User talk:TechScribeNY
Welcome!
[edit]Hi TechScribeNY! I noticed your contributions 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:
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:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Happy editing! Pahunkat (talk) 13:39, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 13
[edit]Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.)
- Access journalism
- added a link pointing to Notability
- Dar es Salaam School of Journalism
- added a link pointing to Media
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 19:59, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 20
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Access journalism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Notability.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:53, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
AI-generated content
[edit]TechScribeNY, I noticed that your expansion of Dar es Salaam School of Journalism in August had been reverted by [[U|Graham87}} as promotional. Looking further, I see that it twice references the Justapedia article on the institution; Kuru had removed these references in the meantime, since Justapedia is in large part a Wikipedia mirror; I checked, and that was so in this instance, so that the Justapedia article in no way supports the material you cited it to support, and never has. I also checked another reference you cited, the plausibly-titled "Top 11 Journalism Colleges in Tanzania (2024)". It's a 404, and was on the date you added the reference, when the Wayback machine checked it. Plausibly-titled but non-existence references and indiscriminately chosen references are hallmarks of AI-generated text, as is the business hype style of passages such as DSJ continues to expand its course offerings and facilities, aiming to provide students with a comprehensive education that combines theoretical knowledge with practical skills. This approach is reflected in the inclusion of new courses such as Graphic Design for Media, Online Media Professional Practices, and Website Development, which cater to the evolving needs of the media and communication industries.
(I wondered at first whether that was copyvio, but found no source.)
Your user page states AI as your primary interest, but you have been mainly editing articles concerning journalism (which is of course perfectly ok!) Have you been adding AI-generated text to Wikipedia? If so, I must tell you that it is generally deprecated (for reasons including the stylistic and referencing issues I have raised above). And where it is used, the editor who adds it is entirely responsible for checking the veracity of the contents, and the adequacy of the references. And identification of the content as based on LLM output is required. See Wikipedia:Large language models. If on the other hand I am barking up the wrong tree and you have just been copying published text, perhaps from the institution's own website, and adding references, then that is also a serious concern: see Wikipedia:Copyright violations and note that copied or only slightly modified text may have to be revision deleted by an administrator. Yngvadottir (talk) 01:12, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
Courtesy repeat ping to Graham87: I messed up the syntax. Graham87 has found another article where you added an invalid reference, this time about a different person: this 2013 funeral home announcement that you added to Jim Snyder (journalist) is about someone born in 1967, not 1965, and if you believed it to be the same Jim Snyder, why didn't you update the article to reflect the person's death? I'm glad you didn't, but look more carefully at the references you add. Yngvadottir (talk) 02:46, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
Your edits
[edit]Hello, your editing pattern has puzzled me so much that I have audited all your edits ... some good (adding good reliable sources and useful links), some not so good (adding bad sources or those that disagreed with the text and overlinking per Wikipedia's guidelines. I am deeply concerned about your intentions and your relationship with other accounts so this is all the help I'll give you until or if you respond. Graham87 (talk) 14:53, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
TechScribeNY, I note that you haven't edited since August 13, but in case you're reading here, I agree with most of Graham87's reverts, and I've just reverted your second-to last edit, at Dick Schaap Award for Outstanding Journalism. None of the references you added was useful. The three you cited in expanding the article are all the main pages on other awards, and search turned up zero mentions of "Schaap" on those websites, much less to specific facts about these awards and their influence. The reference you added to the intro says nothing about the award or Jeremy Schaap's role in selecting recipients; it dates to shortly after Dick Schaap's death, you mistitled it, and the only thing it supports is that Jeremy is Dick's son, for which the link to Jeremy Schaap suffices. In that and some of your other edits, I have the impression you are simply searching for any mention of the title to use as a reference, without concern for either the quality of the source (see Wikipedia's policy on reliable sources) or whether it supports what you are citing it for. And details of your referencing suggest you aren't really reading the references; again, I wonder whether you are actually pasting in AI-generated writing? One instance is Jim Snyder (journalist), mentioned above, where the reference you added is about a different person. At Michael Mills (journalist), your edits added an independent call of the reference archived here ("A life at the centre of power"). You assigned it a different reference name and formatted the original citation, using the same archived version both times, but for some reason you changed "http" to "https" for the URL parameter; did you actually access this reference? Wayback didn't capture the text when it archived the https version, and you would have noticed it was the same as the existing reference. At Helen Lewis (journalist), your edit added this clearly bad source—including overt mention of her "wiki" in the text—but I was interested to note that instead of the stated author, Valentine Belue, you gave the author's name as "Some Person", clearly left over from a referencing guide. I'd like to know what was going on with these references. Also, letting you know that I will shortly be mentioning your edits at a noticeboard, in an ongoing section about Graham87. Yngvadottir (talk) 02:24, 2 October 2024 (UTC)