Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stand Alone Complex

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 No consensus - it appears that merging/redirecting would be the best idea, but no firm target has been identified. A discussion on the talk page would be a good way to go. Yomangani^talk 18:36, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article contains mostly original research, and was tagged with the {{OR}} tag for a while, and received no references or notable improvement. Most of the information was contained on other Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex articles anyways. The concept is not a large enough topic that it needs to be split from the main articles, and even if it did (which would be fine) it shouldn't contain original research. With this in mind the article was turned into a redirect. Recently, some other editors have been restoring the article, saying we should have it, but without addressing the OR issues. Considering the concept can easily be represented on the main anime articles (WP:FICT), and that no one seems willing to improve this article (WP:WAF), I think we should delete the article. -- Ned Scott 08:18, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletions. -- Ned Scott 08:39, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I'm not entirely convinced that there's nothing to save here. It seems to me that the article is trying to present the phenomenon as a real world phenomenon that just happens to be illustrated in fiction. If the cited references can back up the claim, (and I haven't yet read the cited references yet,) then WP:WAF,(and for that matter WP:OR) would not apply. I'm gonna print these upfor some light reading tonight. --RoninBK_ETC 11:20, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, after some not so light reading, and a mild headache, no one but the author attributes this concept as a "stand alone complex" I withdraw my objection, Delete --RoninBK_ETC 22:24, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • The author of the article or of GitS? GitS originated the name (AFAIK), but the point of this article is to describe the concept in the context of the series. Jonathan 07:08, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. The concept is real, but the name is fictional. A "stand alone complex" is nothing but a meme in many ways. — Dark Shikari ^talk/_contribs 14:57, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Stand Alone Complexes aren't memes; memes originate somewhere, while SACs don't. That's the point. Jonathan 07:08, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge and redirect a small portion of it to the Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex article. ColourBurst 18:45, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why there, and not, say, the article for the second season? (This is one of the main problems I have with suggestions to merge the article into something else: it's big enough to deserve its own concept and general enough to not fit properly as a section in any other article.) Jonathan 07:08, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and redirect to the series. Nothing worth saving here. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 20:01, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletions. -- Guiguii 20:22, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and redirect. The general style is tyoical of a WP:OR essay, and it's unclear whether the cited references address this concept as such. Sandstein 05:51, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. I feel that this has become more of a philosophical concept rather than only based on the show's material. As such I have brought the topic before several of my Philosophy professors attention and have written a 20 page essay describing the theory and possible applications. I know my comment doesn't have much weight to it, but, I thought I might chime in. MrMacMan
  • Comment Get your paper published, (and not on a personal web page,) and then it would have more weight. --RoninBK_ETC 08:20, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep or Move to wikipedia namespace if it's not encyclopedic enough. Some things about wikipedia closely resemble SACs, so if only for that reason, it might be nice to have an essay on the subject. Things that can be seen as SACs might be the original MEDCAB or "The wikipedia cabal".

Kim Bruning 19:35, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep The topic is crucially important to GitS:SAC, and certainly more important than some concepts in other articles. The content wouldn't flow correctly if inserted into any other article. Most of the points in the article are supported by sources. I've read WP:NOR, and I'm unconvinced (shall we say) that most of content in this page is original research. Jonathan 06:40, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• I have no comment on the fate of this page, but if it is deleted, redirect to Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex. -- saberwyn 11:25, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The Topic is something new ( except perhaps in Japan )( related to Game theory too ) not yet well documented but the page was under improvement phase.--Neuromancien 15:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

5 November 2006 (Talk) 4 November 2006 (→Director view - minor cor.) 4 November 2006 (→Notes and references - correction and links to browse japanese page) 3 November 2006 (→Notes and references - Last Masahiro Footage 3 November 2006 (add notes and references + corrections + Masachi OSAWA) 3 November 2006 (→External links - some references) 3 November 2006 (→Director view & quotes) 3 November 2006 (add quotes from Director Kenji Kamiyama)

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.