User talk:ElijahJWrites

Mirrors

Thanks for contributing to the article Pamela Kyle Crossley. However, one of Wikipedia's core policies is that material must be verifiable and attributed to reliable sources. You have recently used citations which copied, or mirrored, material from Wikipedia. This leads to a circular reference and is not acceptable. Most mirrors are clearly labeled as such, but some are in violation of our license and do not provide the correct attribution. Please help by adding alternate sources to the article you edited! If you need any help or clarification, you can look at Help:Contents/Editing Wikipedia or ask at Wikipedia:New contributors' help page, or just ask me. Thank you. Sam Kuru (talk) 11:32, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

July 2026

Hi ElijahJWrites! I noticed that you recently made an edit and marked it as "minor", but it may not have been. On Wikipedia, "minor edit" refers only to superficial edits that could never be disputed, such as fixing typos or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not minor, even if it only concerns a single word. Thank you. Innisfree987 (talk) 15:37, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dwight Cuthbert Revire Gardiner, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Administrator was added. 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.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Purring maggot. An edit that you recently made to Dwight Cuthbert Revire Gardiner seemed to be generated using a large language model (an "AI chatbot" or other application using such technology). Text produced by these applications is not allowed on Wikipedia, and may contain factually inaccurate statements, fictitious citations, or other problems. You should instead read reliable sources and then summarize those in your own words. 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, or ask your questions at the Teahouse, a friendly place for new users. Thanks. ^purring_maggot (talk) 01:20, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

Also, I notice that you've been previously asked not to mark edits as minor, but you're still doing it. Please stop marking edits as minor which add, remove, or rewrite parts of an article. Only the absolutely most uncontroversial edits qualify as "minor" and if you're not sure what that means, best not to check the "minor edit" box at all. Thanks! ^purring_maggot (talk) 01:22, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

⁣ Hi @Purring maggot, Thank you for the note. I actually wrote the text entirely by hand without AI assistance. But I understand if my writing style came across as overly structured. I would like to improve it; could you point to specific sections or sentences so I can rewrite them in an encyclopedic tone? ElijahJWrites (talk) 15:02, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for replying. The tone is actually not the issue with this particular edit: This section contains almost no information whatsoever on what specific "contributions" the subject made to marine governance; it just gestures vaguely at related areas of work. What little factual information is written in this section, such as that he chaired the National Ocean Governance Committee, is already present elsewhere in the article, so it's duplicative. I would recommend removing the section entirely.

To be frank, I highly doubt that you're telling me the whole truth about not using LLMs (AI), since many of your edits contain a multitude of typos and ungrammatical punctuation, whereas the added section in this edit contained no typos whatsoever. I'm sorry if I sound harsh since you are a new user; my intention is purely to clarify what's going wrong here. If you're using Microsoft Word with Copilot assistance, or having Grammarly rephrase your writing, these sorts of things also count as an improper use of LLMs, and many people are unaware of that and surprised that Wikipedia doesn't allow such things. But the WP:NOLLM policy exists because all forms of AI tools create these sorts of edits which contain a lot of unverifiable, poorly sourced or biased text. ^purring_maggot (talk) 15:24, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

July 2026 2

Please stop. If you continue to edit Wikipedia using a large language model (an "AI chatbot" or other application using such technology), you may be blocked from editing. Adding LLM-generated content is prohibited on Wikipedia. DraconicDark (talk) 18:14, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

Hi @DraconicDark, I used the tool only for the formatting, which I wasn't aware of. I'll be really careful for the next time and will fully follow the guidelines. ElijahJWrites (talk) 18:25, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gardy St Fleur (July 22)

Draft declined

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Your draft submission to Articles for creation has been reviewed but not accepted at this time.

Feedback

The reviewer, MSK, left the following feedback:

This draft is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Wikipedia's verifiability policy requires that all content be supported by reliable sources.

• Reliable sources include: reputable newspapers, magazines, academic journals, and books from respected publishers.
• Unacceptable sources include: personal blogs, social media, predatory publishers, most tabloids, and websites where anyone can contribute.

Replace any unreliable sources with high-quality sources. If you cannot find a reliable source for the material, it should be removed.

About half the text is now unsourced.

Next steps

• Edit Draft:Gardy St Fleur to address the points above, making sure to publish any changes.
• When you are ready to resubmit your draft for review, click the Resubmit button.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it may be deleted.

Need help?

• For an overview of our policies and guidelines see Everything you need to know.
• You can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page.

Scam warning

• If anyone asks you for money or payment to publish, protect, or restore a Wikipedia article or draft, it is a scam. Learn about scams on Wikipedia.

msk 20:53, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

Hello, ElijahJWrites! Having a draft declined at Articles for creation can be disappointing, but don't be discouraged, it's common when creating your first article. Need help? For an overview of our policies and guidelines see Everything you need to know. To understand why your draft was declined, please read the reviewer's feedback and follow any links to help pages you've been given. If you're still confused, try asking for advice at the Articles for creation Help desk. For peer support regarding all other editing, sourcing, or policies, visit the Teahouse, a friendly question and answer hub for new editors. We'd love to see you there! msk 20:53, 22 July 2026 (UTC)