User talk:What IF Web
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| This is What IF Web's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
Your submission at Articles for creation: Ron Bartsch (November 3)
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.
The comment the reviewer left was:
Subject may be notable, but draft needs addition of multiple citations to cover assertions made in the first two paragraphs (only the final sentence of the second paragraph is supported by a reference). Sources should be reliable independent and secondary with reputations for accuracy and fact-checking. Please also consider use of subheadings (eg: Early life and education, Career, etc) to create sections in the body of the article.
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:Ron Bartsch 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.
 |
Hello, What IF Web!
Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Paul W (talk) 10:48, 3 November 2025 (UTC) |
Your submission at Articles for creation: Ron Bartsch (November 12)
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:
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.
- 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
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Ron Bartsch 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.
Your submission at Articles for creation: Ron Bartsch (December 14)
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
This submission appears to read more like a résumé than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, that provide secondary analysis of the subject's life in context. In contrast, résumés will tend to list individual accomplishments and rely on self-published sources, which might unduly focus on positive events and fail to properly balance their weight. Please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies by using independent, reliable 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:Ron Bartsch 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.
Your submission at Articles for creation: Ron Bartsch (January 22)
Your draft shows signs of having been generated by a large language model, such as ChatGPT. Wikipedia guidelines prohibit the use of LLMs to write articles from scratch. In addition, LLM-generated articles usually have multiple quality issues, to include:
The comment the reviewer left was:
- 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
Something's gone awry with the sourcing in a way that feels very LLM-y to me.
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 it after they have been resolved.
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Ron Bartsch 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.
AfC notification: Draft:Ron Bartsch has a new comment
Your submission at Articles for creation: Ron Bartsch (March 6)
Your draft shows signs of having been generated by a large language model, such as ChatGPT. Wikipedia guidelines prohibit the use of LLMs to write articles from scratch. In addition, LLM-generated articles usually have multiple quality issues, to include:
The comment the reviewer left was:
- 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
WP:OVERATTRIBUTION. "has appeared", "has been interviewed". Remove LLM content and resubmit.
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 it after they have been resolved.
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Ron Bartsch 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.
March 2026
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.
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 ~~~~}}. Drmies (talk) 16:17, 6 March 2026 (UTC)- If you were here to improve our beautiful project, you wouldn't be submitting the same misformatted AI-generated promotional drivel time and again. If you were here for that reason, you'd have actually worked on the draft, and you'd have communicated with, and worked with, the half dozen editors who have worked on that draft for you. Drmies (talk) 16:19, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
Please unblock me
Hey Team, I am not using AI to write. I'm just trying to talk clearly in my writing. Can I please get unblocked. Thank you.
What IF Web (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)
Request reason:
I am not using Ai
Notes:
- In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
- Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.
Administrator use only:
If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:
{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=I am not using Ai |3 = ~~~~}}
If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.
{{unblock reviewed |1=I am not using Ai |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}
If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:
{{unblock reviewed |1=I am not using Ai |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}
What IF Web (talk) 21:54, 9 March 2026 (UTC)