User:Jenynfur/Report

Introduction

The goal of the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) is to build a Wikipedia community to place where people can collaborate to create educational content that promotes community engagement. The Wikipedia community already identified several potential use cases for AI tools like content planning and article structure suggestions or automated edit monitoring. The Wikipedia community has already identified several potential uses for AI tools, such as assisting with content planning, suggesting article structures, and automating edit monitoring. However, introducing AI tools, particularly bots, presents unique challenges, especially concerning editorial quality, content integrity, and the strength of community-driven processes. Given these conditions, I suggest implementing clear policies and accountability measures for AI-based bots to ensure responsible use, promoting harmlessness, resource efficiency, and protection from unintended consequences.

Generative AI bots

Responsibility for Unsourced or Harmful Content

One of the key considerations when creating content on Wikipedia is managing harmful content and unverified information. In class discussions, many students suggested developing automated filtering bots or enhancing user reporting functions. These suggestions reflect concerns about harmful content causing indirect harm and weakening a positive, healthy community atmosphere. AI bots can aid in generating quality content, but they also pose potential risks. In particular, if advanced AI generates harmful or unverified content, issues of responsibility and response measures become critical.

To mitigate these risks, Wikipedia should consider preventive measures such as monitoring AI bot activities, securing authority to take disciplinary action when necessary, improving the user reporting system, strengthening content verification processes, and enhancing the harmful content filtering system. While Wikipedia bots currently filter harmful content, there have been cases where full blocking was not achieved.

ex) Hinduphobia on Wikipedia: How One of the World’s Most Trusted Resources Is Struggling with Hate (Ballard, 2024)

This article highlights concerns about anti-Hindu bias on Wikipedia. Researchers found that Wikipedia’s open-editing model might allow anti-Hindu rhetoric to influence entries about Hinduism, Indian history, and well-known Hindu figures, reflecting similar biases often seen on social media. It mentions that Wikipedia’s reliance on volunteer editors and sometimes unreliable sources can allow misinformation to spread, creating a cycle of biased views against Hindu culture. Enhancing bot support to help maintain Wikipedia’s neutrality goals seems crucial, especially because, as the article points out, there are currently no effective mechanisms to detect or filter such bias and misinformation. Thus, the writing of such articles could lead to misconceptions about Hinduism and religious discrimination, and should have been detected by bots in advance.

So, who should be responsible for harmful content?

In these cases, the responsibility would primarily fall on the bot creators. Wikipedia currently holds creators accountable for their bots' actions, and this accountability is likely to extend to AI-powered bots. While specific responsibilities are not clearly defined, it appears that penalties such as activity suspensions can be imposed.

The Bot Approval Group (BAG) should implement stricter review processes for advanced AI bots. Although AI self-awareness remains speculative, a clear and structured accountability framework is necessary for all bots that may publish unverified or erroneous content. General penalties imposed on bot creators by other platforms include account restrictions, bot deletions, rigorous reapproval processes, and public warnings or criticism within the community. These measures should be reinforced. Especially in cases where AI bots cause significant harm, immediate intervention is warranted. A tiered warning approach may be insufficient, given the high potential for harmful content generated by AI bots. Wikipedia should establish a policy allowing indefinite suspension of bots proven to cause harm, enabling community members to vote on recovery only if the issues have been demonstrably resolved.

Improvements and Potential Uses for Bot Functionality

One of the biggest challenges I faced while working on my Wikipedia assignment was the difficulty in finding reliable references. Despite Wikipedia's massive collection of information, it can still be challenging to locate credible sources suited to specific topics. Adding an "efficient reference search feature" would be incredibly helpful. For example, if bots could automatically recommend relevant sources or help users quickly locate trustworthy references connected to their topic, it would save considerable time and effort.

Additionally, I realized how challenging it is to write from a neutral perspective. I was working on an article about a Korean basketball team(Busan KCC Egis) and wanted to create content that would help showcase Korean culture positively. Despite my best efforts to remain neutral, I understood that others could still interpret my writing as biased. To help maintain neutrality on Wikipedia, I believe strengthening the "content verification feature" would be essential. For instance, when writing a basketball-related article, bots could alert users when terms like "dominant," "legendary," "unfair play," "lucky," or "well-known" are used repeatedly, as they may indicate biased or emotional language. If bots could detect potentially biased expressions or suspicious sources and flag them, it would help users create more neutral content.

Conclusion

AI-based bots are increasingly valued for their ability to process tasks much faster than human editors and for their versatile applications, which greatly contribute to Wikipedia’s development. However, as this technology advances, strong regulations and accountability are necessary, especially to prevent secondary harm. As shown in previous cases, while inaccurate or biased content is partly the writer's responsibility, Wikipedia's open-editing model can unintentionally amplify these biases. Therefore, AI bot developers should also be held accountable, and more stringent regulations and penalties should be implemented to create a healthier online environment.