Too many people being rude to eachother, locking it. Lets be better.
You know, I think I’m overdue for a donation to Wikipedia. They honestly might end up being the last bastion of sanity
Oh for fuck’s sake…
I’d not considered this was happening (people submitting AI wiki articles)
Isn’t Wikipedia where AI gets like half of its information from anyway?
Do you think these people surreptitiously submitting articles written by AI are gonna be capable of validating what they’re submitting is even true? Particularly if the (presumably effective) Wikipedia defense for this is detecting made up citations?
This kind of thing makes something valuable to everyone, like Wikipedia, ultimately a less valuable resource, and should be resisted and rejected by anyone with their head screwed on
Oh, I think this is a good move by Wikipedia. I just hate to imagine the disaster that ouroboros of AI citing AI generated Wikipedia articles would come up with.
The headline reflects a sensible move by Wikipedia to protect content quality. AI-generated articles often include errors or fake citations, so giving admins the authority to quickly delete such content helps maintain accuracy and credibility. While there’s some risk of overreach, the policy targets misuse, not responsible AI-assisted editing, and aligns with Wikipedia’s existing standards for removing low-quality material.
If anyone has specific questions about this, let me know, and I can probably answer them. Hopefully I can be to Lemmy and Wikimedia what Unidan was to Reddit and ecology before he crashed out over jackdaws and got exposed for vote fraud.
Well now I want to know about jackdaws and voter fraud
what about the jackdaws thing?
unzips
They call the rule “LLM-generated without human review”. The specific criteria are mistakes that LLMs frequently make.
It’s a step. Why wouldn’t they default to not accepting any AI generated content, and maybe have a manual approval process? It would both protect the content and discourage LLM uses where llms suck.
Why wouldn’t they default to not accepting any AI generated content
If you can accurately detect what content is AI generated, you’ll have a company worth billions overnight
Manual approval process would kill the site I think, there’s just so much content on it that gets updated constantly it would just grind it all to a halt
Right, and by manual approval it just would be the absolute lowest priority. Kind of like the automated message “we’re expecting higher than normal call volumes” as companies gently tell us their margins are more important than their customers.
Wikipedia certainly doesn’t need AI to fuck up their articles.
Plenty of biased, incorrect stuff done by themselves.Link the incorrect stuff
Wikipedia has a giant article regurgitating the false claims from the extremist Falun Gong cult that China is stealing their organs.
Link or gtfo, let people check the sources themselves
Here you go, Would you like me to cut your food for you too?
“Here’s a thing I believe in”
“I would like proof it is a thing”
“What are you, stupid? Don’t ask me for proof.”
Do you need me to send you a recording of me physically reading the text for you before it counts? Or are you a big enough boy to read it one your own? Were you actually asking in good faith because you genuinely wanted to know? Or were you just trying to be as oblique as possible to waste my time?
I read most this article and don’t see how any of it is false or misinformation. Literally the first word in the page is “alleged”, and it’s full of arguments with linked citations from both sides
Clearly we’re the sheeple for accepting sources and citations and they’re the only one who can see the truth between the lines of how his favorite nation is actually misunderstood.
How unsurprising that a self-described “anarchist” is willing to treat far fight extremists like the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation and the Falun Gong cult as infallible sources of truth so long as it lets them attack the geopolitical enemies of their country.
Falun Gong is a Chinese qigong discipline involving meditation and a moral philosophy rooted in Buddhist tradition. The practice rose to popularity in the 1990s in China, and by 1998, Chinese government sources estimated that as many as 70 million people had taken up the practice.[42][43] Perceiving that Falun Gong was a potential threat to the Party’s authority and ideology, Communist Party leader Jiang Zemin initiated a nationwide campaign to eradicate the group in July 1999.[44]
If you cannot see any problems with the above paragraph, which does not say anything about “alleged”, by the way, then I don’t know what to tell you.
If you think that taking far right propaganda outlets like The Victims or Communism Memorial Foundation (which is a covid truther organization, among other things), then I don’t know what to tell you.
Other than the fact that you don’t actually want reliable information, you want information that confirms what you already believed.
Why have two people replied to my request for a link with something other than a link
Here you go, Would you like me to cut your food for you too?
Thanks!
This looks to be a page about the accusations and the counterarguments to said accusations, not a page claiming to the truth
Falun Gong is a Chinese qigong discipline involving meditation and a moral philosophy rooted in Buddhist tradition. The practice rose to popularity in the 1990s in China, and by 1998, Chinese government sources estimated that as many as 70 million people had taken up the practice.[42][43] Perceiving that Falun Gong was a potential threat to the Party’s authority and ideology, Communist Party leader Jiang Zemin initiated a nationwide campaign to eradicate the group in July 1999.[44]
The above paragraph is from the page, and it is claiming truth.
So you’re just lying, you never actually wanted evidence, you were just trying to waste peoples time by asking them to provide it even when you will just ignore it and lie when they provide it.
More to the point, they don’t have pages for other false claims that just “about the accusations and the counterarguments to said accusations, not a page claiming to the truth”. There’s nothing like this for Pizzagate or Birtherism.
Did you copy and paste the wrong quote? That doesn’t say anything about organ harvesting.
Also
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_conspiracy_theories
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizzagate_conspiracy_theory
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_citizenship_conspiracy_theories
80% of political stuff or with political importance.
I clicked all the words in your comment but none of them opened a browser window
not interested in doing work for others.
There have been plenty instances of manipulation over the years and shady practices in the organisation itself.
Unbelievable there are still so many gullible people still thinking it’s a reputable source.
if you love it so much for some reason then keep using it.
garbage in, garbage outOh so you’re a “do your own research” kind of commenter
Removed by mod
Wait, how is you providing evidence to back up your argument “doing work for others”?
JK we all know the answer … 🤡
Removed by mod
When you make claims, you give proof. That’s how things work in reality.
Unless those claims are against China though, right? That’s you’re position.
