Jump to content

Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:AI-generated media of living people (PIP)

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
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.

Files in Category:AI-generated media of living people (PIP)

[edit]

Unused and should never be used; it is never appropriate to use AI images of real people to represent them, because they will always be inaccurate.

The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 17:20, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete per nom. There's a particular problem with these images - in many cases, the model has generated images with heavily aged-looking faces, even for people who don't look like that in other published photos. For example, compare File:IA-generated image of Joaquín Prat (son).jpg to e.g. the photo in [1] - the AI-generated image has given Prat a ton of unflattering facial wrinkles and other age marks which aren't consistent with other photos of him. This feels really gross, potentially a COM:DIGNITY violation. Omphalographer (talk) 21:33, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete - I don't think these meet COM:SCOPE. I don't think that hosting hypothetical (and potentially misleading, and potentially copyright violating) images meets the educational purpose of Commons. Agree that there is a COM:DIGNITY issue. Consigned (talk) 15:15, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:10, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files in Category:AI-generated media of living people (PIP)

[edit]

COM:AIIP; most of these are probably also OOS

Dronebogus (talk) 14:32, 5 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep per COM:INUSE: File:Sirisha Bandla drawing.png is a neutral depiction with no dignity-related issues and is heavily used. It seems to be fairly accurate and unless it is legitimately replaced with an alternative it per policy should not be deleted and the respective Wikipedias be required to upload it locally to their Wikipedia instead if they put up with the extra effort.
File:53271755473 - Flickr - torstenbehrens.jpg is not showing an identifiable living person or does it; either way it's a neutral depiction that's widely in use. File:Ann graham lotz stable diffusion.webp must also be kept being used on 2 English Wikipedia pages and on several other WPs. It could be renominated if the uses have been replaced. Have not checked all the images here but probably most of these would be good to delete. Prototyperspective (talk) 14:45, 5 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t see anything about “neutrality” at COM:AIIP; it has to either be made by the subject or independently notable; the second cited image seems to be an attempt at depictingw:sydney sweeney. However AI is very very stupid so it just drew the same face it gives literally all young, white women. Dronebogus (talk) 13:33, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It's not just stupid, it's a tool that itself doesn't really do any thinking. And the policy says When dealing with photographs of people, we are required to consider the legal and moral rights of the subject. Images of people created by generative artificial intelligence (AI) raise similar legal and moral concerns. Commons has long held that files that pose such legal or moral concerns should be deleted even if they would otherwise be within the project's scope.. That doesn't apply to these files. Prototyperspective (talk) 13:40, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep File:User Joseywales1961.jpg is an image of myself, a mostly en:wiki user, not famous or anything like that. I am happy to release this picture that I created myself, there are no other persons depicted, there is no immoral content. Joseywales1961 (talk) 15:21, 5 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
That one can be kept. Dronebogus (talk) 06:16, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep File:Andrzej Golimont.jpg is an upscaled image clearly tagged as such and therefore allowed per COM:AIIP, subsection "Altered images". It is not out of scope either as it is used on Polish wikipedia. --Botev (talk) 17:15, 5 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The upscale isn’t that great. Just use the original. Dronebogus (talk) 06:15, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It is allowed. I don't see a valid reason for deletion. --Botev (talk) 08:14, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep - File:Bust of Perquirius (transparent).png and File:Bust of Perquirius.png are AI-generated images of myself and I use them on the Dutch Wikipedia as my user profile picture. These are images that represent my username. The reason for nomination for deletion are therefore irrelevant. Kind regards, Perquirius (talk) 17:19, 5 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Those can be kept. Dronebogus (talk) 06:15, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep File:Anne Graham Lotz (October 2008).jpg(oops wrong link) File:Ann graham lotz stable diffusion.webp, original image is now provided and it's now tagged with {{AI upscaled}} as required in COM:AIIP#Altered images, image is currently COM:INUSE in multiple wikis. Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 17:51, 5 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I guess that can be kept Dronebogus (talk) 06:18, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies I posted the wrong link accidentally, I have now fixed it. Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 13:50, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep The image File:Portrait de Benjamin Castaldi, par l'intelligence artificielle Grok.jpg illustrates fr:Grok (IA). Jérémy-Günther-Heinz Jähnick (talk) 19:16, 5 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Find something else to illustrate Grok, not an image of a real person. Dronebogus (talk) 06:14, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Commons:AI images of identifiable people doesn't seem clear to me for something: the first sentence suggest it deals with photographic-like depictions. Therefore it's not clear those guidelines apply to drawing-like images. What is a difference between a man-drawn caricature and an IA-generated drawing? (Of course my question is only in reference of the concerns explained by the guidelines). In both cases, there's no doubt about the fact it's not a real depiction, so what's the problem? --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 12:17, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    IMO the introduction is just meaningless fluff added because introductions are perceived as mandatory. The only “meat” of the guideline is in the two subsections. Most of these fall under subsection 1, which states AI depictions (without singling out any type as an exception) are only allowed if made by the subject (applicable in some of these cases) or independently notable (not applicable to any of these cases). The ones uploaded by their subjects for what I presume is userpage use do not violate the guideline and can be kept; the others do and should be deleted. Dronebogus (talk) 14:11, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    OK. Delete then. But I keep thinking we should treat differently photo-like and drawing-like images... or treat all drawings with the same rule (which would be dumb but consistent). --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 15:39, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: most per nomination, kept for her above discussion. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:AI-generated_media_of_living_people_(PIP)&oldid=1179526397"