Wiki Article
User talk:Significa liberdade
Nguồn dữ liệu từ Wikipedia, hiển thị bởi DefZone.Net
 |
|
| This is Significa liberdade's talk page, where you can send her messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10Auto-archiving period: 30 days  |
 | This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated. |
AfC August Backlog Drive: Only ten days left!
[edit]
Hi Significa liberdade, thanks for participating in the Articles for Creation August Backlog Drive! We've done amazing work so far, dropping the backlog by more than 3000 drafts already. We have around 1300 drafts outstanding, and we need your help to get that down to zero in the next 10 days. We can do this, but we need all hands on deck to help make it happen – if everyone who signed up to the drive reviewed just 1–2 drafts a day for the next ten days, we'd be down to zero in no time! A list of the pending drafts can be found at WP:AFCSORT, where you can select submissions in your area of interest, or you can find a random submission here. Thank you so much for your work so far, and happy reviewing! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
Review of NPP drive contributions in May
[edit]Hi, I was unaware until recently that you re-reviewed some of my actions during the May backlog drive. My attention was recently drawn to this when somebody linked to it at a discussion page.
Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Backlog drives/May 2026/Re-reviews
You made some errors in your reviews, ironically I feel this may be because you were working too quickly.
1. Draft:Abstract Wikipedia (wiki) In your re-review you state draftified 36 minutes after previous constructive edit (and 45 minutes after creation), in violation of NPPHOUR
. This is false, I tagged it after 35 minutes and draftified after 1 hour and 1 minute, documented on the page's history.
2. Draft:Pondu unclear why eight sources aren't enough
. I draftified this because the page has no reliable secondary sources, it is sourced entirely to recipes (primary sources) in blogs/unreliable sources. Explained to the author here. Also, read the article and tell me it's not AI.
3. Yoo Yeongha This was draftified for grammar. Nearly every sentence started with the name of the subject and it read like a 5-year old had written it. To repeatedly use a name to begin a sentence is a grammatical error in English, this is why we have pronouns. The draftification worked perfectly, the author improved the prose and I approved it quickly, which is probably why it came up your worklist.
As this was months ago, I would normally just forget about it, but the list has been linked in a live discussion. I feel that having this incorrect information on that page is detrimental to my reputation as a wikipedian and may influence the discussion into thinking there are more problems with quick reviews than there are. I would therefore ask you to edit this page to reflect that your re-review of these actions is incorrect.
All the best Boynamedsue (talk) 04:56, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
- Hi there! Thank you for bringing this to my attention (seriously). I have re-reviewed my reviews and made relevant changes. I'll also take a look at the relevant live discussion. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 15:26, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks, I really appreciate that.Boynamedsue (talk) 15:48, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
- Just had a look at the page and I think something might have gone a bit wrong with your edit there! From what you were beginning to write on Yoo Yeongha, I can understand that it's possible to disagree on that one, but I am more concerned about the other two which were pretty textbook draftifications.Boynamedsue (talk) 15:54, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
- Oh goodness. My apologies. It appears I was editing the page in two tabs, then published the wrong tab. (and yes, I recognize the irony, which should not be blamed on me looking at this while drinking my first cup of tea for the day). Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 16:08, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
- Yeah, most of my worse edits are before I get a chance to drink my tea! All the best. Boynamedsue (talk) 16:28, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
- Oh goodness. My apologies. It appears I was editing the page in two tabs, then published the wrong tab. (and yes, I recognize the irony, which should not be blamed on me looking at this while drinking my first cup of tea for the day). Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 16:08, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 23
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited ALS Gold Medal, a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph was added.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 23 August 2026 (UTC)
Hi Significa liberdade. I am not satisfied with your resolution regarding voice banks.
First, your're claiming the article has no reliable sources, while I provided several books from reputable editors like the Oxford University Press, the Duke University Press, Taylor & Francis, the IEEE, etc., at the Literature section, all of them publicly available and some of them found at JSTOR, therefore, the article is not an original research. Since the References sections and the in-line citations provided poor references (Yamaha, Vocaloid, etc), this is why I've provided books about speech synthesis technology with mentions to Vocaloid and the concept of voice bank, at the Literature section rather than inline citations, complying the verifiability, which is a policy, while notability and reliable sources are content guidelines, and independient sources is an essay.
And second, you're claiming I could be used LLM for writing the article, wich offends me since I'm a longterm contributor since 2007 who edited mainly at the Spanish Wikipedia, and to a lesser extent, the English Wikipedia, Commons and Wikidata, who, despite I wrote few articles form begin (and several are translationns en → es using the automatic translation tool, altrough my english level is high), I write articles as thoroughly as possible, avoiding the use of chatbots for write for me (althrough I've used Gemini to find factual data and literatute faster, books I read before adding to the Literature section, and I determined that thoise books comply with the verifiability policy).
And finally, I believe the subject of the article is notable, since it explains a technology used in music production, and explains what is exactly Hatsune Miku or Kasane Teto in the context of software library. Regards. Amitie 10g (talk) 02:13, 24 August 2026 (UTC)
- Hi there, Amitie 10g! Thank you for your contributions, particularly to the Spanish Wikipedia. Both policies and content guidelines should be followed unless extenuating circumstances exist. In this case, notability is one of the strongest content guidelines we have, as is our reliance on reliable sourcing, which ties into independent sourcing. That said, I have searched the sources in the literature section for "voice bank". Thinking with an Accent appears to have coverage, but I do not have access to the source. Zaborowski sources appear to have some writing with the term "voice bank", though I do not have access. Neither Whiteley, Saitou et al., nor Anderson appear to use the term. In each of these cases, other terms may be used. If you have reliable sources that verify claims in the article, I suggest using them in the article rather than listed in a bibliography, especially since the sources cited in the article are unreliable and many sections of the article are unsourced.
- As for LLM-generation, I tagged it as such due to the formatting (WP:AILIST). LLMs often create articles with many bullet points where the beginning of the list item is bolded, as is the case for Draft:Voice bank (music production).
- If you feel my decline was inappropriate, feel free to resubmit for review by another experienced editor. That said, I recommend citing reliable sources in the body of the article. Please let me know if you have any further questions, comments, and/or concerns. Take care, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 15:56, 24 August 2026 (UTC)
- Significa liberdade, as I insisted, the term "voice bank" is not an invention of me. It is documented in many sources, starting with the Vocaloid official website.
- Regarding the sources:
- Thinking with an Accent and The Race of Sound are available at JSTOR as open acces, properly linked. Both books widely document what "Vocaloid" and "voice bank" are.
- Music Generations in the Digital Age, while is not freely available, Google Books allows to see a preview, and allows to find the terms. "Vocaloid" returns several results, and "voice bank" returns one result, but it clearly mentions it as a technology and its relationship with Vocaloid. Also available at JSTOR and several libraries, but with restricted access.
- Speech-to-singing synthesis is a paper about speech syntesys technology, and one of its references is Vocaloid, as "New Singing Synthesis Technology" according to Yamaha (its developer).
- Hatsune Miku, Virtual Idols, and Transforming the Popular Music Experience, as the title suggest, is about "Hatsune Miku and virtual idols" in the context of music production. The leading section says "Vocal synthesisers like Vocaloid"; althrough the term is not mentioned in the paper, "voice bank" is the denomination the "library of audio samples and parametric data used by speech synthesis software and a scorewriter", being Vocaloid speech engine, voice bank editor and scorewriter software, and Hatsune Miku being not just a popular character, but a software library that allowed the composition of many songs, aka., a "voice bank".
- Say that, althrough I believe the article in its current status complies with the verifiability policy, I'll move some of those books to inline-citations, following the strict policies and conventions of the English Wikipedia. Regards. Amitie 10g (talk) 18:26, 24 August 2026 (UTC)
- Hello again, Amitie 10g! This sounds like a good start. If you have any additional questions as you continue improving the article, feel free to reach out to me or the Teahouse. Take care, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 23:42, 24 August 2026 (UTC)
New pages patrol September 2026 Backlog drive
[edit]| September 2026 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol |  |
| |
| You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. | |
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:49, 24 August 2026 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Eric Choi has been accepted
[edit]
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions. Feel free to further improve your accepted article.
Future articles
- Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without submitting a draft for review. However, you may continue submitting drafts to Articles for creation if you prefer.
- Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
Next steps
- Find other Wikipedia articles related to your topic and add links pointing to the new article. This helps readers find it.
- Group the article with similar subjects by adding relevant categories.
- You may consider nominating a fact from the article within the next 7 days to appear on the Main Page's Did you know section.
- The new article will become eligible to be indexed on search engines once patrolled or after 90 days; search engines may take time to reflect this.
- For friendly peer support regarding editing, sourcing, or policies, visit the Teahouse, a question and answer hub for new editors.
Thanks again, and happy editing!
Sulfurboy (talk) 07:48, 26 August 2026 (UTC)Women in Red - September 2026
[edit] Events:
More ... Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 15:47, 26 August 2026 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Your submission at Articles for creation: S. M. Beiko has been accepted
[edit]Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions. Feel free to further improve your accepted article.
Future articles
- Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without submitting a draft for review. However, you may continue submitting drafts to Articles for creation if you prefer.
- Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
Next steps
- Find other Wikipedia articles related to your topic and add links pointing to the new article. This helps readers find it.
- Group the article with similar subjects by adding relevant categories.
- You may consider nominating a fact from the article within the next 7 days to appear on the Main Page's Did you know section.
- The new article will become eligible to be indexed on search engines once patrolled or after 90 days; search engines may take time to reflect this.
- For friendly peer support regarding editing, sourcing, or policies, visit the Teahouse, a question and answer hub for new editors.
Thanks again, and happy editing!
CostalCal (talk) 04:47, 27 August 2026 (UTC)Your submission at Articles for creation: Chadwick Ginther has been accepted
[edit]Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions. Feel free to further improve your accepted article.
Future articles
- Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without submitting a draft for review. However, you may continue submitting drafts to Articles for creation if you prefer.
- Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
Next steps
- Find other Wikipedia articles related to your topic and add links pointing to the new article. This helps readers find it.
- Group the article with similar subjects by adding relevant categories.
- You may consider nominating a fact from the article within the next 7 days to appear on the Main Page's Did you know section.
- The new article will become eligible to be indexed on search engines once patrolled or after 90 days; search engines may take time to reflect this.
- For friendly peer support regarding editing, sourcing, or policies, visit the Teahouse, a question and answer hub for new editors.
Thanks again, and happy editing!
In solidarity, nil nz 06:00, 27 August 2026 (UTC)Nomination of Hockey is for Everybody for deletion
[edit]
These updates are delivered by SodiumBot. To opt out of these messages, add {{User:SodiumBot/NoNPPDelivery}} to your talk page.
Hello, Significa liberdade,
Just FYI, if you restore a draft that is deleted due to CSD G13, you have to make an edit to the article immediately afterward because it is eligible for speedy deletion otherwise. Just like if you restore an article deleted through PROD or AFD, you have to remove all of the deletion tags from the page. Just a reminder, most admins are not aware of this unless they help out at WP:REFUND. Take care. Liz Read! Talk! 00:31, 29 August 2026 (UTC)
- Ah, thanks for the heads up! I was working on improving the article and didn't realize it would be thrown back into the G13 queue. I'll keep this in mind for future reference. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 00:37, 29 August 2026 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Susan Forest has been accepted
[edit]Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions. Feel free to further improve your accepted article.
Future articles
- Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without submitting a draft for review. However, you may continue submitting drafts to Articles for creation if you prefer.
- Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
Next steps
- Find other Wikipedia articles related to your topic and add links pointing to the new article. This helps readers find it.
- Group the article with similar subjects by adding relevant categories.
- You may consider nominating a fact from the article within the next 7 days to appear on the Main Page's Did you know section.
- The new article will become eligible to be indexed on search engines once patrolled or after 90 days; search engines may take time to reflect this.
- For friendly peer support regarding editing, sourcing, or policies, visit the Teahouse, a question and answer hub for new editors.
Thanks again, and happy editing!
Sulfurboy (talk) 09:31, 29 August 2026 (UTC)WikiCup 2026 September newsletter
[edit]The fourth round of the 2026 WikiCup ended on 29 August at 23:59 (UTC). Everyone who competed in round 4 will advance to round 5 unless they have withdrawn or been removed. Round 4 was competitive, though slightly less so than round 3. Three contestants scored more than 1,000 round points; six scored over 500; and nine scored over 300. Each of the top five competitors had hundreds of points accumulated from multiple GAs. The following competitors scored more than 800 round points:
Generalissima (submissions) with 1,318 points, mostly from 13 good articles and 3 featured articles about creeks and Chinese and Japanese subjects
Vanderwaalforces (submissions) with 1,208 points from 2 featured articles, 2 featured lists, and 12 good articles about African leaders, along with over two dozen reviews
A.Cython (submissions) with 1,084 points from 16 good articles and a small good topic about warfare and Greek elections, along with over two dozen reviews
Vestrian24Bio (submissions) with 955 points, mostly from 2 FLs, 2 featured topics, and 16 GAs about cricket, and almost two dozen reviews
Bgsu98 (submissions) with 837 points from 4 FLs and 8 GAs about figure skating, along with two dozen reviews
The full scores for round 4 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 10 featured articles, 11 featured lists, 8 featured-topic articles, 103 good articles, 6 good-topic articles and more than 30 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 11 In the News articles, and they have conducted 170 peer reviews, FA and GA reviews. The tournament points table has been updated.
Remember that any content promoted after 29 August but before the start of Round 5 can be claimed in Round 5. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:43, 30 August 2026 (UTC)
Nomination of Fever Beach for deletion
[edit]These updates are delivered by SodiumBot. To opt out of these messages, add {{User:SodiumBot/NoNPPDelivery}} to your talk page.
Nomination of Olivia Dodd for deletion
[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Olivia Dodd, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Olivia Dodd until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 14 September 2026 (UTC)
Should Draft: Burger Music be redirected to Popular music as per Coworker music? Wobs100 (talk) 13:32, 14 September 2026 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – September 2026
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2026).
Administrator changes
Oversight changes
Guideline and policy news
- Speedy deletion criteria G15 has been renamed from "LLM-generated pages without human review" to "Unambiguously LLM-generated pages" and has an additional sign of detection added to it following a RfC.
Miscellaneous
- The September 2026 New Pages Patrol backlog drive is ongoing. Help tackle the 30,000+ article backlog!
- This week's article for improvement will be added to the Main Page to try converting readers into editors following a RfC.
August 2026 AfC backlog drive award
[edit]
|
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar |
| This is awarded to Significa liberdade for accumulating more than 113 points during the August 2026 AfC backlog drive. Thank you for sharing your time, knowledge and dedication; together, we reviewed over 12,700 drafts during the drive and brought the 3+ month backlog down to just a single week, which we couldn't have done it without you. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 12:38, 16 September 2026 (UTC) |
"MOS:OVERCITE" listed at Redirects for discussion
[edit]
The redirect MOS:OVERCITE has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 September 17 § MOS:OVERCITE until a consensus is reached. LazyLune (talk • edits) 23:16, 17 September 2026 (UTC)