Wikipedia talk:Artificial intelligence
 | This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
ClueBot NG
[edit]Thx for this page. May be add the bot against vandalism used by the English Wikipedia?
Pyb (talk) 11:03, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Not really an essay
[edit]I'd suggest {{Information page}}, since this is in the nature of a summary of the diversity of uses, and doesn't propose policy. Pharos (talk) 14:54, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
Done - Agree with your assessment. - Fuzheado | Talk 16:54, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
Article text generation
[edit]The information under "Article text generation" doesn't reflect how the community feels about this in my experience. As I understand it, using AI to generate article text is very strongly discouraged, including when it's checked for quality, and even competent editors will be scolded for trying. I suggest we remove anything that encourages using it for content writing, and maybe consider replacing it with more practical uses like consulting AI for copyediting suggestions. Pinging the primary author: Fuzheado Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:51, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Agree 100% with TBUA. Anything coming out of an LLM should be considered unreliable by default. Leaving the door open for nonsensical hallucinations (sometimes based on made up sources) to be used on Wikipedia is unacceptable. Especially given how often Wikipedia is used as training data for LLMs, anything from a generative AI that makes its way into a Wikipedia article can make its way back into the LLM and lead to model collapse. There are so many reasons to prohibit writing articles using LLMs, I would advise caution even for copyediting. --Grnrchst (talk) 20:46, 6 October 2024 (UTC)