User talk:BF10


Longhorn build 4042[edit source]

Hey man, why did you delete the installation bugs in the page Windows Longhorn build 4042 (main)? Just asking. Ash (talk) 05:06, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

We do not document bugs that are caused by emulators/virtualizers nor bugs due to having a different system setup. Most of these bugs happens due to the newer virtualization or models used when running these builds, and will be unlikely to be consistently reproducible. Some of the bugs done were also done in unsupported environments (upgrading Longhorn builds is technically not supported according to Microsoft). Alongside, they often clog up bugs/quirks section with extremely niche or non-notable bugs. We don't intend to add them back, as they would otherwise breach the guidelines for making meaningful edits. BF10 (talk) 17:09, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

What is 'bouncing'?[edit source]

I am unsure what you meant by 'bouncing' in that warning. Also what context? Luna (talk) 18:39, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

Slang. to eject, expel, or dismiss summarily or forcibly.

2001:F90:6019:6E1C:A89A:44FC:9A84:F8E3 09:51, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Rollback on Copland page[edit source]

I added some information about the history of Copland and the technical features that penalized Mac OS over time, which resulted in the creation of Copland, but my edit was reverted. I don't see a problem, but I would like to know the reason, if possible, so that I don't do it again if it is against the rules of this wiki. I confess that I read the rules but could not understand the reason for the reversal. It's just a question for my learning. I appreciate your time. Thanks. Motomagx (talk) 19:16, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Because it's a friendly reminder that putting information to the page from ChatGPT or other AI chatbots is against the wiki's guidelines. --Uncle Captain (talk | contribs)

00:53, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

I wrote the text myself, I didn't use hi GPT for this, I myself have known the history and the entire Copland process for years, and that's why I chose to contribute the article on BetaWiki. As for my writing, if you wish, I can present you with articles that I wrote on other Wikis even before ChatGPT existed. I didn't know that carefully written text is considered against Wiki rules. I've been working on developing technical articles for years, including for technology websites, and this is my way of writing. In fact, I'm an academic person, so I have some experience with writing technical articles. If you wish, I can write a live text on any technological topic for you. In fact, if you wish, you can even copy and paste my contribution on websites that assess whether the text was written by a human or an AI. Thanks. Motomagx (talk) 12:00 PM, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
Your edits were reverted because the content you posted appeared to have been generated by an artificial intelligence (AI)/machine learning (ML) model. While we do appreciate your attempts at contributing to the wiki, I do strongly recommend you refrain from using such technologies when writing or significantly expanding upon a wiki article.
Generally speaking, we strongly discourage the use of ML models because the text they generate are very prone to errors and can easily hallucinate information, especially for niche subjects like Copland. To further elaborate on this, for one: Copland development ceased in late 1996 (and not 1994), and two: Windows 3.1 had no roles that directly influenced Copland's development whatsoever.
With that in mind, please consider taking the time to search for reliable sources and verify them wherever possible.
Thanks for your time. - pivotman319 (📫) 10:50, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
As I said above, I have been working with writing technical articles for years, and I have experience in this type of documentation, and therefore, there are writing rules that are applied so that the text results in that model. You said you "think" that my text was generated by AI, but I would like you to check the websites that check AI-generated texts to see if it really is true, since, as I stated above, I have a degree and have experience in writing technical and academic texts. I have countless articles written before ChatGPT even existed, and I would like you to be able to test my editing on the text evaluation sites generated out there, or otherwise, insert a rule in the wiki that "texts written by graduates are not allowed". What were the mistakes I made? Can perfectly neutral text only be generated by AI? Because anyone who has a degree knows that, when writing technical texts, you must omit personal issues, slang and informality.
Regarding Win3.11, I wrote that it was an example of a preemptive multi-thread system, something that the Mac OS didn't even have cooperative MT at the time. And yes, I got the information wrong about the years 64/96 and made the appropriate correction. If this text was generated by AI, there would not be this error. Please copy my text to the AI ​​generated text test sites to see it was actually generated. I'm waiting. Thanks. Motomagx (talk) 17:59, 24 February 2025 (UTC)