User talk:Powercycler
Add topicWelcome!
[edit]Hi Powercycler! 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! Jay8g [V•T•E] 23:00, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
May 2026
[edit]
Hello! Your image was inserted successfully on the page Blepharospasm, but because it appeared to be irrelevant to the article or violated the image use policy, it has been reverted or removed. Please use your sandbox for any tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Wikipedia generally doesn't use AI-generated images in articles, especially medical ones. See WP:AIIMAGES. Belbury (talk) 07:58, 20 May 2026 (UTC)
July 2026
[edit] Hello, I'm JalenBarks. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Rigidity (neurology), but you didn't provide a reliable source. On Wikipedia, it's important that article content be verifiable. If you'd like to resubmit your change with a citation, your edit is archived in the page history. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Jalen Barks (Woof) 14:55, 10 July 2026 (UTC)
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia!
I noticed that one or more of your edits appear to have been carried out using a large language model (LLM), such as ChatGPT. While LLMs are powerful, AI-generated text often contains serious flaws, such as bias, errors, plagiarism, libel, or even hoaxes. Specifically asking an LLM to "write a Wikipedia article" can sometimes cause the output to be entirely made up, complete with fictitious references.
For this reason, the use of AI tools for the creation or rewriting of article content, generating images or sources or writing comments is generally prohibited. AI/LLM-generated articles may be quickly deleted. If you are unsure about your wording, you can suggest it on the talk page for another volunteer to look at it. If you are creating a new article, you may use the Articles for Creation process to get feedback on your work.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you:
Happy editing! ‑‑gurkubondinn 15:33, 14 October 2026 (UTC)
- No intend to use these for ANS. Just technical documentation for my RefDiff tool and no obvious call to action. I'll take care for the label coming weekend. Powercycler (talk) 15:42, 14 October 2026 (UTC)
- The issues have been resolved. Hope it was the proper way to do. -- Powercycler (talk) 07:24, 17 October 2026 (UTC)
CNfirmer
[edit]Greetings. Regarding , the first attempt didn't have any info to figure out the source of the information. Now it does. Did you add that manually, or did it somehow get stripped out earlier? Constant314 (talk) 21:47, 1 November 2026 (UTC)
- The flaw was somewhat on my side and I missed to check everything in the final results. In both cases I used manual steps and only checked to have a link in first place. My focus for was to have a easily verifiable source (link) that matches. When I try to find sources I have many options and many path to step through. As well I often rewrite the claim then to be more tangible and learn to understand the details while I pick a source. Not picking the wrong source is my current priority.
- Automation is tricky. I think with these early real-world learnings I have input to exercise locally and improve. I hope this didn't disrupt you to much. Powercycler (talk) 09:37, 2 November 2026 (UTC)
