Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DARPA Silent Talk

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 Brain–computer_interface#Synthetic_telepathy. Spartaz ^Humbug! 11:08, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DARPA Silent Talk

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Although I believe there is such a proposal and put a reference at DARPA on this, there seems to be no evidence of notability for this and no evidence that any work is being done. I had turned Silent Talk and this article into a redirect to DARPA but the redirect on this article has been removed, thus this AfD. Dougweller (talk) 12:07, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

turn back into a section redirect. As long as there is no reference and no evidence of notability, nobody had a call to revert your edit, it would just have been rollbackable. I don't quite see a point of turning an unjustified revert into an AfD. --dab (𒁳) 13:52, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:29, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Brain–computer_interface#Synthetic_telepathy, as we do whenever these "government mind control/telepathy and war" articles begin to sprout. - LuckyLouie (talk) 14:44, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Revert to previous redirect seems like a reasonable compromise as it is a valid redirect. -- RP459 ^Talk/_{Contributions} 16:00, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect: The original alteration from a short, unreferenced, article to a redirect to a valid page seemed fine. Bagheera (talk) 20:52, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Brain–computer interface#Synthetic telepathy as recommended by LuckyLouie. That target appears to be what the content-free article is about. Johnuniq (talk) 01:46, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Revert to previous redirect sounds like the best idea to me. This is supposedly a DARPA project (even if no work is being done on it) after all, and so I recommend a redirect to the DARPA page. - 128.198.188.39 (talk) 21:08, 15 June 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.