- 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 redirect to Artificial Linguistic Internet Computer Entity. see final comment (non-admin closure) Pcap ping 22:00, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Alicebot (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Doesn't seem to me this should automatically get an article just because it was created by a famous researcher. See charlix. Pcap ping 20:24, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- Pcap ping 20:24, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Warrants a mention in Richard Wallace (scientist), but no more. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 22:13, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Brief coverage here (OnSoftware). Pcap ping 23:10, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge this and AIML into Artificial Linguistic Internet Computer Entity. The bot itself is very notable, being among the first and most advanced of its kind, but 3 articles on essentially the same thing is too much. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 23:38, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Definitely notable. Newer versions continue to be a competitive chatterbot, per http://www.chatterboxchallenge.com/ . Featured in a NYTimes article (which I just added to article references). I would *not* like to see this merged with AIML; a markup language is not a chatterbot and while they're closely related I think that would confuse things. It seems that Artificial Linguistic Internet Computer Entity tries to cover the original bot while this article is meant to treat the newer versions. It doesn't seem to me that the original bot and its followers are "essentially the same thing" but I don't think there's enough content here to make that clear. Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 13:00, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cirt (talk) 20:15, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- There is confusion here. See timeline. The "Alice" from the 1999 NYT article is A.L.I.C.E., because the article says "Alice, whose full name is Artificial Linguistic Computer Entity". Alicebot, aka "program C" did not exist until 2000. These may technically be different programs (entirely new codebase), but even the author's site treats them together. So, merging to A.L.I.C.E. seem the best option here, unless post-2000 coverage is found. Still, I think two articles would confuse the average reader. It looks like program was renamed yet again back to A.L.I.C.E. in 2010; on the chatterbox site both the 2009 "Alice" and the 2010 "A.L.I.C.E." link to [1]. Pcap ping 21:48, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Final comment. I'm WP:BOLDLY closing this as a redirect to A.L.I.C.E. because that article already covers the prizes won by "Program C" aka Alicebot. Pcap ping 22:00, 9 February 2010 (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.