User talk:7804j

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your recent edits to Jean-François Egli when you modified the page, you introduced unknown parameters. Just because you specify |some_param=some_variable does not always mean that variable will display. The |some_param= must be defined in the template. You can look at the documentation for the template you are using but it is also helpful to use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and ensure that the values you have added are displaying correctly. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the page will look like without actually saving it. It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. Note I have likely fixed the error by now so check the history of the page to see how it was fixed. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Thank you. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 16:55, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your recent edits to Jakob Zellweger-Hünerwadel when you modified the page, you introduced unknown parameters. Just because you specify |some_param=some_variable does not always mean that variable will display. The |some_param= must be defined in the template. You can look at the documentation for the template you are using but it is also helpful to use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and ensure that the values you have added are displaying correctly. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the page will look like without actually saving it. It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. Note I have likely fixed the error by now so check the history of the page to see how it was fixed. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Thank you. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 22:30, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

This is now the 4th time this has happened. |religion= is NOT a valid parameter for these infoboxes. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 22:31, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

Your editing is becomming disruptive due to your failure to heed the multiple warnings that have been given. Please understand that one of the requirements for editing on Wikipedia is communicating with fellow editors. While you are not required to respond to every comment on your talk page, failure to respond to any of the multiple warnings, or to heed the advice that has been given, indicates an intentional failure to communicate. Please respond to this message and acknowledge that you understand that communication is required. Additionally please ensure that you have read the multiple warnings that have been given to you on your talk page. Failure to communicate may result in you being blocked from editing. Thank you. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 22:31, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi Zackmann,

Apologies for not responding earlier. I had seen your initial message (which I thought was auto-generated by a bot) so I didn't realize a response was expected. This is on me.

I have tried following your instructions of checking the visual editor, but for some reasons these unknown parameters don't cause any alerts or anything visible there, so they are impossible to spot through the preview, which is why I've missed them. What's especially hard is that in some templates, undocumented parameters still show up, while in others they don't, from what I have seen.

Going forward, I will then open each template manually to check if there are any undocumented parameters and remove them if relevant. I will also try to check if I can add these parameters (e.g., religion) to the template itself 7804j (talk) 22:42, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

Please do be sure to use WP:PREVIEW as this will always show the errors. Religion will NOT be added back as it was long ago decided here not to include it. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 22:48, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Ludomila Alexandrowna Scheiwiler-von Schreyder. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing as a live article at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted it to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. scope_creep^Talk 20:48, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Johann Ulrich Zuberbühler. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing as a live article at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted it to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. scope_creep^Talk 09:13, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Ulrich Zellweger. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing as a live article at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted it to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. scope_creep^Talk 09:13, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

Could you please weigh in here? voorts (talk/contributions) 13:57, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Done, thanks for bringing this up to my attention! 7804j (talk) 14:12, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

At Wikipedia_talk:Translation#Survey I expressed support for adopting a guideline which I hope can demonstrate consensus and support for you to grow your Wikipedia translation efforts. I wish you all success. Bluerasberry (talk) 15:44, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, and for the encouragement! I was actually the one who triggered the initial discussion in Village Pump that led to this RFC, and I am very supportive of the resulting proposed guideline. I have voted in favor of B as well. 7804j (talk) 12:30, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

I'm writing to note that the article Regret (decision theory), which you recently edited, has been brought up at Wikiproject Mathematics. Adrian Prevost mentioned this article, noting that it had long psychological sections despite its mathematical categorization.

As I stated at the discussion, I myself believe that the page should focus on the mathematical aspects of the issue, since decision theory mainly focuses on rational choice, not actual choice. However, you have edited the page to include more psychological material, so I figured I ought to ask your opinion.

I ought to note that Wikipedia does not have a page on regret aversion, and with your lede and the later sections in regret (decision theory), we might be able to create one. Even if you do believe psychology content belongs on this page, it may be best to move your lede to regret aversion, since the article here is not about regret aversion.

I invite you to join the discussion at Wikiproject Mathematics (or wherever else you deem suitable). The Boolean^_Talk 21:12, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi 7804j. Thank you for your work on Vaterland (newspaper). Another editor, 11WB, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Some more sources for this would be good.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|11WB}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

11WB (talk) 21:56, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi! I've been patrolling some of your latest page creations and noticing that you are tagging all your articles with {{one source}}. However, I think you always use a very reliable source (the historical lexicon) which is also published under Creative Commons license. So I don't see issues of plagiarism or notability. You also add always a bibliography to your articles. Why do you feel the need to tag them? Note that most maintenance templates on Wikipedia pages will never be addressed by anyone if not by the original article creator. Broc (talk) 21:35, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

I do because in the past I didn't, and then several reviewers added that maintenance tag and suggested that I do. I agree that it doesn't seem particularly important, but it appears that more people prefer to see these than not 7804j (talk) 06:36, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

Your edits are becoming disruptive. You have been warned multiple times about the need to use preview to check your edits, yet you continue to introduce unknown parameters into articles. You did this again at Caspar Muralt when you modified the page, you once again did this. If you continue your disruptive editing, you may find yourself blocked from editing. Please take the time to review your edits moving forward. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 03:35, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

Why do you continue to make the same error over and over again? Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 03:36, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi Zackmann,

I apologize for this. Let me provide some context. I have over the past few days created more than a dozen article with infoboxes, and I have checked this for almost all of these but that one fell through the crack. This is not disruptive editing, but just a human mistake.

The reason why I sometimes miss these is that some undocumented parameters do show up in preview and in published article. For example, the "relatives" parameter in Wilhelm von Diesbach, or the "office3", "term_end2" in Beat Ludwig von Mülinen, etc. do show up, so it's not a strict rule. I use LLMs to generate the infoboxes, and then preview the infoboxes to make sure all the parameters are shown, but on rare occasion I do miss some. I will try my best to make this as rare as possible -- I have created a few hundred articles, and I believe I have missed these only a few times, so as a % of edits it's still relatively low (though I agree the ideal is 0%). 7804j (talk) 06:43, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

Do NOT use LLM to create pages. This violates wikipedia policy and the fact that you continue to fail the basic requirement of previewing your edits is flat unacceptable. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 04:23, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Courtesy link to WP:NEWLLM. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 04:31, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

NewLLM only applies to pages created from scratch with LLM, not to translations, so there is no violation of Wikipedia policy. There has been extensive discussions about this already.

As I mentioned, I do look at the preview always but these parameters do not return error messages in preview, they are just not shown, so it's not that easy to spot unless checking them one by one, which is why I've missed them sometimes. But here we're talking about Wikicode formatting issues, that happen with everyone, not about content issues, so I do find the language overly and unnecessarily aggressive. We're all trying to improve Wikipedia, it's a collaborative project 7804j (talk) 06:36, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Your errors absolutely do produce a big red preview warning error message. You have done this time and time again, often with the exact same |religion= parameter because you do not bother to check what the LLM is producing. You just assume it is correct. Once is a mistake, twice is forgivable. You have made the exact same error at least 7 times. Stop doing it and take the time to properly check your work. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 06:41, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

I believe you have different settings than I do, because for me the published articles do not show any error even when these parameters are populated. If there is a setting to activate, do you know which one?

I already agreed above to do that check. The reason why this happened 7 times is that before your initial message I didn't know it was even a problem, as the error didn't show to me. Since you have told me, I have been very careful but indeed I acknowledge that I missed it 1-2 times. But please keep in mind that I have also created more than 300 articles recently, most of them with infoboxes, so if I was really not checking these things you would have seen that issue at a much larger scale (just saying that as evidence that I do check, and on rare instances missed it) 7804j (talk) 07:00, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Caspar Muralt. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing as a live article at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and it consists of machine-generated text. I have converted it to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 03:37, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Avoyer, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Burgdorf was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:53, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Veladini. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing as a live article at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and it consists of machine-generated text. I have converted it to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 06:42, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Gazzetta Ticinese. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing as a live article at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and it consists of machine-generated text. I have converted it to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 06:43, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Taddeo Duno. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing as a live article at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and it consists of machine-generated text. I have converted it to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 06:44, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Capitanei di Locarno. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing as a live article at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and it consists of machine-generated text. I have converted it to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 06:44, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Caspar Muralt. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing as a live article at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and it consists of machine-generated text. I have converted it to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 06:45, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Praroman (company). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing as a live article at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted it to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Mccapra (talk) 21:17, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

Regarding the OKA initiative... are you familiar with Goodhart's law? In particular, with how it applies to cash initiatives? DS (talk) 18:00, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Yes, I’m familiar with Goodhart’s law, and I agree that incentive structures can distort behavior if poorly designed.

In our case, translators are paid hourly, not per article, and there are no output quotas or bonuses tied to volume. We monitor output primarily to detect anomalies (for example, unusually high word-per-hour rates), which in a few cases helped identify quality issues.

So while incentive distortion is always a risk in funded initiatives, we’ve tried to design the structure so that quality — not quantity — is what determines continued participation 7804j (talk) 19:07, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for contributing to the article Bank in Zürich. However, one of Wikipedia's core policies is that contributions must be verifiable through reliable sources, preferably using inline citations. Please help by adding more sources to the article you edited, and/or by clarifying how the sources already given support the claims (see here for how to do inline referencing). If you need further help, you can look at Help:Menu/Editing Wikipedia, or ask at the Teahouse, or just ask me. Thank you. 11WB (talk) 19:17, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi @7804j. I'm aware of the recent AN discussion. Having checked many of your articles, it would be a really good idea to go back through those you have authored and make sure everything is verifiable. This will ensure you are safe from being affected by the new rules. Thanks! 11WB (talk) 19:25, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

		The Signpost Barnstar
		For contributing in the Newsroom, in a column, or both! Vol. 22 issue 4 turned out pretty great thanks to a team that was fortunate to include you.

☆ Bri (talk) 05:20, 10 March 2026 (UTC)