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: a261a4347b4318aa

Jump to content

Talk:Ran Balicer

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 10 months ago by Anachronist in topic Edit request for article text improvements 2

Edit request for article text improvements

[edit]

Hello, I would like to kindly request your help with a editing of the Ran Balicer article. I have a lot of small changes so i believe it would be easier just to go for a full-text replacement of the current article on to better reflect Wikipedia's Manual of Style and improve clarity, neutrality, and structure. The updated verssion is more concise, better organized into thematic sections, and uses more neutral language. Below is a section-by-section breakdown of the proposed changes and rationale. (references should of course remain the same)

Proposed full text:

[edit]

Summary of changes and rationale

[edit]

- Tone: Replaces promotional or vague wording (e.g. "significant role", "known for") with neutral, factual phrasing.

- Redundancy: Removes repeated facts and improves flow.

- Clarity: Sentences reworded for clarity and precision

- Consistency: Unifies style (e.g., date formatting, name spelling, institution references).

Please let me know if something is not clear or if you need anything else from my side.

Thank you and kind regards,

MrEksh (talk) 13:48, 13 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

@ Chaotic Enby Your kind help on the matter would be highly appreciated2A06:C701:4A66:4C00:1088:AEDF:9BD9:8776 (talk) 15:06, 20 July 2025 (UTC)Reply
 Not done no sources. Theroadislong (talk) 11:30, 27 July 2025 (UTC)Reply
The links should remain the same
There are 16 approved sources on the original article that have been approved already- my request is dealing with the The wording alone - this is based on the strength of the sources MrEksh (talk) 12:11, 27 July 2025 (UTC)Reply
@theroadisilong would you please review and answer MrEksh (talk) 13:12, 29 July 2025 (UTC)Reply
No I am not interested in doing that for you, please request edits with the template {{edit COI}} and get other opinions. Theroadislong (talk) 13:21, 29 July 2025 (UTC)Reply


Not done for now: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Please include the sources in the request, it's incredibly difficult as a reviewer to hunt down exactly where they need to be placed with this big a text change as there were a few bits of text that I couldn't verify with existing sources, if you're able to place the refs in the request (even if you just put the ref number in brackets like [1] I can match them up myself) that would be massively helpful, thank you! Encoded  Talk 💬 09:01, 13 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

Edit request for article text improvements 2

[edit]

Hello, I would like to kindly request your help with editing the Ran Balicer article. I have a lot of small changes, so I believe it would be easier to go for a full-text replacement of the current article to better reflect Wikipedia's Manual of Style and improve clarity, neutrality, and structure. The updated version is more concise, better organized into thematic sections, and uses more neutral language. Below is a section-by-section breakdown of the proposed changes and rationale. (References should of course remain the same.)

Proposed full text

[edit]

Summary of changes and rationale

[edit]
  • Tone: Replaces promotional or vague wording (e.g., "significant role", "known for") with neutral, factual phrasing.
  • Redundancy: Removes repeated facts and improves flow.
  • Clarity: Sentences reworded for clarity and precision.
  • Consistency: Unifies style (e.g., date formatting, name spelling, institution references).

As for the references – I would like them to stay the same as in the article right now; they were all approved already.

Please let me know if something is not clear or if you need anything else from my side.

Thank you and kind regards,MrEksh (talk) 10:10, 31 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

@MrEksh, I just saw your post on the Teahouse. I do not intend to come off as rude or mean, but was a Large Language Model (such as ChatGPT or Deepseek) used to write this? It comes off as very promotional.
Additionally, you have not addressed the concerns of the editors raised above. There are no sources or links in your proposed draft. Please address all three of these concerns if you want the rewrite to be considered. PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 15:49, 30 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
 Not done. There is no way a wholesale rewrite will be implemented here, especially a completely unsourced version written by an AI, which has no clue about what "neutral" writing really means on Wikipedia.
You say you want to retain existing references, but the existing references fail to verify many of the claims being made. I have accordingly trimmed the article rather than implement the rewrite full of claims that fail verification from the existing sources.
Propose incremental changes, section by section, paragraph by paragraph, citing reliable sources to support every single claim being made, in your own words. You may use AI to help you find sources, but don't let the AI write for you. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 17:48, 30 September 2025 (UTC)Reply