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
editHi 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I was looking at the list of people supected of using AI, and it seems a bit outdated.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
editAn 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
editSee 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
editIf 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)