LilFluffFeb 20, 2025
ploum

University professor, circa 2010 : You can’t trust Wikipedia. You cannot use it for your essay.

University professor, circa 2025 : Here are powerpoint sildes on how to use ChatGPT to do your essay.

Personal conclusion: the only problem with Wikipedia was that it was not corporately owned and that it had no marketing budget.

Feb 18, 2025 at 6:29pmWeb
Show threadMaya SauraFeb 18, 2025
@ploum il faut qu'on sorte du mythe des profs d'université surdoués qui seraient forcément immunisés au marketing et aux idées reçues
Show threadNightlynx☕❄🌨☑Feb 18, 2025
@ploum Our university has a diametral policy. LLM-generated content gets 0 points and lecturers ask a lot of "why did you do this?" questions.
Show threadSimon WaldmanFeb 18, 2025

@ploum @cstross University professor in the UK here. I'm no fan of LLMs (and very few of us who have to mark their output will be!), but university management is pushing it big-time.

So... yeah, you may be right.

Show threadaoanlaFeb 18, 2025
@swaldman @ploum @cstross it's a mixed bag in the University I am at. Certainly, I am still allowed to ban people from using them in my course... but yes, there's some management push for "incorporating GenAI" here too. I have had some surprised reactions to my pointing people at published research that is contrary to what mgmt desires to be true.
Show threadRocíoFeb 18, 2025
@ploum I genuinely still don't get this, how such a vast majority of educators encouraging the use of such a damaging tool but were never okay with wikipedia for absolutely no reason!! At least I was never given an actual reason why wikipedia wasn't an acceptable source, idk about you guys
Show threadAgas Ramirez 🎙️Feb 19, 2025
@whoisroo @ploum I've never used Wikipedia as a primary source. its value has always been in the references.
Show threadRocíoFeb 19, 2025
@agasramirez @ploum well that makes a lot of sense, I think that's a very sensible thing to tell students honestly. That's the way we should learn it, not asking an ai bot, specially with all the information we have about the damage they cause
Show threadEm Feb 18, 2025
@ploum @vmstan I once had a university professor who asked her students to write a Wikipedia article as our homework. What a wonderful way to teach students to participate in universal knowledge 💚
Show threadtapeloopFeb 18, 2025
@ploum Also, 15 years passed during which the project has matured massively
Show threadgretaredFeb 18, 2025
@ploum when my students use Wikipedia, my rule is, “did you read to the end?” A few have platformed problematic ppl/stuff because they don’t get tot he “controversy” section.
Show threadRaphaël LemaireFeb 18, 2025
@ploum I remember good comments about wikipedia around 2005 at my university.
Show threadNicolas PettiauxFeb 18, 2025
@ploum c'est aussi ce qu'écrivait @MonniauxD sur son blog #mediapart
Show threadTesmaiaFeb 18, 2025
I consider quoting ChatGPT as equivalent as quoting google. You can't even properly cite it because the result can be different if other people look at it.
Show threadDr Andrew A. Adams #FBPE 🔶Feb 18, 2025
@ploum @Em0nM4stodon
Me in 2010 (and now): do not cite Wikipedia. Use it as a first source, then follow its citations and cite the original papers.
Me in 2025: If you use a generative AI, you are denying yourself the education you are here for. It will hallucinate and make you look like an idiot. Don't use it until you know what it will get wrong and can correct it.
Show threaddanmcquillanFeb 18, 2025
@ploum
Show threadbicebird Feb 18, 2025
@ploum @ploum this doesn't seem fair tbh, in school we were taught you shouldn't quote wikipedia directly and instead check the source it cites and see if there are ones that contradict it
That just seems like good advice on how to do research not a conspiracy by corporate interests, with you on using AI being a ridiculous solution though
Show threadPsylentFeb 18, 2025

@ploum
All of the below were wikipedia "facts"

Robbie Williams eats domestic pets in pubs for money.
David Beckham was a Chinese goalkeeper in the 18th century.
Sergey Brin's dating Jimmy Wales, and dead.
Tony Blair worships Hitler.
The Duchess of Cornwall's Christian name is Cow-miller.
John Seigenthaler helped assassinate John and Robert Kennedy.
TV gardener Alan Titchmarsh published a new version of the Kama Sutra.

So nothing to do with corporate entities. It's to do with being wrong.

Show threadAzutsune the stargazerFeb 18, 2025
@ploum my conclusion: professors only hate something if it is made by a person and prefer it made by either companies or ai
Show threaditikaneidaFeb 18, 2025

@ploum I think this is partially a result of educational inflation hitting hard in the past years.

When I was in high school I would reference Wikipedia in essays and have teachers say "I'll accept it, but just know that in university they won't because that's more serious". Now I hear it's the same to bachelor's students about both Wikipedia and ChatGPT, saying it's okay but they can't expect to get away with it in master's studies.

Show threadCrimeDadFeb 18, 2025
@[email protected] is this real?
Show threadJacquelineFeb 19, 2025

@ploum

I have taught myself a lot by reading wikipedia for fun.

Show threadJacquelineFeb 19, 2025

@ploum

their math articles are decently accurate.

Show threadAlexandre OlivaFeb 19, 2025
2008: don't even access corporate email from computers not controlled by the corporation

2018: corporate email is now outsourced to the clown
Show threadBrett Riley--Writer GuyFeb 19, 2025
@ploum I'm a professor, and we hate AI and are absolutely 100% against students' using it to do their work for them. We are being encouraged to teach them that as it evolves AI might have productive uses (helping with topic invention if you're struggling to find your initial idea, for instance), but asking it to "use it to do your essay" isn't one of them. We were encouraged to do the same thing with Wikipedia and other general reference sources too.
Show threadFlairforlibertyFeb 19, 2025
@ploum How very true! After comparing some entities in the same subject from Wikipedia & Brittanica and/or Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, I never go to wiki, it’s just beyond the point. GPP chat appears to be a sure way to ‘dissolve’ the knowledge efficiently subverting the very idea as distinctly hunan and personal, integral to one’s mind. It obliterates the value of knowledge as such. Well, it’s my personal perspective.
Show threadsarah tonin Feb 19, 2025
@ploum teachers today are saying you can't trust wikipedia because anyone can edit it, however, a piece of software literally putting random words together can actually help you
Show threadBoreal Sea  Feb 19, 2025
@ploum I haven’t met a single professor suggesting chat GPT for essays, in fact every single one I know (including myself) considers it plagiarism and a waste of time. I go out of my way to show my students how unreliable it is and how it will just waste their time. I’m not saying no professor is doing this, I just don’t think it’s widespread.
Show threadBoreal Sea  Feb 19, 2025
@ploum And as for Wikipedia, I don’t allow my students to cite it, but I do recognize it’s a great way to get an introductory take on a topic, so I don’t discourage them from reading it, but I do tell them to check out the sources themselves.
Show threadmjdxpFeb 21, 2025
@ploum "well anyone can edit wikipedia so you can't trust anything on there!"

the giant wikipedia staff and bot team dedicated to making sure vandalism doesn't occur: 

the barely moderated chatbot that prefers making stuff up whenever it doesn't know something: 
Show threadSophie 🏳️‍⚧️ 🌜Feb 21, 2025

@ploum I remember our teachers at school telling us not to use Wikipedia for research because 'anyone can edit it' but had no problem with us using any other random website we found on Google.

And we wonder why so much of the population aren't good at processing information.