2 ms·
esjeon is simply wrong; this study is not touting the accuracy of wikipedia's knowledge. It's touting their bot's ability to accurately convey wikipedia's know
by mcpackieh 3y ago
esjeon is simply wrong; this study is not touting the accuracy of wikipedia's knowledge. It's touting their bot's ability to accurately convey wikipedia's knowledge. It's very much about the qualities of their bot, not the qualities of wikipedia.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2305.14292.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/2305.14292.pdf
- lacksconfidence 3y agoIt's both. My interpretation is that the study is as you say, but it's posted on the wikipedia signpost for the reasons esjeon says.
- TZubiri 3y agoWikimedia controls what goes in the signpost, they are very different from the actual community, and they are known for misrepresenting the intent of a project. When the Ukraine Russia war came out, they made a banner about a ukranian translation project that had existed for years and made it look like some project to support Ukraine, effectively breaking neutrality on the war subject (which was unrelated to the translation project.)