Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simulacra and Simulation

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 keep. —Korath (Talk) 02:13, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)

Simulacra and Simulation

Table of Contents of a book. Delete. utcursch | talk 12:31, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)

• I think this article can be encyclopedic (it isn't now). I remember this book (or is it a paper, or story or something) being the basis for some movie. My thoughts were first thirteenth floor, but it might be the matrix. Does this ring a bell for anyone? Such notability (and a better article) could really find a place in wikipedia Keep McKay 18:39, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• The book appears in the Matrix; I wasn't aware it was real. Delete unless some content is provided. Meelar (talk) 20:11, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)
• If it is the basis for a movie (and not simply mentioned in The Matrix), then redirect to the movie. Otherwise delete. This is a borderline speedy. Keep new stub, but delete the original article, ie the table of contents that is still included. -R. fiend 20:15, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Nevermind, I decided to be bold and so I removed it myself. Seems there was quite a conensus to do so. Keep article as is now. -R. fiend 19:28, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• There's no content here. Delete. -- Cyrius|✎ 00:36, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, could be speedied as a contextless, low content fragment, else article offers nothing encyclopedic about this topic. Wyss 00:55, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Hm. Jean Baudrillard is certainly highly notable, and Simulacra and Simulation is one of his best-known (and arguably most important) works. (Incidentally, Neo from The Matrix movies does happen to have a copy, and the Matrix movies draw on some of Baudrillard's ideas.) On the other hand, what's in the article right now is a table of contents that appears to be a cut and paste out of a library catalog or somesuch. Let's see if someone can put some real content there in the next five days, otherwise we're better off with a redlink: delete unless completely rewritten and expanded. --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 04:27, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep the rewritten, expanded stub. --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 03:16, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep but definitely definitely rewrite. Article as it stands is not encyclopaedic but I do see some merit on an article which discusses this book. Megan1967 06:41, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and Re-write as notable and verifiably real Baudrillard book. Lacrimosus 22:12, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Not an encyclopedia article. Delete unless rewritten. - Mike Rosoft 23:06, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Changed my vote to keep after a rewrite. - Mike Rosoft 17:29, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Current contents besides the book's table of contents comprise a valid stub. The tidbit about appearing in the background of a scene in The Matrix isn't particularly important (I'm not sure whether it's Matrix fans that keep adding trivia to articles on modern philosophy to convince people of the film's intellectual worthiness, or philosophy enthusiasts adding it to philosophy articles to tie the subjects in with a popular culture reference point, or both, or what), but it is true and the whole thing is verifiable. The best known book by an important modern philosopher is definitely notable. — Gwalla | Talk 23:14, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. I added some content based on what I know of the novel, but now it is up to other Wikipedians to preserve this encyclopedic topic.Shutranm
• Added some more info to what the book is about, about the famous Borges fable, and more info about the Matrix connection. I hope this was enough to keep the entry. Anonymous, 21:15, 22 March 2005
  • Comment: Nice job on the rewrite! — Gwalla | Talk 08:46, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Definitely encyclopedic now after numerous people pitched in. - BanyanTree 02:20, 23 Mar 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.