Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nicocado Coinslot.png
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
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.
Derivative work of this image (Warning: Image of an obese man's anus) of Nikocado Avocado's anus. --benlisquareTalk•Contribs 07:50, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- It’s not a derivative work if just its color palette resembles the original photo, or is it? Even though it needed the original photo to exist, it’s in fact completely different from it, and only someone with well-trained eyes would be able to tell it. @DarwIn: can you check this one, as you’re certainly a more experienced user than me? RodRabelo7 (talk) 07:58, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- This image could not have been generated without the original image, as it uses the img2img feature within Stable Diffusion, with the denoiser value set to somewhere between 0.4 and 0.7 for it to maintain the same frame composition and general shape, but with the contents replaced with pumpkins instead of Nikocado Avocado. I'll leave it to the rest of the Commons community to decide whether or not the threshold of originality has been met; I personally don't have a firm opinion on this at the moment. --benlisquareTalk•Contribs 08:02, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Alright, thanks for opening the talk then. RodRabelo7 (talk) 08:04, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- No hard feelings, by the way, I didn't nominate this deletion request specifically out of spite as a result of the image content, I hope you'll understand. I myself am curious as to how the Wikimedia Commons community in general will decide on this, as it would set a precedent as to whether Commons will consider img2img AI-generated COM:DW images as meeting the threshold of originality or not; the implications of this discussion will determine what future content can be uploaded to Commons. --benlisquareTalk•Contribs 08:11, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Alright, thanks for opening the talk then. RodRabelo7 (talk) 08:04, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- This image could not have been generated without the original image, as it uses the img2img feature within Stable Diffusion, with the denoiser value set to somewhere between 0.4 and 0.7 for it to maintain the same frame composition and general shape, but with the contents replaced with pumpkins instead of Nikocado Avocado. I'll leave it to the rest of the Commons community to decide whether or not the threshold of originality has been met; I personally don't have a firm opinion on this at the moment. --benlisquareTalk•Contribs 08:02, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Keep may be eventually inspired (seeded) on the other image, but IMO certainly does not count as a Derivative Work. Darwin Ahoy! 19:20, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Delete not a copyright violation but out of scope. We don’t need an AI generated picture of pumpkins that look suspiciously like someone’s anus. Dronebogus (talk) 04:36, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
- It only looks like that if you’ve already seen the anus picture. RodRabelo7 (talk) 20:01, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- No it doesn’t, it was my first thought. Dronebogus (talk) 00:54, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- It only looks like that if you’ve already seen the anus picture. RodRabelo7 (talk) 20:01, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per Dronebogus... Madeline (part of me) 13:36, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per Dronebogus. Not a copyright violation, but out of scope. Nosferattus (talk) 11:08, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
Delete No idea what the purpose of having this image here is--Trade (talk) 17:17, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, out of scope. --IronGargoyle (talk) 21:45, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
