Revision as of 16:25, 19 December 2024 editGregariousMadness (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users623 edits →Contested deletion← Previous edit |
Revision as of 17:11, 19 December 2024 edit undoGregariousMadness (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users623 edits →Reliable sources: new sectionTag: New topicNext edit → |
Line 14: |
Line 14: |
|
:I'm admittedly not too involved in this discussion, so I'll refrain from saying much, but I have no issues with keeping this article around since it seems to meet bare notability and can be verified as being a new version of the article via the creator's edit history. I'd appreciate an admin verifying the edit histories are different so as to dispel all reasonable doubt. However, I do have concerns about the fact there's an ongoing deletion review for the subject. I'm admittedly unsure as to how it's handled when the article is recreated while the deletion review is ongoing, but I do have concerns it may interfere with the discussion. It's still not grounds for a speedy to my knowledge, but there may be problems there. ''] Considerer:'' ''']''' (]) (]) 15:50, 19 December 2024 (UTC) |
|
:I'm admittedly not too involved in this discussion, so I'll refrain from saying much, but I have no issues with keeping this article around since it seems to meet bare notability and can be verified as being a new version of the article via the creator's edit history. I'd appreciate an admin verifying the edit histories are different so as to dispel all reasonable doubt. However, I do have concerns about the fact there's an ongoing deletion review for the subject. I'm admittedly unsure as to how it's handled when the article is recreated while the deletion review is ongoing, but I do have concerns it may interfere with the discussion. It's still not grounds for a speedy to my knowledge, but there may be problems there. ''] Considerer:'' ''']''' (]) (]) 15:50, 19 December 2024 (UTC) |
|
::That's my mistake. When I was creating the draft, it said that approvals could take up to 8 weeks, so I decided to submit it and continue editing it. I wasn't expecting it to be approved so quickly. But it's ''definitely'' not true that what I wrote is an ''unchanged draft'', which was the rationale for this speedy delete. I spent so much time researching and writing this up, and this version of the article has a lot of sources that weren't present in the now-deleted one. The second AfD for the original article was closed as a "delete" due to the sockpuppetry and canvassing, so my new research that was posted after the re-listing was never taken into consideration in the AfD. This version of the article includes all of the new sources that meet reliability and significant coverage. ] (]) 16:13, 19 December 2024 (UTC) |
|
::That's my mistake. When I was creating the draft, it said that approvals could take up to 8 weeks, so I decided to submit it and continue editing it. I wasn't expecting it to be approved so quickly. But it's ''definitely'' not true that what I wrote is an ''unchanged draft'', which was the rationale for this speedy delete. I spent so much time researching and writing this up, and this version of the article has a lot of sources that weren't present in the now-deleted one. The second AfD for the original article was closed as a "delete" due to the sockpuppetry and canvassing, so my new research that was posted after the re-listing was never taken into consideration in the AfD. This version of the article includes all of the new sources that meet reliability and significant coverage. ] (]) 16:13, 19 December 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Reliable sources == |
|
|
|
|
|
I'm posting this as a reference. According to archived discussions on the Teahouse, a good rule of thumb is three independent and reliable sources that demonstrate significant coverage to establish ]. Here are the major reliable sources that provide significant coverage for the subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
*'']'' . Reliable as one of the largest and oldest-running newspapers in Taiwan. Listed as one of the three major Chinese-language newspapers in ]. Significant coverage includes an overview of the technology behind 15.ai, particularly noting its ease of use and limited data, and also discusses how 15.ai works, its features, and the viral videos that have spawned using 15.ai. Over 400 (approximate since the article is written in Chinese) words of coverage. |
|
|
*'']'' . Reliable as listed in ]. Significant coverage includes an overview of the DeepMoji technology used for emotiveness, applications of the voices not restricted to viral videos, and how to use it. Over 400 (approximate since the article is written in Japanese) words of coverage. |
|
|
*'']'' . While not listed in ], ''AUTOMATON'' is one of the largest and reputable gaming news outlets in Japan, and has been used in multiple GA's like '']'', '']'', and ]. Significant coverage includes DeepMoji, a list of characters available on the application, examples of video content users have created with the platform, an overview of the pronunciation capabilities of the model, as well as a mention of how to use ARPAbet strings. Almost 800 (approximate since the article is written in Japanese) words of coverage. |
|
|
*''Towards Data Science'' . While the website itself is written on Medium (which is not considered reliable), Medium is only being used as a vessel to host the article itself (similar to how Google Docs can be used to host an article), which is part of a very popular newsletter called ''Towards Data Science'', which has almost 800K followers on social media. Following alone means nothing in determining the reliability of a source, but Rionaldi Chandraseta, the author of the article, is an ]-published machine learning specialist who has published papers that are listed on Google Scholar . The newsletter has a solid editorial board that consists of multiple masters and PhD's in machine learning and computer science. '''Over 1,000''' words of English-language coverage detailing every facet of 15.ai, from its capabilities to its underlying research. |
|
|
*Yongqiang Li . Since the article is locked to foreigners without an account, I asked a friend to translate this for me. The article goes into great detail about the technology behind 15.ai and talks about its features, its future, and potential problems. The author is a professor at the Harbin Institute of Technology and has multiple publications listed on Google Scholar . |
|
|
*'']'' . Reliable as listed in ]. While the main focus of the article isn't 15.ai, it goes into detail the controversy and Twitter exchange that happened when Voiceverse NFT misappropriated 15.ai's work. From {{tq|However, in now-deleted tweets, Voiceverse was found to have boasted about using its tech for the voice of a cartoon character - which was in fact created using 15.ai, a popular non-commercial text-to-speech service.}} to {{tq|"Hey @fifteenai we are extremely sorry about this," Voiceverse NFT wrote. "The voice was indeed taken from your platform, which our marketing team used without giving proper credit. Chubbiverse team has no knowledge of this. We will make sure this never happens again."}}, this is about 300 words of coverage. |
|
|
*''Stevivor'' . After doing more research, I found that Steven Wright, the author of this article, ''also'' writes for '']'', a solid and well-known technology and gaming publication. In addition, ''Stevivor'' is reliable and independent, and it is the most-read independent gaming news network in the Oceanic region. |
|
|
*'']'' . While ''Kotaku'' is in ], it's still debated whether an article from the "Odds and Ends" category is considered "News". There is no clear consensus to this, but the description for the "Odds and Ends" category is "Odds and Ends - Gaming Reviews, News, Tips and More.". The argument in the previous AfD was that this article did not meet reliability, although it met independence and significant coverage. |
|
|
*'']'', '']'', and '']'' All three of these sources are found under ], but there has been a debate whether these three met significant coverage. While they all pass ], it is not a Misplaced Pages policy and their significant coverage can be debated. |
|
|
*'']'' . ] notes ''NME'' is reliable in its expertise, and it has been debated whether gaming is one of their areas of expertise. The Misplaced Pages article for NME states that this is so, and gaming is listed as one of NME's header sections, but there has been debate whether NME's expertise extends outside of music. Similar coverage to ''Eurogamer'', but with fewer words, but still above the threshhold for ] (which, again, is not Misplaced Pages policy). |
|
|
|
|
|
However, they have been contested in ''some form'', the arguments for which I personally disagreed with. Think of these sources as you will. I still haven't gone over many of the the sources that are used in the newly written page, but I will continue to do my research and update this. |
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I'm aware that this is a contentious article that was submitted to AfD. But the AfD was closed largely due to the misbehaving of new Misplaced Pages editors, who are likely to be children, which is not surprising given the popularity of the application among younger people. I'm committed to doing this subject justice, and I argue that this subject not only meets the bare minimum of notability, but meets it well-within question. ] (]) 17:11, 19 December 2024 (UTC) |
I'm posting this as a reference. According to archived discussions on the Teahouse, a good rule of thumb is three independent and reliable sources that demonstrate significant coverage to establish WP:GNG. Here are the major reliable sources that provide significant coverage for the subject:
Yes, I'm aware that this is a contentious article that was submitted to AfD. But the AfD was closed largely due to the misbehaving of new Misplaced Pages editors, who are likely to be children, which is not surprising given the popularity of the application among younger people. I'm committed to doing this subject justice, and I argue that this subject not only meets the bare minimum of notability, but meets it well-within question. GregariousMadness (talk to me!) 17:11, 19 December 2024 (UTC)