Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Monkey controls a robotic arm

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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Redirect to Brain-computer interface as content was merged there during the course of this debate. Rx StrangeLove 04:40, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Monkey controls a robotic arm

Not an encyclopedic article. Delete, maybe transwiki to WikiNews (but its's rather old news). --Pjacobi 17:45, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete - move content to BCI or wikinews. — Omegatron 18:25, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
• Merge to Brain-computer interface. I believe the GDFL requires that if content is moved a redirect be created to preserve the history--correct me if I'm wrong. Chick Bowen 18:36, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
• Merge per User:Chick Bowen. As to preserving the history, if the content page is renamed but no merge is made, the redirect made can be deleted as the history is moved to the new page. However, if the content is merged, either a redirect must be kept or the page history (but not the contributions themselves) must be copied to the new page's talk page as is often done through the Interwiki process. Andrew pmk | Talk 19:04, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

GFDL issues: The contributors of the merged-in article must be mentioned in the edit summary of the merges. Createion of a redirect is optional and no substitute for naming the contributors. Anyway, Monkey controls a robotic arm has only one contributor and that one was anonymous. Anonymous contributors can be named summarily. --Pjacobi 19:21, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

• Strongly disagree with deletion As far as I know, the article about the monkey controlling the robot was downloaded by far much more than any other article published in PLoS Biology. Thus, it contributed significantly to the journal's acceptance and popularity not to mention the impact on the brain-computer interface field. Instead of deleting articles from this list, I would suggest adding more. This way, the scope and impact of PLoS Biology will be more clear. (Unsigned comment by 24.163.65.156 - CB)
  • The content is useful, 24.163; that's why I proposed a merge rather than delete. Articles are generally not written on single experiments unless they're, say, the oil-drop experiment. Chick Bowen 01:17, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
• Merge and keep redirect The phrase is a little unwieldy, but I knew exactly which experiment it meant, so it is a possible search term. Xoloz 03:03, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
• Strong Keep: I agree with 24.163.65.156, this is a very famous study that not only impacted and sparked major research into a new field but also highly impacted the success and respectibility of the PLoS journals. I do not feel User:Chick Bowen appropriately addressed 24.163.65.156's comments. There are plenty of articles written about specific experiments, but few experiments have so impacted a specific journal such as this one. The article needs to be renamed, and more about its PLoS impacts need to be added. semiconscious (talk · home) 04:49, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
• EVERYTHING IS FIXED: I've blended the article with Brain-computer interface (please check how it looks now) and changed the reference from the PLoS Biology page. Hopefully this will be satisfactory. Please delete Monkey controls a robotic arm. I do not know how to execute deletion. (Unsigned comment by 24.163.65.156 — CB)

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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.