Wikipedia talk:WikiProject AI Cleanup

WP:UPSD Update

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)

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_creep^Talk 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)

AI cleanup at NPP

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)

Talk to the creator for more information. —Alalch E. 21:27, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

Recommended additions to mentions

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.

Wikipistemologist (talk) 22:23, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

Proposal: adopting WP:LLM as this WikiProject's WP:ADVICEPAGE (2)

Previous proposal: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject AI Cleanup/Archive 1#Proposal: adopting WP:LLM as this WikiProject's WP:ADVICEPAGE

Nothing major, adopting this proposal would just mean that Wikipedia:Large language models is tagged with {{WikiProject advice}} instead of {{essay}} and that it is moved to Wikipedia:WikiProject AI Cleanup/Guide. The current incomplete "Guide" would be merged either with it or with Wikipedia:WikiProject AI Cleanup/AI catchphrases. —Alalch E. 21:57, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

The issue of llms has been discussed far more widely than this WikiProject, in very broad community forums. Things are a bit scattered, but there should be a central repository for the community directly in the Wikipedia space. CMD (talk) 23:04, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

It doesn't appear that WP:LLM is that "repository", or any kind of repository. It would rather be the case that this WikiProject is the central hub of interest in this topic on Wikipedia. The breadth of forums that have discussed LLMs and AI did not translate into breadth of support for the essay such that it might become anything other than an ordinary essay. At the same time, Wikipedia:Artificial intelligence is an information page also covering LLMs. —Alalch E. 23:56, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

Yep, having a central hub here could be helpful. Wikipedia:WikiProject AI Cleanup/Resources kinda does that, but we can consider a separate subpage for on-wiki discussions. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 13:59, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Has the "AI images in non-AI contexts" list served its purpose?

Wikipedia:WikiProject AI Cleanup/AI images in non-AI contexts has been documenting reasons given for removing AI-generated images from Wikipedia articles, since 2023. Is there any reason to continue keeping track of this, now that WP:AIIMAGES has become policy? I assume the list page was created to help guide that eventual policy with organic examples from across Wikipedia, which would mean it was no longer really needed. Belbury (talk) 11:37, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Yep, most of them have been deleted, and "what to do" is much clearer with the policy. Borderline cases (which will be less frequent, but will certainly happen) can be discussed on this very noticeboard. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 14:06, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Request for cleanup assistance at ANI

There is a request for cleanup assistance at WP:ANI § Cleaning up after User:M1rrorCr0ss's mess, which involves over 2,000 edits that need to be reviewed for AI-generated content. Some details were mentioned in an earlier discussion, WP:ANI § User:M1rrorCr0ss creating articles with fake sources, possibly with LLMs. — Newslinger talk 12:30, 21 May 2025 (UTC)