| This draft must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the draft and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this draft, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This draft does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Untitled
editHello,
Thank you for your edit and for flagging the article.
The current version is based on multiple reliable sources (Dayton Daily News, Associated Press, BeBasket, etc.), all cited inline. I have tried to ensure that each statement is verifiable and supported.
If there are specific parts that raise concerns (accuracy, sourcing, tone, or possible original research), I would be happy to review and improve them.
Could you please indicate which sections you believe need attention? @JTtheOG Zeptentrion (talk) 20:52, 26 April 2026 (UTC)
- Do you use LLMs to help you write your articles? This is no longer allowed on Wikipedia. JTtheOG (talk) JTtheOG (talk) 20:54, 26 April 2026 (UTC)
- Hello,
- Thank you for your message. I understand the broader concerns about AI and fully support Wikipedia remaining a human, collaborative project.
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Writing_articles_with_large_language_models
- The articles (including those on G. Ayayi and Amaël L'Étang) are based on my research on reliable, cited sources, and all content is verifiable. If any specific part raises concerns, I would be happy to review and improve it.
- Best regards. Zeptentrion (talk) 21:17, 26 April 2026 (UTC)
- The concern is that you may be using LLM tools in a way inconsistent with these policies. I am sure that you do research and verify the content, but you have again refused to answer my question and I'm not sure why. JTtheOG (talk) 02:14, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- It definately does read like LLM had a huge hand in the writing. Masterhatch (talk) 17:44, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- Hello @JTtheOG: and @Masterhatch:,
- I have already answered this question. I don’t see the point of pursuing it further, and I’m not going to engage further on my editing process.
- Per Wikipedia practice, the assessment should focus on the article’s content—verifiability, sourcing, neutrality, and no original research. The material added is supported by reliable, cited sources.
- If there are specific issues with the content (including wording or style), please point to them and I will address them. Otherwise, I suggest we seek a third opinion to move this forward.
- Best regards, Zeptentrion (talk) 23:11, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- It definately does read like LLM had a huge hand in the writing. Masterhatch (talk) 17:44, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- The concern is that you may be using LLM tools in a way inconsistent with these policies. I am sure that you do research and verify the content, but you have again refused to answer my question and I'm not sure why. JTtheOG (talk) 02:14, 27 April 2026 (UTC)