Template talk:Collapse AI top

Collapsing text is undesirable

@Newslinger, why did you create Template:Collapse AI top to auto-collapse? I think it's great to box up such discussions (assuming they're accurately identified, which is sometimes difficult) and not otherwise important (one hardly wants to hide a report of real problems just because a newbie used AI to explain the problem), but hiding the text makes it difficult for pinged editors to figure out what they were pinged to, and for editors to find comments that need to be taken to ANI with ⌘F. Nobody is going to want to go through a long talk page or talk page archive and uncollapse everything to find the one comment. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:26, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi WhatamIdoing, this template is derived from {{Hidden archive top}} and serves the same purpose of collapsing discussions, but focuses on disruptive discussions that were initiated with a disruptive LLM-generated comment. The template is set to auto-collapse because the purpose of this template is to collapse the content, as allowed by WP:AITALK. The same considerations about searching with a browser and pinging apply to text collapsed with this template as with text collapsed with any other template.

To be honest, the idea of having using the template to highlight an LLM-generated comment without collapsing it did not even occur to me, since I have yet to see a single discussion leading with an obviously LLM-generated comment that ends up being constructive. Typically, editors end up complaining about the LLM use, or the LLM-using editor ends up bludgeoning the discussion.

This template actually does not support leaving the enclosed text expanded by default. My intent was to keep this template simple so that it can be used for its purpose without worrying about parameters. If any editor wants to wrap any type of discussion with a collapsible box while leaving the contents expanded by default, the general-use templates {{Hidden archive top}}, {{Collapse top}}, and {{Collapse}} can all do that with the right parameter setting and also support customizable messages. — Newslinger talk 19:25, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if it's possible for the template to detect whether it's in an archive, and uncollapse there. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:40, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The page name can be scanned for anything with /Archive in it, which would cover most archive pages, but not any that have nonstandard or date-based names. However, I'm not convinced that disruptive discussions with LLM-generated comments should be made more visible in archives by default than disruptive discussions with only human-generated comments, which are auto-collapsed by the general-use collapsible templates by default. Is there any reason disruptive LLM-generated comments should be privileged in this way? — Newslinger talk 21:54, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The primary use case for archives is finding past comments. That includes comments that are disruptive and off-topic. The need is not specific to LLM-generated comments. Making it difficult to find comments means making archives be less functional for people when they are trying to use them.

I can see the value in collapsing disruptive and off-topic comments during an active discussion. That interferes with pings (you end up at the top of the page, which is not helpful on an long and active page like ANI), but there's a benefit. The benefit to hiding comments in archives, which means hiding them from people who might be looking for exactly that comment (e.g., to provide a link in a new ANI discussion) is not obvious to me. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:46, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Since that concern is not specific to discussions with LLM-generated comments, I think it would be useful to have a more general discussion at one of the village pumps (such as WP:VPR) and propose for this change to be implemented across all of the collapsible templates, including this one, {{Hidden archive top}}, {{Collapse top}}, and {{Collapse}}. My intent was for this template to have the same default behavior as the other ones so that it would be familiar and unsurprising.

I'm happy to add support in this template for any reasonable feature, including an option to leave the wrapped content expanded on all pages when the template is first displayed, and an option to have the wrapped content expanded only in archives when the template is first displayed. However, I would prefer the default behavior to mirror the other collapsible templates to keep them consistent. — Newslinger talk 17:56, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've inquired about this at Template talk:Collapse top#Archived discussions and the ⌘F problem. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:08, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. I've commented there with a technical suggestion. — Newslinger talk 17:56, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template message

EEng, in reference to your edit summary in Special:Diff/1296752408, I had phrased the template message with "This discussion" to cover any replies that would become irrelevant when the LLM-generated comment is disregarded. For example, any replies which argue about the first comment being LLM-generated, hallucinated, incorrect, bludgeoning, or otherwise disruptive would be covered. I think your change from "This discussion" to "Text" is better and I support it. — Newslinger talk 10:10, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Don't thank me -- it was ChatGPT's idea. E Eng 16:13, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]