c/technology · by Beep@lemmus.org · 214d

Generative AI and Wikipedia editing: What we learned in 2025

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

68 points · 3 comments · view on lemmy.world

3 Comments

Takapapatapaka@tarte.nuage-libre.fr · 21 pts · 214d (1 reply)

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

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.

kalkulat@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 213d

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."