Samoyedweixuan

/Wikipedia Advising Report

Identification of the Issue

The common use of generative AI has brought the Wikipedia community not only convenience in content-writing but also potential drawbacks, such as content quality issues, potential misinformation, or even disinformation. Knowing that any innovative approach comes with a cost, the Wikipedia Foundation could consider taking actions to preserve its value of “Empowering and engaging people around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally.”

Recommendation & Justification

First of all, develop a comprehensive policy outlining the acceptable use of generative AI tools for content creation. This policy should emphasize the necessity of citations, verification of facts, flagging AI use, and adherence to Wikipedia’s core content guidelines. Establishing such clear guidelines will mitigate the risk of misinformation and ensure that AI-generated content maintains almost the same level of reliability as traditional contributions. Stating encouraged behaviors would lead to more users complying with it.

Next, create a system for peer review of AI-generated content, allowing experienced editors to evaluate and verify contributions before they are published. Through this approach, AI contributions will be assessed by others, therefore being under human control. The negative impact on the community could be contained when a moderation system detects, labels, or deletes inappropriate messages.

On some moderators' talk page, it is not rare to see editors questioning the moderators' actions to reverse edits, or considering the moderators as someone who "lacks qualification to judge my topic because you do not know anything" or "Being disruptive to my editing", which reflects a lack of trust between the community and the moderators. Therefore, to ensure a smooth enforcement of the policy and minimize resistance from the community, it would be necessary to point out that the moderators should have rotating duties within the community and should be elected by the entire community to avoid abuse of power and ensure the legitimacy of such power.

Then, create discussion pages designated for AI feedback, allowing everyone to share their thoughts. Such a step would encourage Wikipedia editors to share their concerns and findings, establishing a sense of community and belonging, where they engage to promote the community for the better. It is essential to empower community members and invite them to be a part of the decision-making process. This step would be vital for a feedback loop because the Wikipedia Foundation needs frequent feedback to make adjustments to successfully fulfill its value.

Lastly, make adjustments while collecting data on how the current policy is performing. The Wikipedia Foundation could observe AI's impact on the community with certain metrics on accuracy, engagement, and satisfaction. They could have a dedicated task force composed of AI ethics experts, data scientists, administrators, and experienced editors to analyze the effects of the current policy and check the feedback page for useful information provided by the community. After that, they would decide whether to make any changes to the current policies. The community should improve in response to real-world feedback instead of following a fixed set of rules, being insightful about what inappropriate behaviors are not covered in the rules and what else is expected to be done, and gradually improving the policies.

Conclusion

In conclusion, while generative AI offers significant benefits for content creation on Wikipedia, its integration requires careful consideration to ensure that the platform's core values of accuracy, neutrality, and verifiability are not violated. By implementing clear guidelines for AI use, establishing peer review systems, ensuring appropriate moderation practices, and fostering open community feedback for policy adjustment purposes, the Wikipedia Foundation can effectively manage the risks associated with AI-generated content. Continuous data collection and adjustments based on community input will allow the Foundation to adapt to the evolving landscape of AI technology, ensuring that Wikipedia remains a trusted and reliable source of educational content for all users worldwide.