Open Menu
AllLocalCommunitiesAbout
lotide
AllLocalCommunitiesAbout
Login

Generative AI and Wikipedia editing: What we learned in 2025

⁨68⁩ ⁨likes⁩

Submitted ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago⁩ by ⁨Beep@lemmus.org⁩ to ⁨technology@lemmy.world⁩

https://wikiedu.org/blog/2026/01/29/generative-ai-and-wikipedia-editing-what-we-learned-in-2025/

source

Comments

Sort:hotnewtop
  • Takapapatapaka@tarte.nuage-libre.fr ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    Interesting numbers for people who dont wanna read : - on all the new contributors they taught, only ~5% were flagged by the AI detection tool. - on the AI flagged articles, only 7% presented sources that didn’t even exist. Most of the AI outputed correct statements with existing sources. - however, north of 66% of AI articles failed verification : the citations or facts could not be found in the sources provided by AI

    source
    • colonelp4nic@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      thanks for the relevant excerpt! One small correction: most of the AI sentences had valid and relevant cited sources, but the statements were not correct.

      source
  • kalkulat@lemmy.world ⁨20⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    From the article:

    “A total of 178 out of the 3,078 articles came back as flagged for AI … About half of our staff spent a month during summer 2025 painstakingly reviewing the text from these 178 articles…

    Far more insidious, however, was something else we discovered: More than two-thirds of these articles failed verification. That means the article contained a plausible-sounding sentence, cited to a real, relevant-sounding source. But when you read the source it’s cited to, the information on Wikipedia does not exist in that specific source.”

    source