Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)

The miscellaneous section of the village pump is used to post messages that do not fit into any other category. Please post on the policy, technical, or proposals sections when appropriate, or at the help desk for assistance. For general knowledge questions, please use the reference desk.

Discussions are automatically archived after remaining inactive for a week.

« Archives, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81

An improved dashboard for the Content Translation tool

Hello Wikipedians,

The Language and Product Localization team has improved the Content Translation dashboard to create a consistent experience for all contributors using mobile and desktop devices. Below is a breakdown of important information about the improvement.

What are the improvements?
The improved translation dashboard allows all logged-in users of the tool to enjoy a consistent experience regardless of their type of device. With a harmonized experience, logged-in desktop users can now access the capabilities shown in the image below.

Does this improvement change the current accessibility of this tool in this Wikipedia?
The Content translation tool will remain in beta; therefore, only logged-in users who activated the tool from the beta features will continue to have access to the content translation tool. Also, if the tool is only available to a specific user group, it will remain that way.

When do we plan to implement this improvement?
We will implement it on your Wikipedia and others by 24th, March 2025.

What happens to the former dashboard after we implement the improvement?
You can still access it in the tool for some time. We will remove it from all Wikipedias by May 2025, as maintaining it will no longer be productive.

Where can I test this improvement and report any issues before it is implemented in this Wiki?
You can try the improved capabilities in the test wiki using this link: https://test.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ContentTranslation&campaign=contributionsmenu&to=es&filter-type=automatic&filter-id=previous-edits&active-list=suggestions&from=en#/

If you notice an issue related to the improved dashboard in the test wiki, please let us know in this thread and ping me, or report it in Phabricator, adding these tags: BUG REPORT and ContentTranslation.

Please ask us any questions regarding this improvement. Thank you!

On behalf of the Language and Product Localization team. UOzurumba (WMF) (talk) 17:56, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the update! —Ganesha811 (talk) 21:03, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This isn’t related to the improvement, but about the content translation dashboard, do you know if there’s any way to get it to stop autofilling new paragraphs with the foreign-language text? Currently when I click “add paragraph” it automatically copies the French text, presumably as an alternative to machine translation, which I must then delete. It would be useful to be able to disable this, as en WP has disabled machine translation, and obviously having French in the final En article is not helpful. Mrfoogles (talk) 15:31, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Mrfoogles, there is a feedback button in Special:ContentTranslation. You might try using that.

Alternatively, perhaps some system could be set up to allow trusted users access to machine translation, which would help with (e.g.,) links. Send me an e-mail message if you'd like to know how to get machine translation. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:27, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback wanted on Wikidata in Watchlist and Recent Changes

Hello everyone,

We are looking for a few Wikipedians to speak with us about their experiences looking at Wikipedia watchlist and recent changes lists. We are especially interested in your understanding and interpretation of the information displayed when the edits are caused by Wikidata.

The format will be a roughly 1-hour long interview with our UX researcher and conducted in English, compensation is available.

If you would like to participate, please register your interest as a reply to this post or on our Talk_page and we will shortly be in touch.

Thank you, - Danny Benjafield (WMDE) (talk) 12:50, 25 March 2025 (UTC) (posting on behalf of the Wikidata for Wikimedia Projects team)[reply]

Wait… I thought we had consensus that edits should NEVER be caused by Wikidata. Or am I misinterpreting what is being discussed? Blueboar (talk) 13:18, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So can I claim compensation for talking about nothing for an hour? Phil Bridger (talk) 13:26, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, well we certainly wouldn't fill the hour with silence, but would have a series of questions and visuals about the information that is currently shown from those watchlist entries caused by a Wikidata edit. You absolutely do not need to be a Wikidata-expert to participate, but we do welcome a cross-section of experience. Feel free to reach out with any more questions -Danny Benjafield (WMDE) (talk) 13:49, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

These entries caused by Wikidata in your Wikipedia Watchlist or the Recent Changes list can be triggered by a number of ways, including but not limited to:

adding, removing or changing
- a language link
- a badge
- Wikidata item label, description and/or alias
- a claim (Property and/or value-pair)
connecting or disconnecting an article to a Wikidata item

Wikidata edits in the watchlist are not visible by default. To include them, you can toggle them from your preferences/watchlist/advanced options section.

Alternatively, a toggle can also be found under the Filters dropdown in the Type of change section, directly from your Watchlist/Recent Changes page. -Danny Benjafield (WMDE) (talk) 13:43, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It won't take up an hour, but as an initial piece of feedback, enabling the watchlist toggle means every wikidata change is displayed separately, as opposed to the (default) article behaviour of only showing the most recent edit, which can absolutely wreck watchlists. For example, if I currently enable the toggle, my watchlist is a wall of changes to wikidata:Q9027, apparently because Nordic Council is on my watchlist(?). CMD (talk) 15:38, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback @Chipmunkdavis. Just curious, do you also use the 'Group changes by page in recent changes and watchlist' feature (from Preferences > Recent Changes)to counter that? Danny Benjafield (WMDE) (talk) 15:53, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well no, I didn't. Why is an option for watchlist customisation in the recent changes tab rather than the watchlist tab, and why is its default setting the opposite of what would be implied by the existing watchlist toggle "Expand watchlist to show all changes, not just the most recent"? Questions and anecdote for the UX team. I might give it a try with that enabled. CMD (talk) 15:59, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Great questions, alas I don't have the answers for you, but I do hope that function improves things for you if you try it out, thanks again for your thoughts. Danny Benjafield (WMDE) (talk) 17:13, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My watchlist is ok on desktop, where the multiple changes to a Wikidata item are rolled up under a clickable right-pointing triangle, but I know what you mean on my phone/Minerva, where I spend more time these days and where the watchlist can be an unsummarised mass of property value and reference changes to a single item. That's where I look forward to discussing th euser experience... AllyD (talk) 16:01, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have this disabled because I don't edit Wikidata anyway, but also because it is mostly useless (as in, you know something has changed, but that's the end of the useful information). If I would get instead of "(diff | hist) . . Dm Michael Buxton (Q133464990); 03:08 . . AntiCompositeNumber (talk | contribs) (‎Created claim: Property:P106: Q1642960)" the actual values of the P and Q numbers, I might have an idea whether I should check if I were so inclined. And then there are pure errors, like this appearing twice in my watchlist. It's also confusing that "(diff | hist) . . Dm Wikipedia:Authority control (Q76); 14:03 . . Prototyperspective (talk | contribs) (‎Created claim: Property:P12361: barackobama.bsky.social)" is given as a change to Authority Control, when it is a change to Barack Obama (yes, Obama = Q76, but that's not really something I know for every article on my watchlist).

I thought this option was restricted so only changes which impact enwiki were shown (say, things which would appear in an infobox), but this is no longer the case?

I have no idea what the line "(diff | hist) . . Dm User:Andrawaag (Q31); 18:28 . . RVA2869 (talk | contribs) (‎Set [nl] aliases: Koninkrijk België, Belgie, BE, BEL, 🇧🇪, be)" does in my watchlist: the diff goes to [1]. Similarly, I get 6 changes like "(diff | hist) . . Dm User:Saarik (Q95592946); 08:06 . . Saarik (talk | contribs) (‎Removed claim: Property:P8687: 45)" which are changes to a Wikidata article, not a Wikidata user page([2])

I get "(diff | hist) . . Dm Help:Authority control (Q414110); 09:28 . . Ham II (talk | contribs) (‎Changed [cy] label, description and aliases: Akademie der Künste Berlin, amgueddfa yn yr Almaen, Academi Celfyddydau Berlin, Academi y Celfyddydau, Berlin, Academi Celfyddydau, Berlin)" which is not a change to Help:Authority control but this.

So I stopped looking for further issues and now know again why I disabled this years ago already. Fram (talk) 16:32, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wow, thank you for all the feedback and examples, this is very helpful. Addressing the techno-babble and jargon to those unfamiliar with Wikidata terminology is something we would like to improve. Danny Benjafield (WMDE) (talk) 17:21, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

More than 29,000 accounts compromised

WMF and User:AntiCompositeNumber has discovered and locked more than 29,000 compromised accounts. See m:Special:Log/WMFOffice. GZWDer (talk) 10:50, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Additional information? How were they compromised? What kind of damage was done? — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 14:08, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, please. A simple statement like "accounts using 2FA were not affected" would be helpful. ☆ Bri (talk) 19:05, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all. Yes, this is something we (WMF) are aware of and responding to. You can find more information on the Meta-wiki page m:Wikimedia Foundation/March 2025 discovery of account compromises; please add any questions on the talkpage there, keeping in mind that we cannot share some details for wp:beans/security/etc reasons. Also yes, confirming Bri is correct that accounts with 2fa were not affected. Thanks, Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 22:17, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Liverpool FC.svg

Hi ,why this user publicated this logo (File:Liverpool FC.svg) for 2 articles, regarding the Wikipedia:Non-free content ,for logos used for 1 article but why the user publicated this logo for 2 articles?? (Google translator) AbchyZa22 (talk) 13:53, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CAPTCHA

Somebody needs to shout this out loud.

MOST ASSISTIVE READERS CANNOT PASS THE NEW CAPTCHA TEST, BLOCKING ALL SUCH EDITORS FROM THEIR ACCOUNTS. PERSISTENT RANGEBLOCKS COVERING THINGS LIKE THE VODAFONE GATEWAY PREVENT EVEN IP ACCESS FOR MANY.

In protest, I am totally off-wiki from this moment on, unless and until this abuse of the disadvantaged ends. So no point in your replying to me personally. (Though I have passed a suggestion for a workable captcha to phabricator).

— Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 12:36, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the details of the new captcha test, the affected screen readers, and the phab ticket. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:45, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably the appropriate Phab link is phab:T6845#10686296, which is a new comment on a very old ticket. Anomie ⚔ 13:11, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Per phab:T6845#10686370, sounds like they're about to turn it off. –Novem Linguae (talk) 13:28, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @ScottishFinnishRadish, I wanted to clarify that this particular change wasn't related with the tests. It was a separate decision, more like a one-off, that's also why we didn't check all accessibility consequences and rolled back that easily. SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 23:26, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think that this should serve as a reminder to many people (including me) that accessibility is not a "nice-to-have" afterthought, but that systems are unusable to many people when it is not designed in from the start. Phil Bridger (talk) 14:16, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey everyone, thanks for the comments above. We implemented CAPTCHA as a quick security measure: T390197 IPReputation: Support showing a CAPTCHA on Special:UserLogin and T379178 Support captcha as part of login flow (not just on "badlogin"). Given that it has an accessibility tradeoff, we did decide to roll it back. We will try to figure out a better way of securing logins keeping accessibility in mind. Thank you! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 18:16, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the prompt rollback. As something to work towards, may I suggest offering the alternative of 2FA by sending a confirmation code to the account's registered email address. Not perfect, as email is nowadays frowned on as less secure than phone nonsense, and some editors may not have registered, but better than what we have at the moment. Even more basic but a key part of the UX should be to add an accompanying caption stating that it is only a temporary measure; this would help inform those few who are locked out, meaning they will take it with far better grace than, say, I did. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 17:58, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As it happens, we're working on that now and hope to have it deployed in some form soon, hopefully later this week T390437: Deploy Extension:EmailAuth. :)

I'm sorry for the issues we caused with deploying the CAPTCHA in this way, and thank you for speaking up about it. KHarlan (WMF) (talk) 18:54, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody needs to shout this out loud. Yeah, but it violates WP:SHOUT. Removing your bolding. Leaving the all-caps since I lack the energy to convert it. ―Mandruss ☎ IMO. 06:53, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

With due respect, WP:SHOUT says "seldom" not "never". I made that judgement call and I stand by it. The subsequent conversation shows I had a point. No violation there. FYI, I'm taking this off my watchlist now it's descended to trivia. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 12:54, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You stand by it, yet you haven't restored your bolding. So the point of your comment was? Dude, if you feel that strongly about this, by all means shout to high heaven. I didn't mean to offend your sensitivities. ―Mandruss ☎ IMO. 14:23, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edit count of users blocked as LLMs increasing 10x per year

Please see this WT:LLM discussion.

Cramulator (talk) 01:37, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can I get credit for predicting this at Wikipedia:Eleventy-billion pool#2038 with my predictions for January 19?-Gadfium (talk) 02:53, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome templates

I love all of them V1kor0to (talk) 05:12, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome job on the front page today

I really enjoyed the front page today. It's hard to get wordplay like that, and to have pretty much all the topics be so silly really made my day. Thanks to the folks who worked it, y'all knocked it outta the park. Wackogamer123 (talk) 02:42, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's just the DYK section on the front page that's April Fool's, right? Yeah, I see a couple funny ones in there :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 03:15, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What if it all just ended…

Imagine if, one day, this encyclopedia were to go dark, if the Wikimedia project came to an end permanently. All the articles, all the discussions, the debates, the conflicts, the memories buried within its page all of it, gone forever.

How would you feel, after dedicating hours, months, even years of your life to it? After sharing so much knowledge, debating countless topics, forging connections with contributors from all over the world, what would remain, if Wikipedia suddenly vanished without a trace? Would it be sadness, nostalgia, or perhaps a quiet, lingering emptiness?

Riad Salih (talk) 11:37, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure that, in the long term at least, those who only read would find something else to read, and the editors would find something else to do with their time. There would still be a need for some sort of online encyclopedia, but it would probably be very different. Phil Bridger (talk) 11:49, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As part of the open source movement, if Wikipedia were to disappear, someone would surely fork it quickly using meta:Data dumps, and then folks would head over there. The work we've done is likely quite resilient to any kind of disappearance, attack, etc. –Novem Linguae (talk) 12:07, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure there would be copies around from the regular data dumps. What would be hard to rebuild is the financial, infrastructure, and technical support supplied by the Foundation. There would also be the problem of making the public aware that a new clone was a legitimate successor to WP (depending on what might happen to the Foundation, the name "Wikipedia" might not be available for use). Donald Albury 15:37, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've worried about this recently, in light of the current abandonment of the rule of law in the US and the purge of everything and everyone contrary to the Administration's views. I hope that if they don't already replicate the site and its database to servers outside the US, say in Ireland or Denmark or Spain, that they're now arranging to do that. Largoplazo (talk) 13:31, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Foundation has several data centers around the world, although the ones outside the US are used for edge caching. Donald Albury 15:28, 1 April 2025 (UTC) Edited 15:41, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Federal government can enact legislation that in-effect makes life very difficult under the guise of combating piracy, pornography, anti-American propaganda. If the WMF is not already looking at moving the organization to Canada, Netherlands, etc.. they should be laying the foundation. The regime is cleaning house with a long wishlist of liberal crown jewels to dismantle. -- GreenC 04:02, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I had actually thought about this two days ago when the site was having technical difficulties. Honest answer to your question? I would feel indifferent. As Phil Bridger said, people would find something else to read and something else do with their time. I know I would. I wonder how the wiki-addicts will cope though, but I'm sure they'll eventually get over it. Some1 (talk) 22:54, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's intended purpose, to serve as an informational ready reference for most of the world, is beside the point? The damage would be measured only by its value as a leisure pursuit for the people who contribute to it and keep it running? Largoplazo (talk) 23:13, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Some sadness, I love reading it as well as editing. The upside would be my new hobby which I'm rubbish at might improve. I've gone from putting out fires to creating them.

As long as YouTube survived? I've no idea how to fix things unless I can look it up on the toob. Knitsey (talk) 23:20, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Riad Salih For which reasons do you think this encyclopedia can cease to exist ?

If it does happens when I'm alive. I don't think I can predict how I will feel. Anatole-berthe (talk) 03:56, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Anatole-berthe just crossed my mind. But yeah, it can always happen. Just as an example, if Google somehow stops showing the encyclopedia in the top search results, it could seriously reduce the number of page views. It's a subtle way to kill something. Riad Salih (talk) 05:35, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Riad Salih I was thinking to the fact "Myspace" lost songs because of a faulty server migration.

There are many articles about this story.

An article among others.

It was wrote by "Matthew Robinson" published in "MARCH/18/2019" on the website of "CNN" : https://edition.cnn.com/2019/03/18/us/myspace-lost-12-years-music-uploads-apology-intl-scli/index.html

Your example about "Google search" seemed to me interesting.

In a hypothetical case like this that seem unlikely to me for the decade "2020s".

Maybe , a "Streisand effect" could save the encyclopedia instead of kill it. Anatole-berthe (talk) 06:21, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The encyclopedia might become read-only (for what reason I won't hazard a guess), but I doubt it would disappear. If it disappears, read on. I poured my heart into software development for twenty years. A lot of it was really good software. I feel a sense of loss that none of it is likely to still be in use by mid-century, but such is life. I also miss music like what was being created in the 60s and 70s—a lot. I miss a lot of things. ―Mandruss ☎ IMO. 06:49, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's natural to miss and be personally affected with something one had dedicated time and efforts to. Many great projects had to become obsolete and be replaced with because they had over-grown and could no longer muster resources to go over the migration or just maintain themselves Nisingh.8 (talk) 14:57, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No more charts in articles?

I think charts / datagraphics are some of the most useful in articles. Now it looks like some editors want top keep them out or remove them for being unreadable without clicking on them (don't know if this even applies on mobile where the images are displayed larger).

See Talk:Innovation#Image "too small to read"?.
I think datagraphics often contain very valuable information and should not be kept out by a few editors.
Prototyperspective (talk) 14:27, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion is about one chart in one article, not "No more charts in articles". Phil Bridger (talk) 15:09, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What they say there extends to many and possibly most other datagraphics however. Prototyperspective (talk) 15:13, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible to have charts and datagraphics that work at the display size. The one at Innovation does not appear to do so however. CMD (talk) 15:25, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Many or most charts need to be clicked on desktop or viewed on mobile (there it doesn't even need to be tapped but having to is not a problem if it's really informative). This is one of those many datagraphics in Wikipedia. If it was just one chart, then it would only show the adoption of one particular technology which wouldn't be (nearly as) useful or insightful. Prototyperspective (talk) 15:41, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I boldly put LLM-generated summary suggestions on the talk pages of the 68 most popular articles with Technical templates

I have to start work very shortly, but I've been repeatedly urged to start a discussion here, so please pardon my brevity.

This morning, I posted summaries from the 68 most popular articles or their sections with the {{Technical}} template to their talk pages. So far I have about two positive, two neutral, and four negative comments. My major error was asking for fifth grade reading level summaries (because I had a vague recollection that was the target for the World Book Encyclopedia reading level) but I have since learned that STEM articles on Wikipedia are preferably written at the ninth grade reading level, when e.g. WP:ONEDOWN or the other conditions at WP:JARGON don't apply.

I did carefully read WP:LLM, which says, among many other pertinent things, that "LLMs can be used to copyedit or expand existing text and to generate ideas for new or existing articles." And generally, other pages such as Wikipedia:Using neural network language models on Wikipedia and this discussion seem even more positive on this use case. However, I agree that the summary should be sourced to the sources for the statements being summarized, and I don't know what I should do about that. I also read all of the 68 articles I generated summaries for and the summaries themselves. Anyway, here are the fifth grade and ninth grade level summaries, and I've released the source code into the public domain.

Please share your opinions! Cramulator (talk) 16:46, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think this was a reasonable idea. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:47, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, bullshit-bot-generated text should be deleted from Wikipedia (articles, talk pages, everywhere) on sight. If a contributor can't communicate in their own words, they should leave such matters to people who can. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:51, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't do this. It hurts to read these. I checked this ("A rainbow table is like a special cheat sheet that helps bad people guess passwords."), this and this ("If the minimum wage is already high, raising it more could make fewer people want to work"?). Fram (talk) 17:01, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clear demonstration that it's thoroughly inappropriate to generate summarires like that for Wikipedia. From your ninth-grade file:

to begin 5.56×45mm NATO#Cartridge dimensions: "The 5.56x45mm NATO cartridge has specific measurements and its case can hold 1.85 mL of volume."

to begin DisplayPort: "DisplayPort (DP) is a digital connection primarily used to link video sources, like computers, to display devices, such as monitors."

to begin Avicenna#Metaphysical doctrine: "Avicenna, an important Islamic philosopher, explored deep questions about reality, known as metaphysics."

Did you prompt it to write like a struggling ninth-grader? NebY (talk) 17:21, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I looked through a few and found some striking issues. The whole of the summary on the Whore-Madonna complex I think would be unusable. It seems that the time spent making all these questions and discussing them could instead have been used to just read and summarize the articles. Sock-the-guy (talk) 19:21, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As usual for LLM on Wikipedia, this appears to be creating more work than it is saving. Please discontinue. –Novem Linguae (talk) 21:10, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Although I'm not completely against use of AI to assist a well informed editor in writing, we should not be suggesting it's widespread use by the average editor with only a superficial understanding of a topic. I've used AI to help write professional material off-wiki in areas of my expertise. But like much technology, use by those without expertise risks serious errors. Wikipedia already fights an uphill battle with editors who have little understanding of topics they write about. AI can make writing appear impressive and give the writer a false sense of confidence, but if you look at professional reviews of its use it's scary. Sundayclose (talk) 17:05, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I made similar points at Talk:Waste management where AI assumes that waste = trash. It doesn't. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 17:18, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

LLM-generated texts often violate Wikipedia guidelines. For example, both your 5th-grade and 9th-grade AI summaries of Existentialism#Facticity violate MOS:YOU. Phlsph7 (talk) 17:15, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to hop in here, as it's related, to further publicize that I used ChatGPT 4.5 in project mode with sources uploaded directly for an experimental rewrite of Shit flow diagram. While converting all of the references to {{sfn}} I checked sources, verified content and rewrote some parts that had issues. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:24, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]