Category talk:OpenAI-written articles

I don't think it is accurate to put articles that use OpenAI as a translation tool into this category. Those articles were written by the person who wrote the source article for the translation. Thoughts? @Habst @JackFromWisconsin - Wil540 art (talk) 18:11, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

:@Wil540 art I hear you, but I think they should be included because an OpenAI LLM wrote the words in the article. Another common case is using AI to summarize a source text and putting that in the article like for 1901 Boston Marathon{{snd}}I think this is a slippery slope because you could also then say that the reference author is the original author in that case rather than the AI. (By the way, I think this category should be renamed to :Category:AI-written articles and its scope should broaden to any LLM model, it only happens to say OpenAI now as a historical quirk I believe.)

:Maybe a subcat could be created for translated articles? --Habst (talk) 18:20, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

:I think the contribution of the LLM translation model warrants inclusion in this category. Language translation isn't 1:1 so the LLM has had to make decisions about wording, which is (a reason) why we have this category. I'd think a more broad category name could do better, like what Habst proposed above. JackFromWisconsin (talk | contribs) 18:55, 1 February 2025 (UTC)