User talk:Hichem872642

Welcome![edit]

Hi Hichem872642! I noticed your contributions to Operation Rescue New Zealand and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! AntiDionysius (talk) 11:46, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

February 2024[edit]

Hello, I'm AntiDionysius. I noticed that you recently removed content from Operation Rescue New Zealand without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. AntiDionysius (talk) 11:46, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello AntiDionysius,

Thank you for reaching out and for your guidance regarding my recent edits to the Operation Rescue New Zealand article. I appreciate your vigilance in maintaining the quality and accuracy of Wikipedia content.

My intention behind the edit was [briefly explain your intention, e.g., "to remove information that I believed was outdated/incorrect/not properly sourced," but do not include this example explanation verbatim unless it accurately reflects your situation]. I realize now that I failed to provide a comprehensive edit summary that could have clarified my actions, and I understand the importance of doing so for the benefit of all Wikipedia users and editors.

I appreciate you restoring the content, and I will make sure to use my sandbox for any experimental edits in the future. I will also ensure that any further edits I make will be accompanied by detailed edit summaries to better communicate my intentions.

If there are specific concerns about the accuracy or sourcing of the content I attempted to edit, I would be keen to discuss this further and contribute to improving the article within Wikipedia's guidelines. Please feel free to contact me on my talk page with any suggestions or if there's any way I can assist in enhancing the article's quality.

Thank you once again for your understanding and for helping new editors like myself navigate the editing process more effectively. Hichem872642 (talk) 22:43, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Beef Negimaki has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Beef Negimaki. Thanks! WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 22:30, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024[edit]

Hello, I'm Alon Alush. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Apple sauce have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Alon Alush (talk) 08:30, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Alon Alush, Thank you for pointing out the issue with my contribution to the Apple sauce article. I apologize for any appearance of promotional content; that was not my intention. I appreciate your guidance and will ensure my future contributions adhere strictly to Wikipedia's policies on neutrality and objectivity. Thank you for helping me improve as a contributor. Hichem872642 (talk) 08:34, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Negimaki. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. This addition is unacceptably promotional. I am not convinced you are not using an AI bot to write this unencyclopedic content. Julietdeltalima (talk) 16:56, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Coffee cake, you may be blocked from editing. You continue to introduce utterly inappropriate MOS:PEACOCK non-WP:NPOV language to the encyclopedia, apparently using an AI bot, without any apparent comprehension that we do not write like this here. Please stop. If you cannot write in English by yourself, please do not write for this encyclopedia. Julietdeltalima (talk) 16:58, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reaching out. Just wanted to clear something up real quick – I didn't use any AI to help with my edits. Honestly, I was just trying to make the article better by adding a recipe I thought was pretty neat. I've noticed other articles include recipes too, so I was kinda following that lead. Thought it would be a nice addition, you know?

I get that there are rules to follow on Wikipedia, and I'm all for that. If I've stepped on any toes or if my edit didn't quite fit the bill, I'm totally open to chat about it and fix things up. It's a bit confusing, though, seeing similar stuff elsewhere but then having issues with my contribution. Can we talk about what makes mine different? I'm here to contribute in a good way, and I really value what you and others do to keep Wikipedia awesome. Let me know how we can sort this out. Thanks for your understanding. Hichem872642 (talk) 20:10, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is not "pretty neat" or a "nice addition" or "keep[ing] Wikipedia awesome". This isn't a cookbook. Please talk to the editors at WP:TEAHOUSE again. The fact that other articles among the millions in this encyclopedia contain recipes does not give license to add them. And you simply must cut it out with the flowery, promotional-sounding, unencyclopedic language that is not appropriate for a neutral reference work. (And I didn't "reach out"; I left a talk page message. Vague corporate cliches like this are to be avoided. Thanks.) - Julietdeltalima (talk) 20:57, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your feedback, but I must respectfully disagree with your perspective. My intention in adding a recipe was to enrich the article and provide comprehensive information, not to transform Wikipedia into a cookbook. The inclusion of similar content in other articles served as a precedent, suggesting that such information could be valuable to readers seeking a deeper understanding of the subject.

Regarding your comments on my language, I believe expressing information engagingly does not inherently compromise neutrality. Effective communication and neutrality are not mutually exclusive. I am committed to adhering to Wikipedia's standards and am willing to refine my contributions to align with them. However, I stand by the principle that enhancing articles with relevant, well-sourced content serves the encyclopedia's goal of being a comprehensive information resource.

Let's focus on constructive dialogue and improving Wikipedia together, rather than dismissing attempts to contribute positively. Hichem872642 (talk) 13:02, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Berrouaghia. Phrases like "vibrant community," "rich historical tapestry" clearly violate WP:NPOV. The rest of it was completely unsourced, and reads like your own commentary. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:44, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ohnoitsjamie, what do you think of Julietdeltalima's suggestion that (some of) this is AI generated? User:Glane23 seems to agree with it, and I certainly do. Drmies (talk) 02:01, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hichem, I just caught my boy using AI for his homework, and I've seen dozens of AI contributions among my students. That last paragraph of Draft:Beef Negimaki, that's so typical. Drmies (talk) 02:03, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, it does read like something AI generated, in that it's using a lot of words to say very little. I just asked ChatGPT to write an encyclopedia entry about Berrouaghia, and it came up with something suprisingly similar to this, including the use of the word "tapestry" twice. ChatGPT really likes tapestries. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 02:19, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]