Thanks to Chaotic Enby for their proposal, which was accepted with overwhelming approval. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Writing_articles_with_large_language_models/RfC
How are they going to enforce it
I’d assume the same way anything is enforced on Wikipedia, by making a stink in the discussion pages. There are existing processes for rule violations etc which I’m not intimately familiar with but which I’ve often witness unfold.
jimmy wales will personally show up to your house and stare at you creepily through the window
I think Jimmy is pro AI.
How are they going to detect it?
The default writing style can be adjusted with specific prompts.
There are plenty of people who follow rules, then there are plenty of people who are really bad/obvious when breaking rules. I’m sure it will reduce the noise and give people more time to review the rest.
And usually I assume people review by noticing a questionable section, then check for rules violations. LLM use is now another thing worth objecting to. I don’t think catching every single case of forbidden LLM use is really worthwhile.
Wouldn’t want to ruin good homemade CIA propaganda with sources from the Eagle Burger Institute and have some AI spread lies on the internet instead
I think Wikipedia is a useful resource as long as your are aware of the rules and social structures behind it.
There was already an LLM generated article about the Iran war that someone submitted to slop I think. The article stayed up even after the undisclosed LLM use and other rules violations got the creator banned. I’d hope further steps would be taken under these new rules.
Wikipedia still has a lot of good uses though.
It’s one of the more democratic information sources, especially if you look for sources that are read outside of nieches, despite various forms of interference and despotism.
I shit on it for being very biased and badly sourced regarding communism going as far as to represent fascist conspiracy theories as undisputable fact. The other articles are good though, especially the scientific ones.
Good!
