User talk:Astropulse

Don’t change someone else’s section heading

Unless it’s a personal attack. Doug Weller talk 20:58, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

lede -> lead [[1]] is same. my section was removed by the other person and merged [[2]] to his. so i dont see what the problem is Astropulse (talk) 21:31, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SearchGPT

Hi Astropulse, I think it's still a bit too early to mention SearchGPT in the lead section of the article on OpenAI. But maybe one day, if it's fully released and has significant notability, it would be good to change the sentence "As a leading organization in the ongoing AI boom, OpenAI is known for the GPT family of large language models, the DALL-E series of text-to-image models, and a text-to-video model named Sora." into something like "As a leading organization in the ongoing AI boom, OpenAI is known for the GPT family of large language models, the DALL-E series of text-to-image models, a text-to-video model named Sora and the search engine SearchGPT." Alenoach (talk) 21:33, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:LEAD lead section is an introduction to an article and a summary of its most important contents. It gives the basics in a nutshell and cultivates interest in reading on. It should identify the topic, establish context, explain why the topic is notable, and summarize the most important points, including any prominent controversies.

It doesn't need to be significant notability. just notable. It launch has received lots of attention and is worth mentioning in lead Astropulse (talk) 22:02, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:Screenshot-2024-07-25-at-2.46.02 pm-306.png

Thanks for uploading File:Screenshot-2024-07-25-at-2.46.02 pm-306.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 04:30, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:1RR at Hamas

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

You have recently made several reverts at this article, with this one, with the edit summary reverting because of violation of WP:3RR and 1 edit revert max 24hrs violating 1RR. Please self-revert. BilledMammal (talk) 00:03, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i have only made 1 revert. where are are the several reverts you are talking about. another editor has reverted all of changes without sufficient reason. this issue is already talked in page talk and hopefully resolved. Astropulse (talk) 00:25, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And i will not self revert. If you have issues with edit - feel free to either make improvements or open a discussion in talk pages. editor in question has already made changes he has objections on Astropulse (talk) 00:27, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This and this, among others.

Regarding the discussion on the talk page, I don’t see a consensus for your edit - most editors appear to oppose it. WP:1RR is a bright-line rule, and per your edit summary you are aware of the restrictions in this topic area.

Self-reverting is not optional here, it is required. BilledMammal (talk) 00:51, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These are edits - not really reverts. i made several edits to fix NPOV. Editors have issues with parts of it. One editor reverted all of my changes instead parts of it. I reverted it because i think it's against WP:DOREVERT Since then several changes are made to improve it. A revert is no longer possible. Astropulse (talk) 01:01, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And i made changes as per WP:BRD No consensus is required. I removed some info as per WP:ONUS Again burden is not on me to get consensus @BilledMammal Astropulse (talk) 01:04, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A revert is possible; there is content you removed that can be restored. For example, you can restore the text beginning with The ongoing 2023 war began after Hamas launched a surprise attack on Israel, killing mostly civilians, and taking hostages back to Gaza, and you can restore the section which previously started with Hamas has carried out attacks against Israeli civilians and soldiers, including suicide bombings and indiscriminate rocket attacks.

And those were reverts, because they undoes or manually reverses other editors' actions—whether in whole or in part - see the definition at WP:3RR BilledMammal (talk) 01:11, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think this particular edit [[3]] in question violated NPOV - I already discussed my reasoning in talk page. I removed it as per WP:ONUS - if you want to include it - you need to get consensus.

Again this statement `Hamas has carried out attacks against Israeli civilians and soldiers, including suicide bombings and indiscriminate rocket attacks.` also violates NPOV indiscriminate?? you cant include words like that.

The current version is much better which reads "Hamas and Israel have engaged in protracted armed conflict. Hamas has attacked Israeli civilians, including using suicide bombings, as well as launching rockets at Israeli settlements." Astropulse (talk) 01:29, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also please make your comments in article talk page. This isn't really about me. multiple editors are involved. You have no comments in article talk page. Not sure the purpose of this.

I will not revert these changes. We can talk on article talk page to gather consensus. We already have healthy conversations there. Will not reply further comments here Astropulse (talk) 01:32, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Additionally, you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Notice of Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a report involving you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement regarding a possible violation of an Arbitration Committee decision. The thread is Astropulse. Thank you.