Jump to content

Talk:Future of Go Summit

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Should the detailed coverage of the Ke Jie match be in its own article?

[edit]

I have created a stub, AlphaGo versus Ke Jie, in the form of the previous AlphaGo versus Lee Sedol article, and I raise the question: should the Ke Jie match with AlphaGo have the same status (as in having its own article) as the Lee Sedol match? The implication is that the "Future of Go Summit" is more than just the Ke Jie match, and more than AlphaGo playing in several matches – are there not also several seminars? – and therefore might reasonably summarize the several matches, leaving the detailed analysis and commentary to AlphaGo versus Ke Jie.

Alternatively, it may be that the substance and significance of this Summit is AlphaGo plays all, where Ke Jie is just one of the challengers and the seminars are forgettable. In that case perhaps one article suffices for all matches, though the title seems inapt.

Comments? ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 19:00, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Probably we should wait till the end of the event to see.--128.112.17.154 (talk) 22:22, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Not Merge. The 3 games of Ke Jie vs AlphaGo have 1.5 million dollars winner prizes like the game vs Lee Sedol while other two matchs in the "Future of Go Summit" don't have any winner prizes. Then there is $ 300k appearance fee for Ke Jie's game while other two not. Hence, the Ke Jie's match is more like official game while other two are more like exhibition games. The several seminars in this summit are not even a match. Also, this is the first official game for AlphaGo vs a current world ranked 1 player. Lee Sedol is a world champion but he is not the world No 1 ranking player last year while Ke held the No 1 ranking for two years. -- Miracle dream (talk) 18:17, 26 May 2017‎ (UTC)[reply]
Merge. I'm in favor of combining both articles. Probably under this lemma. AS Ke Jie is the main event, I'd trim the other events. Maybe don't show all moves. -Koppapa (talk) 06:57, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please note: this is not a Merge discussion, because there is esentially nothing at the AlphaGo versus Ke Jie stub not already in this article. (The Merge template was added by Neo-Jay here, who doesn't understand that if an item "A" and an item "B" are "merged", with the result that "A" is gone and "B" is unchanged, the effect is a deletion of item "A".) What I have proposed here is in the nature of a rename and split. I have replaced the template a more accurate one.

I believe the driving criterion here is notability, and the most notable aspect here is the AlphaGo AI playing against Ke Jie. While the other games are of interest, and have some notability, they seem (as Miracle dream said) "more like exhibition games." The mentioned "forum on the AI" is the total coverage of that item, and, in brief, this whole "Summit" is notable mainly for the AlphaGo/Ke Jie match.

This is reinforced by Google search results: start typing "alphago" and it suggests "alphago ke jie". Click on that and the first hit is the Wikipedia incomplete stub AlphaGo versus Ke Jie. Only dozens of hits later does "The Future of Go Summit" come up, and it is not the Wikipedia article.

What I propose is:

And given the current interest in this topic, the sooner the better. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 20:41, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not merge. Keep AlphaGo versus Ke Jie and Future of Go Summit as separated articles. There is no need to delete AlphaGo versus Ke Jie, then rename Future of Go Summit to AlphaGo versus Ke Jie, and then create a new article Future of Go Summit. The relevant content can be moved from Future of Go Summit to AlphaGo versus Ke Jie. And by the way, I like to remind J. Johnson that merging item "A" to item "B" does not mean deletion of item "A", but means redirecting item "A" to item "B". And I added Template:Merge from to Future of Go Summit at 12:14, 25 May 2017 just to do 128.112.16.122 a favor because he/she added Template:Merge to AlphaGo versus Ke Jie at 18:12, 24 May 2017. Adding merge templates to both articles is required by Wikipedia:Merging. It does not means that I support this merger proposal. --Neo-Jay (talk) 02:16, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
A Redirect There doesn't seem like too much material for one article and is unlikely to grow significantly. Fairly indifferent as to whether 'AlphaGo versus Ke Jie' simply redirects here or article is moved to 'AlphaGo versus Ke Jie' then have Future of Go Summit redirected to the 'AlphaGo versus Ke Jie' with appropriate rewrites to explain match is (main) part of summit. crandles (talk) 15:35, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 27 May 2017

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus - Closing as not much participation was seen. It must be noted that both sides have fine arguments. A new discussion can be started after notifying relevant wikiprojects, if necessary. (non-admin closure) Yashovardhan (talk) 10:03, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Future of Go Summit → AlphaGo versus Ke Jie – More notable name. J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 20:52, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The AlphaGo versus Ke Jie match is the ONLY notable part of the Summit. And the despite the great interest in that match, "Future of Go Summit" is not of any great interest, and certainly not the search term that comes to mind trying to find the match. It's almost as if we were trying to bury an item of great interest under a title of no significance. And if we removed the non-notable material it would be readily seen that this article is mis-named.
Note that I am not against having Future of Go Summit as a separate article, and as such it could cover all of the details not directly relevant to the Ke Jie match. But as such it would only summarize the details of the Ke Jie match. not duplicate them, which implies a split. (As I have proposed, above.) As the non-Ke Jie material is so little it would be easiest to copy it out rather than the rest of the material, which is why I propose doing this as a rename/move. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 20:24, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
We can not say that the AlphaGo vs. Ke Jie match is the only notable part of the Summit. Other games and the forum in this Summit have also been widely reported and I can add enough content. If you are not against having Future of Go Summit as a separate article, then it should not be renamed to AlphaGo versus Ke Jie. Please just move the relevant content from Future of Go Summit to AlphaGo versus Ke Jie and keep the two articles separate. Thank you. --Neo-Jay (talk) 01:04, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Now the section "Ke Jie vs AlphaGo" of Future of Go Summit has only a summary and AlphaGo versus Ke Jie has grown into a long page. There is no need to rename Future of Go Summit to AlphaGo versus Ke Jie any more. --Neo-Jay (talk) 11:26, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You're being rather ham-handed, but as we have gotten to nearly the same end result I will agree: there is no need for a rename. If there are no objections, we can take that as consensus, and close this discussion after seven days (3 May).
Similarly regarding any merge of the two articles. The situation there is bit murkier, especially as an explict merge discussion was not started. But I doubt there will be any objections if you remove the merge templates. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 20:37, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding merge of these two articles, the discussion is actually carried on at the above section: "Should the detailed coverage of the Ke Jie match be in its own article?" Since the section "Ke Jie vs AlphaGo" of Future of Go Summit has only a summary now and AlphaGo versus Ke Jie has grown into a long page, your argument that "there is essentially nothing at the AlphaGo versus Ke Jie stub not already in this article" (at the above section) does not stand now. So the above section is the right place to discuss the merger issue even according to your own interpretation of Wikipedia:Merging. Although I personally oppose the merger, two editors have supported it. So maybe we need to wait for several days to see whether there will be a consensus. And by the way, it will be 3 June, not 3 May, after seven days of this discussion about moving. And I think that the editor who proposes moving an article does not need to wait for seven days to withdraw the proposal if no one else has supported it (but of course it's at your discretion to decide to wait for how many days to withdraw your proposal). --Neo-Jay (talk) 04:18, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Future of Go Summit. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:50, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Future_of_Go_Summit&oldid=1207334654"