Jump to content

User talk:77.98.111.156

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

[edit]

Hi 77.98.111.156! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

I've noticed that you've expressed an interest in the Arab–Israeli conflict. Unfortunately, due to a history of conflict and disruptive editing it has been designated a contentious topic and is subject to some strict rules.

The rule that affects you most as a new or IP editor is the prohibition on making any edit related to the Arab–Israel conflict unless you are logged into an account and that account has extended confirmed rights (automatically granted when an account is at least 30 days old and has made at least 500 edits).

This prohibition is broadly construed, so it includes edits such as adding the reaction of a public figure concerning the conflict to their article or noting the position of a company or organization as it relates to the conflict.

The exception to this rule is that you may request a specific change to an article on the talk page of that article or at this page. Please ensure that your requested edit complies with our neutral point of view and reliable sourcing policies, and if the edit is about a living person our policies on biographies of living people as well.

Any edits you make contrary to these rules are likely to be reverted, and repeated violations can lead to you being blocked from editing.


As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

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:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! :Jay8g [V•T•E] 00:32, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

[edit]

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.

:Jay8g [V•T•E] 00:32, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 2024

[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Jamedeus. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Mira Murati seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Jamedeus (talk) 03:17, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Mira Murati shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Jamedeus (talk) 18:20, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You removed my edit on the basis that it wasn't neutral. I changed the wording so that it was neutrally-worded, and yet you've deleted it again anyway. On what basis have you removed it this time? 77.98.111.156 (talk) 19:19, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I only reverted your first edit, the rest were reverted by 3 other editors. Your citation was actually re-added with different wording in this edit, but you reverted again anyway and created a duplicate. Jamedeus (talk) 22:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The edit you mention was effectively hiding what she said amongst a long paragraph of pro-AI propaganda. What she said was extremely controversial, so it warranted being in a separate Controversy section. 77.98.111.156 (talk) 22:59, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the edit on the article Dario Amodei also needs to be reverted, as I explained here. It lacks notability, and it seems to misrepresent what Amodei said, without additional context. I'm more uncertain about the edit on the article on Sam Altman, and a discussion on the talk page of the article on whether we want a section that presents his views may be valuable. Alenoach (talk) 00:03, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please explain why only positive information about AI is allowed on AI-related pages?
I've looked at your editing history. Your life appears to revolve around propagandising AI, so please don't try to make out you're somehow impartial on this subject.
Are only AI fanboys allowed to edit these pages or something? 77.98.111.156 (talk) 01:19, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have no conflict of interest related to AI. I don't even work with AI in my daily life, I'm an embedded software developer. Please stop your repeated personal accusations and edit wars. Alenoach (talk) 01:26, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your have a gigantic conflict of interest on this subject, as your extensive pro-AI editing history clearly shows.
You're the one going round reverting my edits on the basis that they don't concur with your fanboy view of AI. 77.98.111.156 (talk) 02:06, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Btw if you're an embedded software developer, why aren't you concerned about losing your job to AI? Because you will lose it. 77.98.111.156 (talk) 02:12, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's also what I believe, that I will relatively soon face technological unemployment. But it's not the point of the discussion. My edits are consistent with Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, and if you think they are not, you can start a discussion on the talk pages of the articles, presenting your arguments while remaining WP:CIVIL and waiting for a consensus.
And I have no problem showing my identity in private to an admin to prove that I'm really an embedded software engineer and I have never worked for any of the companies or the people I have written about in Wikipedia, if that's the issue. Alenoach (talk) 02:34, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I accept that you don't work in AI. But you still have a huge conflict of interest because your editing history shows that you're a huge fan of AI. 77.98.111.156 (talk) 02:37, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How on earth does that quote by Dario Amodei (net worth $830m) "misrepresent" what he said? He said it, so why do you object to it being added??
Are you being paid to gatekeep these pages? 77.98.111.156 (talk) 01:24, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I stand by my edit summary, "cherry-picked from a long text and framed as a controversy" Alenoach (talk) 01:33, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is blatantly controversial. Only an AI fanboy would be incapable of accepting that. 77.98.111.156 (talk) 02:07, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So in summary, you've reverted ALL OF MY EDITS because they offend your pro-AI sensibilities, and YOU'RE ACCUSING ME OF EDIT WARRING? 77.98.111.156 (talk) 02:15, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Definition of controversial:
giving rise or likely to give rise to controversy or public disagreement.
Definition of controversy:
prolonged public disagreement or heated discussion.
A CEO of an AI company who has a net worth of $830m saying that it "doesn't think it matters much" if people lose their ability to earn money because of the work his company is doing. That is BLATANTLY controversial.
Do you actually dispute that? 77.98.111.156 (talk) 02:25, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just asked o1 the following: "is the subject of AI replacing people's jobs a controversial subject?"
o1: Yes. Many worry about job displacement and economic disruption, while others argue AI can create new roles and boost productivity. The debate often centers on how quickly automation will transform industries and whether society can adapt in time, making it a hotly contested topic.
You refuse to listen to me. Will you listen to your AI overlord instead? 77.98.111.156 (talk) 02:31, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Introduction to contentious topics

[edit]

You have recently edited a page related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, 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 an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

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

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.

Morbidthoughts (talk) 08:55, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sam_Altman#Section_about_Mr_Altman's_views_on_AI_replacing_people's_jobs 77.98.111.156 (talk) 09:03, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have any consensus there to make your changes per WP:BLPUNDEL? I don't see it. Morbidthoughts (talk) 09:07, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Did you not ask me to open a topic about it on the talk page? 77.98.111.156 (talk) 09:20, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies. I was looking at User talk:77.98.111.156#December_2024 in determining whether there was consensus. Morbidthoughts (talk) 09:25, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. 77.98.111.156 (talk) 09:35, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy notice - ANI discussion

[edit]

Your editing is being discussed here. Please consider joining the discussion. --Hipal (talk) 21:03, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:77.98.111.156&oldid=1265821826"