Talk:System 001

Merge this article back into The Ocean Cleanup
Why is an individual article for System 001 necessary? I suggest this article is deleted, and content merged back into The Ocean Cleanup. There is no reason for splitting that article. ― Heb the best (talk) 12:23, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * please put a merge tag on both articles; that will direct to this talk page. Then I can put the DYK nomination on hold. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 11:11, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Done ― Heb the best (talk) 11:21, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Let's be clear, though: although a merge may be the result of this discussion, the current article was not carved OUT of The Ocean Cleanup, and that article was not SPLIT to create this one. Ok, having a quick look at WP:MERGE: there are 4 reasons given to justify possible mergers: duplication, overlap, short text, and context. System 001 is not The Ocean Cleanup (the former is a project, the latter is the non-profit carrying it out); System 001 is not another name for Floating Garbage Collector or something else (i.e., it is not an alternate name for what is essentially the same thing like "flammable" and "inflammable"); neither article is so short that size alone justifies a merge; and System 001 does not require a broader context to be understood (like a minor character in a work of fiction).  I understand that both articles seem to address the same basic idea (cleaning the ocean) and are closely related in the real world (one derives from the other), but which of these four reasons would justify the merger in this instance?  A loose noose (talk) 16:19, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Am pinging principle co-authors regarding merger proposal. A loose noose (talk) 16:40, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * You are right, this article started independently, and not as a split. However after it was started, JC7V moved content from The Ocean Cleanup to this article, that is why I have described is as a split. Considering merge, I would say that all the four reasons apply to some extend, although I mainly see it as duplicate/context. Besides a little research, this is all that TOC does. Consequently, it's article almost only contain info related directly to these systems. If you want to know about the design, design iterations, funding, criticism, ect. of this system, you have to look at that article instead of this. Also, if TOC manages to launch 60 vessels, should there be an article for each of them? ― Heb the best (talk) 18:51, 12 December 2018 (UTC)


 * , I'd be ok with merging it back (all text from System 001 article into the System 001 section of The Ocean Project article). But if there are a lot more Systems released, then at the time we can make a List article that includes all of those systems (and thus we'd move the System 001 section from The Ocean Clean Project article into that list article under the Section 001 section). — Preceding unsigned comment added by JC7V7DC5768 (talk • contribs)
 * Merge is a good idea. I found this draft randomly, and then did some work to bring it up to snuff and then JC7V7DC5768 was kind enough to complete the AFC process. It was only after that I discovered The Ocean Cleanup. It's a bit borderline, the differences, so I am ok with the merge.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 02:24, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hm. Since we have Boyan Slat, why should we have The Ocean Cleanup as a separate article, if the only thing Slat is notable for is the enterprise/ organization? Hint: because they are each of them the independent subject of multiple independent reliable published sources! Also System 002 is already apparently underway....  A loose noose (talk) 02:31, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
 * My goal here is to improve the reader-experience. And by reading this article, the reader will miss the entire context. TOC was established for this project, System 001 is an element of that project. If they did all sorts of things, then yes, they should be different articles, but they don't. I see no benefit lost by making this a section of the TOC article. I am interesting in hearing what you think we will lose by this merge. As for more systems, let's take that when the next one launches. ― Heb the best (talk) 08:55, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Merge The main article is small enough to accommodate it. Visitors would be best served with one article. A standalone here is unnecessary. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:06, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Following this comment from  A loose Noose, I have now merged this content into the other article. ― Heb the best (talk) 02:46, 14 December 2018 (UTC)