I checked Wikipedia’s “Signs of AI writing” page. Here are the AI-writing signs it lists, in Englis…

I checked Wikipedia’s “Signs of AI writing” page. Here are the AI-writing signs it lists, in English, summarized cleanly.Signs of AI writing1) Undue emphasis on significance, legacy, and broader trendsCommon phrases/ideas:- “stands/serves as”- “is a testament/reminder”- “a crucial/pivotal/vital/significant/key role/moment”- “underscores/highlights its importance/significance”- “reflects broader...”- “symbolizing its ongoing/enduring...”Typical pattern:- The text keeps insisting that something is historically important, transformative, or part of a bigger movement, even when the details are thin.2) Generic praise or inflated importanceExamples of the kind of language to watch for:- “revolutionary”- “iconic”- “groundbreaking”- “trailblazing”- “game-changing”Typical pattern:- Specific facts get replaced by broad admiration and grand labels.3) Vague, broad, or overgeneralized statementsTypical pattern:- The writing sounds polished but stays abstract.- It avoids concrete, unusual, or verifiable details.4) Repetition and formulaic structureTypical pattern:- Same sentence patterns repeated again and again- Predictable transitions- Paragraphs that feel mechanically organized5) Overly balanced or overly neutral toneTypical pattern:- The text avoids making a clear point.- It sounds cautiously objective but also shallow or evasive.6) Citation-style quirks and formatting issuesExamples mentioned on the page:- excessive boldface- broken markup- odd citation formatting- unusual wiki-style formatting habits7) “Tell” patterns from statistical smoothingWikipedia describes this as LLMs tending to:- replace specific facts with generic ones- remove nuance- make text more “average”- turn unusual details into safe, broad descriptionsIn short:- a highly specific claim becomes a generic compliment- detailed observation turns into polished but empty prose8) Detection caveat: not proofWikipedia explicitly warns that:- these are only signs, not proof- human writing can look the same- AI detectors are unreliable- humans are also poor at identifying AI text reliablyShort versionIf you want the simplest checklist, Wikipedia’s main AI-writing signals are:- too much emphasis on importance- generic praise- vague abstraction- formulaic repetition- overly smooth, balanced writing- formatting/citation oddities- loss of specificity and nuanceIf you want, I can also turn this into:1. a checklist you can use to judge any text, or 2. a prompt that pushes writing toward natural human style.