Commons:Deletion requests/File:Algorithmically-generated portrait art of a young woman with long blonde hair.png

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

File:Algorithmically-generated portrait art of a young woman with long blonde hair.png

This picture is the user's own work and used for harassment but I deleted this file with F10 criteria because I do not think that this file is in scope. By the reason of User:Dronebogus's request in my talk page, I undeleted it and nominated for deletion. Kadı Message 05:01, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete more generic booby art from benlisquare. Doesn’t fill any kind of useful niche. Dronebogus (talk) 05:22, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (on behalf of uploader Benlisquare, who is blocked – see their reply to the DR notification on their talk page) Brianjd (talk) 14:03, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Dronebogus and Kadı: Weak keep In use at the uploader’s user page on zhwiki, where (as far I know) the uploader is active and in good standing. But the AI prompt includes artists’ names. See Commons:Deletion requests/Algorithmically generated AI artwork in specific styles by User:Benlisquare for scope and copyright concerns. Brianjd (talk) 14:20, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

we must dont remove all AI artwroks, they all unique. ----modern_primat ඞඞඞ ^TALK 04:20, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Modern primat But we don’t keep all non-AI artworks, even if they are different to all the existing ones. Why should AI be any different? Brianjd (talk) 07:22, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. In my opinion this is bad algorithm. The breasts are unrealistically big. Taivo (talk) 10:57, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Taivo The file is not intended to depict realistic art (at least I don’t think it is), but rather to demonstrate the use of Stable Diffusion. So I don’t think your reason is valid. Brianjd (talk) 11:03, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But in my opinion this is valid argument, because category:Stable Diffusion has at moment 164 images and most of them depicts people with more realistic proportions. We do not need to prove, that unrealistic proportions are possible. On the contrary, we need to prove, that realistic proportions are possible. Taivo (talk) 11:10, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Taivo If we want to promote Stable Diffusion, then we need only prove that realistic proportions are possible. But if we want to host a full range of educational material, we should include images representing the full variety of Stable Diffusion output; that would include both realistic and unrealistic proportions.

If the only way to get unrealistic proportions is to use prompts that clearly lead to that result, then perhaps we don’t need to include them. But that is a big ‘if’. Let’s give some much-deserved credit to the uploader here: they detailed how they generated these images. I don’t think the prompts used here clearly lead to unrealistic proportions. Brianjd (talk) 11:19, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. See above discussion. --Yann (talk) 14:38, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]