Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GPT-5

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 draftify‎. ✗plicit 12:18, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GPT-5

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is currently based on nothing but a trademark registration. GPT-5 has not been officially announced by OpenAI or reported on as anything beyond a rumor by reliable sources. Of course, GPT-5 is widely expected to be announced later (soon, even), but this topic is not yet ripe for an article. See Crystal for relevant guidelines. StereoFolic (talk) 10:21, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology, Computing, and Software. StereoFolic (talk) 10:21, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - WP:TOOSOON, although to be fair it probably will quickly become notable. JMWt (talk) 10:34, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I think that there is enough information in the article to justify an article. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 12:04, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The only information relating to GPT-5 is a patent application and Sam Altman denying rumors. There was a rumor from Siqi Chen, who falsely and perplexingly was described as "a research scientist at OpenAI," but I just removed this as it's wrong and more WP:Crystal. StereoFolic (talk) 01:29, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify, improve and publish when more information is released and it becomes more relevant. The article seems too speculative as of right now. NotAGenious (talk) 13:37, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify for now as the article is premature. - Indefensible (talk) 15:13, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify per WP:TOOSOON. The article is really only about a registered trademark. Could be useful soon, though, so not delete. Asparagusus (interaction) 18:02, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wikipedia isn't the equivalent of Ming-Chi Kuo. Nate • (chatter) 18:57, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete content is mostly reused from GPT-4, and per comments above. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 08:45, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is WP:CRYSTAL and WP:TOOSOON. InfiniteNexus (talk) 15:55, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as WP:TOOSOON since the model was not released yet. By definition, there can be no reliable in-depth third-party coverage since the model is still being developed. All reported information can be only nearly verbatim regurgitation of authors' claims. Anton.bersh (talk) 20:39, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why not allow the author to keep the draft then? It costs virtually nothing and prevents having to start over from scratch with a deletion. - Indefensible (talk) 20:42, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If the article is deleted at the conclusion of this AfD, the article creator (or anyone who would like to work on it) is permitted to request for a draftspace WP:REFUND. InfiniteNexus (talk) 15:55, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, but why make them go through such a hassle? Just draftify it directly. - Indefensible (talk) 18:53, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not opposed to draftifying, but I think it needs a careful look before going back to mainspace given the major factual error I found earlier. StereoFolic (talk) 23:22, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:CRYSTAL. WindTempos ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:38, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.