Wikipedia talk:AI generated content

Comments on proposed guideline

How is this different from what's required of any other articles? -- Auntof6 (talk) 09:49, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

It's not really other setting out specifically that AI content is allowed and saying what the copyright status would be. fr33kman 10:20, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Many people right now are confused about how we deal with AI content. I think this page will help clarify that. However, there is much information lacking, and a proposal to modify the QD reason or to create one is required to effectively manage the content, which if we do not regulate now will be much more difficult to handle later. Some examples, some keys about identifying the AI content, who owns the content under different circumstances (like when the text or media closely resembles someone else's work) etc.. need to be added. BRP ^ever 10:33, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

I've added the QD reason but I need to contact the WMF legal counsel to have them explain the ownership issue. My thoughts are that WMF would end up with ownership. Thx fr33kman 11:12, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

OK, I've emailed the general counsel and will await his response. fr33kman 11:26, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Different opinion

I always try to sound somewhat neutral, professional but chill on Wikipedia, but I'm sounding very opinionated this time, because I don't know how to word this better and I am bad at setting the right tone, so…

On WP:Simple Talk, Fr33kman said Do we want to allow this? […] I, for one, feel we should have a policy prohibiting it use. here and my answer is "No, I don't want to allow this". I am for banning LLM generated content, not for regulating it. I do not want to read an article that nobody wanted to write. If I wanted to read some LLM stuff, I'd ask chatgpt or something (it's never going to happen). AI fans don't look up things on Wikipedia anyway, because they have their LLMs stealing the content from Wikipedia and other sites and feeding it to them. Why are we allowing this? I don't want to allow this. This is not to say "I don't like it so I decided that we ban this" and I already know I am going to lose this "battle", but I'll still try to speak my mind. All I'm doing here is answering a very good question (if we want to allow this) and my answer is "no". If we allow LLMs, then why should I keep contributing to this project or any project ever? So demotivating. Uninspiring. The beauty of Wikipedia is going to be lost. Do people even care anymore? So sad. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 23:04, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Important note: Fr33kman might have a totally different opinion than mine, and it's fine of course. Here's the full quote to avoid confusion: Do we want to allow this? Problems I see relate to copyright issues as well as problems with complexity and context. I, for one, feel we should have a policy prohibiting it use. Sorry for the confusion. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 23:08, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

I totally agree with you. I don't want to allow it either, but I feel the genie is out of the bottle and I feel the only thing I can do is influence how it gets used. It's happening on commons and enwiki so it'd be hard to ban it here. It's a sad day!! fr33kman 23:10, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

It totally is a sad day!! Possibly a sad future too :( And I am so glad you agree with me :) I too feel like it's too late to stop it completely, but I could never forgive myself if I never said anything at all. I should try at least, even if I know that it's leading nowhere, even if the road is dark and I can't see where I'm going, I'm still trying. Even if it's a very small attempt, it's better than zero. I don't wanna go off-Wiki too much so I'll stop here :') Signed: a very real, flawed and human ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 23:57, 21 November 2024 (UTC)