Talk:Human image synthesis

Untitled

I do not see how a technology that has been applied in a Hollywood film to a large extent is a hoax. Would you go on to claim the makers of Matrix Revolutions as liars about how they did that film. This claim of the article being a hoax seems rather a hoax itself. --ASU 19:57, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

{{unreferenced}}

This article or section does not cite its references or sources. You can help Wikipedia by including appropriate citations.

I cannot see how the bonus DVD of Matrix Reloaded does not count as a source.

The part about biblical references section is about belief of some people. Matters of belief are matters of belief, not evidence, though similarity with the beasts of revelations is apparent, but perhaps elaboration is needed to point out in more detail how Human image synthesis bears so many of the characteristics of the beasts described in the Book of Revelations. --ASU 19:57, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

---

WP:NPOV, WP:NOR, WP:CITE

This article violate all of these principles of Wikipedia as it now stands. I think it should be WP:AFD. -- Gnetwerker 20:21, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

WP:NPOV: In what sense is the article not neutral? Please present your case in detail

WP:NOR: this is not research, this is collecting some of the publicly available information about the state of human image synthesis that is available to the general public

WP:CITE: As the text reads :"Simply provide any information you can on the source" which is what I've done. --ASU 20:35, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Here are obvious examples:

• WP:NPOV: "This is a dangerous and powerful technology" -- dangerous?
• WP:NOR: The whole thing, but in particular "Many find the technology of synthesizing human images to share a lot of characteristics of the beasts described in the Book of Revelations"
• WP:CITE: Nothing is sourced, other than a specific use of CGI

Insofar as the information in here deserves to be on Wikipedia, it should be in Computer-generated imagery. Outside that, it does not. -- Gnetwerker 20:55, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Revamp!

So, I went ahead and removed NPOV material, added some sources (you'll need a subscription to view them), and removed the hoax tag. Somebody PLEASE find some more sources that people can verify without paying anything. Zelmerszoetrop 01:43, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. I am still not sure this article needs to exist separately from Computer-generated imagery, but this is an improvement. I moved your comment from the page to here. -- Gnetwerker 02:06, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Removed clonebot and synbot

I removed the pseudo-definitions of clonebot and synbot. The first is in FOLDOC and elsewhere, and means something completely different. The latter does not exist in the purported usage outside of this article. -- Gnetwerker 02:06, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Why does "clonebot" redirect here?

Not used or explained in article. 86.159.197.174 (talk) 03:12, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Woman 7.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:05, 10 April 2021 (UTC)