How to fight Wikipedia the content of male intelligence

With the rise of artificial intelligence writing tools, Wikipedia editors were forced to deal with an attack from the artificial intelligence that is full of wrong information and fake martyrdom. Indeed, the Wikipedia volunteer community has mobilized to respond to AI SLOP, which is similar to Marshall Miller, director of the Wikimedia Foundation products, to a kind of response to the “immune system”.

“They are vigilant to ensure that the content remains neutral and reliable,” says Miller. “With the internet change, as things like artificial intelligence appear, this is the immune system that adapts to a type of new challenge and know how to process it.”

One way of Wikipedians wandering in the mud with the “rapid deletion” of badly written articles, As mentioned earlier by 404 media. A Wikipedia references Those who expressed support for al -Qaeda said they “do not stop the floods with horrific blasting.” They add that the fast removal “will greatly help efforts to combat it and provide endless hours in capturing the male pillars.” Another says “Fake lies and references” within the outputs of artificial intelligence “take an incredible amount from the time of the experienced editor for cleaning.

Usually, articles were marked to remove Wikipedia Enter A. A seven -day discussion period During which members of society determines whether the site should delete the article. the The newly approved base will allow It is clear that the Wikipedia managers to circumvent these discussions if an article of artificial intelligence is not born and was not reviewed by the person who provides it. This means searching for three main signs:

These are not the only signs of Nikipidien, the Amnesty International he is looking for. As part of Wikiproject ai cleanWhich aims to address “an increased problem of unwritten content of artificial intelligence”, the editors’ situation Together a list of phrases and coordination The characteristics of the written articles on Chatbot.

The list exceeds the exploitation of the excessive use of EM (” -“) Associated with Chatbots of artificial intelligenceAnd even includes excessive use of some communication, such as “moreover”, as well as the promotional language, such as describing something “for breathtaking”. There are other formatting problems that advise Wikipedidin to search for it as well, including frizzy quotes and Apostrophes instead of those straight.

However, the Wikipedia rapid removal page indicates that these characteristics “should not, on its own, be the only basis” to determine something written by Amnesty International, which makes it subject to removal. Fast deletion policy is not only For the slope that was created from artificial intelligence, either. The online encyclopedia also allows the rapid removal of pages that annoys its topic, contains deception or sabotage, or expresses a “unfinished or humidity” text from other things.

The Wikimedia Foundation, which hosts the encyclopedia but does not have a hand -creating policies, has not always seen the volunteer community on artificial intelligence. In June, The Wikimedia Foundation stopped An experiment that placed summaries created from artificial intelligence at the top of the articles after facing a violent reaction of society.

Despite the different views of artificial intelligence through the Wikipedia community, the Wikimedia Foundation does not contradict its use as long as it leads to accurate and high -quality writing.

“It is a double -edged sword,” says Miller. “It causes people to be able to generate less quality content in higher sizes, but artificial intelligence is likely to be a tool to help volunteers do their job, if we do it properly and work with them to know the right ways to apply it.” For example, Wikimedia Foundation AI is already used To help define articles reviews that contain Editious support With artificial intelligence tools that will help them automate “frequent tasks” and translation.

Wikimedia is also developing an unnecessary tool It is called the editing of the check This is directed towards helping new shareholders to stand with its policies and writing guidelines. In the end, this may help reduce the burden of presentations that are not reviewed by artificial intelligence as well. Currently, Edit Check can mention the book by adding the testimonies if they have written a large amount of text without one, as well as checking their dialect to ensure the book remains neutral.

Wikimedia also operates Add “paste check” To the tool, which will ask users who paste a large part of the text in an article if they had already written it. Their shareholders have Many ideas To help the Wikimedia Foundation to build the tool as well, as a user suggests requesting artificial intelligence authors to determine how much it was created by Chatbot.

“We are following with our societies about what they do and what they find a producer,” says Miller. “At the present time, our focus on using machine learning is more in the context of liberation to help people make constructive adjustments, as well as help people who patrol pay attention to the correct amendments.”