User talk:ItsEthanP

Welcome!

Hello, ItsEthanP, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page Sidharth Slathia did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to The Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome!  Dl2000 (talk) 21:06, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello Mr. Dl2000, thank you for the warm welcome and for taking the time to explain this. I agree with your point and I did try extensively to find as much reliable, independent information as possible; however, only a limited number of high-quality sources were available, which is why the edit may have fallen short. I appreciate your clarification regarding verifiability and original research, and I will be more careful to rely strictly on strong sources going forward.

If you have time, I would also appreciate your feedback on another draft I am working on, to ensure it meets Wikipedia’s standards: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:VolkLocker

Thank you again for your guidance. ItsEthanP (talk) 13:43, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

CS1 error on Rottnest Island

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Rottnest Island, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A ISBN error. References show this error when the ISBN value or formatting is invalid. Please edit the article to ensure the value is correct, that only one ISBN is used, that the proper optional separators are used, and that no other text is included. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 09:13, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

i fixed that error. ItsEthanP (talk) 09:23, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

The problem isn't so much that a CS1 template says "invalid ISBN", the problem is that it ended up there in the first place. The markdown syntax that you added along with the hallucinated ISBN in Diff/1332344574 strongly suggests that this was generated by an LLM, not written by yourself. That's the problem, you are adding inaccurate, hallucinated and factually incorrect information that was generated by a machine. Can I ask you to please stop using LLM/AI to generate text for Wikipedia? These tools are extremely ill-suited for Wikipedia, and are by no means up to the job, as I hope that you have now learned. --Gurkubondinn (talk) 15:24, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

January 2026

Please refrain from making edits generated using a large language model (an "AI chatbot" or other application using such technology) to Wikipedia pages, such as those you made to Bioenergy in Ukraine. Your edits have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Thank you. --Gurkubondinn (talk) 13:46, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello. I wanted to let you know that your recent edit(s) to Bioenergy in Ukraine have been removed because the citation you added was to another Wikipedia article or an external wiki. As discussed at our policies on circular sourcing and self-published sources, Wikipedia and other wikis should not be used in citations because they are not considered reliable sources. You are welcome to re-add the information using a better reference, perhaps from the article you originally cited. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. --Gurkubondinn (talk) 13:48, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I will locate reliable sources that meet Wikipedia’s standards and re-add the information accordingly. Thank you for your feedback. ItsEthanP (talk) 13:51, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to unconstructively edit Wikipedia using a large language model (an "AI chatbot" or other application using such technology), as you did at Guiyang, you may be blocked from editing. Implausibly fast since last edit, suggests LLM use. Page numbers missing from some refs. Invalid and hallucinated ISBN. Stop using an LLM and write your own Wikipedia edits. --Gurkubondinn (talk) 13:53, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

thank you for raising these concerns. I want to clarify that I did not use a large language model or AI chatbot for this edit. The content was compiled manually from multiple external websites and published sources.

I understand the issues you noted regarding missing page numbers and an incorrect ISBN, and I agree those are valid problems. I will review the references carefully, correct any citation errors, add page numbers where required, and remove or replace any unreliable or improperly formatted sources before making further edits.

I appreciate the feedback and will ensure future edits are slower, fully verified, and compliant with Wikipedia’s sourcing and formatting standards. ItsEthanP (talk) 13:55, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

You've inserted at least one hallucinated and fictional ISBN:

Naughton, Barry (2018). The Chinese Economy: Transitions and Growth. MIT Press. ISBN 9780262533862. {{cite book}}: Check |isbn= value: checksum (help)
— Diff/1332369035

Please write your Wikipedia edits yourself, stop using AI chatbots, and take more care with what you add to the encyclopedia. This is not grokipedia, the standards are higher here. --Gurkubondinn (talk) 13:56, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

If you don’t mind, I’d really appreciate it if you could be my mentor and guide me on improving my edits to better meet Wikipedia’s standards. ItsEthanP (talk) 13:57, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Start by reading H:INTRO, and you can ask for help and mentorship at WP:TEAHOUSE. I'll leave you a welcome message with more information. --Gurkubondinn (talk) 14:10, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Alright, thanks!

Could you please take a look at these drafts as well and let me know what changes are needed?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Friedrich_von_Luxburg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:VolkLocker

Your guidance would be much appreciated. ItsEthanP (talk) 14:15, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

The best thing that you can do, is to simply revert all the changes that you made with the assitance of an LLM/AI chatbot. It is very time consuming to go through this, I have already spent over an hour fixing the Chase Foundation article. --Gurkubondinn (talk) 15:06, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

At a glance:

• Draft:Friedrich von Luxburg: this draft looks fine to me, without knowing anything about the subject or having researched him at all, so I have no idea if he meets WP:NBLP or not.
• Draft:VolkLocker: this draft has obvious signs of having been written by an LLM, for example all of the MOS:BOLDFACE that these tools love to insert everywhere. On Wikipedia, it is only appropriate for certain specific usages.

You should WP:ALWAYSARCHIVE all your references, neither of the drafts have any of the references archived. This isn't required and won't hinder them at AfC, but you should make a habit of it. --Gurkubondinn (talk) 15:20, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:VolkLocker i taken that from Bloomberg , SentinelOne , Hacker News sites . ItsEthanP (talk) 15:24, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

What do you mean by taken that from? --Gurkubondinn (talk) 15:25, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

i mean to say i gather all info's about VolkLocker from those sites. some CERTs team also writed about them you can see https://mkd-cirt.mk/debito-na-cybervolk-protiv-ransomware-se-sopnuva-na-slabost-vo-kriptografijata/ ItsEthanP (talk) 15:28, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback. I have revised the draft to comply with MOS:BOLDFACE by limiting bold text to the article title in the lead sentence and removing unnecessary emphasis elsewhere. and can recheck it now, thank you. these was my first article's that's my bit mistakes now i leaned everything thank you soo much sir. ItsEthanP (talk) 15:37, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Are you using an LLM or AI chatbot to reply to me? --Gurkubondinn (talk) 15:52, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

no . I really logout my accounts form LLM after understanding all things you told me. ItsEthanP (talk) 15:55, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Great, and thank you for listening! I much prefer talking to you directly than going through a robot. :) --Gurkubondinn (talk) 15:58, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Would you consider going through your LLM edits and undoing them? It is much easier for you to fix that than for someone else, because nobody else knows for sure what was machine generated or written by yourself. --Gurkubondinn (talk) 16:00, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

the things you told to fix i did on VolkLocker draft and I also added interview details in my second draft. ItsEthanP (talk) 16:02, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

After taking a closer look, Draft:Friedrich von Luxburg actually has pretty problematic sources. They either don't work/exist, or are just WP:PRIMARY websites. You should have submitted that draft to AfC instead of just moving it into mainspace, and it's not a good look to move it back into mainspace after Magnolia677 moved it back into mainspace. --Gurkubondinn (talk) 17:48, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

What edit shall I do this was my first article can you please help me sir. ItsEthanP (talk) 17:52, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you unconstructively edit Wikipedia using a large language model, as you did at Kalanchoe daigremontiana. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:20, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to History of the Central Intelligence Agency. Your edits do not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use your sandbox. Your edits have, most noticeably, changed the spelling of people's names. There is no reason to use incorrect spelling of the names. —C.Fred (talk) 11:34, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to unconstructively edit Wikipedia using a large language model (an "AI chatbot" or other application using such technology), as you did at CyberHunters (hacktivist collective), you may be blocked from editing. --Gurkubondinn (talk) 11:44, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

all those infos from reliable resources, the team cyber Hunters help intelligence teams to capture terrorists ItsEthanP (talk) 11:47, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

all those infos from reliable resources

And then you expect me to believe that you typed in Reliable sources have not established a verified connection between? Stop using LLMs to generate your Wikipedia edits for you. Just stop. You told me a few days ago that you had really logout my accounts form LLM, and I chose to assume good faith and believe you. Everybody here has been very patient with you and given you a very wide berth, and this is how you respond to us? Please stop using LLMs on Wikipedia. --Gurkubondinn (talk) 11:52, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

kindly check that last edits I did on it. And that's form form any Ai first thing. ItsEthanP (talk) 11:50, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, ItsEthanP!

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

• Editing
• Referencing
• Images
• Tables
• Policies and guidelines
• Talk pages
• Navigating
• Manual of Style

---

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

---

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help. Has a list of maintenance tasks you can do.

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 on 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, --Gurkubondinn (talk) 14:12, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Drafts

Please note that drafts such as Draft:Friedrich von Luxburg are not allowed to be filed in categories as if they were already finished articles in mainspace, per WP:DRAFTNOCAT. The page must stay out of any categories while it's in draft, and may be added to categories only if and when it gets accepted and moved into mainspace by an WP:AFC reviewer. Until then, the page may have disabled categories on it that display as text links to the category, but the categories must not be enabled so that the page gets filed in the category.

Since the page has already had to be pulled out of categories three times today alone, do not readd it to categories again, because drafts are not allowed to be in categories. Bearcat (talk) 15:07, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

alright thanks for your response. ItsEthanP (talk) 15:09, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

any suggestion for this draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:VolkLocker? ItsEthanP (talk) 15:11, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Rottnest Island

With this edit at Rottnest Island, you added that the Wadjemup Project involved "truthful acknowledgement of the site and its history". To support your edit you cited this source. Perhaps I missed it, but where is "truthful acknowledgement" mentioned at the source cited? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:30, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your question — and you’re right to check the sourcing carefully.

The phrase “truthful acknowledgement of the site and its history” was intended to summarize the general purpose of the Wadjemup Project as described across multiple planning and consultation documents. However, the specific words “truthful acknowledgement” do not appear verbatim in the source I cited.

To avoid implying wording that isn’t present in the source, I’ll revise that sentence to reflect exactly what the source states about the project’s goals.

For example, the cited UABIO/Rottnest Island Authority source discusses the project’s aim to recognize and preserve the cultural significance of the burial ground, involve Aboriginal community consultation, and support memorialisation and design work going forward. I will rephrase the sentence to directly reflect those points rather than using a paraphrase that could be construed as interpretive.

Revised wording will read something like:

“The Wadjemup Project, a statewide initiative involving consultation with Aboriginal communities, aims to support the recognition, conservation, and memorialisation of the burial ground and its cultural significance, with further work planned following detailed design and surveys.”<ref>{{cite web |title=Wadjemup Aboriginal Burial Ground Memorialisation |url=https://www.ria.wa.gov.au/projects-and-developments/significant-projects/wadjemup-aboriginal-burial-ground-memorialisation |publisher=Rottnest Island Authority |access-date=…}}</ref>

Thank you for pointing this out — I’ll update the article now to ensure the wording matches the cited source precisely. ItsEthanP (talk) 15:41, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Even your responses are AI. Please let me caution you one last time...stop adding AI junk to Wikipedia. One more AI-generated edit and I'll report you. Thank you for your understanding. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:45, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

my English is not good as professional. I improve my message . I really apologize about it. ItsEthanP (talk) 15:47, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Nomination of Friedrich von Luxburg for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Friedrich von Luxburg 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/Friedrich von Luxburg 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 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 17:29, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

what's issue in it kindly let me know please. I added all proper things that match Wikipedia. Please tell me the issue in it. ItsEthanP (talk) 17:33, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

It is all explained in the nomination for deletion - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Friedrich von Luxburg. You are entitled and very welcome to contribute to that discussion' Your policy based opinion matters. Please consider matters carefully before you respond there, and understand that it is a policy based discussion.

After at least seven days an uninvolved editor will assess the consensus from all contributors and determine the will of the community. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 17:38, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Ok i will wait for 7 days. I just make an article with proper way also asked other editors about this article and they said it's looks good. That's why I moved that to main space. And if needed to add something more than let me know I will do my best and edit that. Thank you. ItsEthanP (talk) 17:42, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

I said that I took a cursory look at it, and that it looked fine. While I didn't say it outright, I was expecting that you would submit the draft to AfC instead of moving it to mainspace. --Gurkubondinn (talk) 17:51, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

I already submitted that for AfC . When you said it's look fine that's why I moved that. Sorry for that. ItsEthanP (talk) 17:57, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Someone saying that it looks fine at a glance isn't the sme as an AfC acceptance :) I would suggest that you move it back to draftspace (and request CSD under WP:R2 for the redirect), and just re-submit it to AfC. I'm not sure what effect, if any, that has on the current AfD though. Someone more experienced can chime in, or you can look it up. --Gurkubondinn (talk) 18:01, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

There is no requirement for you to wait for seven days. You may comment in the discussion and you may edit the article to improve it 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 17:52, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

alright sir. Can you change deletion message to this article need improvement that alert message sir ? By that I can get help of other editors so I will learn more. Thank you I u for you feedback sir. ItsEthanP (talk) 17:55, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

The message summarises with precision that he fails WP:BIO, and stays. These nomination messages are non negotiable, I'm afraid. The nominator says what their analysis shows. I will give you some help, because yiur references are broadly useless in demonstrating notability:

For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today.

I think you have probably written what you wish to say about the subject, and then sought references after writing in order to cite what you say. This is WP:BACKWARDS. Instead, please read this essay, one of several which outline a process which will succeed assuming the subject to be notable. If it isn't notable then no amount of editing can help. We use the references in the process described in the essay to determine and verify notability. No suitable references means the subject is not notable, and it is time to stop. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 18:00, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

CS1 error on Kalanchoe daigremontiana

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Kalanchoe daigremontiana, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A ISBN error. References show this error when the ISBN value or formatting is invalid. Please edit the article to ensure the value is correct, that only one ISBN is used, that the proper optional separators are used, and that no other text is included. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 17:29, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hello ItsEthanP! The thread you created at the Teahouse, Request for review and improvement suggestions on draft articles, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please . See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 03:04, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Friedrich von Luxburg

The page Friedrich von Luxburg has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it was a redirect from the article namespace to a different namespace except the Category, Template, Wikipedia, Help, or Portal namespaces.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, you may contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:16, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Friedrich von Luxburg

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:Friedrich von Luxburg, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• It appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Friedrich von Luxburg. (See section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) If a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.
• The page exhibits signs of having been generated by an AI model with no clear human review. Text produced by these applications can be unsuitable for an encyclopedia and output must be carefully checked. (See the section G15 of the criteria for speedy deletion.)

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 04:21, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Sorry it was my mistake I directly maded the article and not putting that on draft. ItsEthanP (talk) 05:04, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited CyberHunters (hacktivist collective), a link pointing to the disambiguation page Anonymous 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) 07:55, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

VolkLocker moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to VolkLocker. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing as a live article at this time because it consists of machine-generated text and See User talk:ItsEthanP. This was submitted to AfC but was never accepted.. I have converted it 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. --Gurkubondinn (talk) 11:46, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

This draft had been submmitted for AfC, but it was not accepted. Please stop unilaterally moving your draft into mainspace. You should let them go through AfC. --Gurkubondinn (talk) 11:54, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

CyberHunters (hacktivist collective) moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to CyberHunters (hacktivist collective). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing as a live article at this time because it consists of machine-generated text and See user talk. I have converted it 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. --Gurkubondinn (talk) 11:53, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

This draft definitely should go through AfC. --Gurkubondinn (talk) 11:55, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: CyberHunters (hacktivist collective) (January 31)

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

Your draft shows signs of having been generated by a large language model, such as ChatGPT. Wikipedia guidelines prohibit the use of LLMs to write articles from scratch. In addition, LLM-generated articles usually have multiple quality issues, to 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 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 it after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:CyberHunters (hacktivist collective) 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.

~ rusty ^meow ~ 00:42, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, ItsEthanP! 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! ~ rusty meow ~ 00:42, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:NoraFrost per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/NoraFrost. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  asilvering (talk) 07:07, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

What? ItsEthanP (talk) 07:25, 6 February 2026 (UTC)