Editing Eurovision Wiki:Village pump (policy) (section)

== AI help in c/e ==

{{moved from|Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)#AI help in c/e}}
To me, this copy edit[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sailing&diff=prev&oldid=1343405170] appears to use an AI editor to produce the changes. I base this on the similarity to changes suggested by Grammarly (a product I use largely to detect typos that an ordinary spelling verifier would not detect). Beyond the blandness of the writing style that this produces, it can put errors into the article. In this instance I have had to change "across the Mediterranean" back to "the length of the Mediterranean", as the the two have quite different meanings in the context involved.[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sailing&diff=prev&oldid=1343435608]

What is the Wikipedia view on editors using AI for copy edits? [[User:ThoughtIdRetired|ThoughtIdRetired]] <sub> [[User talk:ThoughtIdRetired|TIR]]</sub> 08:34, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
:Might it not be a good idea to ask the person who made that edit whether they used AI, or any tool? Let's at least ping them. {{u|Meleager91}}. [[User:Phil Bridger|Phil Bridger]] ([[User talk:Phil Bridger|talk]]) 13:42, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
:There's no current rule on using AI for copyedits. That said, quite a few of those edits changed the meaning of the sentence, so it is worth asking the editor if they meant to do that. [[User:Chipmunkdavis|CMD]] ([[User talk:Chipmunkdavis|talk]]) 13:49, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
::Yes, a ping is appropriate; thanks. I only checked a part of the article that I knew well for retention of meaning, as I was short of time. I've not looked further at the changes for more changes of meaning.<br/>Just out of interest, Grammarly decided to check the two posts above. [[User:Chipmunkdavis]] has a writing style that it thinks needs fixing, whilst [[User:Phil Bridger]] only gets one complaint from the software (the comma before "or any tool"). To be clear, I think both original versions are perfectly OK. The second sentence of this post is something that Grammarly wants to change to a version which seems to me to have no meaning whatsoever. The lesson is, I suggest, always proofread the output of the proofing software. 
::I should probably alert [[User:HopsonRoad]], who may be interested in this discussion due to the article involved. [[User:ThoughtIdRetired|ThoughtIdRetired]] <sub> [[User talk:ThoughtIdRetired|TIR]]</sub> 15:50, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
:::I think my comment is correct either with or without the comma, but subtly different in meaning. I guess Grammarly doesn't do subtle. [[User:Phil Bridger|Phil Bridger]] ([[User talk:Phil Bridger|talk]]) 18:56, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
:Shouldn't this be moved to [[WP:VPP]] instead? We now have this guideline about LLMs for articles ([[WP:writing articles with large language models]])... Actually, it now applies to only new articles. [[User:George Ho|George Ho]] ([[User talk:George Ho|talk]]) 19:18, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
::I have no problem with this discussion being moved to Village Pump (policy). You presumably look for opinions from the other contributors. I am going to be limited on further involvement in this matter as I will be on the road for 2 days. [[User:ThoughtIdRetired|ThoughtIdRetired]] <sub> [[User talk:ThoughtIdRetired|TIR]]</sub> 20:36, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
::: Moved this from [[Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)]], especially since I feel the matter may be more rule-related... or not? {{ping|Chipmunkdavis}} Is what you said about lack of guidelines against AI-generated copyediting true, despite the list of rules seen in [[WP:AI]]? [[User:George Ho|George Ho]] ([[User talk:George Ho|talk]]) 22:44, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
::::As far as I am aware there are three broad "rules" (so to speak) regarding AI usage: [[WP:NEWLLM|don't create articles using AI]], [[WP:LLMT|carefully research your AI translations]], and [[WP:AIIMAGES|with few exceptions avoid AI images]]. However, the issue here is a second-order issue of AI use, as AI use often creates issues with meaning, with source integrity and outright fabrication, with effective communication, and so on. [[User:Chipmunkdavis|CMD]] ([[User talk:Chipmunkdavis|talk]]) 06:28, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
:I'm not really convinced whether this is an AI copyedit -- it could be, could not, the changes are so minor that it basically doesn't matter. Besides one or two small oversights it's a good edit regardless of where it came from; the problem with AI copyedits is when they start changing the meaning or injecting promotional tone ([[Special:Diff/1225544446|example]]), but this isn't that. [[User:Gnomingstuff|Gnomingstuff]] ([[User talk:Gnomingstuff|talk]]) 05:20, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
::update - upon spot-checking some other edits I think that one probably is AI-assisted in some way, just by association based on the speed of the editing and other changes that are much more unambiguously AI output: [[Special:Diff/1274297260|the text added here]], the [[Special:Diff/1273961369|failure to eliminate obvious puffery here]] despite the edit summary claiming that happened. (The puffery seems to be [[Special:Diff/1143302511|AI-generated by someone else in 2023]].) So I think that's a fairly good gamut of the three cases with AI revising: minor-but-good copyedits, bad "copyedits" that introduce slop, and "copyedits" that fail to do what they claim they do but are ultimately pointless either way. [[User:Gnomingstuff|Gnomingstuff]] ([[User talk:Gnomingstuff|talk]]) 05:30, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
::The edit cited does change the meaning in quite a few places, from the first change onwards. Whether the new meaning is an improvement or not would require a deeper look, but meaning is being changed. [[User:Chipmunkdavis|CMD]] ([[User talk:Chipmunkdavis|talk]]) 06:31, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
:::The "across the Mediterranean" from "the length of the Mediterranean" change definitely moved the article away from the cited source on this, and on the key point that both the source and Wikipedia are trying to make. "Across" is, at best, ambiguous and distance-wise is about 1500 miles out (or 60%).[[User:ThoughtIdRetired|ThoughtIdRetired]] <sub> [[User talk:ThoughtIdRetired|TIR]]</sub> 08:35, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
::::Got it, thanks for the clarification -- I was referring to most of the stuff like "give an indication of" => "indicate," which is clearly an improvement. [[User:Gnomingstuff|Gnomingstuff]] ([[User talk:Gnomingstuff|talk]]) 22:33, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Copying and pasting... and quoting below post by [[User:Meleager91|Meleager91]]:
{{talk quote block|1=Apologies for any disagreeable edits. I can confirm that I edited the article with the assistance of Grammarly, but I was reviewing each suggested change and inputting any edit manually in the plaintext. I certainly did not intend to worsen or confuse the meaning of the article. I apologize if any of my edits missed the mark. |oldid=1343731617 |source=[[User:Meleager91|Meleager91]] ([[User talk:Meleager91|talk]]) |ts=01:46, 16 March 2026 (UTC) }}
[[User:George Ho|George Ho]] ([[User talk:George Ho|talk]]) 03:52, 16 March 2026 (UTC)