User talk:Giovannitech

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. However, please do not use unreliable sources such as blogs, wikis, personal websites, and websites and publications with a poor reputation for checking the facts or with no editorial oversight. These sources may express views that are widely acknowledged as pushing a particular point-of-view, sometimes even extremist, being promotional in nature, or relying heavily on rumors and personal opinions. One of Wikipedia's core policies is that contributions must be verifiable through reliable sources, preferably using inline citations. If you require further assistance, please look at Help:Menu/Editing Wikipedia, or ask at the Teahouse. Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 11:56, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

You added the content again with a slightly different set of blogs and other unreliable sources. That was not an improvement. Please read the sourcing guidelines carefully and use only citations that meet Wikipedia's requirements in the future. MrOllie (talk) 15:04, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi MrOllie,

Thanks for taking the time to review my recent contribution.

That said, I find the rationale for removing the paragraph on adaptive machine translation somewhat inconsistent. The objection was the use of "blogs, arXiv, or unreliable sources." However, one of the sources was an Analysts' Insight by Arle Lommel, published by Common Sense Advisory—a well-regarded market research firm specializing in the language industry. I would hardly categorize it as unreliable.

Moreover, interestingly, the paragraph immediately preceding mine also cites arXiv and CSA including one source that describes DeepL as "an exceptionally magnificent language translator," which seems to contradict Wikipedia’s neutrality policy more than my factual and neutrally written paragraph did.

I fully understand that any contribution can always be improved - that’s the nature and strength of collaborative editing. What I struggle with is the choice to completely delete the addition, rather than suggest revisions or encourage improvement. In my view, such blanket removal discourages participation and may ultimately hinder the growth and quality of the article—especially when input comes from subject-matter experts. I use these technologies every day in my professional work, and I’m confident that any expert in the field would confirm the accuracy and relevance of what I wrote.

For context, I’m a professional translator with in-depth knowledge of the field. If contributions like mine are not welcome or possible under the current editorial approach, I’ll respect that and refrain from further editing—but not without disappointment.

Thanks again for your time and for your continued work on Wikipedia. Giovannitech (talk) 12:26, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello. Sorry, I've reverted a lot of your work here. I trust that your intentions are good, but I have multiple serious concerns with your additions.

Please review WP:LLM. I don't know if you're using an LLM to compose these additions, but the inappropriate WP:TONE strongly suggest this.

Please carefully review WP:NPOV, WP:SYNTH, and WP:WTW. Too much of what you've added has been vague and functionally promotional. I'm not saying you are promoting any one company or product, I'm saying the tone promotes these concepts themselves far beyond what is supported by reliable, independent sources. Much of what you've added lacks any source at all, much doesn't appear to be directly supported by the attached sources, and much of the sources are, as already mentioned, pre-prints and similar.

I know this seems harsh. These additions will need to be completely rewritten from the ground up to be appropriate for Wikipedia. Grayfell (talk) 19:21, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

You should stop adding variations of this over and over - you've been reverted several times, the WP:ONUS is now on you to gather consensus support from other edits on the article's associated talk page before proceeding. - MrOllie (talk) 15:17, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. MrOllie (talk) 16:08, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to add promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Kindly stop promoting Matecat, Modenmt, or anything else on Wikipedia. MrOllie (talk) 17:57, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Dear Mrollie,

Thank you for your feedback. I understand where you're coming from, so I've adjusted my edit to avoid mentioning any specific applications or tools used in the post-editing field.

That said, I’d like to point out that some of the tools previously mentioned are not commercial but freely available. In any case, my intent was to align with the tone and style of similar Wikipedia entries on related topics, where tools — including commercial ones — have sometimes been referenced when relevant and appropriately sourced. I will follow your suggestion, of course.

Thanks again for your attention and support. Giovannitech (talk) 09:55, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Giovannitech, 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! Syn73 (talk) 16:18, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Amflow. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it is promotional and reads like an advertisement. 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. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 14:41, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks @Fancy Refrigerator I will do as you suggest. Giovannitech (talk) 14:58, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Giovannitech. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Amflow, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 01:07, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Giovannitech. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Amflow".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:40, 30 November 2025 (UTC)