User talk:JeannetteBlake: Difference between revisions

:so I can review and fix the issues?

:so I can review and fix the issues?

:Thank you very much for your help. [[User:JeannetteBlake|JeannetteBlake]] ([[User talk:JeannetteBlake#top|talk]]) 14:24, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

:Thank you very much for your help. [[User:JeannetteBlake|JeannetteBlake]] ([[User talk:JeannetteBlake#top|talk]]) 14:24, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

::@[[User:JeannetteBlake|JeannetteBlake]], I’ve restored it to the same draft title it was at previously. You ”did” clearly leave in LLM-generated content. Please don’t use AI to write wikipedia articles. For now, I’ve declined it to take it out of the queue while you work on it. We’re running a backlog drive this month, so I encourage you to work quickly, as you likely won’t be waiting long on a new review if you can get it in before the end of the month. I think it’s quite likely that the museum meets our notability guidelines but basically what you’ve written so far is more like a brief fact sheet, like one might find on a tourist board website. We want to see references to independent sources. You have a jumble of them at the bottom of the page, so the thing to do next is incorporate information from them into the body of the article. Feel free to ask for help by replying to this message or at [[WP:TEA]]. Cheers. — [[User:Asilvering|asilvering]] ([[User talk:Asilvering|talk]]) 19:25, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

== Your submission at [[Wikipedia:Articles for creation|Articles for creation]]: [[Draft:Annapolis Maritime Museum|Annapolis Maritime Museum]] (December 1) ==

== Your submission at [[Wikipedia:Articles for creation|Articles for creation]]: [[Draft:Annapolis Maritime Museum|Annapolis Maritime Museum]] (December 1) ==

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

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 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.

Taking Out The Trash (talk) 18:52, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JeannetteBlake! 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! Taking Out The Trash (talk) 18:52, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JeannetteBlake, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited was Steve Hershey, which appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, which will be reviewed by other editors. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don’t hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms of use and our policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, visit the Teahouse, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Y2hyaXM (talk) 22:09, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chris ( Y2hyaXM ), thanks for reaching out. I want to clarify a few points in your message. I’m editing in my personal capacity, not on behalf of any organization, campaign, or employer, and I’m not receiving compensation for my contributions. My username represents an individual, and the account is used solely by me.

The edits I made to articles were based on current, verifiable information and reliable sources. They were not promotional, and they were made with the intention of improving the accuracy of the page.

If there are specific policy-based issues with the edits, I would appreciate it if you could point those out directly. Generalized COI templates don’t help me understand what, specifically, you feel violated policy.

I’m happy to adjust anything that does not meet Wikipedia’s guidelines, but I’d prefer clear feedback tied to specific policies rather than broad assumptions.

Thanks for your time. JeannetteBlake (talk) 02:17, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jeannette, I left this on your talk page because I noticed you declared a conflict of interest with Steve Hershey, specifically with respect to his communications and writing team. As a result, I assumed that the edits you were trying to make to Hershey’s page were requested by Hershey, since there’s been several users trying to remove Wendy from his personal life section for the past year and a half. As I mentioned on Hershey’s talk page, the information currently on the page is factually correct, as reliable sources (Maryland Matters and The Star Democrat) previously reported that Hershey was married to Wendy, but his MSA bio has recently updated (sometime in the past year) to say that he is single following his divorce. Y2hyaXM (talk) 02:26, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, a COI declaration does not mean edits are directed by the subject, and assumptions about my motives are not appropriate under WP:AGF.

The issue is simple: the current Maryland State Archives bio lists him as single. Per WP:V and WP:BLP, the article should reflect up-to-date, authoritative information, not outdated reporting.

If you have questions or concerns, you’re welcome to contact me directly rather than relying on assumptions. Otherwise, let’s stick to policy and update the page based on the present source. JeannetteBlake (talk) 02:30, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies. Let’s continue this on Hershey’s talk page. Y2hyaXM (talk) 02:34, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The page Draft:Annapolis Maritime Museum has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section G15 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it exhibited one or more of the following signs which indicated 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.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia’s policies and guidelines. If you think these signs were incorrectly identified and you assert that you did carefully check the content, you may contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review. 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. asilvering (talk) 02:16, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Asilvering,

I saw that Draft:Annapolis Maritime Museum was deleted under G15. I wrote the draft myself and would like to continue improving it. Could you please restore the deleted content into my userspace at:

User:JeannetteBlake/Annapolis_Maritime_Museum

so I can review and fix the issues?

Thank you very much for your help. JeannetteBlake (talk) 14:24, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JeannetteBlake, I’ve restored it to the same draft title it was at previously. You did clearly leave in LLM-generated content. Please don’t use AI to write wikipedia articles. For now, I’ve declined it to take it out of the queue while you work on it. We’re running a backlog drive this month, so I encourage you to work quickly, as you likely won’t be waiting long on a new review if you can get it in before the end of the month. I think it’s quite likely that the museum meets our notability guidelines but basically what you’ve written so far is more like a brief fact sheet, like one might find on a tourist board website. We want to see references to independent sources. You have a jumble of them at the bottom of the page, so the thing to do next is incorporate information from them into the body of the article. Feel free to ask for help by replying to this message or at WP:TEA. Cheers. — asilvering (talk) 19:25, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

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.

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.

asilvering (talk) 19:22, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]