User talk:Barbalet

Kersal Massive
Hi! It just so happens that I tried to bring about a deletion review for Kersal Massive at the same time as you! Anyway, one of the reasons that the original was deleted was that it had been somewhat vandalised, and people couldn't tell the vandalism from the actual content (hence some people deleting it for being nonsense), so I've created a new, sourced, draft at User:Smurrayinchester/Kersal2. As you were the one who created the original DR, you may want to see/edit the draft - the best way to get a deletion reversed is generally to create a good enough to have it moved into the mainspace. Laïka 01:12, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Nomination of ApeScript for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ApeScript is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Tom Barbalet until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Reyk YO! 10:54, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles_for_deletion/Tom_Barbalet
I am writing to ask for a review and reversal of the deletion of the wikipedia entry about me and my project, Noble Ape. The entries deleted were created by a series of listeners to my podcasts from 2007 through to about 2013. To be clear, I am only interested in the reversal for Noble Ape and Tom Barbalet on Wikipedia. The other two articles are less important to me.

While I appreciate the articles that were deleted were not ideal, the articles Tom Barbalet and Noble Ape did represent my work in a form which was comparable to others who have contributed a similar extent to the field of artificial life and still actively represented on Wikipedia - OpenWorm, Critterding, Avida, Boids, Polyworld.

They also show through Wikipedia and external academic references (http://www.nobleape.com/sim/#Academic) that my work is not a walled garden. It has contributed to a number of different areas and been used by Apple and Intel for their development.

As the article on Artificial life organizations also shows I have also fostered a community of developers and dialogue in the field of artificial life.

Probably unknown to you through this process is that a number of the external references to Noble Ape are currently being suppressed through payment to Google and other search sources by a comedian who aggressively promoted a comedy tour and album under the same name from 2016 to the present. This has lowered any chance of finding external references to Noble Ape.

I continue to work on Noble Ape to this day totaling more than ten hours per week on average. This is a voluntary effort to further ideas in social evolution, philosophy and open source software. I appreciate that working on Wikipedia is also a voluntary effort. I thank you for your time and considering my request to appeal this deletion.

Barbalet (talk) 23:44, 12 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi, just to let you know that the editor you approached has "userfied" the articles on you and on Noble Ape, under my name - so I have them, with their history and sources. I will try to create one new article, using the sources I had found (having access to their full content that you saved on your website will be very helpful!) As I said to that editor, as a new article it would then go through the revision process that all new articles go through, so will again be assessed to see if there are enough independent, reliable sources to indicate notability in Wikipedia's terms. If you have any other articles written about you or your work by people you're not connected to, that would be useful too. I don't know when I'll be able to do this - people keep nominating articles about notable people/subjects for deletion, and the main way to argue against that is to find and add sources! and I am trying to write some new articles too. However, at least the articles aren't completely lost. (Unfortunately, as you've probably noticed, the article on Artificial life organizations has just been deleted, so it's not there to refer to either!) RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:36, 14 May 2019 (UTC)


 * RebeccaGreen - thank you so much for all your efforts here. Thanks also to Jo-Jo Eumerus for passing the articles to you. If you need any additional information please don't hesitate to contact me. I really appreciate this effort. Barbalet (talk) 15:32, 14 May 2019 (UTC)


 * RebeccaGreen Most of the articles you referenced are found here:

http://nobleape.com/int/ http://www.flipcode.com/interviews/nervana/

The articles here are competitive peer reviewed:

http://www.nobleape.com/sim/#Academic

This is the Apple referenced article:

http://nobleape.com/sim/shark_optimize.pdf

There are also independent audio interviews:

https://twit.tv/shows/floss-weekly/episodes/31

https://web.archive.org/web/20051112214331/www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/science/thematerialworld_20030327.shtml http://www.longfunk.com/data/na_bbc4.mp3

https://shrinkrapradio.com/126-shrink-rap-radio-live-3-artificial-life-and-artificial-intelligence/

https://geekspeak.org/episodes/2018/11/06

I'm not sure if these are useful sources for your rewrite.

I'm interested in your thoughts on creating one combined article versus maintaining the two previous articles. Would it be that Tom Barbalet would point to Noble Ape? Anyway, all when you have time. Thanks once again. Barbalet (talk) 19:38, 14 May 2019 (UTC)