There is also already simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
Comment on Wikimedia Foundation's plans to introduce AI-generated summaries to Wikipedia
Cheradenine@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
Wikipedia articles already have lead in summaries.
Fuck right off with this
A future experiment will study ways of editing and adjusting this content.
chunes@lemmy.world 2 days ago
MDCCCLV@lemmy.ca 3 days ago
A lot of them for the small articles and stubs are written very technically and don’t provide an explanation for complex subjects if you aren’t already familiar with it. Then you have to read 4 subjects down just to figure out the jargon for what they’re saying
Takapapatapaka@lemmy.world 3 days ago
I agree, having experienced this especially on mathematics pages. But on the other hand, from my experience, the whole article is very technical in those cases : I’m not sure making a summary would help, and im not sure you can provide a summary both correct and easily understandable in those cases.
catloaf@lemm.ee 3 days ago
Math articles are the worst. They always jump right into calculus and stuff. I usually have to hope there’s a simple English article for those!
AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world 3 days ago
This is one thing I can see an actual use case for (as an external tool, not as part of WP itself): Create a summary, not of the article itself, but of the prerequisite background knowledge. And customized to the reader’s existing knowledge—like, what do I need to know to understand this article assuming I already know X but not Y or Z.
Cheradenine@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
I’d agree with that, both are problematic.
A lot of stubs should be deleted until they are expanded, they’re often more confusing than knowing nothing at all. I don’t think an LLM summary will help here though.
Reading a few articles deep is not only a pain in the ass, but is going to dissuade those who won’t do it. There’s also the issue that when you do wade in it might link to something that is poorly cited and confusing. Again, I think an LLM is going to make things worse here.
BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 3 days ago
Maybe it’s a result of Wikipedia trying to be more of an “online encyclopedia” vs a digital information hub or learning resource. I don’t think it’s a problem on its own but I do think there should be a simplified version of every article.