Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Targeted Memory Erasure

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was - should be merged - SimonP 00:07, May 22, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Targeted Memory Erasure

Fictional medical procedure created as plot point for the movei Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. An elaborate website describing the procedure was created as a promotion for the movie. As fiction it is unverifiable, and it merits only a mention in the article on the movie. -Willmcw 23:53, May 16, 2005 (UTC)

• Merge and redirect. -Sean Curtin 01:45, May 17, 2005 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect. Unverifiable and devoid of meaning outside of the movie. Kelly Martin 04:42, May 17, 2005 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect --the wub (talk) 08:50, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
• Agreed. DS 11:51, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
• merge Jeremybub 23:23, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
• ditto. Master Thief Garrett 08:26, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
• Not sure about this one, it's a bit long to merge (as per WP:FICT). I would disagree that it is unverifiable because it's fiction, we have plenty of long articles on fictional places, people and things. On balance I say keep. -- Lochaber 09:04, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
• keep, merging an informative article of this size is inappropriate. Kappa 22:07, 21 May 2005 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect. Informative? It has no existence outside of the movie. Someone has created a special category just so that this can be categorized with its movie: category:Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. It would be much shorter if it did not pretend to be describing a real medical procedure. -Willmcw 22:29, May 21, 2005 (UTC)
  • It's informative to fans of the movie, and to anyone else interested in memory manipulation in science fiction. And what's wrong with creating a category for it? Are categories in short supply? Kappa 22:47, 21 May 2005 (UTC)
    • Merging does not necessitate losing information, though in this case it really needs to be re-written to better indicate that it is a movie gizmo with a backstory rather than any kind of real science. The pseudo-science has to be carefully attributed if it's gonna stay. The original version was clearly written to appear as science, by an editor who can be said to have a sense of humor. user:TrojanMan. Is there an article on fictional memory erasure and replacement? It's a frequent plot element. -Willmcw 23:20, May 21, 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.