Wikipedia talk:WikiProject AI Cleanup
This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject AI Cleanup and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
|
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 30 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 centralize discussions and keep related topics together, all non-archive subpages of this talk page redirect here. |
![]() | This page has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:
|
Following Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)/Archive_201#URLs_with_utm_source=chatgpt.com_codes, I have added detection for possible AI-generated slop to my script.
Possible AI-slop sources will be flagged in orange, thought I'm open to changing that color in the future if it causes issues. If you have the script, you can see it in action on those articles.
For now the list of AI sources is limited to ChatGPT (utm_source=chatgpt.com
), but if you know of other chatGPT-like domains, let me know!
Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:24, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks, this is awesome, I've already found a bunch of garbage to revert. You're probably already aware of this, but there's also a filter for this, Special:AbuseFilter/1346, being trialed. Apocheir (talk) 21:52, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for the EF, I'll add the other AI agents to my script! Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:57, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
- @Samwalton9:, I've added m365copilot.com to the EF, since that was listed at Microsoft Copilot. I think I did it right? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:10, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
- If you want, you can take a look at a relevant Phabricator task where I tested out the outputs of a few LLMs to see if any others gave a
utm_source
parameter, it seems like it is exclusive to ChatGPT. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 22:29, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
- If you want, you can take a look at a relevant Phabricator task where I tested out the outputs of a few LLMs to see if any others gave a
- @Samwalton9:, I've added m365copilot.com to the EF, since that was listed at Microsoft Copilot. I think I did it right? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:10, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for the EF, I'll add the other AI agents to my script! Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:57, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
- I found this thread after some searching from now-closed thread [1], where it was used as a telltale for LLM use. Anyway there may be some urgency for searching insource:"utm_source=chatgpt.com", because there are also bots that go around stripping off utm-source junk from urls and we want to catch it before it is cleaned away. Currently I'm seeing about 1400 of them. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:43, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
- Strip it out from all articles using script? scope_creepTalk 22:06, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
- But we don't want to just strip it out. We want to find it and check that the text added with it is accurate and not an AI hallucination. Stripping it out would prevent us from finding it. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:57, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
- Strip it out from all articles using script? scope_creepTalk 22:06, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
AI cleanup at NPP
[edit]I just became a NPP reviewer and have been messing around with it, and I just ran into some article by the same author whose sources I can't access at all (they're offline mostly, but the ones which have links are mostly deadlinks). I'm not going to link it because it's probably not AI, but I just realized that NPP reviewers are supposed to prevent hoaxes and suchlike, but for articles with mostly offline sources, especially those in different languages, there's no real good way to tell if an article is AI without knowledge of the subject matter. Should (or does) NPP have some guidance on this? Mrfoogles (talk) 15:59, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
- If everything is offline (and several different websites are cited) then either it's AI or all the servers are affected by the current Iberian blackout. Flounder fillet (talk) 20:23, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
- No, I meant books, not dead links. Also, I'm guessing you looked through my contributions history, but you've gotten the wrong one. Mrfoogles (talk) 01:31, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
- A first step is checking if the books exist. Not to say that AI can't pretend it's using a real book, but if the book doesn't exist that's a strong indicator. CMD (talk) 03:53, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
- Yeah, I gave it a shot, but they're in Arabic, so it's hard to tell. Mrfoogles (talk) 17:37, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
- A first step is checking if the books exist. Not to say that AI can't pretend it's using a real book, but if the book doesn't exist that's a strong indicator. CMD (talk) 03:53, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
- No, I meant books, not dead links. Also, I'm guessing you looked through my contributions history, but you've gotten the wrong one. Mrfoogles (talk) 01:31, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
Recommended additions to mentions
[edit]For the Mentions > Talk section: Wikipedia:WikiProject AI Cleanup/List of uses of ChatGPT on Wikipedia#Talk 2
Keyword(s) flagged | Talk page |
ChatGPT | Talk_Carbon footprint |
ChatGPT; LLM; AI | Talk_Climate Change |
ChatGPT; LLM; AI | Talk_Donald Trump |
ChatGPT; LLM | Talk_Earth |
ChatGPT | Talk_Effects of Climate Change |
ChatGPT; AI | Talk_Environmental, social, and governance |
ChatGPT; LLM; AI | Talk_Generative artificial intelligence |
ChatGPT; AI | Talk_Greenhouse gas |
AI | Talk_Jimmy Carter |
ChatGPT; AI; Quillbot; | Talk_Meetup SDGs Communication |
AI | Talk_Natural disaster |
ChatGPT | Talk_Net-zero emissions |
ChatGPT | Talk_Sustainable energy |
ChatGPT; LLM; AI | Talk_Tesla Model S |
ChatGPT; LLM | Talk_Wikiproject Climate change |
ChatGPT; LLM; AI | Talk_Wikiproject Environment |
For the Mentions > User talk section: Wikipedia:WikiProject AI Cleanup/List of uses of ChatGPT on Wikipedia#User talk 2
Keyword(s) flagged | User talk page |
ChatGPT; Deep Seek; Le Chat | User talk_Wikipistemologist |
Didn't want to add these directly in, incase you only wanted ChatGPT-related Talk pages.