User talk:Coded message of truth

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Draft:Salish matter. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Draft:Salish Matter. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Draft:Salish Matter. If you have new information to add, you might want to discuss it at [[Talk:Draft:Salish Matter|the article's talk page]].

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Waypoint47 (talk) 13:19, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Coded message of truth, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum, see the Wikipedia Teahouse.

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Simplified Manual of Style
• Your first article
• Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
• Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
• and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Knitsey (talk) 19:03, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Coded message of truth, welcome to Wikipedia! I reverted one of your edits as WP:NOTFORUM applies. Thank you, Knitsey (talk) 19:04, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Nor is the New York Post. Doug Weller talk 18:04, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Please do not add links to draft pages to regular wikipedia articles, as you did in Abu Dhabi (disambiguation) --Altenmann >talk 19:45, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Sorry Coded message of truth (talk) 19:54, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Seercat3160. An edit that you recently made to 1918 in Sweden seemed to be generated using a large language model (an "AI chatbot" or other application using such technology). Text produced by these applications is usually unsuitable for an encyclopedia, and may contain factually inaccurate statements, fictitious citations, or other problems. You should instead read reliable sources and then summarize those in your own words. Your edit may have been reverted. If you want to practice editing, please use your sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Seercat3160 (talk) 03:30, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Draft:Roy McMurtry youth centre. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. .

Don't change the text of comments left by reviewers! bonadea contributions talk 10:09, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Dr vulpes. An edit that you recently made to Bluewater Youth Centre seemed to be generated using a large language model (an "AI chatbot" or other application using such technology). Text produced by these applications is usually unsuitable for an encyclopedia, and may contain factually inaccurate statements, fictitious citations, or other problems. You should instead read reliable sources and then summarize those in your own words. Your edit may have been reverted. If you want to practice editing, please use your sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Dr vulpes (Talk) 18:18, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

I originally did it with AI that I made some touchups in my Notes app then I posted it, but I verified everything and all of the information seems to be correct and I have a general gist of the abuse at these places and the trouble the teen industry because I investigated it for 49 days i think it was for something else, but I never kept any citations when I did all of that I just gathered the consistent facts anyways but also how did you know it’s AI Coded message of truth (talk) 18:31, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Please refrain from making edits generated using a large language model (an "AI chatbot" or other application using such technology) to Wikipedia pages, such as those you made to Luke Everett Strimbold. Your edits have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Thank you. Dr vulpes (Talk) 18:21, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Responding to a complaint in part about personal attacks with a repetition of the personal attacks is a very bad move. You are on thin ice and need to recalibrate your approach to WP:CIVILITY and collaboration on this platform or you are going to lose your editing privileges. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:11, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Yes, got it. I won’t talk to anyone. Thank you for proving that I was correct about the statement “Wikipedia is uncensored” is incorrect. I figured I was right but it’s OK. I won’t talk to anyone. If it’s possible to block someone, I will do so as soon as they contact me just leave me alone. Coded message of truth (talk) 14:27, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

I don’t think I can walk anyone whatever I won’t talk to anyone leave me alone Coded message of truth (talk) 14:28, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Hey@Coded message of truth, I can see you're getting stressed out so out might be a good idea to step away for a breather. Wikipedia is highly collaborative - it works so well because you have to work with other people.

You're gonna have disagreements, you're going to make mistakes and have those pointed out. Everyone has that happen at some point, we're all complete strangers trying to work towards a common goal.

What's important is how you choose to deal with that.

Do you go "Whoops, I screwed up, I know I shouldn't do that and won't do it again", or do you get angry and frustrated and lash out?

One of those reactions is good for Wikipedia, the other will make admins worried that you don't know how to work with other editors & could get you blocked until you can show you've learned how to deal with criticism.

If all this attention is upsetting you, it might be a good idea to step away from editing until you're in a better place to handle situations like this. There's no shame in that, but you need to learn and understand how Wikipedia works if you genuinely want to help make it better for everyone. Blue Sonnet (talk) 14:54, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Am I allowed to send a message to the person who made borderline personal insults against me and tell him that he should own up to it just as you have Coded message of truth (talk) 15:30, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

I don't think I've owned up to anything, but I'd repeat that it'd be a good idea for you to step away and calm down a little.

The ANI board is really highly visible and full of admins, they'll take action if they need to. It also means that there is a massive audience of people scrutinising you, too.

Sometimes it's best to just let things go. There's something known as "dropping the stick", it means that sometimes you'll be absolutely sure that you're in the right, but taking things any further won't change anything and is only going to hurt you in the long run.

It's a really valuable skill to learn in life and it'll take you far. I think this is a really good time to show your maturity and let this one go, ok? Blue Sonnet (talk) 17:34, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

BTW If you do choose to carry on editing, it looks like this started because people are worried you're using AI or a chatbot to make your edits. These cause a ton of problems on Wikipedia because they like to "hallucinate" or make stuff up.

It's causing a ton of damage, where things like sources and citations simply don't exist when you try to look them up. There are even cars where lawyers tried to use it in their cases and got hauled over the coals by the judge because none of their case examples existed!

If you are using AI then I'd strongly recommend that you stop using it, because it's going to cause a giant mess that other volunteers will have to clean up and that's not really fair on others.

You can find out more here: Wikipedia:AIFAIL Blue Sonnet (talk) 17:46, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

@Coded message of truth People like myself and @Blue Sonnet are trying to help you by advising you to take a break from Wikipedia. You aren't accomplishing anything by continuing to argue and argue to try to prove a point against the user who you feel has insulted you. All you're doing is making yourself more stressed out by inviting more responses, more scrutiny and more criticism.

All of this talk of "ok, ok, you won, I won't talk to anyone" isn't what we want. Nobody's trying to force you into a box or to comply with some rules you don't understand or believe in.

If you want to understand Wikipedia's rules and culture and want to be part of it -- walk away. Take a break for as long as you need and come back later with a clear head. If you still feel the need to pursue your complaint against another user, you can do so then with a clear head and a proper understanding of the dispute procedures.

If you don't want to understand Wikipedia's rules and culture, and you think the "higher-ups" are out to get you in some way or that people are conspiring against you or want you to be someone you're not -- walk away for good. Wikipedia isn't the place for everyone and it might not be the place for you.

If you choose to continue down the path you're on, the inevitable result is you will be blocked due to your uncivil and unproductive participation. You'll waste both our time trying to help you and your own time trying to grind an axe for no gain, and you'll just continue to stress and frustrate yourself in the process.

Whether you want to be here or you don't, what you need to do right now is walk away. Athanelar (talk) 17:51, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

I've been attempting to walk away but perhaps you are saying that so I don't get banned because I suspect that is something that would happen if I continue to entertain the group of people but I feel like by doing that I would lose integrity points but I whatever I have been backed away Coded message of truth (talk) 19:40, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

My mental health is just fine don't worry though I suspect you are not saying that coming from any sort of standpoint of concern but I am doing just fine Coded message of truth (talk) 19:42, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

I’m trying to walk away but people like you just keep messaging me for some reason I used to have this happened to me when I was a kid and I would get targeted by like everyone for practically nothing but it’s quite amusing that it’s happening with adults as well Coded message of truth (talk) 19:31, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm sorry that you feel that way, but please understand that no-one here can see who you are - all we can see is what you do.

That's what everyone is concerned with. They see an editor who's causing problems that they need to spend their own personal time to fix. It wasn't stopping so it had to go to ANI for support and advice from admins. It's not you as a person, it was your editing.

If you're causing problems then it must be brought up and addressed; we can't just ignore it and let it carry on. We need to work together because this is a collaboration - no-one is more important than anyone else and we're all volunteers doing this in our own personal spare time.

I want you to understand that no-one is out to get you because we don't know anything about you. All we have to go from are your edits and your responses. We can't see who you are, how old you are or what's happened to you in the past.

Since I'm worried I might be causing you more stress I won't respond again unless you specifically ask me a question, so you don't need to reply to this message.

Just log off Wikipedia and come back another time if/when you feel up to it. The Teahouse is a really nice, friendly place to get help and support whenever you're ready to come back. Blue Sonnet (talk) 21:07, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you unconstructively edit Wikipedia using a large language model, as you did at Draft:Krizz Kaliko - Abu Dhabi. Theroadislong (talk) 13:29, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

Gifted (2017 film)

added links pointing to Custody and Isolated

Ball python

added a link pointing to Python

Iain Armitage

added a link pointing to Assyrian language

Murder of Ronald Johnson

added a link pointing to Investigate

William Lyon Mackenzie King

added a link pointing to Spiritualism

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 07:53, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi Coded Message of truth. I've moved your recent article from the title of YourTitleHere to Luke Everett Strimbold, since I assume it was done in error. I also undid your blanking of Luke Everett Strimbold; if you intended to have it be deleted, you can just tell me and I can request speedy deletion per WP:G7. Best, 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 16:00, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

No, it’s fine thank you I just didn’t know what I was doing fully. I thought I tried to upload it the wrong way so then I tried to just remove it but it’s good now thank you I’m still learning. Coded message of truth (talk) 16:01, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Oh, what do I do about the page where it says your title here cause you just changed it to a redirect thing if you can delete it that’s fine my bad Coded message of truth (talk) 16:05, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

I've requested speedy deletion of YourTitleHere per WP:G6, so it should be gone relatively soon. Best, 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 16:07, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Ok thanks Coded message of truth (talk) 16:18, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi Coded message of truth. Thank you for your work on Luke Everett Strimbold. Another editor, Mariamnei, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice start! This is a WP:BLP article, and I have removed a few sentences because they were unsourced and potentially fell under WP:Libel. Please feel free to add them back only if they are backed by reliable sources. Thanks and have a wonderful day!

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

Mariamnei (talk) 10:03, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.wound theology◈ 06:38, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Syl Apps youth centre. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article 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. Theroadislong (talk) 21:54, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

It has no sources? Coded message of truth (talk) 00:13, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Did you use AI to create the article? Look at your draft. Doug Weller talk 07:39, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Ah, you agree you have used AI. Doug Weller talk 07:43, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

That was my mistake (a missclick) when reviewing, it requires submitting to AFC because it looks like it was created by AI. Theroadislong (talk) 07:47, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Really good new article in a topic that isn't discussed enough. I know you're not the only one who worked on it but the work you did is very much appreciated. Keep it up! Cerulean Depths (talk) 22:22, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Well that's odd and too nice to be genuine but thanks Coded message of truth (talk) 22:50, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Ball python

added a link pointing to Python

Iain Armitage

added a link pointing to Assyrian language

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:58, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. wound theology◈ 08:27, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Mhm I see 😁😁😁😁😁😁😁😁😁😁 Coded message of truth (talk) 16:30, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Apple Music, Spotify, Strange Music Inc and YouTube are not reliable independent sources.

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.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Krizz Kaliko - Abu Dhabi and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 18:57, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, fair I guess Coded message of truth (talk) 20:04, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Theroadislong were:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Your draft shows signs of having been generated by a large language model, such as ChatGPT. Their outputs usually have multiple issues that prevent them from meeting our guidelines on writing articles. These include:

• Promotional tone, editorializing and other words to watch
• Vague, generic, and speculative statements extrapolated from similar subjects
• Essay-like writing
• Hallucinations (plausible-sounding, but false information) and non-existent references
• Close paraphrasing
  

Please address these issues. The best way is usually to read reliable sources and summarize them, instead of using a large language model. See our help page on large language models.

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.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Krizz Kaliko - Abu Dhabi and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 13:27, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

All right Coded message of truth (talk) 13:38, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Draft:Krizz Kaliko - Abu Dhabi requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G15 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it exhibits one or more of the following signs which indicate that the page could only plausibly have been generated by large language models (an "AI chatbot" or other application using such technology) and would have been removed by any reasonable human review:

• Communication intended for the user: This may include collaborative communication (e.g., "Here is your Wikipedia article on..."), knowledge-cutoff disclaimers (e.g., "Up to my last training update ..."), self-insertion (e.g., "as a large language model"), and phrasal templates (e.g., "Smith was born on [Birth Date].")
• Implausible non-existent references: This may include external links that are dead on arrival, ISBNs with invalid checksums, and unresolvable DOIs. Since humans can make typos and links may suffer from link rot, a single example should not be considered definitive. Editors should use additional methods to verify whether a reference truly does not exist.
• Nonsensical citations: This may include citations of incorrect temporality (e.g a source from 2020 being cited for a 2022 event), DOIs that resolve to completely unrelated content (e.g., a paper on a beetle species being cited for a computer science article), and citations that attribute the wrong author or publication.

Text produced by these applications can be unsuitable for an encyclopedia, and output must be carefully checked. Pages created using them that did not undergo human review may be deleted at any time.

If you think these signs were incorrectly identified and you assert that you did carefully check the content, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Additionally – if you would like to create an article but find creating new encyclopedia content yourself difficult, please share this with other editors at the Teahouse, and they may be able to help. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your legitimate contributions. Theroadislong (talk) 13:43, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 year for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:46, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

Wow what the seriously they actually did it what the fuck Coded message of truth (talk) 13:48, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

Well isn't this beautiful isn't this just what they wanted wow so I really was right they really do have no humor or heart do they well look at that where are my lawyers at my lawyers are sleeping well fuck good job give yourself a pat on the back Coded message of truth (talk) 13:50, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

A year is like the highest that anyone even suggested and it just happened wow look at that where are my lawyers they're more like duty council they're sleeping where are you dude well you know I hope someone sees this and tries to revert it the 1 year ban is basically just a permanent ban I mean you don't actually expect me to wait a year LOL well whatever Coded message of truth (talk) 13:53, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

@Coded message of truth In the gentlest way possible; I don't think your current personality and typing style fits Wikipedia; which is a serious, collaborative project. I hope you take the year to reflect and mature, and perhaps you can then come back and request an unblock and contribute successfully.

I will note that your ability to edit this page may be removed.

Best of luck. qcne (talk) 13:55, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked because an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

(block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the Unblock Ticket Request System that have been declined leading to the posting of this notice.

 _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:04, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

---

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

---

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:13, 27 October 2025 (UTC)