Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/15.ai: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
SineBot (talk | contribs)
m Signing comment by AveTrueToCaesar - ""
No edit summary
Line 19: Line 19:


*'''Keep''' The guy who runs the site goes on hiatus like every other month for improvements, this isn't anything new. Page was still up the last time it went under maintenance. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:AveTrueToCaesar|AveTrueToCaesar]] ([[User talk:AveTrueToCaesar#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/AveTrueToCaesar|contribs]]) 20:11, 18 January 2023 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
*'''Keep''' The guy who runs the site goes on hiatus like every other month for improvements, this isn't anything new. Page was still up the last time it went under maintenance. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:AveTrueToCaesar|AveTrueToCaesar]] ([[User talk:AveTrueToCaesar#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/AveTrueToCaesar|contribs]]) 20:11, 18 January 2023 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

*'''Keep''', articles like [[NovelAI]] and [[character.ai]], which have far fewer reliable sources, are allowed to stay but somehow THIS gets nominated for deletion? Seriously? [[Special:Contributions/63.139.68.87|63.139.68.87]] ([[User talk:63.139.68.87|talk]]) 22:59, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:59, 18 January 2023

15.ai (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is an anonymous creator's unfinished project at a dead website, where they collected all of the My Little Pony videos and ran them through open source voice cloning software. Their grandiose view of their own project doesn't mean that it's notable. This article is 49% original research, and 49% content that needs to be moved to the Audio_deepfake article, since it's so generalized. I'm very impressed at boundless energy this particular group of editors has towards curating this article, considering the topic. It ultimately doesn't belong on Wikipedia though. Habanero-tan (talk) 00:48, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong Keep. As one of the primary editors of the article in the past (now mostly inactive due to real-life things), the article from several months ago was most certainly up to GA standards. However, this article has constantly been plagued by anonymous editors and new users making unsubstantiated edits ever since the article was first created. I have since reverted the article back to what it was back in November. As for notability, the subjects absolutely meets the requisite standards, and as pointed above, was extremely crucial in the development of TTS voice generation. I apologize for being inactive as an editor for so long, but I did not expect the level of vandalism to reach this high, causing concern for the legitimacy of this article. —HackerKnownAs (talk) 19:36, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]