Wikipedia talk:WikiProject AI Cleanup
This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject AI Cleanup and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
|
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
|
To help centralise discussions and keep related topics together, all non-archive subpages of this talk page redirect here. |
Adding a category to users warned with the user templates
[edit]Hi all,
I was looking at the list of people supected of using AI, and it seems a bit outdated. Couldn't we just make the AI warning templates automatically add the users to a category? Acebulf (talk | contribs) 01:35, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- Sounds good to me. I'll go ahead and do it in a few days if no one else does so or objects. Queen of Hearts talk 01:58, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Acebulf: this search can be used to find pre-tracking-cat subst'd instances of the warning templates (229 results). ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 09:55, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Help with AI-written articles
[edit]An editor admitted to using AI to write two aircraft articles; Caproni Ca.104 and Focke-Wulf W 4, and has agreed to stop using AI to write more. Both articles have been determined to be largely inaccurate, but I am unsure about the proper course of action for dealing with such cases. My first instinct is to nominate them for CSD G3, but given the unfamiliar circumstances, I thought I'd bring it up here first. - ZLEA T\C 00:08, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- FYI: While investigating the CSD tag on Caproni Ca.104 image as a copyvio (and subsequently deleting it), I looked at the Caproni Ca.104 article which was tagged as a possible hoax. Because of the discussion on the talk page and the discussion at User talk:Sir MemeGod, I tagged and deleted the article as a G3 hoax. If the Focke-Wulf W 4 article has some valid text, I suggest deleting everything else and leaving what can be salvaged. Otherwise, ZLEA, I agree that the article should be tagged G3 as a AI-generated hoax. Afterwards it can be created from scratch using valid sources. — CactusWriter (talk) 01:21, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot. - ZLEA T\C 02:00, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- yeah, such things strike me as clearly a case for WP:TNT, whatever path you take to that conclusion - David Gerard (talk) 08:21, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Listed at MfD July 2024
[edit]See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject AI Cleanup/Possible AI-using editors. - SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:34, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
I wanted to share a helpful tip for spotting AI generated articles on Wikipedia
[edit]If you look up several buzzwords associated with ChatGPT and limit the results to Wikipedia, it will bring up articles with AI-generated text. For example I looked up "vibrant" "unique" "tapestry" "dynamic" site:en.wikipedia.org and I found some (mostly) low-effort articles. I'm actually surprised most of these are articles about cultures (see Culture of Indonesia, Culture of Qatar, or Culture of Indonesia). 95.18.76.205 (talk) 01:54, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! That matches with Wikipedia:WikiProject AI Cleanup/AI Catchphrases, feel free to add any new buzzwords you find! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 02:00, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
A new WMF thing
[edit]Y'all might be interested in m:Future Audiences/Experiment:Add a Fact. Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 21:46, 26 September 2024 (UTC)