User talk:182.55.68.245

November 2023[edit]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at GPTZero, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Hello, Github is not a reliable source. Please do not make claims without proper citations. Comintell (talk) 07:40, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, who are you to decide whether Github is reliable source or not? According to your logic, wikipedia should delete LangChain, Stable Diffusion and many more pages, because they are hosted on Github and their prime sources are Github.

Also, I know who you are. And have seen your edits / pages. You get paid to add new pages, which are taken down by Wikipedia. Stop spamming. 182.55.68.245 (talk) 15:15, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Firs of alll, just because Stuff exists , doesn't mean it should or is allowed. GPTzero is lucky they haven't been proposed deletion yet because their page has issues. When I first began fixing it, it was things like self references non-secondary sources (Website, blog MEDIUM. etc) Whoever was paid to create Gptzero page nearly got it deleted with the horrible citations.

There is no logic beyond Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. Your contribution reads like chatGPT. While Github may be reliable, it is not independent, secondary, or relevent. In fact it seems like link spam to someones github repo. Really embarrassing; please knock it off. Comintell (talk) 17:38, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think, you have to decide what you have to write next. I'm providing an indepedent view on GPTZero, by showing a public repo (reliable source), how exactly GPTZero works. And the fact, you're talking I'm using ChatGPT shows that you are connected with the main GPTZero and therefore no longer reliable.

Stop spamming here. I will report you. 182.55.68.245 (talk) 03:31, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to GPTzero, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Comintell (talk) 18:14, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making abusive or otherwise inappropriate edit summaries or comments , as you did to GPTZero. Your edit summary or comment may have been removed. Please communicate with civility and refrain from making personal attacks. Thank you. --AntiDionysius (talk) 17:47, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at GPTZero shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. —C.Fred (talk) 03:31, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. The other user admits Github is reliable source but still removes that one paragraph. 182.55.68.245 (talk) 03:40, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Where did they say that? I see them saying it is unreliable—and by its nature, it is unreliable. —C.Fred (talk) 03:42, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Here, on my talk page

There is no logic beyond Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. Your contribution reads like chatGPT. While Github may be reliable, it is not independent, secondary, or relevent. In fact it seems like link spam to someones github repo. Really embarrassing; please knock it off. Comintell (talk) 17:38, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Last time, I checked Github falls under reliable source, because it's peer-reviewed. And stars and forks are the indiciation that whether a repository on Github is reliable or not. Moreover, the author on the repo claims that it is working exactly the same as GPTZero. Finally, if you look at this users editing history, 95% of his contributions are paid articles which are taken down by Wikipedia. 182.55.68.245 (talk) 03:51, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is, using Github as a source (and it's a self-published source) is limited to what's stated in the repository. If you're interpreting what's in the code, then that's original research. —C.Fred (talk) 03:54, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I want to ensure that the article maintains a neutral stance, currently it looks like a promotional ad-piece. Will be linking new stuff very soon. 182.55.68.245 (talk) 14:46, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.