Editing Eurovision Wiki:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (section)

== RifatHasan25 LLM usage and unsourced article spam ==


The user has been warned about LLM usage multiple times with no response:
* [[User_talk:RifatHasan25#February_2026]]
* [[User_talk:RifatHasan25#March_2026]] (multiple times)
* [[User_talk:RifatHasan25#Unsourced_articles_and_LLM_usage]] (from me)
* [[User_talk:RifatHasan25#Warning_for_LLM_usage_without_human_review]]

Also, they created many articles that have either been deleted/draftified due to unchecked LLM output or no sources:
* [[User_talk:RifatHasan25#Speedy_deletion_nomination_of_Sheikh_Manjurul_Haque_Rahad]]
* [[User_talk:RifatHasan25#Speedy_deletion_nomination_of_Rakibul_Islam_Bokul]]
* [[User_talk:RifatHasan25#Speedy_deletion_nomination_of_Sheikh_Manjurul_Haque_Rahad_2]]
* [[User_talk:RifatHasan25#Your_submission_at_Articles_for_creation:_Rony_Roy_Chowdhury_(February_15)]]
* [[User_talk:RifatHasan25#Use_citations]] (5 articles without sources)
* [[User_talk:RifatHasan25#Speedy_deletion_nomination_of_Md._Enamul_Haque]]
* [[User_talk:RifatHasan25#Fazley_Huda_Babul_moved_to_draftspace]]
* [[User_talk:RifatHasan25#Shaikh_Monzurul_Haque_Rahad_moved_to_draftspace]]
* [[User_talk:RifatHasan25#Abul_Kawser_Md._Nazrul_Islam_moved_to_draftspace]]
* [[User_talk:RifatHasan25#Lutfullahel_Majed_moved_to_draftspace]]
* [[User_talk:RifatHasan25#Md._Mostafizur_Rahman_(Naogaon_politician)_moved_to_draftspace]]
* [[User_talk:RifatHasan25#Md._Fazlur_Rahman_Sayed_moved_to_draftspace]]
* [[User_talk:RifatHasan25#Ekramul_Bari_Tipu_moved_to_draftspace]]

Also, some other cases:
* [[User_talk:RifatHasan25#Speedy_deletion_nomination_of_Sheikh_Manjurul_Haque_Rahad_2]] - A7
* [[Draft:Simi_Kibria]] - LLM output, also resubmitted without changes
* [[User_talk:RifatHasan25#Speedy_deletion_nomination_of_Sheikh_Manjurul_Haque_Rahad]] - LLM generated response, also kinda nonsensical if you look at the replies
* [[User_talk:RifatHasan25#Simi_Kibria_moved_to_draftspace]] - LLM generated response

All communication by them on the talk page has been LLM generated and they've ignored most warnings. The articles they've created have been mostly deleted due to either unchecked LLM output, unsourced content or non-notability.

I think that this is disruptive. [[User:Laura240406|Laura240406]] ([[User talk:Laura240406|talk]]) 04:35, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

:I can confirm I warned them a few times for AI use but they never got back to me. '''[[User:Dr_vulpes|<span style="background:#4B0082; color:white;">Dr vulpes</span>]]''' [[User talk:Dr_vulpes|(Talk)]] 04:52, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
:I can also confirm I warned them, and they responded with an AI generated response on my talk page [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SecretSpectre&oldid=1343399257| here] [[User:SecretSpectre|SecretSpectre]] ([[User talk:SecretSpectre|talk]]) 06:43, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
::Blocked from creating mainspace pages for six months. ~[[User:Anachronist|Anachronist]] (who / me) <small>([[User talk:Anachronist|talk]])</small> 06:54, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
:::Yeah seems fair to me '''[[User:Dr_vulpes|<span style="background:#4B0082; color:white;">Dr vulpes</span>]]''' [[User talk:Dr_vulpes|(Talk)]] 07:01, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
::::Any idea what's going on with their user page at [[User:RifatHasan25|RifatHasan25]]? It looks like they've written it as an article claiming that they created a/the Wikipedia article wizard. 
::::I'm just a bit worried since I've seen this before with UPE, where they use their User page to claim to be a Wikipedia authority in order to legitimise their work. The pattern of edits (creating multiple articles on non-notable BLP's) seems to back this up. 
::::Hopefully I'm wrong, but it's a bit strange. [[User:Blue-Sonnet|Blue Sonnet]] ([[User talk:Blue-Sonnet|talk]]) 07:46, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::I've also noticed it and CSD tagged it for promotion (of themself) [[User:Laura240406|Laura240406]] ([[User talk:Laura240406|talk]]) 08:02, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::Again badly written using AI, the link there is example.com. [[User:SecretSpectre|SecretSpectre]] ([[User talk:SecretSpectre|talk]]) 08:15, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::Using the information on their pseudo-article, it looks like they're actively promoting themselves online as providing digital marketing services - I'm not going to go into any detail due to [[Wikipedia:Outing]] (although they posted their real name and it's easily found via Google I'm going to play it safe) but it's enough for me to put a COI warning on their userpage. [[User:Blue-Sonnet|Blue Sonnet]] ([[User talk:Blue-Sonnet|talk]]) 08:39, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::::Quick update, they've created an [[User talk:RifatHasan25#c-RifatHasan25-20260317092100-Request for Unblock – Will follow Wikipedia guidelines|AI-generated appeal]] that accepts creating drafts through the AFC process but still wants to appeal the block that allows them to create drafts through the AFC process. 
:::::::I've got some [[Wikipedia:CIR|CIR]] concerns & asked them to clarify what they're actually appealing (and to please stop using AI). [[User:Blue-Sonnet|Blue Sonnet]] ([[User talk:Blue-Sonnet|talk]]) 09:55, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
*I propose '''Immediate full indef''', no discussion. My response to these situations has evolved to the following:
**(a) If someone owns up immediately to their AI use, and appears to genuinely understand they shouldn't be generating article content or talk-page posts using AI, then an indef ''from article space'' with AfC required for drafts should be put in place, which they can appeal after a minimum of 6 months of useful (and not AI-generated) talk-page contributions or draft creations.
**(b) If (as is the case here) they lie about it, argue about it, or pretend they don't hear us, then immediate full indef, period. Appeal in 1 year, if they can do so convincingly at that time. A successful appeal must include a demonstration that the genuinely understand they shouldn't be generating article content or talk-page posts using AI, and will result in a conversion of the block to an indef from article space, with AfC required for drafts, which they can appeal after a minimum of 6 months of useful (and not AI-generated) talk-page contributions or draft creations.
**(c) If during the 6-month probation they even once use AI to generate article content or talk-page posts, then it's back to indef, period, voted off the island, end of story.
:For fuck sake, why are we pussyfooting around with this fool? They're using AI to deny and defend their AI use. They're here to promote themselves as a paid editor. I repeat: why are we pussyfooting around with this fool? By what possible path will they ever become a useful editor? Indef block ''now''. [[User:EEng#s|<b style="color:red;">E</b>]][[User talk:EEng#s|<b style="color:blue;">Eng</b>]] 02:44, 19 March 2026 (UTC)
::They were checkuser blocked on Wednesday, and I imagine that discussing this stuff will be part of any plausible unblock request, if one should ever come. Given the editor's communication skills in English, this may be a moot issue, for all intents and purposes. [[User:CoffeeCrumbs|CoffeeCrumbs]] ([[User talk:CoffeeCrumbs|talk]]) 04:34, 19 March 2026 (UTC)