Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a250bc618f128821

Jump to content

Talk:Adelaide Pride March

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 7 months ago by Aplucas0703 in topic Feedback from New Page Review process

AI flag

[edit]

Hi @Gnomingstuff, I researched and wrote this article myself. I am not sure if you or I should remove the AI flag notice, so please advise. BindiS (talk) 06:38, 17 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

I'm sorry, I don't believe you here.
  • The statement The march also connects with wider national and international pride movements, reinforcing South Australia's historical role in advancing LGBTQIA+ rights following the reforms of the 1970s not only displays linguistic signs of AI use, but is not backed up by the source it is cited to, which does not mention the Adelaide Pride March anywhere, let alone what it "reinforces" or "connects" to.
  • The statement In 2023, Adelaide marked the 50th anniversary of the 1973 Proud Parade with commemorative events that highlighted the historical significance of LGBTQIA+ activism in South Australia not only displays characteristic vocabulary overused in AI text compared to human text, but is not backed up by the source it is cited to, which is about one panel discussion that was part of a general history festival, not multiple events.
Et cetera. Gnomingstuff (talk) 10:42, 17 November 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Gnomingstuff I've made copy edits to clarify and added some citations. BindiS (talk) 08:32, 19 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

Feedback from New Page Review process

[edit]

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Appears notable, but some sections should still be rewritten to remove some peacock language. Good work on the article overall. I think after certain portions are copy-edited for tone, the large language model notice can be removed.

aaronneallucas (talk) 22:08, 14 December 2025 (UTC)Reply