Wikipedia:AI noticeboard/ProgramT
.svg){kind=icon}
ProgramT
8 October 2026
.svg){kind=icon}
.svg){kind=icon}
Discussion: ProgramT
ProgramT (talk · contribs · block log · filter log · page creations · central auth · count)
8 October 2026
Replaced the redirect Piñerismo in Diff/1379159176 (log) with AI-generated text containing markdown and dab links today. Claims to have never used an LLM except when translating articles from other language
, which might mean that there are unattributed machine translations in article space. Was was warned in § April 2026 and there's a bunch of removed dab link notices in their talk page history.
Lot of the usual rapid editing, f.ex. Diff/1379173678 produced c. 2,5 kB in six minutes, Diff/1379184365 added c. 5 kB just four minutes after their previous edit to a diffferent article, Diff/1374997203 added a c. 19 kB machine translation in 36 minutes, Diff/1373140652 is c. 2 kB in eight minutes, and Diff/1371754458 produced c. 5 kB in six minutes. The various sandbox pages in their user space shows even more of this pattern. ‑‑gurkubondinn 12:21, 8 October 2026 (UTC)
- Diff/1379173678, Diff/1379184365, Diff/1373140652 - I did not use an LLM. I took the source of the article on Korean nationalism (or Pledge of Allegiance (South Korea)).
- Diff/1371754458 - I did not use an LLM. I took the source of the article on Epoch Times.
- Diff/1374997203 - I used Gemini for the translation. However, this is a translation of the Chinese Wikipedia and has undergone some review.
- ProgramT (talk) 12:52, 8 October 2026 (UTC)
- I'm the one who warned ProgramT in April. This is part of a very long-term concern I've had with their sourcing. I've regularly found articles they created or that they heavily edited to contain substantial quantities of WP:SYNTH and outright failed-verification sources. As an example, I noted that the Roger Griffin source cited at Authoritarian nationalism came from a book that did not, even once, use the phrase "authoritarian nationalism". I was pretty convinced at that time that this was AI generated content on the basis that Roger Griffin is a very well-known scholar of fascism and the sort who you might instruct a chatbot to cite. At that time ProgramT insisted that they did not use AI and I left it at that - I've other things to do with my Wikipedia time than fix more bad citations from one editor I had a history of conflicts with - but it does appear that these problems have continued. Simonm223 (talk) 14:14, 8 October 2026 (UTC)
- Regarding the Authoritarian nationalism article, I acknowledge that my source verification was careless and the citation of Roger Griffin was improper. Regardless of my editing intentions, failing to strictly verify references was my error. ProgramT (talk) 23:28, 8 October 2026 (UTC)
- Can you explain in more detail your editing process, i.e. how you wrote the content, where you found that source, and how you decided to cite it? Chaotic Enby (in solidarity · talk · contribs) 00:35, 9 October 2026 (UTC)
- While researching the topic online, I gathered various references on nationalist and authoritarian political systems, including works by Roger Griffin. In the process, I confused his comprehensive analysis of fascism with the term "authoritarian nationalism" and failed to properly verify the text's precise expression and context.
- Additionally, regarding the citation format, entering the book title as the chapter title for Chapter 2 was a clerical mistake on my part during manual entry.
- This was a clear error in my editing process, and going forward, I will strictly double check all source details and references before making any edits. ProgramT (talk) 02:23, 9 October 2026 (UTC)
- Can you explain in more detail your editing process, i.e. how you wrote the content, where you found that source, and how you decided to cite it? Chaotic Enby (in solidarity · talk · contribs) 00:35, 9 October 2026 (UTC)
- Regarding the Authoritarian nationalism article, I acknowledge that my source verification was careless and the citation of Roger Griffin was improper. Regardless of my editing intentions, failing to strictly verify references was my error. ProgramT (talk) 23:28, 8 October 2026 (UTC)
- I'm the one who warned ProgramT in April. This is part of a very long-term concern I've had with their sourcing. I've regularly found articles they created or that they heavily edited to contain substantial quantities of WP:SYNTH and outright failed-verification sources. As an example, I noted that the Roger Griffin source cited at Authoritarian nationalism came from a book that did not, even once, use the phrase "authoritarian nationalism". I was pretty convinced at that time that this was AI generated content on the basis that Roger Griffin is a very well-known scholar of fascism and the sort who you might instruct a chatbot to cite. At that time ProgramT insisted that they did not use AI and I left it at that - I've other things to do with my Wikipedia time than fix more bad citations from one editor I had a history of conflicts with - but it does appear that these problems have continued. Simonm223 (talk) 14:14, 8 October 2026 (UTC)
- Ok, I just saw National Charter of Education (see the lead and history sections especially) and my AI senses started ringing. I checked ProgramT's talk page, and I'm glad other people had the same feelings.
- I've seen ProgramT's explanations above and I am not convinced by them. I'm fairly confident there has been inappropriate AI usage.
- Side note, I've seen ProgramT's edits for a long time and have been displeased with them. Too many issues with lax sourcing, WP:OR, and WP:SYNTH. Now this? grapesurgeon (talk) 02:04, 10 October 2026 (UTC)
- +1 exactly how I feel. And the responses above don't exactly make AI use seem less likely. PARAKANYAA (talk) 15:11, 17 October 2026 (UTC)
- +1 to that +1. I've been concerned with ProgramT's lax sourcing to the point where, before I considered AI, I wondered if, perhaps they were using sources without reading them either via transclusion from another wiki or reading headlines only. Perhaps the answer is that no human read these sources at any point before publishing. Simonm223 (talk) 15:22, 17 October 2026 (UTC)
- Just a quick note: National Charter of Education was partially translated from I think the kowiki version of the article. But the lead and history sections are original I think. grapesurgeon (talk) 15:26, 17 October 2026 (UTC)
- someone might want to take a look at what they're doing at Special:History/Template:Far-right politics navbox, they're also adding it to loads of articles.
- Special:Diff/1380645550:
...this publication reflected Cheng's intent to introduce Korea's fierce resistance against authoritarian rule to the Taiwanese public
indicates they're still using LLMs Kowal2701 (talk, contribs) 15:43, 17 October 2026 (UTC)- @Kowal2701 See also Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2026 October 5#Template:Far-right politics sidebar PARAKANYAA (talk) 15:59, 17 October 2026 (UTC)
- An LLM was not used in this article on Cheng Nan-jung.
- A discussion was held to deleted the Template:Far-right politics sidebar, and a suggestion was made to switch to a navbox; this navbox editing was also done 100% manually, without any AI assistance.
- To improve my own editing, I have not created any articles since October 9; the only thing I have created is redirects. (This is true, please check my log.) I will not create new articles for a while, and even if I create new ones later by referencing Chinese Wikipedia, I will not use an LLM. ProgramT (talk) 23:02, 17 October 2026 (UTC)
- – These are my initial logs; I only started using LLMs recently and didn't use any LLMs until 2025. I started using LLMs in 2026, but I will never use them again. ProgramT (talk) 23:28, 17 October 2026 (UTC)
- You said above that you had never used an LLM on those articles. So, that was untrue? Your responses above read of WP:AITALK. No one in this discussion pointed out Cheng Nan-jung. Given that much of your edits there consist of adding a totally unsourced section with no identifiable source I wouldn't say that helps your case . Where did you get this information from, if it wasn't AI?
- When, exactly, did you start using LLMs? What articles have you used LLMs on? Like Simonm223 and Grapesurgeon I have noticed very frequent OR/SYNTH issues with your edits for a long time.
- The behavioral issue is that you copied a template that was being deleted and then pasted it into dozens of articles. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:03, 18 October 2026 (UTC)
- moving this to admin requested (would otherwise go to ANI), see Kowal2701 (talk, contribs) 13:46, 19 October 2026 (UTC)
- P-blocked from mainspace. The user of AI talk page messages and the inconsistent stories about when/where LLMs were used are unacceptable. If user wants to edit here, they may rebuild trust through draftspace and edit requests. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:42, 19 October 2026 (UTC)
- This is seriously a relief. Honestly I had been hoping ProgramT would be blocked way earlier for the rampant OR. But they've made >23,000 edits now... I should have intervened earlier. grapesurgeon (talk) 07:32, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- P-blocked from mainspace. The user of AI talk page messages and the inconsistent stories about when/where LLMs were used are unacceptable. If user wants to edit here, they may rebuild trust through draftspace and edit requests. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:42, 19 October 2026 (UTC)
- @Kowal2701 See also Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2026 October 5#Template:Far-right politics sidebar PARAKANYAA (talk) 15:59, 17 October 2026 (UTC)
- Immense amounts of WP:SYNTH to try and project their own political fantasies, onto historical movements (see the talk page of the now-deleted Republic of China nationalism), and also running rampant defence of a ideologically motivated cult (Falun Gong) when called out on it. Frankly, this user was just using Wikipedia as a WP:SOAPBOX, then going on about their own personal ideology (about how China should be liberalised and democratised, but how a disunited liberal China is preferable to a united authoritarian China, all this somehow coupled with an admission that they are neither Chinese, Taiwanese, nor Japanese on their on user page). Not to mention all the times they've tried to force zero-consensus claims of Chiang Kai-shek being an "anti-fascist" or re-wording existing passages to manipulate readers into seeing Chiang as more liberal. Couple that with adding untraceable, unverifiable sources that we're apparently just supposed to accept as extant. They've been doing this for tens of thousands of edits over multiple years. ~2026-58586-48 (talk) 21:21, 2 November 2026 (UTC)
- +1 exactly how I feel. And the responses above don't exactly make AI use seem less likely. PARAKANYAA (talk) 15:11, 17 October 2026 (UTC)
- 23,000 edits :0 Special:Permalink/1333030692 (Jan 2026) was translated from dewiki, there's no indication they speak German, Special:Permalink/1327827232 (Dec 2025) is pretty blatant, Special:Permalink/1316040215 (Oct 2025) also incorporates from the dewiki article. Warned for SYNTH in Oct 2025 as well . 10 Oct 2025 looks like a reasonable start date, Special:Diff/1315152416 on 5 Oct had errors akin to their prior editing Kowal2701 (talk, contribs) 18:20, 19 October 2026 (UTC)
- I'll LLMPROD/tag their articles. modestlyscarykookaburras 19:31, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- The following three pages, written by ProgramT, are written in awful English and most of the content seems to be synthesised by an LLM, not to mention being hotspots of WP:SYNTH:
- and, along with all the redirect pages that point to these. Additionally, I don't really see these pages as providing any novel content or presenting anything novel, they're just re-syntheses of existing content in other pages and poorly LLM-translated pages from Chinese Wikipedia. I think the pages should be deleted on the grounds of WP:LLM violations, any thoughts? ~2026-58813-91 (talk) 05:26, 5 November 2026 (UTC)
- these were before the determined start date for LLM usage (October 2025) so not eligible for WP:LLMPROD, but that's not to say the articles don't need cleanup. They've only written 15% of Anti–People's Republic of China sentiment (can see this using WP:SAUCERSHIP or WP:WWT). Pro–Republic of China sentiment and Pro-Taiwanese sentiment are almost entirely written by them, I think you'd be fine WP:BLARing them to suitable targets or stubbifying them. Kowal2701 (talk, contribs) 14:14, 5 November 2026 (UTC)
- I'll also add Republican Fever to this list. Another WP:LLM-translated page from Chinese Wikipedia. ~2026-59084-05 (talk) 03:10, 6 November 2026 (UTC)
Cleanup
Tracker detail
- User: ProgramT (talk · contribs · block log · filter log · page creations · central auth · count)
- Start date: 2025-10-10
- End date: 2026-10-19
Tracking list
 | Notes
|
Each individual row below tracks an article's status using a template with three parameters: {{AIC article row|a page title, |a status, |and optional notes }}
Available statuses are: 
to do/requested, 
ongoing, 
tagged, 
unnecessary, and 
completed.
Please update and add entries as needed.