Change Details

In T368274, we are exploring the viability of using an LLM to detect the presence of [peacock behavior](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Words_to_watch#Puffery). This task involves the work of learning what percentage of edits are reverted because of peacock behavior so that, ultimately, we can decide how to surface feedback of this sort. === Decision(s) to be made 1. How will we treat MOS:Peacock-related feedback and ultimately, present it to people? -- //E.g. Do we consider feedback of this sort essential to communicate to people before they publish an edit because NOT doing so would likely result in the edit being reverted? Do we consider feedback of this sort something that could be presented as a suggestion later on? Both?// NOTE: the decision above will draw on the clarity we reach through T367897 === Research question(s) 1. What percentage of edits to the Wikipedia main namespace are reverted because of the presence of peacock behavior? --- //Note this ticket was an idea @MNeisler raised during an [offline conversation on 25 July 2024](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Flp1okj5tgdj_bJPSZidXZky7QLucFfKC-jF6IDFgxU/edit#heading=h.rnjmr5jaaifp).//

In T368274, we are exploring the viability of using an LLM to detect the presence of [peacock behavior](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Words_to_watch#Puffery). This task involves the work of learning what percentage of edits are reverted because of peacock behavior so that, ultimately, we can decide how to surface feedback of this sort. === Decision(s) to be made 1. How will we treat MOS:Peacock-related feedback and ultimately, present it to people? -- //E.g. Do we consider feedback of this sort essential to communicate to people before they publish an edit because NOT doing so would likely result in the edit being reverted? Do we consider feedback of this sort something that could be presented as a suggestion later on? Both?// NOTE: the decision above will draw on the clarity we reach through T367897 === Research question(s) 1. What percentage of edits that **newcomers** [i] and **Junior Contributors** to the Wikipedia main namespace are reverted because of the presence of peacock behavior? --- i. Newcomers as defined by people who have created accounts and published 0 edits and unregistered accounts --- //Note this ticket was an idea @MNeisler raised during an [offline conversation on 25 July 2024](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Flp1okj5tgdj_bJPSZidXZky7QLucFfKC-jF6IDFgxU/edit#heading=h.rnjmr5jaaifp).//

In T368274, we are exploring the viability of using an LLM to detect the presence of [peacock behavior](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Words_to_watch#Puffery). This task involves the work of learning what percentage of edits are reverted because of peacock behavior so that, ultimately, we can decide how to surface feedback of this sort. === Decision(s) to be made 1. How will we treat MOS:Peacock-related feedback and ultimately, present it to people? -- //E.g. Do we consider feedback of this sort essential to communicate to people before they publish an edit because NOT doing so would likely result in the edit being reverted? Do we consider feedback of this sort something that could be presented as a suggestion later on? Both?// NOTE: the decision above will draw on the clarity we reach through T367897 === Research question(s) 1. What percentage of edits that **newcomers** [i] and **Junior Contributors** to the Wikipedia main namespace are reverted because of the presence of peacock behavior? --- i. Newcomers as defined by people who have created accounts and published 0 edits and unregistered accounts --- //Note this ticket was an idea @MNeisler raised during an [offline conversation on 25 July 2024](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Flp1okj5tgdj_bJPSZidXZky7QLucFfKC-jF6IDFgxU/edit#heading=h.rnjmr5jaaifp).//