Talk:ALICE

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1 Bipolar disorder
2 Clive Thompson article
3 A.L.I.C.E. with A.L.I.C.E. conversation link down
4 Split
5 Move to ALICE

[edit] Bipolar disorder

...Richard Wallace, a computer science Ph.D. who lost his academic positions because of his manic depression.

Statements like these shouldn't appear in Wikipedia.

One individual's personal problems are not encyclopedic material. It might be as part of a train of logic, but here it's off-topic.
It violates Richard Wallace's privacy. Would you like to see your job position and medical problems discussed in Wikipedia?

—Herbee 21:46, 2004 Mar 6 (UTC)

http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,53072,00.html?tw=wn_story_related There is no privacy violation. In fact, he's the one who brought this into the public. Anthony DiPierro 21:50, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)

That's no reason to include it. It's still not encyclopedic, it's still an irrelevant bit of human interest sensationalism, and it's still private information spilling around for no good reason. I'm not worried about the harm to Wallace (who probably doesn't give a hoot), I'm worried about the quality of an otherwise interesting article.
—Herbee 22:52, 2004 Mar 6 (UTC)

Then why do you keep bringing up the "private information" bit? It's not private information, it's public information. I'll move it to a page on Richard Wallace. You're right that it's somewhat out of place here. Anthony DiPierro 23:44, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)

You're right, I could have formulated that differently. —Herbee 00:57, 2004 Mar 7 (UTC)

[edit] Clive Thompson article

The link to Clive Thomson article doesn't work.

If you're talking about this link:

Clive Thompson: Approximating Life [1], The New York Times Magazine, July 7, 2002

I just checked it, and it works fine Kevyn 10:59, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] A.L.I.C.E. with A.L.I.C.E. conversation link down

I noticed that the link to the A.L.I.C.E. to A.L.I.C.E. conversation is down. I don't know what the error is, as where I am now blocks network errors, but I changed the link to point to the latest copy at web.archive.org. --alien2k 09:48, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

And now the wonderful college have blocked the web archive, so I've added a Google cache link pointing to the archived page. *sigh* --alien2k 12:25, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Split

This page appears to be half disambiguation, and half article, which actually contains two articles. Even thought the first article is only a stub, I think this needs splitting into 3 articles and a disambiguation page. Guinness 10:56, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. It's mildly confusing the way it is now, and there's enough information on both to warrant two stub articles, to be expanded. --Blackcap | talk 03:48, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Actually, now that I think about it, it makes much more sense to merge this with Alice. Since the dab has already been done, I'm going to be bold and do it now, and it's easily changeable/revertable if there's disagreement. It seems that, though a split was a good idea, this finishes the job better and we won't then have two dabs with the same or similar information. Blackcap | talk 05:50, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

I believe standard procedure with when both all-caps and lower case mean different things, is to have two different disambiguation pages and have them link to each other. I would think having ALICE and Alice would make the most sense here. -- SCZenz 06:20, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Let's move this conversation over to Talk:Alice#Merge with A.L.I.C.E.. I'm copying your above comment and mine over there; I'll respond on that page. Blackcap | talk 06:45, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Move to ALICE

Please see the discussion at Wikipedia:Requested moves#November 13, 2005. I didn't bring this up earlier in case this was merged with Alice (in which case it would have been irrelevant), but it now applies... honestly, I won't be proposing any further page moves/renames of the "Alices" - I promise! --Blackcap | talk 18:28, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Ah... my mistake, I didn't realize that this page was the discussion forum. Sorry... I'm pasting in the template from WP:RM now and filling it out. Blackcap | talk 18:33, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Rationale

Talk:A.L.I.C.E. – A.L.I.C.E. → ALICE – It seems like the convention is to not have the dots in between the letters of an acronym (e.g. SETI, the AJAR dab, TOP, etc.), although I can't find an actual policy that says that. Wikipedia:Use common names would seem to suggest ALICE over A.L.I.C.E. In #Exceptions, it says: