Talk:Slavery in Portugal
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Request to Remove AI-generated Tag from Slavery in Portugal
 |
|
| The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. | |
|
I am the contributor to the Slavery in Portugal article, having written a significant part of its content based on my research and reliable sources. On September 9, 2025, the AI-generated tag was added by User:Gnomingstuff with no explanatory edit summary diff. This action appears inappropriate due to the lack of specific evidence, contrary to Template:AI-generated requirements, and reflects a pattern of unsupported actions by User:Gnomingstuff, including the deletion of 176,264 bytes from Kirishitan diff and tagging of History of the Catholic Church in Japan diff without evidence. See Talk:History of the Catholic Church in Japan#Request_to_remove_AI-generated_tag_from_History_of_the_Catholic_Church_in_Japan and Talk:Kirishitan#Request_to_restore_content_removed_from_Kirishitan_and_provide_evidence_for_AI_claims. This issue is raised to seek resolution per WP:AGF and WP:CON. According to the documentation for the AI-generated template Template:AI-generated, the tag is intended for pages that are "entirely LLM-generated with no plausible human review", which should either be fixed by editors or nominated for deletion using Db-llm. The documentation also advises editors to "consider being bold and fixing" correctable issues rather than applying the tag and leaving cleanup to others. Crucially, it instructs editors to "explain your reasons on the page's talk page" after adding the tag. The absence of such an explanation from User:Gnomingstuff does not comply with this requirement. WP:G15 specifies three clear-cut criteria for identifying LLM-generated pages: (1) communication intended for the user (e.g., "as a large language model"), (2) implausible non-existent references (e.g., invalid ISBNs or DOIs), and (3) nonsensical citations (e.g., citations with incorrect temporality or unrelated content). WP:G15 explicitly states that more subjective signs should not serve as the sole basis for tagging or deletion unless accompanied by these clear-cut indicators. The addition of the AI-generated tag without an edit summary or Talk page explanation fails to align with the AI-generated template's purpose or the three criteria of WP:G15. As the contributor, I can confirm that the article was crafted with human oversight and reliable sources, and I am unaware of any issues that suggest the article is either partly or entirely LLM-generated in violation of the three criteria of WP:G15. Per Wikipedia's policies on verifiability WP:V and assuming good faith WP:AGF, I kindly request that User:Gnomingstuff clarify the reasoning behind the tag. In the absence of concrete evidence, I propose removing the AI-generated tag immediately to maintain the article's integrity. I welcome community feedback to reach a consensus. Thank you. 杜の街 (talk) 03:50, 15 October 2025 (UTC) | |
Treatment
Almost all of this section was ChatGPT generated. I've rewritten and/or deleted this. Where it was relevant (the first section) I rewrote this. Though this section used reliable sources and accurately cited them, verifying the citations showed the meaning of the text added was not adequately supported by the underlying sources, which at time drew almost opposite conclusions. I deleted the latter section as this was primarily about Slavery in Asia, Japan in particular so was only of tendentious relevance to an article on Slavery in Portugal Note the editor responsible was indef banned from article space for this (among other pages) so I am not sure he can still comment here, but I am putting this in since this was a pretty big change, and people might want to discuss. Tallus (talk) 20:03, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
Asians
I removed additions by user:杜の街 as he admitted these were written with ChatGPT. They also had the effect of placing undue emphasis on the Japanese slave trade and the role of the Jesuits in it. Overall there is a lot of emphasis on Portuguese involvement in Asia on this page. This seem very unbalanced when it formed a very small part of the Portuguese slave trade compared to their involvement in the Atlantic slave trade where the Portuguese where the largest player. This seems to be a long standing issue though, so perhaps better tackled by adding sections dealing with the Atlantic Slave trade (and its economic effects) Tallus (talk) 21:37, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
ChatGPT Generated Text
I have cleaned a lot of this up, but I believe there are still significant amounts in the history section. I've left this in, rather that delete it, since it does contain useful information and be usefully rewrittenTallus (talk) 21:37, 30 November 2025 (UTC)