After months of heated debate and previous attempts to restrict the use of large language models on Wikipedia, on March 20 volunteer editors accepted a new policy that prohibits using them to create articles for the online encyclopedia.\u00a0\u201cText generated by large language models (LLMs) often violates several of Wikipedia’s core content policies,\u201d Wikipedia\u2019s new policy states. \u201cFor this reason, the use of LLMs to generate or rewrite article content is prohibited, save for the exceptions given below.\u201dThe new policy, which was accepted in an overwhelming 40 to 2 vote among editors, allows editors to use LLMs to suggest basic copyedits to their own writing, which can be incorporated into the article or rewritten after human review if the LLM doesn\u2019t generate entirely new content on its own.\u00a0\u201cCaution is required, because LLMs can go beyond what you ask of them and change the meaning of the text such that it is not supported by the sources cited,\u201d the policy states. \u201cThe use of LLMs to translate articles from another language’s Wikipedia into the English Wikipedia must follow the guidance laid out at Wikipedia:LLM-assisted translation.\u201d\u00a0I previously reported about editors using LLMs to translate Wikipedia articles and introducing errors to those articles in the process.\u00a0Wikipedia editor, Ilyas Lebleu, who goes by Chaotic Enby on Wikipedia and who proposed the guideline said that it seemed unlikely the policy will last because previously the editor community has been divided on the issue. However, Lebleu said \u201cThe mood was shifting, with holdouts of cautious optimism turning to genuine worry.\u201d\u201cA few months ago, a much more bare-bones guideline had passed, only banning the creation of brand new articles with LLMs,\u201d Lebleu told me in an email. \u201cA follow-up proposal to reword it into something more substantial failed to pass, but was noted to have \u2018consensus for better guidelines along the lines of and\/or in the spirit of this draft.\u2019 In recent months, more and more administrative reports centered on LLM-related issues, and editors were being overwhelmed.\u201dThe policy was written with the help of WikiProject AI Cleanup, a group of Wikipedia editors dedicated to finding and removing AI-generated errors on the site. Editors have been dealing with an increasing number of AI-generated articles or edits lately, and have made some minor adjustments to its guidelines as a result, like streamlining the process for removing AI-generated articles. Editors\u2019 position, as well as the position of the Wikimedia Foundation, has been to not make blanket rules against AI because Wikipedia already uses some forms of automation, and because AI tools could assist editors in the future.\u00a0\u00a0The new policy doesn\u2019t ban the use of other automated tools that are already in use or future implementations, but it does show the Wikipedia community is less optimistic about the benefit of AI-generated content, and taking a stand against it.\u00a0\u201cIn context, this has implications far beyond Wikipedia,\u201d Lebleu said. \u201cThe same flood of AI-generated content has been seen from social media to open-source projects, where agents submit pull requests much faster than human reviewers can keep up with. StackOverflow and the German Wikipedia paved the way in recent months with similar policies, and, as anxiety over the AI bubble grows, I foresee a domino effect,\u00a0 empowering communities on other platforms to decide whether AI should be welcome. On their own terms.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"