User talk:Manvi jha13

This is Manvi jha13's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Welcome!

Hello, Manvi jha13!

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.

Introduction to contributing

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.

Happy editing! Cheers, 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 10:11, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: LLM aided design (June 17)

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

Promotional tone, editorializing and other words to watch
Vague, generic, and speculative statements extrapolated from similar subjects
Essay-like writing
Hallucinations (plausible-sounding, but false information) and non-existent references
Close paraphrasing

Please address these issues. The best way to do it 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.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:LLM aided design and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 09:31, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Manvi jha13! 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! Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 09:31, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: LLM aided design (June 17)

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

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

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:

Promotional tone, editorializing and other words to watch
Vague, generic, and speculative statements extrapolated from similar subjects
Essay-like writing
Hallucinations (plausible-sounding, but false information) and non-existent references
Close paraphrasing

Please address these issues. The best way to do it is usually to read reliable sources and summarize them, instead of using a large language model. See our help page on large language models.

The comment the reviewer left was:

AI generation is obvious with the whole draft plus poor sources

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.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Manvi jha13/LLM aided design and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 10:09, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

June 2025

Hello, I'm Timtrent. An edit that you recently made seemed to be generated using a large language model (an "AI chatbot" or other application using such technology). Text produced by these applications can be unsuitable for an encyclopedia, and output must be carefully checked. 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. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 10:11, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

LLM aided design moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to LLM aided design. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because While not conclusively AI-generated, the writing style, structure, and tone are consistent with LLM-assisted authorship. It likely had human curation or editing layered on top of content produced or scaffolded by a large language model. Further, the references are almost all deprecated 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. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 16:25, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Timtrent,

Thank you very much for taking the time to review my draft and for providing your feedback — I sincerely appreciate your efforts.

I noticed that the draft has been tagged again for AI-generated content. I’d like to clarify that while earlier versions of the draft may have involved AI-assisted phrasing improvements, I have since thoroughly revised the content and undone any polishing done by AI, and to the best of my knowledge, the current version no longer contains AI-generated material.

Additionally, I would be grateful if you could elaborate on the note regarding “deprecated sources.” As the article deals with an academic and research-oriented topic, the majority of references are publications. If any of them do not meet Wikipedia’s reliability standards, I’d really appreciate your guidance on which ones should be replaced or improved.

Thank you,

Manvi Manvi jha13 (talk) 00:13, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I only just saw this. You are not aware of the wp:ping system. Do, please, become familiar with it, so that folk don't miss things you wish to address to them.

Anything and everything at Arxiv is unreliable. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 10:27, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of LLM aided design for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article LLM aided design is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LLM aided design until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 08:51, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have modified the nomination in response to your message and Qcne's intercession. Arxiv carries "papers for pay" and is not a reliable source, but you can work on that. I think you will find WP:ACADEME of interest. While you are not the target audience for that essay you will see how it has relevance. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 10:22, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Timtrent,

Thank you so much for your response. I was unaware that Arxiv articles would come under unreliable source. Thank you so much for clarifying this and for sharing the link, I will fix the article accordingly.

Thank you,

Manvi Manvi jha13 (talk) 10:27, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]