Talk:NovelAI

Nomination for AfD

I have requested that this article be nominated to articles for deletion due to lack of notability (severe lack of citations and non-reliable sources throughout) and possible advertising. If a logged-in user could do this for me, it would be much appreciated. Thanks. 63.139.68.87 (talk) 20:08, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

It hasn't even been 24 hours since the AfD notice was posted, and it was already deleted by the primary contributor of the article (who is suspected to have a significant amount of WP:OR, as detailed in Talk:Stable Diffusion). As a non-logged-in user, I have already posted a notice to the AfD talk page for a logged-in user to create the nomination. I'll be sure to make note of this attempt to brush it under the rug. 63.139.68.87 (talk) 15:46, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

@63.139.68.87: You do realise that as a non-logged in user, you can simply add the {{proposed deletion}} tag to the top of the article, right? An uninvolved third-party will then review the PROD and then take the article to AfD where necessary. See WP:PRODNOM for more thorough details. I didn't see your talk page comment, because it's not on my watchlist. --benlisquare_T•C•E 15:51, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

According to WP:PRODNOM, it says:

>PROD must only be used if no opposition to the deletion is expected.

I was under the impression that this option is only to be used for vandalism or patent nonsense, but it appears I was incorrect. I will add the tag to the article. 63.139.68.87 (talk) 15:59, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

You have my word that I will not remove the PROD template. Once the article goes to AfD, I'll probably !vote for a keep, purely based on third-party coverage in Japanese-language news sources such as Yahoo! Japan. --benlisquare_T•C•E 16:07, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Again, within 24 hours of posting the proposed deletion tag, it was deleted by an editor Special:Contributions/2A02:9B0:802D:79D6:70F8:B154:B749:D7EB who has no history of edits on Wikipedia. It's quite clear that there are some shenanigans afoot, very likely a WP:COI. 63.139.68.87 (talk) 09:26, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

It's interesting to note that the editor in question ostensibly knew what they were doing (and wasn't just a random act of vandalism, but still vandalism regardless), as they left the {Advert} tag intact while making sure to delete the proposed deletion tag beneath it. 63.139.68.87 (talk) 09:28, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Honestly, I'd recommend just creating an account, even if just a mere throwaway account, to start the AfD nomination. You don't have to remember the password, and you'll never even have to login to the account ever again. All I can say is, you're gimping yourself by insisting on editing as an IP for all eternity. --benlisquare_T•C•E 09:57, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Done. Throwaway21239 (talk) 11:39, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Smiling high school girl with square glasses s-4012097278.webp

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:22, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

COI

A direct link to this AfD discussion was posted in NovelAI's public Discord server twice: once in the #no-mic and once in the #novelai-discussion channels. The link has been sitting there as the latest post in the #no-mic channel since October 12 (direct link to the posts in question post 2). This is a pretty obvious WP:COI and explains all the WP:PROMO and WP:SPA editing present here and in the article.

Screenshot 1

Screenshot 2

Screenshot 3: one of the developers of NovelAI commenting that the AfD is likely to be rejected, two days after the link was posted in the server

Throwaway21239 (talk) 10:00, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

미소 짓는 소녀

동그란 안경을 쓰기 58.229.177.4 (talk) 07:33, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Erotic furry art of a dragon generated by NovelAI.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:37, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Removal of erotic art

@BiasedImbecile: Can you elaborate on why you removed the example of erotic art generated by NovelAI? Given that the article discusses its use for generating sexual content, and some other AI image generating things disallow sexual content (e.g.DALL-E), an example seems appropriate. The image serves a dual purpose of also being an example of the furry diffusion model - there's already an image generated using one of the anime models on the article. Waxworker (talk) 01:04, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Same reason as the user did before me. Wikipedia is not a furry porn dump. BiasedImbecile (talk) 01:16, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

@BiasedImbecile: Wikipedia is WP:NOTCENSORED, and I think having an example of erotic art generated by the AI, as well as an example of the furry diffusion model, serves an encyclopedic purpose. The 'Reception' section discusses its use in generating sexual content, and having an example seems pertinent and appropriate. Waxworker (talk) 01:23, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Do you need an example for every word or concept mentioned in an article? This is redundant. And as the other user has said, it is not sourced. It could be from anywhere for that matter. BiasedImbecile (talk) 02:09, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

@BiasedImbecile: The source is it was generated by the AI, and is thus under public domain, a source isn't necessary to prove that. The image in the infobox is similarly 'unsourced'. Waxworker (talk) 02:34, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

We'll remove that one as well then. BiasedImbecile (talk) 02:35, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

@BiasedImbecile: I think it's important to have some example of the AI's image generation, and I don't think there's any reason to remove the picture in infobox, sourcing doesn't seem to be an issue here - both the image in infobox and the removed furry art are in the public domain. I'm unsure what the issue regarding sourcing is here. Waxworker (talk) 02:53, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Why wouldn't you use an example from the page in question, or official correspondence and citations, instead of this weird borderline erotica dragon picture? HexenBischof (talk) 16:41, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Removing maintenance templates

I am removing a set of maintenance templates that were tagged on this article in October 2022; rationale for each template are as follows:

• This article contains content that is written like an advertisement. The tagger has had since October 2022 to write on the article talk page explaining what part of the article prose reads like an advertisement, as required when performing such tags. Furthermore, half the "Reception" section is shitting on NovelAI, so if this page is apparently an advert, it's a pretty bad one.
• The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for companies and organizations. This tag is the most justifiable out of the bunch, indeed there could ideally be more English-language coverage on the topic. However, there is a wide plethora of Chinese and Japanese media coverage; WP:NONENG stipulates that non-English citations are just as valid as English ones, and to weigh English-language coverage over non-English coverage would be to further proliferate WP:SYSTEMIC, a long-running problem on Wikipedia. The articles at ja:NovelAI, zh:NovelAI and ko:노벨AI all exist and were seemingly created organically (i.e. were largely written by long-term zhwiki and kowiki editors rather than anons), so to claim that the topic somehow does not meet enwiki notability requirements, but that it also does meet requirements for jawiki/zhwiki/kowiki, is strikingly dubious. Thus, I will WP:BOLDly remove this tag based on this rationale; if anyone has any concerns relating to the excessive use of foreign-language citations, feel free to start a new thread at WP:RSN.
• This article needs additional citations for verification. This article is 5,243 characters (507 words) long, and has 25 inline citations. That gives us a better citation-to-content ratio than the Barack Obama article. This is a 100% nonsensical WP:IDONTLIKEIT tag.
• This article possibly contains original research. The tagger has had since October 2022 to point out what part of the article prose constitutes original research; they have not.
• A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. According to article statistics from xtools, I am the only major contributor to the article. I have no connection with the developer of the website, I just write a fuckton of articles about nerdy weebshit, and you can find out more about the type of articles I write by looking at my userpage.

Of course, if anyone disputes any of these, I'm all ears. However, editors have had months to use this talk page to sort things out, and yet they haven't; if anyone disagrees with my rationale above, you're going to have to point things out properly, on this talk page. --benlisquare_T•C•E 03:54, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

See also listing 15.ai

Why is 15.ai (a text-to-speech voice ai generator) listed under "see also" when the references to NovelAI featuring a text to speech model have been edited out of the main NovelAI article? HexenBischof (talk) 16:36, 11 March 2023 (UTC)