Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Large language models/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ClueBot III (talk | contribs) at 06:50, 28 April 2023 (Archiving 2 discussions from Wikipedia talk:Large language models. (BOT)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7

Creating drafts with AI before verification

I want your thoughts on the practice of creating a draft article with AI as a starting point before verifying all points in it. I see this as a potentially useful strategy for making a well flowing starting point to edit. Immanuelle β€οΈπŸ’šπŸ’™ (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 18:13, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Immanuelle. This is an automated technique for writing an article the wrong way. The best practice is to identify several reliable, independent sources that devote significant coverage of the topic. AI tends to be indiscriminate about sources. Please read Wikipedia:Writing Wikipedia articles backward. Cullen328 (talk) 18:33, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Aside from the issue identified by Cullen, which I completely agree with, there's the possibility that another editor might come across an abandoned draft and assume that it just needs to be copyedited before moving to mainspace. This is particularly concerning when an article contains fabricated facts and fabricated sources, since WP:AGF would lead an editor to assume that the content is legitimate and that the sources are simply difficult to find and access. –dlthewave ☎ 20:33, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Personally, I feel that writing exercises with unvetted information aren't suitable for submission to any page on Wikipedia. I think the collaborative process is better served when the content being shared has undergone some degree of review by the editor with respect to accuracy and relevance. Otherwise it's indistinguishable from anything made up. isaacl (talk) 21:55, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Noticeboard for AI generated things

AI generated articles show up a lot on ANI. I think it might be helpful to add a dedicated noticeboard for this stuff. IHaveAVest talk 02:01, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Applicable TOS

The Terms of use for ChatGPT[1] say As between the parties and to the extent permitted by applicable law, you own all Input. Subject to your compliance with these Terms, OpenAI hereby assigns to you all its right, title and interest in and to Output. This means you can use Content for any purpose, including commercial purposes such as sale or publication, if you comply with these Terms.

In threads above there is a link to a Sharing & publication policy[2] with attribution requirements. It's not clear to me whether this in generally in force. I think it may be meant for invited research collaboration on products that aren't yet publically available. Sennalen (talk) 16:47, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Outright falsification

This doesn't go far enough: "LLM-generated content can be biased, non-verifiable, may constitute original research, may libel living people, and may violate copyrights." LLMs also blatantly falsify both citations (creating plausible-looking cites to non-existent sources) and quotations (making up fake quotes from real sources).  — SMcCandlish ☏ Β’β€ƒπŸ˜Όβ€ƒ 09:28, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

added somethingβ€”Alalch E. 10:09, 13 April 2023 (UTC)