Re: Do we even know what a good AI Optimization strategy would be for Wikipedia? Re: Re: Google Zero is coming [was Re: Wikipedia at 25: A Wake-Up Call (essay)]

Todd Allen via Wikimedia-l <[email protected]> Sat, 11 Jul 2026 08:53:05 -0600
Newsgroups gmane.org.wikimedia.foundation
Message-ID <CAGToUqwG+sAcbRtTDm9=WR0UZ7Y6yc8LNZz-_zYBnP546YtjnQ@mail.gmail.com>
--===============1660879387969112078==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000054f23506565705d4"

--00000000000054f23506565705d4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Are you talking about that godawful thing that I just clicked on in the
"wheat" article, that the back button doesn't work on?

I'm pulling that out. Sorry, but "back button works" is a basic thing of
Web functionality. I should not need to click a "return to article" button
to get back where I was.

Todd

On Sat, Jul 11, 2026 at 8:32=E2=80=AFAM James Heilman via Wikimedia-l <
[email protected]> wrote:

> English Wikipedia is a conservative organization / project as are many
> other large versions of Wikipedia. Many stakeholders need to be convinced=
 /
> brought on board to make even relatively minor changes. Innovating within
> smaller versions of Wikipedia or in other projects outside Wikipedia is
> much easier. And successes can occasionally be brought into the larger
> Wikipedias such as we did with Our World in Data interactive graphs...
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheat#Production_and_consumption
>
> We have now added 100s of these in various languages. And they are gettin=
g
> thousands of plays a day.
>
> James
>
> On Sat, Jul 11, 2026 at 3:28=E2=80=AFPM Charles Roberson via Wikimedia-l =
<
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Wikimedia-I used to be a premium listserve of high minded ideas about ho=
w
>> to move the Foundation into the future. The past few months it has drift=
ed
>> into a lot of whining about AI with no real effort to accomplish anythin=
g
>> or even plan to do so.
>>
>>  - Charles
>>
>> On Sat, Jul 11, 2026 at 1:44=E2=80=AFAM Todd Allen via Wikimedia-l <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> We sure do know what a good AI strategy looks like for Wikipedia. No AI
>>> on Wikipedia.
>>>
>>> We have not succeeded by being FaceGramTwitTube. We have succeeded by
>>> not being like them.
>>>
>>> So, same here. No "latest and greatest". No AI on Wikipedia. Ever, for
>>> any reason, period. Wikipedia is written by people for people.
>>>
>>> Todd
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 11:09=E2=80=AFPM James Heilman via Wikimedia-l =
<
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> What has motivated me to spend time writing Wikipedia over the years i=
s
>>>> writing for humans. The fact that the content is openly licensed and t=
he
>>>> work is supported by an NGO is also key.
>>>>
>>>> Personally i do not feel any motivation to write primarily for trillio=
n
>>>> dollar machines surrounded by venture capital folks hoping to make a
>>>> killing. If the machines want to adapt to human facing content sure.
>>>>
>>>> The approaches you mention is how Healthline succeeded, they basically
>>>> have dozens of articles covering the same topic just addressing it fro=
m a
>>>> slightly different question.
>>>>
>>>> J
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sent from Gmail Mobile
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 21:24 Alex Stinson via Wikimedia-l <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Forking this conversation, because I don't think we have a shared
>>>>> framing of what we are competing for in a "Google" Zero landscape dom=
inated
>>>>> by ChatBot/AI search style RAG citations (i.e.
>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retrieval-augmented_generation).
>>>>>
>>>>> For the last 9 months, I've been examining how civil society content
>>>>> should be showing up in AI search, and there is a missing perspective=
 in
>>>>> our "we will build it and they will come" approach to Wikipedia. I do=
n't
>>>>> think we can wait for the big tech companies or European regulatory b=
odies
>>>>> to adopt a different idea of how RAG should work.   Here is my take f=
rom
>>>>> what I have been engaging with in the AIO/AEO/SEO space:
>>>>>
>>>>> *Wikipedia doesn't have content that is SEO/AEO optimized*
>>>>>
>>>>> Part of the problem, even if we did have an MCP server is that the
>>>>> models (at least in my tracking), are pushing many citations away fro=
m
>>>>> "factual" websites, towards "authoritative" websites. This authoritat=
ive
>>>>> content includes:
>>>>>
>>>>>    - Expert original, analysis that makes strong claims based on
>>>>>    facts (i.e. blog posts by authoritative companies or recently publ=
ished
>>>>>    ScienceDirect articles)
>>>>>    - Content that has been updated recently, with the biggest "hot
>>>>>    takes" (i.e. I have monitored a couple of prompt pools where citat=
ions
>>>>>    shift to newer content after 2-3 months)
>>>>>    - Content that helps users make a decision between different
>>>>>    choices (i.e. review websites, etc)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This is following Google's longer-term push towards "human centered
>>>>> and useful" content (sometimes called  E-E-A-T an abbreviation of
>>>>> experience, expertise, authoritativeness, and trustworthiness, in SEO
>>>>> world).
>>>>> https://developers.google.com/search/docs/fundamentals/creating-helpf=
ul-content
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> To win in an AI optimization battle -- its less about Wikipedia doing
>>>>> well in the keyword search indexes that led to our content being visi=
ble
>>>>> (which is why we have a reputation as a "fact checking" website) and =
more
>>>>> about "winning" in the criteria for what makes a good RAG citation --=
- and
>>>>> our content format, is the exact opposite of the EAAT criteria:
>>>>>
>>>>>    - Wikipedia is not authoriative, but rather points to other
>>>>>    authorities
>>>>>    - We ground our content in anonymity instead of named experts or
>>>>>    instutional process/opinoin
>>>>>    - We rarely do original analysis instead summarizing the
>>>>>    experience and expertise of others,
>>>>>    - Alot of our content is out of date, and self-aware of its gaps
>>>>>    (i.e. maintenance tags), so also is likely to be undermining its o=
wn
>>>>>    trustworthiness
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *All the data points to us being used, but without an official roundu=
p
>>>>> we are all talking in the dark about different assumed reputation los=
ses*
>>>>>
>>>>> RAG unlike Google Search Indexing, seems to be using Wikipedia for a
>>>>> fraction of a fraction of responses, favoring these other kinds of
>>>>> sources:
>>>>>
>>>>>    - Only 5% of AI overviews have Wikipedia in them:
>>>>>    https://ahrefs.com/blog/most-cited-domains-ai-overviews/
>>>>>    - I have access to SERanking's corpus of prompt monitoring across
>>>>>    5 models (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google Models and they suggest that=
 in May
>>>>>    ~16% of prompts included Wikipdia, and in their most recent month =
(June),
>>>>>    ~13% of prompts. SERankings corpus is probably the # 4 or 5 in com=
mercial
>>>>>    AIO data -- so could have gaps.
>>>>>    - Studies from earlier in the year put Wikipedia at about ~13% of
>>>>>    CHATGPT citations (
>>>>>    https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/wikipedia-and-reddit-now-=
drive-over-25-of-chatgpt-citations-in-the-us-new-5w-research-finds--wsj-nyt=
-and-bloomberg-do-not-appear-in-the-top-20-302768339.html
>>>>>    but chatgpt on average includes >20 sources in a response, compare=
d to
>>>>>    googles 5-10 and doesn't expose it in the interface very well)
>>>>>    - Comparable "top" Websites, like Youtube, Reddit, and LinkedIn
>>>>>    tend to represent a greater % of content (in the SERanking data po=
ol nearly
>>>>>    30% of responses had a Youtube Video cited for instance)
>>>>>    - Domain specific citation pools have pretty significant
>>>>>    differences in "which" sources are being called, with Wikipedia do=
ing well
>>>>>    on some prompt pools: https://generativepulse.ai/report/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *RAG/AI search optimization focuses more on intent than keywords, and
>>>>> we aren't very effective at serving intent, and we don't know where o=
ur
>>>>> optimization options are*
>>>>> What we need is an understanding of "which actual user reader behavio=
r
>>>>> are we seeking to serve?". In the past we were extremely lazy, becaus=
e
>>>>> keyword search always delivered Wikipedia as "a first". Now we need o=
ur
>>>>> content to be more optimized for the kind of user curiosity driving t=
heir
>>>>> use of a chatbot/search tool:
>>>>>
>>>>>    - What percentage of prompts or AI searches are informational vs
>>>>>    opinion forming? Are we even a competitor for grounding opinion ba=
sed
>>>>>    questions or only the informational ones?
>>>>>    - How many of the interactions are two or three steps down a chain
>>>>>    of more "specific" interactions with the chatbot and thus no longe=
r need
>>>>>    "general knowledge" information from Wikipedia, but rather the kin=
ds of
>>>>>    stuff that we rely on our citations to provide ?
>>>>>    - How much are the AI companies optimizing for "sales" or
>>>>>    "addiction" rather than for leading users to reliable content? (I =
was
>>>>>    tracking a series of informational topics about food that (on Chat=
GPT and
>>>>>    Google), kept wanting me to continue the conversation by *inviting
>>>>>    me to go to local hamburger restraunts)*. Do we even have a
>>>>>    reasonable chance to be in those searches?
>>>>>    - How much is geolocation forcing more and more responses into
>>>>>    "local" sources rather than "global" websites? In one dataset I tr=
acked, in
>>>>>    Global South countries citations were overwhelmingly to Facebook a=
nd
>>>>>    Instagram despite more authoritative academic, news and Wikipedia-=
type
>>>>>    sites in the same searches from the UK.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *We may need to radically change the "readable signals" on our conten=
t
>>>>> pages, meaning changing the Manual of Style, Editing Practices, and A=
I
>>>>> enabled enrichment.*
>>>>>
>>>>> If we are trying to market Wikipedia's content into AI interfaces, we
>>>>> also can't do what most AI optimization/marketing agencies would sugg=
est:
>>>>> writing listicle/FAQ type content that closely matches the user-queri=
es
>>>>> that folks are giving the IA models (i.e. analysis like:
>>>>> https://neilpatel.com/marketing-stats/trust-signals-ai-engines-reward=
-most/
>>>>> ).
>>>>>
>>>>> We would then have to experiment with other content types, that _no
>>>>> longer look like the encyclopedia_. Or we would need to be reconfigur=
ing
>>>>> the Encyclopedic content to expose enrichments to paragraphs or secti=
ons
>>>>> within the encyclopedia  that pretty radically change editorial assup=
mtions
>>>>> and our Manual of Style (i.e. instead of simple 1-2 word section head=
ings,
>>>>> like "History" we may need intent-focused headings like "What is the
>>>>> history of [x topic]?).
>>>>>
>>>>> If we want to compete in the shifting AI search landscape -- we would
>>>>> need a lot more data from the Foundation on where we are succeeding o=
r not,
>>>>> and then consider *_radically different_ *ways of exposing our
>>>>> content in terms of treating RAG systems as a user that needs correct=
 paths
>>>>> to Wikipedia pages.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, this doesn't necessarily need to change the *human reader
>>>>> experience *, but would need to be about configuring the content
>>>>> (beyond an MCP server or Enterpise APIs) *for an AI audience/consumer
>>>>> experience -- *which I haven't seen addressed in any WMF publications
>>>>> or community conversations. Without a firm theory of "What kind of co=
nsumer
>>>>> is an AI search agent/RAG index?" and "How does our content need to s=
erve
>>>>> that AI audience?" the editing community won't be able to adjust its
>>>>> editing practices or weigh in on feature recommendations that make ou=
r
>>>>> content "AI useful".
>>>>>
>>>>> As I have written elsewhere, I think there is a inherent audience for
>>>>> editing/using the Wikis organically:
>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2026-06-21=
/Op-ed
>>>>> -- but its a different question than competing "with other informatio=
n
>>>>> sources" for AI as an audience.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 2:30=E2=80=AFPM Steven Walling via Wikimedia-=
l <
>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 9:52=E2=80=AFAM Erik Moeller via Wikimedia-l=
 <
>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 5:59=E2=80=AFPM James Heilman via Wikimedia=
-l
>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > Yah a search engine that actually gives real references that
>>>>>>> supports the statements in question would be amazing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Almost like .. a Knowledge Engine. ;-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is the WMF building an MCP server to connect Wikipedia and Wikidata
>>>>>> directly to Gemini, Claude, and ChatGPT? This is a more lightweight,
>>>>>> backdoor way to leverage the audience of those platforms but present
>>>>>> structured outputs to AI chats for users based on Wikimedia knowledg=
e. If
>>>>>> we did so, we could present citations within the returned responses =
to
>>>>>> users, and those platforms make it transparent to the user when they=
 are
>>>>>> calling a particular tool.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Steven Walling
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sadly, the only realistic path I see there would be through
>>>>>>> acquisition, and even if that was financially feasible, you'd begin
>>>>>>> by
>>>>>>> inheriting a lot of corporate practices that aren't really consiste=
nt
>>>>>>> with Wikimedia values.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But perhaps there is a middle ground where Wikimedia seeks to defin=
e
>>>>>>> more clearly the terms of engagement that it wants with search
>>>>>>> engines
>>>>>>> (clear attribution, clear and correct references, calls-to-edit,
>>>>>>> etc.), and then finds and recognizes search partners who implement
>>>>>>> those. To Luis' point, that need not be done by WMF.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Warmly,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Erik
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected],
>>>>>>> guidelines at:
>>>>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>>>>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>>>>>>> Public archives at
>>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]=
edia.org/message/HNDPDZBBDMILF7WGMUBVJVIAZYQ7OXOS/
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to
>>>>>>> wikimedia-l-leave-RusutVdil2icGmH+5r0DM0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected],
>>>>>> guidelines at:
>>>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>>>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>>>>>> Public archives at
>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]=
dia.org/message/IUDAKJRN5EQT5CCWEEYQXKDSVXCDBXR6/
>>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave-RusutVdil2icGmH+5r0DM8Xa4x6EXUF0@public.gmane.org=
g
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected],
>>>>> guidelines at:
>>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>>>>> Public archives at
>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]=
ia.org/message/YODBKTCLA2XJC24Y23I2SUN3PUYA4QXE/
>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave-RusutVdil2icGmH+5r0DM0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected],
>>>> guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guideline=
s
>>>> and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>>>> Public archives at
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]=
a.org/message/5MPMZGZ2MXLLHER3NTNUS6KHIMAXIIBD/
>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave-RusutVdil2icGmH+5r0DM0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], guidelines
>>> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>>> Public archives at
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]=
.org/message/QAGHRXXTGSXKVFOALBRQHP5G27NUIFDD/
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave-RusutVdil2icGmH+5r0DM0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], guidelines
>> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> Public archives at
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]=
org/message/6RKSJMWMVUHUUVV7WGKPOCOHCN4NBQK4/
>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave-RusutVdil2icGmH+5r0DM0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org
>
>
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]=
rg/message/FRGCURSOK3KPMT3UWZFOR6Z4TMZFE7KF/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave-RusutVdil2icGmH+5r0DM0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org

--00000000000054f23506565705d4
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>Are you talking about that godawful thing that I just=
 clicked on in the &quot;wheat&quot; article, that the back button doesn&#3=
9;t work on?</div><div><br></div><div>I&#39;m pulling that out. Sorry, but =
&quot;back button works&quot; is a basic thing of Web functionality. I shou=
ld not need to click a &quot;return to article&quot; button to get back whe=
re I was.</div><div><br></div><div>Todd</div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_=
quote gmail_quote_container"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Sat, =
Jul 11, 2026 at 8:32=E2=80=AFAM James Heilman via Wikimedia-l &lt;<a href=
=3D"mailto:[email protected]">[email protected]=
</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:=
0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">=
<div dir=3D"ltr">English Wikipedia is a conservative organization / project=
 as are many other large versions of Wikipedia. Many stakeholders need to b=
e convinced / brought on board to make even relatively minor changes. Innov=
ating within smaller versions of Wikipedia or in other projects outside Wik=
ipedia is much easier. And successes can occasionally=C2=A0be brought into =
the larger Wikipedias such as we did with Our World in Data interactive gra=
phs...<div><br></div><div><a href=3D"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheat#Pr=
oduction_and_consumption" target=3D"_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W=
heat#Production_and_consumption</a></div><div><br></div><div>We have now ad=
ded 100s of these in various languages. And they are getting thousands of p=
lays a day.</div><div><br></div><div>James</div></div><br><div class=3D"gma=
il_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Sat, Jul 11, 2026 at 3:2=
8=E2=80=AFPM Charles Roberson via Wikimedia-l &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:wikimed=
[email protected]" target=3D"_blank">[email protected]=
</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:=
0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">=
<div dir=3D"ltr">Wikimedia-I used to be a premium listserve=C2=A0of high mi=
nded ideas about how to move the Foundation into the future. The past few m=
onths it has drifted into a lot of whining about AI with no real effort to =
accomplish anything or even plan to do so.<div><br></div><div>=C2=A0- Charl=
es</div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmai=
l_attr">On Sat, Jul 11, 2026 at 1:44=E2=80=AFAM Todd Allen via Wikimedia-l =
&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" target=3D"_blank">wi=
[email protected]</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"=
gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(20=
4,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>We sure do know what a g=
ood AI strategy looks like for Wikipedia. No AI on Wikipedia.</div><div><br=
></div><div>We have not succeeded by being FaceGramTwitTube. We have succee=
ded by not being like them.</div><div><br></div><div>So, same here. No &quo=
t;latest and greatest&quot;. No AI on Wikipedia. Ever, for any reason, peri=
od. Wikipedia is written by people for people.</div><div><br></div><div>Tod=
d</div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail=
_attr">On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 11:09=E2=80=AFPM James Heilman via Wikimedia=
-l &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" target=3D"_blank"=
>[email protected]</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=
=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rg=
b(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"auto">What has motivated me to=
 spend time writing Wikipedia over the years is writing for humans. The fac=
t that the content is openly licensed and the work is supported by an NGO i=
s also key.</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">Personally i=
 do not feel any motivation to write primarily for trillion dollar machines=
 surrounded by venture capital folks hoping to make a killing. If the machi=
nes want to adapt to human facing content sure.</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br>=
</div><div dir=3D"auto">The approaches you mention is how Healthline succee=
ded, they basically have dozens of articles covering the same topic just ad=
dressing it from a slightly different question.=C2=A0</div><div dir=3D"auto=
"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">J</div><div><br clear=3D"all"><br clear=3D"al=
l"><div><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_signature">Sent from Gmail Mobile</=
div></div></div><div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=
=3D"gmail_attr">On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 21:24 Alex Stinson via Wikimedia-l =
&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" target=3D"_blank">wi=
[email protected]</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"=
gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(20=
4,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr">Forking this=
 conversation, because I don&#39;t think we have a shared framing of what w=
e are competing for in a &quot;Google&quot; Zero landscape dominated by Cha=
tBot/AI search style RAG citations (i.e. <a href=3D"https://en.wikipedia.or=
g/wiki/Retrieval-augmented_generation" target=3D"_blank">https://en.wikiped=
ia.org/wiki/Retrieval-augmented_generation</a>).<br><br>For the last 9 mont=
hs, I&#39;ve been examining how civil society content should be showing up =
in AI search, and there is a missing perspective in our &quot;we will build=
 it and they will come&quot; approach to Wikipedia. I don&#39;t think we ca=
n wait for the big tech companies or European regulatory bodies to adopt a =
different idea of how RAG should work.=C2=A0 =C2=A0Here is my take from wha=
t I have been engaging with in the AIO/AEO/SEO space:<br><br><b>Wikipedia d=
oesn&#39;t have content that is SEO/AEO optimized</b><br><br>Part of the pr=
oblem, even if we did have an MCP server is that the models=C2=A0(at least =
in my tracking), are pushing many citations away from &quot;factual&quot; w=
ebsites, towards &quot;authoritative&quot; websites. This authoritative con=
tent includes:=C2=A0<br><ul><li>Expert original, analysis that makes strong=
 claims based on facts (i.e. blog posts by authoritative companies or recen=
tly published ScienceDirect articles)</li><li>Content that has been updated=
 recently, with the biggest &quot;hot takes&quot; (i.e. I have monitored a =
couple of prompt pools where citations shift to newer content after 2-3 mon=
ths)</li><li>Content that helps users make a decision between different cho=
ices (i.e. review websites, etc)</li></ul><br>This is following Google&#39;=
s longer-term push towards &quot;human centered and useful&quot; content (s=
ometimes called=C2=A0=C2=A0E-E-A-T an abbreviation of=C2=A0 experience, exp=
ertise, authoritativeness, and trustworthiness, in SEO world).=C2=A0<a href=
=3D"https://developers.google.com/search/docs/fundamentals/creating-helpful=
-content" target=3D"_blank">https://developers.google.com/search/docs/funda=
mentals/creating-helpful-content</a>=C2=A0<br><br>To win in an AI optimizat=
ion battle -- its less about Wikipedia doing well in the keyword search ind=
exes that led to our content being visible (which is why we have a reputati=
on as a &quot;fact checking&quot; website) and more about &quot;winning&quo=
t; in the criteria for what makes a good RAG citation --- and our content f=
ormat, is the exact opposite of the EAAT criteria:=C2=A0<br><ul><li>Wikiped=
ia is not authoriative, but rather points to other authorities</li><li>We g=
round our content in anonymity instead of named experts or instutional proc=
ess/opinoin</li><li>We rarely do original analysis instead summarizing the =
experience and expertise of others,=C2=A0</li><li>Alot of our content is ou=
t of date, and self-aware of its gaps (i.e. maintenance tags), so also is l=
ikely to be undermining its own trustworthiness</li></ul><br><b>All the dat=
a points to us being used, but without an official roundup we are all=C2=A0=
talking in the dark about different assumed reputation losses</b><br><br>RA=
G unlike Google Search Indexing, seems to be using Wikipedia for a fraction=
 of a fraction of responses, favoring these other kinds of sources:=C2=A0=
=C2=A0<br><ul><li>Only 5% of AI overviews have Wikipedia in them:=C2=A0<a h=
ref=3D"https://ahrefs.com/blog/most-cited-domains-ai-overviews/" target=3D"=
_blank">https://ahrefs.com/blog/most-cited-domains-ai-overviews/</a></li><l=
i>I have access to SERanking&#39;s corpus of prompt monitoring across 5 mod=
els (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google Models and they suggest that in May ~16% o=
f prompts included Wikipdia, and in their most recent month (June), ~13% of=
 prompts. SERankings corpus is probably the # 4 or 5 in commercial AIO data=
 -- so could have gaps.</li><li>Studies from earlier in the year put Wikipe=
dia at about ~13% of CHATGPT citations ( <a href=3D"https://www.prnewswire.=
com/news-releases/wikipedia-and-reddit-now-drive-over-25-of-chatgpt-citatio=
ns-in-the-us-new-5w-research-finds--wsj-nyt-and-bloomberg-do-not-appear-in-=
the-top-20-302768339.html" target=3D"_blank">https://www.prnewswire.com/new=
s-releases/wikipedia-and-reddit-now-drive-over-25-of-chatgpt-citations-in-t=
he-us-new-5w-research-finds--wsj-nyt-and-bloomberg-do-not-appear-in-the-top=
-20-302768339.html</a> but chatgpt on average includes &gt;20 sources in a =
response, compared to googles 5-10 and doesn&#39;t expose it in the interfa=
ce very well)=C2=A0</li><li>Comparable &quot;top&quot; Websites, like Youtu=
be, Reddit, and LinkedIn tend to represent a greater % of content (in the S=
ERanking data pool nearly 30% of responses had a Youtube Video cited for in=
stance)</li><li>Domain specific citation pools have pretty significant diff=
erences in &quot;which&quot; sources are being called, with Wikipedia doing=
 well on some prompt pools:=C2=A0<a href=3D"https://generativepulse.ai/repo=
rt/" target=3D"_blank">https://generativepulse.ai/report/</a></li></ul><br>=
<br><b>RAG/AI search optimization focuses more on intent than keywords, and=
 we aren&#39;t very effective at serving intent, and we don&#39;t know wher=
e our optimization options are<br></b><br>What we need is an understanding =
of &quot;which actual user reader behavior are we seeking to serve?&quot;. =
In the past we were extremely lazy, because keyword search always delivered=
 Wikipedia as &quot;a first&quot;. Now we need our content to be more optim=
ized for the kind of user curiosity driving their use of a chatbot/search t=
ool:=C2=A0<br><ul><li>What percentage of prompts or AI searches are informa=
tional vs opinion forming? Are we even a competitor for grounding opinion b=
ased questions or only the informational ones?</li><li>How many of the inte=
ractions are two or three steps down a chain of more &quot;specific&quot; i=
nteractions with the chatbot and thus no longer need &quot;general knowledg=
e&quot; information from Wikipedia, but rather the kinds of stuff that we r=
ely on our citations to provide ?=C2=A0</li><li>How much are the AI compani=
es optimizing for &quot;sales&quot; or &quot;addiction&quot; rather than fo=
r leading users to reliable content? (I was tracking a series of informatio=
nal topics about food that (on ChatGPT and Google), kept wanting me to cont=
inue the conversation by <i>inviting me to go to local hamburger restraunts=
)</i>. Do we even have a reasonable chance to be in those searches?</li><li=
>How much is geolocation forcing more and more responses into &quot;local&q=
uot; sources rather than &quot;global&quot; websites? In one dataset I trac=
ked, in Global South countries citations were overwhelmingly to Facebook an=
d Instagram despite more authoritative academic, news and Wikipedia-type si=
tes in the same searches from the UK.</li></ul><br><b>We may need to radica=
lly change the &quot;readable signals&quot; on our content pages, meaning c=
hanging the Manual of Style, Editing Practices, and AI enabled enrichment.<=
/b><br><br>If we are trying to market Wikipedia&#39;s content into AI inter=
faces, we also can&#39;t do what most AI optimization/marketing agencies wo=
uld suggest: writing listicle/FAQ type content that closely matches the use=
r-queries that folks are giving the IA models (i.e. analysis like: <a href=
=3D"https://neilpatel.com/marketing-stats/trust-signals-ai-engines-reward-m=
ost/" target=3D"_blank">https://neilpatel.com/marketing-stats/trust-signals=
-ai-engines-reward-most/</a> ). <br><br>We would then have to experiment wi=
th other content types, that _no longer look like the encyclopedia_. Or we =
would need to be reconfiguring the Encyclopedic content to expose enrichmen=
ts to paragraphs or sections within the encyclopedia=C2=A0 that pretty radi=
cally change editorial assupmtions and our Manual of Style (i.e. instead of=
 simple 1-2 word section headings, like &quot;History&quot; we may need int=
ent-focused headings like &quot;What is the history of [x topic]?).=C2=A0<b=
r><br>If we want to compete in the shifting AI search landscape -- we would=
 need a lot more data from the Foundation on where we are succeeding or not=
, and then consider <i>_radically different_ </i>ways of exposing our conte=
nt in terms of treating RAG systems as a user that needs correct paths to W=
ikipedia pages.<br>=C2=A0<br>However, this doesn&#39;t necessarily need to =
change the <i>human=C2=A0reader experience </i>, but would need to be about=
 configuring the content (beyond an MCP server or Enterpise APIs)=C2=A0<i>f=
or an AI audience/consumer experience -- </i>which I haven&#39;t seen addre=
ssed in any WMF publications or community conversations. Without a firm the=
ory of &quot;What kind of consumer is an AI search agent/RAG index?&quot; a=
nd &quot;How does our content need to serve that AI audience?&quot; the edi=
ting community won&#39;t be able to adjust its editing practices or weigh i=
n on feature recommendations that make our content &quot;AI useful&quot;.<b=
r><br>As I have written elsewhere, I think there is a inherent audience for=
 editing/using the Wikis organically:=C2=A0<a href=3D"https://en.wikipedia.=
org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2026-06-21/Op-ed" target=3D"_blank">h=
ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2026-06-21/Op-ed<=
/a> -- but its a different question than competing &quot;with other informa=
tion sources&quot; for AI as an audience.<br><br><br><br><br></div><br><div=
 class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Fri, Jul 10=
, 2026 at 2:30=E2=80=AFPM Steven Walling via Wikimedia-l &lt;<a href=3D"mai=
lto:[email protected]" target=3D"_blank">[email protected]=
kimedia.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=
=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding=
-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><br></div><br><div class=3D"gm=
ail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 9:=
52=E2=80=AFAM Erik Moeller via Wikimedia-l &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:wikimedia-=
[email protected]" target=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a=
>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px=
 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">On =
Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 5:59=E2=80=AFPM James Heilman via Wikimedia-l<br>
&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" target=3D"_blank">wi=
[email protected]</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
<br>
&gt; Yah a search engine that actually gives real references that supports =
the statements in question would be amazing.<br>
<br>
Almost like .. a Knowledge Engine. ;-)<br></blockquote><div><br></div>Is th=
e WMF building an MCP server to connect Wikipedia and Wikidata directly to =
Gemini, Claude, and ChatGPT? This is a more lightweight, backdoor way to le=
verage the audience of those platforms but present structured outputs to AI=
 chats for users based on Wikimedia knowledge.=C2=A0<span style=3D"backgrou=
nd-color:transparent">If we did so, we could present citations within the r=
eturned responses to users, and those platforms make it transparent to the =
user when they are calling a particular tool.=C2=A0</span><span style=3D"ba=
ckground-color:transparent">=C2=A0</span></div><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><=
span style=3D"background-color:transparent"><br></span></div><div class=3D"=
gmail_quote"><span style=3D"background-color:transparent">Steven Walling=C2=
=A0</span></div><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_q=
uote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,2=
04);padding-left:1ex">Sadly, the only realistic path I see there would be t=
hrough<br>
acquisition, and even if that was financially feasible, you&#39;d begin by<=
br>
inheriting a lot of corporate practices that aren&#39;t really consistent<b=
r>
with Wikimedia values.<br>
<br>
But perhaps there is a middle ground where Wikimedia seeks to define<br>
more clearly the terms of engagement that it wants with search engines<br>
(clear attribution, clear and correct references, calls-to-edit,<br>
etc.), and then finds and recognizes search partners who implement<br>
those. To Luis&#39; point, that need not be done by WMF.<br>
<br>
Warmly,<br>
<br>
Erik<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]=
rg" target=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a>, guidelines at: <=
a href=3D"https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines" rel=3D"=
noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists=
/Guidelines</a> and <a href=3D"https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l"=
 rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikim=
edia-l</a><br>
Public archives at <a href=3D"https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/w=
[email protected]/message/HNDPDZBBDMILF7WGMUBVJVIAZYQ7OXOS/" r=
el=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/=
list/[email protected]/message/HNDPDZBBDMILF7WGMUBVJVIAZYQ7OX=
OS/</a><br>
To unsubscribe send an email to <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]=
ikimedia.org" target=3D"_blank">wikimedia-l-leave-RusutVdil2icGmH+5r0DM0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org</a></=
blockquote></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]=
rg" target=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a>, guidelines at: <=
a href=3D"https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines" rel=3D"=
noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists=
/Guidelines</a> and <a href=3D"https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l"=
 rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikim=
edia-l</a><br>
Public archives at <a href=3D"https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/w=
[email protected]/message/IUDAKJRN5EQT5CCWEEYQXKDSVXCDBXR6/" r=
el=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/=
list/[email protected]/message/IUDAKJRN5EQT5CCWEEYQXKDSVXCDBX=
R6/</a><br>
To unsubscribe send an email to <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]=
ikimedia.org" target=3D"_blank">wikimedia-l-leave-RusutVdil2icGmH+5r0DM0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org</a></=
blockquote></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]=
rg" target=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a>, guidelines at: <=
a href=3D"https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines" rel=3D"=
noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists=
/Guidelines</a> and <a href=3D"https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l"=
 rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikim=
edia-l</a><br>
Public archives at <a href=3D"https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/w=
[email protected]/message/YODBKTCLA2XJC24Y23I2SUN3PUYA4QXE/" r=
el=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/=
list/[email protected]/message/YODBKTCLA2XJC24Y23I2SUN3PUYA4Q=
XE/</a><br>
To unsubscribe send an email to <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]=
ikimedia.org" target=3D"_blank">wikimedia-l-leave-RusutVdil2icGmH+5r0DM0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org</a></=
blockquote></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]=
rg" target=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a>, guidelines at: <=
a href=3D"https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines" rel=3D"=
noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists=
/Guidelines</a> and <a href=3D"https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l"=
 rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikim=
edia-l</a><br>
Public archives at <a href=3D"https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/w=
[email protected]/message/5MPMZGZ2MXLLHER3NTNUS6KHIMAXIIBD/" r=
el=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/=
list/[email protected]/message/5MPMZGZ2MXLLHER3NTNUS6KHIMAXII=
BD/</a><br>
To unsubscribe send an email to <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]=
ikimedia.org" target=3D"_blank">wikimedia-l-leave-RusutVdil2icGmH+5r0DM0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org</a></=
blockquote></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]=
rg" target=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a>, guidelines at: <=
a href=3D"https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines" rel=3D"=
noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists=
/Guidelines</a> and <a href=3D"https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l"=
 rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikim=
edia-l</a><br>
Public archives at <a href=3D"https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/w=
[email protected]/message/QAGHRXXTGSXKVFOALBRQHP5G27NUIFDD/" r=
el=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/=
list/[email protected]/message/QAGHRXXTGSXKVFOALBRQHP5G27NUIF=
DD/</a><br>
To unsubscribe send an email to <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]=
ikimedia.org" target=3D"_blank">wikimedia-l-leave-RusutVdil2icGmH+5r0DM0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org</a></=
blockquote></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]=
rg" target=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a>, guidelines at: <=
a href=3D"https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines" rel=3D"=
noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists=
/Guidelines</a> and <a href=3D"https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l"=
 rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikim=
edia-l</a><br>
Public archives at <a href=3D"https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/w=
[email protected]/message/6RKSJMWMVUHUUVV7WGKPOCOHCN4NBQK4/" r=
el=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/=
list/[email protected]/message/6RKSJMWMVUHUUVV7WGKPOCOHCN4NBQ=
K4/</a><br>
To unsubscribe send an email to <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]=
ikimedia.org" target=3D"_blank">wikimedia-l-leave-RusutVdil2icGmH+5r0DM0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org</a></=
blockquote></div><div><br clear=3D"all"></div><div><br></div><span class=3D=
"gmail_signature_prefix">-- </span><br><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_sign=
ature"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"=
ltr">James Heilman<br>MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian</div></div></div></div></div>=
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]=
rg" target=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a>, guidelines at: <=
a href=3D"https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines" rel=3D"=
noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists=
/Guidelines</a> and <a href=3D"https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l"=
 rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikim=
edia-l</a><br>
Public archives at <a href=3D"https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/w=
[email protected]/message/FRGCURSOK3KPMT3UWZFOR6Z4TMZFE7KF/" r=
el=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/=
list/[email protected]/message/FRGCURSOK3KPMT3UWZFOR6Z4TMZFE7=
KF/</a><br>
To unsubscribe send an email to <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]=
ikimedia.org" target=3D"_blank">wikimedia-l-leave-RusutVdil2icGmH+5r0DM0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org</a></=
blockquote></div>

--00000000000054f23506565705d4--

--===============1660879387969112078==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/message/XILTKQ2VLVFZKTY5BEYP55426JVAU5VY/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave-RusutVdil2icGmH+5r0DM0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org
--===============1660879387969112078==--