance (see Hollywood Reporter and Wall St Journal articles as examples).
- The Harvard Business Review article is a bit older but I included it to reflect that these types of citations have been occurring for a significant number of years, as well as another case of Equilar research representing the entire news peg for the story. If it would help, there are similar citations going back as far as 2002, I just didn't want to overdo it from a quantity standpoint.
I can include some citations on topics beyond CEO pay if they would be of interest, though the CEO compensation data definitely yields the most substantial citations in independent media because of widespread public interest in the topic.
I recognize these do not quite rise to the level of, say, a full-on feature or profile on the company, but I feel they do clearly rise above the level of citation Wikipedia considers to be trivial according to its guidelines. CEO pay in particular continues to be a highly socially relevant issue for a number of reasons, and Equilar is a frequently cited and quoted authority on that topic across a wide swath of independent media. I believe it is reasonable to the public interest to have a Wikipedia article establishing the nature of the origin of that data.
If there are any particular types of citations missing from the above that would be helpful, I am happy to provide additional reporting.
Thanks for taking the time taken to evaluate the above, and if Equilar is deemed to meet the notability guidelines I would look forward to following all processes and guidelines in creating the article.
Hello! Thank you for using Cite Unseen. We are excited to share details about a big update we just deployed. With grant support from Wikimedia CH, we've added several new features, including a citation filtering dashboard, settings dialog, support for localization, and the ability to easily suggest domain categorizations. Cite Unseen now also lives on Meta Wiki, as part of our effort to serve all Wikimedia projects. Our source lists are now also on Meta-Wiki, where they can be collaboratively edited by the community.
Please see our newsletter on Meta-Wiki for full details. If you have feature ideas, notice any issues with our new updates, or have any questions, please get in touch via our project talk page. Thank you!
This message was sent via global message delivery. You received this message as you've been identified as a user of Cite Unseen. If you are not a Cite Unseen user, or otherwise don't want to receive updates in the future, you can remove yourself from our mailing list here.
