As pointed out already, it’s a tad more nuanced than ‘Wikipedia Bans AI-Generated Content’… Ah, if only click bait titles were also banned.

Text generated by large language models (LLMs) often violates several of Wikipedia’s core content policies. For this reason, the use of LLMs to generate or rewrite article content is prohibited, save for the exceptions given below.

Editors are permitted to use LLMs to suggest basic copyedits to their own writing, and to incorporate some of them after human review, provided the LLM does not introduce content of its own. Caution 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.

One can use AI to edit their own work… keeping in mind AI are fncking weird and also they’re fncking dumb.

The 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.

AI can be used to translate too.

Some editors may have similar writing styles to LLMs. More evidence than just stylistic or linguistic signs is needed to justify sanctions, and it is best to consider the text’s compliance with core content policies and recent edits by the editor in question.

Also, to decide what was written by LLM and should be banned we should not rely only on style. ie, we should not consider the use of em-dashes a sure sign of AI fucktardery because it happens that—no matter how unusual it seems to be for some ‘human readers’—em-dashes have been around forever and some people, actual flesh and bones human beings I mean, not some text manipulating statistical engines, have been using them for centuries before your very first computer was even devised.

I’m not nearly as anti-ai-content as your average lemmy user, but if there is one place there shouldn’t be ai-content it’s Wikipedia.