User:Powercycler

Userboxes

🔍This user clears {{citation needed}} tags with CNfirmed — the AI proposes a source, this user checks it.

⟨~ref~⟩This user reviews diffs and combats template camouflage with RefDiff.

CWThis user patrols recent changes with ChangeWalker.

This user uses Ultraviolet to fight vandalism.

This user checks citations with Source Verifier.

Activities

Historically I did a lot of graphics works in my older accounts.

My interest is discussing the future of Wikipedia in context of the AI revolution. More specifically demonstrate the potential of new tools and their process integration. People prefer human man content. My believe is that done right Wikipedia will prevail even in a future where AI is better in everyway compared to us.

I'm not fluent with all the English Wikipedia rules and culture yet. Let me know in case i make a mistake. Thanks for the patients in the meantime.

Projects and Ideas

/RefDiff → AI stats say Wikipedia:Interceptor and WP:Twinkle are the top tools for vandal fighting it should be compatible with

Pure reference definition: <ref def name="ref1">{{cite}}</ref>. It separates content from meta data.

Next year subscription based AI will come at 10$/month. A flood of new comers with a different mind-set can be expected. Many long-term contributors are unaware of AI capablities and therefor lowbar training is needed.

AI can help deal with typical boiler plate and quirky wiki syntax. It can ingress categories or list and check for outdated content or other gaps across a topic.

/Sandbox

German Senior-Wikipedian in Exile

I left for good. I will not complain about details of the discussion there just these outlines.

German rules say:

• The content of Wikipedia is written by humans. This can be considered as 'Proof of mental work'. AI is allowed as tools for minor corrections then.
• Researching sources with AI is allowed, but need to be read before use. My suggestion for citing templates would be do have a comment field where authors can add a short source rational again as a 'Proof of mental work'
• No AI content itself in any way

I agree to these concepts for the WP:ANS and assure always adhered to these rules in ANS.

They apply to discussion and WP:UP the same way, which makes it odd to discuss about the potential of AI and the future use in Wikipedia. Shall I paraphrase everything while I could just copy and paste to demonstrate something?