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 keep. -Scottywong| communicate _ 15:56, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DAYDREAMER[edit]

DAYDREAMER (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)

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

No indication of notability. Only primary sources given and appears to have been created by Mueller. Google searches not revealing anything significant. Disputed prod. noq (talk) 23:47, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:05, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Lacks reliable independent secondary sources to establish notability as required by WP:GNG. Googling turned up nothing useful. Wikipedia is not for WP:PROMOTION. Msnicki (talk) 02:35, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: There might be one or two non-primary sources, but I'll have to search a little harder. There's a criticism of Mueller's work in this book and he's mentioned here and here, but even if there are enough RS to warrant keeping, the article will have to be almost completely re-written.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 03:56, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That book ref isn't bad. (It's better than I've seen used to support keeps in some AfDs.) If you or someone else can spot another that good, that would be enough for me. Msnicki (talk) 04:28, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Question: Is Dyer directly involved in Mueller's research? If not, then a paper by him and him alone could be considered a RS if he's an authoritative source when it comes to research of this nature. [1] Mueller is also mentioned in these research papers as well, so some of these could be usable: [2], [3], [4], [5] (this one has distortion issues, but he was mentioned in a NASA paper), [6] (this is a MIT student's paper, but might be usable if the student later became notable). I don't know all of what I'm looking at, so I'll refrain from voting or editing the article, but I did find enough to where someone with more experience might be able to sort through this and see what can be used.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 04:37, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - though controvercial, there are independent reliable sources that reviewed it, therefore it is notable. I agree with Tokyogirl79 about re-writing the article, but re-writing does not necessarily mean deletion. The problems can be fixed under normal editing practices. Perhaps starting with a stub.Tamsier (talk) 12:08, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Here are some third-party publications that discuss, mention, or cite DAYDREAMER:
  • Rosalind W. Picard. Affective Computing. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1997.
  • Philip N. Johnson-Laird. Human and Machine Thinking. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1993.
  • Marvin Minsky. Society of Mind: A response to four reviews. Artificial Intelligence, 48:371–396, 1991.
  • John S. Antrobus. Toward a neurocognitive processing model of imaginal thought. In Jefferson A. Singer and Peter Salovey, editors, At Play in the Fields of Consciousness: Essays in Honor of Jerome L. Singer, pages 3–28. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, 1999.
  • Jon Rowe and Derek Partridge. Creativity: A survey of AI approaches. Artificial Intelligence Review, 7(1):43–70, 1993.
  • Joseph Bates, A. Bryan Loyall, and W. Scott Reilly. An architecture for action, emotion, and social behavior. In Cristiano Castelfranchi and Eric Werner, editors, Artificial Social Systems, volume 830 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 55–68. Springer, Berlin, 1994.
  • Daniel Deslauriers and George W. Baylor. The usefulness of the script concept for characterizing dream reports. In Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pages 496–502, Hillsdale, NJ, 1988. Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • George W. Baylor and Daniel Deslauriers. Dreams as problem solving: A method of study - Part I: Background and theory. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 6(2):105–118, 1986.
  • Rachel Karniol and Michael Ross. The motivational impact of temporal focus: Thinking about the future and the past. Annual Review of Psychology, 47:593–620, 1996.
  • Thomas Wehrle and Klaus R. Scherer. Toward computational modeling of appraisal theories. In Klaus R. Scherer, Angela Schorr, and Tom Johnstone, editors, Appraisal Processes in Emotion: Theory, Methods, Research, pages 350–368. Oxford University Press, New York, 2001.
  • Alberto Greco. Integrating "different" models in cognitive psychology. Cognitive Systems, 4(1):21–32, 1994.
  • John H. Andreae. Associative Learning: For a Robot Intelligence. Imperial College Press, London, 1998.
  • Harwood Fisher. Self, Logic, and Figurative Thinking. Columbia University Press, New York, 2008.
  • Scott R. Turner. The Creative Process. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1994.
  • George W. Atkinson. Chess and Machine Intuition. Intellect, 1998.
  • Syed I. Ahson. Daydreaming robots. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium on Artificial Life and Robotics, pages 342–346, Oita, Japan, 2000.
  • William B. Gevarter. MoCog1: A computer simulation of recognition-primed human decision making. Technical Report FIA-91-23, Moffett Field, CA: NASA Ames Research Center, 1991.
  • Paul Martin. Counting Sheep: The Science and Pleasures of Sleep and Dreams. Thomas Dunne, New York, 2004.
  • David C. Moffat and Nico H. Frijda. Functional models of emotion. In Giyoo Hatano, Naoyuki Okada, and Hirotaka Tanabe, editors, Affective Minds, pages 59–68. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2000.
  • Akifumi Tokosumi. A computational literary theory: The ultimate products of the brain/mind machine. In Tadashi Kitamura, editor, What Should Be Computed to Understand and Model Brain Function?, pages 43–51. World Scientific, Singapore, 2001.
  • Hirohide Ushida, Yuji Hirayama, and Hiroshi Nakajima. Emotion model for life-like agent and its evaluation. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Tenth Conference on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence, pages 62–69, Menlo Park, CA, 1998. AAAI Press.

Etm (talk) 02:07, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Okay, I'm satisfied. The article needs improvement but that's irrelevant to the question of notability, which is the only thing we need to establish at AfD. I'm satisfied by the arguments offered by Tokyogirl97 and Etm that there are sufficient sources. Thanks to both of you for your efforts. Msnicki (talk) 02:14, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep in light of the new verifiable, third-party sources. - Mailer Diablo 11:04, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per non-primary sources cited. I came to the article as it was listed at WP:Copyright problems. On investigation, I found that virtually the entire text of the article was verbatim from:

Mueller, Erik T. (1990). Daydreaming in humans and machines. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

I've had to reduce it to a stub, but have added enough references to it for anyone who wants to re-expand the article to get started. Voceditenore (talk) 13:06, 9 July 2012 (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.