Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:AI-generated steampunk

Files in Category:AI-generated steampunk

These are all AI-generated images of "steampunk." Although they have various inaccuracies, it's not even clear if they accurately represent the genre, and we don't usually host user generated amateur artwork anyway. Commons isn't a personal file host. So these images should be deleted as OOS.

• File:'A Little Bit Steampunk' - Flickr - Dennis S. Hurd.png
• File:AI created tintype photos of a scientist with his steampunk robot.png
• File:Algorithmically-generated AI-generated artwork of a steampunk computer.png
• File:Aquarium-Welt (Steampunk).jpg
• File:Chamäleonautik (Cyberpunk).jpg
• File:Chamäleonautik (Mimikry).jpg
• File:Der Mensch eine Maschine (Steampunk).jpg
• File:Jugend forscht (Steampunk).jpg
• File:Kosmisches Rätselraten (Fermi-Paradoxon).jpg
• File:Stable Diffusion - Cyborg and its model.jpg
• File:Steampunk (Himmelszauber).jpg
• File:Steampunk (Sternenlok).jpg
• File:Steampunk (Traumlok).jpg
• File:Steampunk girl ai-art.jpg
• File:Weltformel (Steampunk).jpg
• File:Weltmechanik (Steampunk).jpg
• File:Wissensfabrik (Steampunk).jpg
• File:X-Y plot of algorithmically-generated AI art by different science-fiction subgenres.png

Adamant1 (talk) 09:36, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

 Keep all. Yet another extremely indiscriminate nomination of AI artwork. In particular File:X-Y plot of algorithmically-generated AI art by different science-fiction subgenres.png is COM:INUSE and should be removed from this nomination immediately. The others vary wildly in quality but most of them are not so poor as to be unusable. I’m also tired of this “user generated amateur artwork” thing— if we only allowed professional artists we’d probably lose a huge chunk of Commons. Dronebogus (talk) 15:19, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

I agree that any INUSE files should be kept, but I think we should keep the "no user generated amateur artwork" unless they are significant contributors and is used as one of the small number of allowed personal files. We are a curated media repository, not DeviartArt or social media. Abzeronow (talk) 19:03, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

And we have policies about that. But Adamant1 doesn’t seem to understand what they actually mean. If a file is in scope, it doesn’t matter if the artist is an amateur. Dronebogus (talk) 19:12, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, AI should not be treated any differently from a work created by a human, and any notable AI works (such as those that get independent press coverage) are also in scope. Abzeronow (talk) 19:15, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

 Info I agree regarding the general concerns about Adamant1's misinterpretation of those policies, but Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#Adamant1_and_deletion_discussions is probably a better venue right now for discussing these. Best to focus on specific mistaken claims here that were made in context of this particular DR. Regards, HaeB (talk) 00:57, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

 Info File:'A Little Bit Steampunk' - Flickr - Dennis S. Hurd.png was kept by me in April 2023 processing this deletion request, but this was a nomination based on COM:DW concerns and I'm open to re-evaluation based on the scope argument brought forward here. That being said, as of today the following file is in use, which should be an automatic  Keep per COM:INUSE, because a file that is in use is always in scope: File:X-Y plot of algorithmically-generated AI art by different science-fiction subgenres.png (used in zh:Stable Diffusion as an example of SD's output, so a perfectly legitimate use). Some other files are in use only in user space, these might qualify under "small numbers of images (e.g. of yourself) for use on a personal user page of Commons or another project" per INUSE as well. Gestumblindi (talk) 19:52, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

a file that is in use is always in scope I don't really feel like getting into an argument about it, but that's patently false. Plenty of files that are "in use" get deleted pretty routinely on a daily basis. Including ones like these. --Adamant1 (talk) 01:04, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

No, it's not. Of course plenty of files that are "in use" get deleted pretty routinely on a daily basis, but the reason for that are in most cases copyright concerns. COM:INUSE is only about the scope issue. If a file is in use in a Wikimedia project, it is in scope and can not be deleted as "out of scope". INUSE is pretty clear and unambiguous there - it explicitly says "if it is in use, that is enough", can't get much clearer, right?. However, if turns out that there is a copyright issue or other non-scope-related issues (e.g. privacy), deletion for these other reasons is still possible, of course - even if the file is in use. If a file that is in use and where there are no other concerns is deleted, that is simply a mistake that should be corrected - mistakes happen. Gestumblindi (talk) 09:54, 2 July 2024 (UTC)