Commons:Deletion requests/File:GPT-4o Studio Ghibli portrait of Donald Trump.png
COM:AIIP Dronebogus (talk) 06:25, 24 April 2026 (UTC)
- Haven't we already had this discussion? Wait, that was Vance: Commons:Deletion requests/File:GPT-4o Studio Ghibli portrait of JD Vance.png
This file is used on w:te:స్టూడియో గిబ్లి for some reason, so
Keep per COM:INUSE.
Trying to use AIP to delete an AI image of a person who shared an AI image of themselves as Jesus seems really warped to me and shows how poorly written that guideline is. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 10:26, 24 April 2026 (UTC)- It’s non-notable artwork that deceptively resembles something uploaded by the man himself. COM:INUSE being slavishly followed regarding AI is what’s messed up to me. Dronebogus (talk) 00:37, 25 April 2026 (UTC)
- Dronebogus, we need policy that targets deceptive content, and I've been working on it on-and-off for a while. You can indeed argue this is deceptive, because it's not a work by Studio Ghibli. But it's not deceptive regarding Trump. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 01:06, 25 April 2026 (UTC)
- No, it’s deceptive because it looks identical to the same style of memes posted by Trump and pals, but is just random personal slop prompted and posted by a Commons user Dronebogus (talk) 01:08, 25 April 2026 (UTC)
- Dronebogus, why can't we both be right? It seems to be used as an example of either the style of or a work from Studio Ghibli. Not sure which as I don't speak the language. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 08:15, 25 April 2026 (UTC)
- AIIP may possibly override INUSE, I’m not certain. But if it does, then neither if our opinions matter because it’s a clear violation. I don’t see it as a “moral protection clause” that can be judged on a case-by-case basis; I see it as the line in the sand where blatant misinformation ceases to be tolerated. Personally on that alone I think AIIP>INUSE and shows something fundamentally wrong with the latter: it says “you are required to tolerate other projects defeating the entire purpose of Wikimedia”. INUSE to me seems meant to defend in-use images from primarily quality or scope based DRs, which are mostly subjective. Objective DRs, like blatant misinformation, should not be protected. Dronebogus (talk) 09:11, 25 April 2026 (UTC)
- Dronebogus, why can't we both be right? It seems to be used as an example of either the style of or a work from Studio Ghibli. Not sure which as I don't speak the language. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 08:15, 25 April 2026 (UTC)
- No, it’s deceptive because it looks identical to the same style of memes posted by Trump and pals, but is just random personal slop prompted and posted by a Commons user Dronebogus (talk) 01:08, 25 April 2026 (UTC)
- Dronebogus, we need policy that targets deceptive content, and I've been working on it on-and-off for a while. You can indeed argue this is deceptive, because it's not a work by Studio Ghibli. But it's not deceptive regarding Trump. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 01:06, 25 April 2026 (UTC)
- It’s non-notable artwork that deceptively resembles something uploaded by the man himself. COM:INUSE being slavishly followed regarding AI is what’s messed up to me. Dronebogus (talk) 00:37, 25 April 2026 (UTC)
