Will AI be successfully editing Wikipedia unassisted, adding substantive original cited prose, before 2026?
Will AI be successfully editing Wikipedia unassisted, adding substantive original cited prose, before 2026?
94
1.2kṀ9595
2026
10%
chance

English Wikipedia, mainspace.

Get
Ṁ1,000
to start trading!


Sort by:
2d

I suspect the original OpenAI Deep Research page was written by Deep Research.

3mo

Why are you guys so optimistic about this? Just about one year to go and still nowhere close, right?

3mo

My experience with AI topics is that "techbros" really overrate the competence of AI consistently, especially when the problem statement has nothing to do with AI.

In this case, this is very much a Wikipedia question. So even if o4 and o5/o6 make massive enough leaps that they mimic a Wikipedia article well enough, I consider an approximately <0.1% chance it will be accepted by the English Wikipedia community at large

9mo

How's it going?

1y

Does it count if it would do that against the rules? I imagine a private auto-GPT-6 agent deciding to run a smear campaign/promote X product.

1y

@xxx Yes, but if it's effectively detected and reverted, then it wouldn't be successful.

1y

@xxx I will add that, in the spirit of the question, if it evades reversion merely because it just so happens that nobody sees it, because it's obscure, or something like that, rather than because of the quality of the writing, I would not consider that to be a success.

1y

@BenjaminIkuta what if just barely happens on a technicality, like grammar correction? Because Wikipedia has a lot of mundane tasks where setting up the ai is more work than doing it.

1y

@MakrIngrajam Grammar correction is not substantive original prose.

1y

@BenjaminIkuta Wikipedia editing is a polticial process dominated by nerd fascism. Not even humans can edit Wikipedia without heavy review by moderators so unless Wikipedia symbolically allows an ai to make a token edit it will never be allowed.

1y

An AI that scrapes news to add automatic updates to ongoin events, for example results of sporting events

predictedNO 1y

@EduardoFilippi Tables of sports scores aren't exactly "substantive original cited prose."

predictedNO 1y

Given Wikipedia nutritious history of beaucracy and difficulty when it comes to updating articles, I have EXTREME doubts

1y

@Qvex yeah, me too. This market is overvalued imo.

1y

When you say 'unassisted', is it OK for a human to prompt the AI by asking/triggering a command to make it edit a particular page, or does the AI have to be fully autonomous? In the latter case, regardless of capabilities, wikipedia might well ban such activity (or in the former, but it's somewhat less likely).

1y

@AngolaMaldives If the human can review the edit and choose to stop it before it's published, then it doesn't count.

What is this?

What is Manifold?
Manifold is the world's largest social prediction market.
Get accurate real-time odds on politics, tech, sports, and more.
Or create your own play-money betting market on any question you care about.
Are our predictions accurate?
Yes! Manifold is very well calibrated, with forecasts on average within 4 percentage points of the true probability. Our probabilities are created by users buying and selling shares of a market.
In the 2022 US midterm elections, we outperformed all other prediction market platforms and were in line with FiveThirtyEight’s performance. Many people who don't like betting still use Manifold to get reliable news.
ṀWhy use play money?
Mana (Ṁ) is the play-money currency used to bet on Manifold. It cannot be converted to cash. All users start with Ṁ1,000 for free.
Play money means it's much easier for anyone anywhere in the world to get started and try out forecasting without any risk. It also means there's more freedom to create and bet on any type of question.
© Manifold Markets, Inc.Terms + Mana-only TermsPrivacyRules