Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ADS-AC

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=ADS-AC}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=ADS-AC}})

Fails WP: GNG. I could not find any sources to establish notability. This was dePRODed without sourcing improvements, and the user who dePRODed went admitted on my Talk page that they do not have sources to establish notability.

This has also been tagged for notability issues for four months. HyperAccelerated (talk) 14:56, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:57, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• :Delete if you decide so, but please don't vex me with more discussions. This has been going on for 3 months with undecided results, i want no more discussion, this is too much, do what you want. Tkorrovi (talk) 15:09, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• ::Come again? You can abstain. Nobody is forcing you to participate. HyperAccelerated (talk) 15:15, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• :::I abstain, i already said everything. Tkorrovi (talk) 15:37, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• ::::But please end it faster. Tkorrovi (talk) 15:40, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• ::::I also did not admit that i don't have sources to establish notability, i just said that it is old and i cannot find no more sources, as things in web disappear in time. Tkorrovi (talk) 18:11, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• :::::This AfD is here to discuss whether this article should be deleted. Nobody here asked you to ramble about a topic of your choice. If you do not have anything to contribute with respect to whether this article should be deleted, stay away and stop cluttering this page. Thanks. HyperAccelerated (talk) 19:47, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• ::::::I have to contribute, but as i said i already said everything. Only just please don't put words into my mouth, as you did when you started this request for deletion (at the beginning of this page). Thank you. Tkorrovi (talk) 19:58, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• :::::::You're clearly not here to have an on-topic discussion, and I have no business with you. Goodbye. HyperAccelerated (talk) 21:32, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• ::::::::Sorry, if you have no business about the matter, then who should go away? Tkorrovi (talk) 21:53, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• ::::Is that text still the same? Anyway, the "user who dePRODed", one can see that in your talk page, the only user who talked with you about ADS-AC, was me. Tkorrovi (talk) 02:42, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
• ::::The article has references of sources, and what is this lack of notability about, lack of sources, if it is not over complicated issue that can be interpreted in many ways, but it is a very simple article. Tkorrovi (talk) 04:36, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete unsourced article about 'experimental' software. I'd have gone A7 with it. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 15:05, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete. I could find no WP:SIGCOV. Fails WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 15:52, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

:Comment: I believe that Tkorrovi might have a conflict of interest with respect to the subject in this article. I've left them a message on their Talk page. HyperAccelerated (talk) 02:50, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

::No, i have no interest in promoting myself, no personal interest, neither do i get any benefit from any of it. This is not WP: COI, i'm not writing about myself, and not in the interest of these who contributed to the software or anything related. The ADS-AC article was in fact created not by me, but by someone else, there were a number of people involved in these issues. I didn't even like creating the article at first, but as it was created, it stayed, was there for 10 years i guess. To be the way to show some principles in artificial consciousness, including these by Dennett and McCarthy, and implementing them in software, not mentioned anywhere else. My interest is artificial consciousness, i created the artificial consciousness article in Wikipedia, many many years ago, and i have been one of the main contributors to it since. This software is part of my interest, it has been a common interest of several people, one can see in the AI Forum (archive), elsewhere in the Internet, but these sites are mostly no longer there any more. My interest is artificial consciousness, a certain field of study, this is no way in conflict with the interests of Wikipedia. Or if you claim anything, would you also then propose how to improve it, other than removing all knowledge, thank you if you do. Tkorrovi (talk) 05:50, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Cultural revolutionaries, destroy knowledge, clear decision. There is no talk about the principle of generality and multiple drafts model, and implementing them in software, in the AC or AI articles. sure remove that knowledge, so there will be one more thing that no one knows about. Tkorrovi (talk) 04:36, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

This discussion has gone bad, only confrontation, no talk about the actual article. This is how it shouldn't be. The article has improved during the process, it is no longer considered to have lack of sources, only the lack of notability tag remains, which also supposed to be about lack of sources, and is no longer relevant, but it is there. There has been discussion with another editor, that sources for open source software are not so simple issue than say geography articles, there mostly are no journal or newspaper articles about most of the open source software. The other of my concerns is what it is about, and what the software implements, the two principles proposed by Dennett and McCarthy, their meaning, and actual importance in software. This article mentions it, the software is about it, and i don't want it to be lost from Wikipedia. Thus i think that here should be some other solution, improving and evolving things further, rather than mute deletion. Thank you for these who paid attention. Tkorrovi (talk), 30 November 2024 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.