ICHTHUS

January 2012

In this issue...

• From the Editor
• What are You doing For Lent?
• Fun and Exciting Contest Launched
• Spotlight on WikiProject Catholicism

---

Ichthus is the newsletter of Christianity on Wikipedia • It is published by WikiProject Christianity
For submissions contact the Newsroom • To unsubscribe add yourself to the list here

Hi, I'm DCI2026. Kencf0618, thanks for creating Kalyn Heffernan!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. A slightly more encyclopedic (or a tad dryer) tone might be appropriate for the article. Notability could be further ascertained through the inclusion of more sourced content on the page; however, current references should suffice.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date. You have shown interest in blockchain and cryptocurrencies. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has enacted a more stringent set of rules. Any administrator may impose sanctions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Welcome, welcome, welcome Kencf0618! I'm glad that you are joining the drive! Please, have a cup of WikiTea, and go cite some articles.

CactiStaccingCrane (talk)15:38, 2 February 2024 UTC [refresh]via JWB and Geardona (talk to me?)

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Artificial intelligence art, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. I don't understand what "the human-accurate response to the prompt" is alluding to in the caption you put on your image. Any observations on AI image generation being "human-accurate" should be written in the article body and supported by sources. Belbury (talk) 17:36, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

on the topic of the image added to turkeys voting for christmas... why? consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 17:51, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The leopard image had no AI hallucinations; cows are not that large, and the "midwest" no such mountain ranges. Not a matter of citation, it's a matter of how closely the image matches the prompt. Secondly, the image is fanciful portrayal of the evil hungry beast of the cartoon caption. kencf0618 (talk) 22:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

what

that's... not even tangentially related to the topic of leopards eating people's faces. it's like adding a picture of a cowboy boot to snake because "you know, that noodle from the big book could have worn at least 2 of those once"

the image might match whatever prompt you gave it, but it only actually matches one word of the article's content. it could just as easily have been under the list of gen 2 pokémon for all anyone would care

also, who brought ai hallucinations up here? really, policy puts all the responsibility on the editor consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 22:43, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kencf0618! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Artificial intelligence art several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Artificial intelligence art, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Belbury (talk) 14:33, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]