User talk:ApoieRacional: Difference between revisions

Hello, ApoieRacional!

I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

---

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

---

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips

• Don’t be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
• It’s normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don’t worry if you don’t understand everything at first—it’s fine to edit using common sense.
• If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article’s talk page. Be civil, and don’t restore the edit unless there is consensus.
• Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
• When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
• If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
• Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Hi,

I know you sent me an email, but I only have email enabled so that I can deal with administrative actions, and it is not enabled for general queries. As your question at my talk page, or here and we can discuss. Regards. — Whpq (talk) 12:57, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I conduct my editing and communications here on Wikipedia, and not through email. If you have a query, you can ask on my talk page. — Whpq (talk) 23:10, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on Criticism of Apple Inc.. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. I do not appreciate you dragging my name through the mud in an edit summary. If you have a problem with me, deal with it on my talk page. I will not hesitate to inform ANI if you continue to harass me. GSK (talk • edits) 21:27, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am really disappointed after telling you explicitly to resolve this with discussion on the article talk page and to not edit war, you immediately decide to edit war. — Whpq (talk) 02:18, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, please be sure to sign your posts (but never when editing articles). There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. Whpq (talk) 20:24, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Empagliflozin, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages EGFR and CKD. 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.)

It’s OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, —DPL bot (talk) 19:52, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I’m Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Pralatrexate, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator.
Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 20:10, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Nephropathic Cystinosis. 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. Squawk7700 (talk) 17:34, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I think this is the very first wiki-article, that I am making. I will work on it, when I have time. Would it be possible for other wiki-editors to contribute in the meantime? ApoieRacional (talk) 17:40, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for contributing! When discussing health, please remember to cite high-quality medical sources like review articles, major textbooks, and statements by national or international health organizations. Other good sources can be found here and here. We also have a guide to editing medical articles at WP:MEDHOW.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me or the WikiProject Medicine talk page! —Femke 🐦 (talk) 20:53, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your note. I have also access to many pay-walled publication via my university library, which are not available via Wikipedia. Although people, who get Federal funding in the USA, are subject to Biden’s Open-access mandate, most other countries do not have similar policies, and a lot of research publications (reviews and original) are still behind paywalls. It seems, that you are from the EU. Does the EU have Open Access mandate policies similar to the USA? ApoieRacional (talk) 21:00, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ApoieRacional. The UK and the EU both have open access mandates too, similar the the US. Often, papers are open access but not easy to find, for instance in institutional repositories. The best way typically to find medical sources apart from clinical guidelines is to use PubMed, where you can filter papers from the last 5 years that are review papers. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 13:23, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank for letting me know about the EU and UK practices.

I wrote the US Section here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Open-access_mandate&section=7&veaction=editsource .

Someone else wrote the EU and Canadian sections.

Would you be comfortable with writing the UK section for this wiki-article?

I would like to write it myself, but I am totally unfamiliar with their practices,

and I do not feel qualified to make such contribution. ApoieRacional (talk) 18:30, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Chronic kidney disease

added a link pointing to Jazan

Russian language

added a link pointing to Sentence

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

Hello, I’m Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Russian language, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator.
Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 16:12, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I’m Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Fast-neutron reactor, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL and missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator.
Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 20:31, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I’m Jay8g. An edit that you recently made to Richard Sakwa 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. Jay8g [V•T•E] 21:13, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your note. I work with Generative Large Language Models as a part of my job, and I am well aware of their limitations, such as creating fake cited references by Grok (chatbot). Yes, I used a reputable AI bot to get the first draft of that addition, but I verified every reference and I changed ca. 1/3 of the original AI text to fix inaccuracies and to make it more human-like. Are we required to disclose the use of AI in our wiki-writing? ApoieRacional (talk) 21:39, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I found that the use of AI is allowed in Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:AI-generated_content . Just because text seems to be “AI-generated” is not a valid reason for deletion.

The content I added is valid and supported by proper references. If you cannot point out specific problems with my text, please restore it. ApoieRacional (talk) 21:53, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That’s really not a valid interpretation of that essay, which also isn’t a policy. What it actually says is Often the use of such tools on Wikipedia may be discouraged due to the poor quality of the output from currently available technology. Clearly rewriting ca. 1/3 of the original AI text wasn’t enough to make it actually read like a Wikipedia article or otherwise non-AI. Did you not notice all of the random emojis it added?

If you’re going to use AI (which you really shouldn’t), you should expect to have to rewrite all of it since it really can’t handle encyclopedic writing or Wikipedia formatting. Jay8g [V•T•E] 22:51, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for being civil in this conversation. I agree with you, that even expensive Generative Large Language Models are far from perfect nowadays. I would like to rewrite this article. Since I did not save my draft on my computer, I would have to restore my draft temporarily for 30 min, and copy it to my Sandbox. Please do not interfere for the next 30 min. In the meantime, I would really appreciate, if you can provide specific suggestions how to make this draft better. It seems, that we both agree, that this subject is worth expanding on. ApoieRacional (talk) 23:02, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

IgA nephropathy

added a link pointing to Genetic

Platinocyanide

added a link pointing to Electronic

Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties

added a link pointing to Human Rights Act

(Opt-out instructions.) —DPL bot (talk) 07:57, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi – are you using AI tools for your recent edits here? If so, can you mention:

• What tool(s) you are using, and what version
• What prompts, features, workflow, etc. you are using
• What review, if any, you are doing of the output

Thank you! NicheSports (talk) 06:55, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I will do that. Although, I use AI’s only for the firsts drafts of larger artciles. I re-write everything myself, an I add my own references with EndNote. ApoieRacional (talk) 12:43, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently edited a page related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks’ noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

TylerBurden (talk) 11:40, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Draft:Stanislav Krapivnik requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from podcasts.groong.org/guest/skrapivnik. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia’s copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, 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. MCE89 (talk) 06:21, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your note. I am puzzled, what the infringed source is. Could you please provide a reference, where and what infringing text came from? ApoieRacional (talk) 20:25, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello ApoieRacional! Your additions to Draft:Stanislav Krapivnik have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably free and compatible copyright license—to request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, it’s important to understand and adhere to guidelines about using information from sources to prevent copyright and plagiarism issues. Here are the key points:

• Limited quotation: You may only copy or translate a small portion of a source. Any direct quotations must be enclosed in double quotation marks (“) and properly cited using an inline citation. More information is available on the non-free content page. To learn how to cite a source, see Help:Referencing for beginners.
• Paraphrasing: Beyond limited quotations, you are required to put all information in your own words. Following the source’s wording too closely can lead to copyright issues and is not permitted; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when paraphrasing, you must still cite your sources as appropriate.
• Image use guidelines: In most scenarios, only freely licensed or public domain images may be used and these should be uploaded to our sister project, Wikimedia Commons. In some scenarios, non-freely copyrighted content can be used if they meet all ten of our non-free content criteria; Wikipedia:Plain and simple non-free content guide may help with determining a file’s eligibility.
• Copyrighted material donation: If you hold the copyright to the content you want to copy, or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license the text for publication here. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• Copying and translation within Wikipedia: Wikipedia articles can be copied or translated, however they must have proper attribution in accordance with Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. For translation, see Help:Translation § Licensing.

It’s very important that contributors understand and follow these practices. Persistent failure to comply may result in being blocked from editing. If you have any questions or need further clarification, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 06:51, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the pie! 🙂 EkoGraf (talk) 09:31, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]