Talk:Virt-manager

Use of LLMs

Talk status

This discussion is still ongoing.

Several recent revisions to the page (Special:Diff/1360145, Special:Diff/1360150, Special:Diff/1360151) by User:Egberts make reference to using ChatGPT or otherwise an LLM to edit the page. I'm also not sure about some of the style (sounds quite marketing-speak), or what "gentoo.org-speak" means as referenced in the change descriptions. I think Special:Diff/1360151 has the wrong "perspective" too (it says "your").

I'm not sure we want this on our wiki for e.g. copyright reasons, and also not sure it complies with Gentoo's AI/ML policy. --Sam (talk) 16:32, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

As mentioned earlier in User talk:Egberts#Copyright_violations by User:Grknight and User:Maffblaster, I ran (and have been running) plagiarism check and it has been cleared. However in the light of your concerns (most of which I agree) AND the aforementioned Gentoo's AI/ML policy (which I did NOT encounter before all this started), I will do an ALL-STOP on this lone experiemental "Gentoo-org-style" transformation and any other AI/ML approaches (which I had no plans to expand so). At any rate, I will revert ALL these "transformation" changes at day 7 (or sooner if instructed) from now to give other council members time to review this. Wish I had read this particular policy. My apology if stressors have mounted amongst you, as this is not my attempt to do so, but to improve my writing style. --Egberts (talk) 17:19, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! I will bring it up with others. It happens, please don't worry, and thank you for working to improve our wiki. It is appreciated. --Sam (talk) 17:25, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Fascinating (but only an sidebar observation of a transformation error), if I had entered in instead the query of "Using the style of Gentoo.Org Wiki website but without using possessive pronoun, rewrite "...."" resulted in what appears to be "proper Gentoo" but now logically incorrect: notably my taking the "If /dev/kvm is present, you are ready to proceed. If not, ensure that KVM is properly configured and that the system is compliant with QEMU requirements." and changing into a simpler but more readable however INCORRECTLY as "If /dev/kvm is present, return to QEMU to confirm compliance." (sigh) The very self-evidential hazard of using transformation. I'm sold on its blatant failure. However, I am mighty tempted to use a revised ""If /dev/kvm is not present, return to QEMU to confirm compliance." Its utility is poor; barely useful for wordiness reduction, and terrible for logic preservation. The mere fact that someone had to point this out to me and my SNAFU, just evidentially and solidly poisoned my short-foray into this failed experimental effort. --Egberts (talk) 17:57, 2 April 2025 (UTC)