Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/This Person Does Not Exist


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Black Kite (talk) 00:55, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

This Person Does Not Exist

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable website. Whereas are notable, we have an article for them. This is merely a new website displaying GAN creations which has elicited a minimum of comments from a couple of blogs. Tagishsimon (talk) 10:58, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 12:59, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 12:59, 17 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Author Comment. Boing-Boing and Slashdot are not blogs. Nor is arXiv. kencf0618 (talk) 17:01, 17 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment. Since the website has been specifically designed to familiarize people with the applications of generative adversarial networks, maybe it deserves a mention in the Application section of that article rather than its own page? PraiseVivec (talk) 14:52, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Possibly. kencf0618 (talk) 17:01, 17 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep - Article needs to be improved, a quick search showed far more sources than are currently listed in the blog. This website has been the focus of a lot of tech publications in the past couple weeks. I think we need more consensus. Skirts89 19:58, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I have already folded this article into the main GAN article and added a few more citations there. This technology has already been used in art research, and its own development is fascinating. kencf0618 (talk) 20:52, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: This looks to be heading towards a Keep, but a little more consensus either way would be helpful.
 * Keep. Plenty of significant coverage.     w umbolo   ^^^  09:18, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ad Orientem (talk) 00:18, 25 February 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Swing back on the balance, further discussion (or discussion of current !votes) still needed
 * Delete I don’t see enough significant coverage from reliable sources. Trillfendi (talk) 02:56, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete A mention in the GAN article seems fine but there are already multiple places which do exactly the same thing including an Android app. PhobosIkaros   ✉  18:23, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. There's lots of sources, including CNN. Gaelan 💬✏️ 19:45, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear (talk) 15:14, 4 March 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.