Talk:Chidiebere Ibe


 * What I think should be changed (include citations):Following Ibe's social media success, users on X (formerly Twitter) and LinkedIn revealed that the illustration of the black fetus was copied and color-graded from a pre-existing illustration.[13][14] Shortly thereafter, it was discovered that Ibe's portfolio of work contained excessive accounts of plagiarism and copyright infringement. Ibe stole artwork from published anatomical atlases, medical journals, and the portfolios of actively-practicing medical illustrators while claiming them to be original.[15][16][17] Ibe sold the artwork as an NFT on OpenSea on January 13, 2022 for 0.500 ETH (~$826.80 USD)[18] [19]


 * Why it should be changed: This should be totally removed. A hater edited this to discredit my work. They are all lies.

Chidiebereibe (talk) 19:35, 19 March 2024 (UTC)


 * , thanks for using the edit request template to make this request. Most of the content in question violated the Biographies of Living Persons policy, so I've removed it. I have modified but not removed the mention of an NFT being listed on OpenSea, which appears to be supported by a reliable source. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 20:39, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the support. Could you add to the last edit that the art work was taken down from OpenSea by me, as I refused to sell it anymore.
 * Lastly, can the edit section be locked by an admin or me to avoid further happening. Chidiebereibe (talk) 20:47, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Out of curiosity, I've searched for some of Chidiebereibe's work myself, and found that they are indeed identical to existing works, with sight modifications. Seems like the media hadn't caught onto this, but he was indeed criticized by other artists. It baffles me that such a controversial persona has a Wikipedia article after them... 2A02:AB88:258E:A700:4525:4089:E38D:2CD7 (talk) 15:07, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

The "black fetus image" is not original work; in addition, the tone of the article is not in line with other BLP articles
According to Mr. Chidiebere (https://www.chidiebereibe.com/the-black-fetus-illustration/) the illustration is an adaptation (see the last line in the page: "Adapted from the original illustration © QA International, 2010. https://qa-international.com").

Here is a comparison of the two: https://imgur.com/a/plagiarism-its-best-9olJ5Ia

If as per Mr. Chidiebere himself, the image is an adaptation, why is it presented as if he is the one who created it?

In addition, the tone of the article feels as if I'm reading an advertisement, or a cover page for Mr. Chidiebere's resume, and not a biography. 2A02:AB88:258E:A700:E810:638:FEF1:F5ED (talk) 21:17, 30 May 2024 (UTC)