Talk:Tit-for-Tat

Tit-for-Tat was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made below the archived discussion rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was REDIRECT

No idea what this is supposed to be about. Deb 18:02, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * It's about an important problem in game theory. Redirect to prisoner's dilemma. Gazpacho 18:15, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * added information about game theory, i think that makes it more obvious. --Michaledwardmarks 18:18, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep and Redirect to an appropriate article (probably prisoner's dilemma).
 * Keep. Don't redirect.  Move some of the relevant information from prisoner's dilemma to Tit for Tat. -- WOT 18:40, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Alternate spelling for Tit for Tat (note the lack of - -)Redirected to that article. (no VFD required)

No vfd has been declared for Tit for Tat so no votes on that article please. Kim Bruning 19:16, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep as redirect --Improv 22:28, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Can we remove this listing and clean up VfD? zoney &#09827; talk 21:13, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Encyclopedic, relevant, factually accurate, verifiable. --[[User:OldakQuill|Oldak Quill]] 00:58, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

End archived discussion -- Graham &#9786; | Talk 01:01, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)