Draft talk:GitClear
 | This draft does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Not AI Generated
[edit]While it's true that, for the first draft of this article, I tried to get ChatGPT to help me write a draft that would be as unbiased as possible (given all the warnings that Wikipedia presents about "conflicts of interest"), when the first draft was rejected for being "too vague," I took a fine-tooth comb and tried to pare everything out of the article that was not cited by media.
At this point, the article is stripped down to a couple paragraphs about research that has been cited by multiple sources. Given that this relatively short page comes with around 10+ citations, I don't think the page could still be considered "too vague"? So I am hoping that this article might be reviewed by somebody besides pythoncoder, who did not offer any specific feedback that I can find about why the revised+streamlined draft was rejected. I am open to revise this further if given specific ideas for how it can be improved, but I can assert with all confidence that this submission is
- NOT AI generated
- Not vague in any way I can not recognize
- Populated only by data & quotes that come from reputable tech media like TechCrunch & Geekwire & Visual Studio Magazine
If the next reviewer thinks there is something about the page that can be improved further before it is published, can you please share your ideas for what that is? I am open to further feedback, but being rejected with no feedback after spending significant time rounding up all these citations is discouraging. Edibill (talk) 14:43, 28 July 2025 (UTC)