Someone started the deletion voting and commented on the deletion support:
this survived the first nomination from 2005 (just old enough to be a VfD), but that was under the lower standards of the era–a year later, it was boldly merged to Pollyanna principle (a newer article that hadn't even been created yet at the time of the VfD), and the resulting BLAR held up for 20 years before finally being contested just today, seemingly just to add the YouTube sourcing. As there did appear to be a merger (even if any evidence of that was removed from the other article's text, it's still there in the page history), I'd advise against full deletion, but no opinion (even on a restoration of the long-stable redirect) beyond that.
~ Wcquidditch
Source [2026-09-20 17:58:00 Z]
The page they want to delete:
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Pollyanna_Principle
Frankly... I was shocked when I saw such at my Wikipedia notifications...
A reply I sent was:
Wonderful day!
I absolutely vote Against the Deletion of the dear page of a miracle!
More to that, sorry, but I just cannot even imagine how anyone in their dear mind may delete that page from Wikipedia at these times when LLM/"AL" is being used frequently absolutely inhumanly... in development or even in art...
If you want to contribute to Wikipedia so much, create a page for the clockmaker William Clement recently added as a reference only at!: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Clement
...but leave this page alone in safe!
No, we must absolutely NOT delete this page and the miraculous and so important quote from it. Too many human history and work is being inhumanly altered, deleted nowadays...
Executives working on AI at Microsoft and OpenAI admitted what its critics have been saying all along: Large language models are predatory pieces of technology that have been built on what a Microsoft executive called "an astonishing theft of unprecedented proportions," and the "largest theft of labor in human history." An internal Microsoft document said generative AI products have created a "doom loop" that is killing "the entire web." ~ Source
In 2024, a group of authors, led by novelist Andrea Bartz and nonfiction writers Charles Graeber and Kirk Wallace Johnson, hit Anthropic with a class action lawsuit, alleging the company violated copyright laws by using pirated books to train its AI model... "It is the largest known copyright recovery in history," said Justin Nelson, the authors' lead attorney. - How Anthropic secretly destroyed millions of books to train its AI ~ Source
This quote on the page? This is us... those who remember, appreciate, and love the human history... this is a quote of an important human history moment... which highlights the crucial difference between a Human and not... respecting, supporting, attributing to those alive... who feel, who think, who work, who cherish, who love...
The YouTube video? Well, it's published by the video's dear author! The Jim Henson Company! People at YouTube comments even find it a marvel, too!
I come back to this every once in a while when I start feeling particularly apocalyptic about AI. Machines should work, people should think. ~ @RossCourtright
Absolutely not. We must not delete such a miracle from our, the infinite history... and we must respect these words with its own whole page.
We should rather make it more transparent, explicit, better formatted, and more comprehensible.
And I myself being almost 40 years old recall a class at school with this dear quote hanging on the wall near teacher's table!
Machines should work. People should think. ~ IBM
Source [2026-09-22 08:59:00 Z]
The video is a source of the quote itself:
- https://youtu.be/_IZw2CoYztk?t=249
Yes, the page needs formatting, but absolutely not its deletion.
I believe that the deletion is inadequate, wrong, and simply awful.
The deletion request was started by those who could not care less about history and human, they are not involved in it enough.
The deletion request was discarded by those who actually realize its importance, preciousness, magnificence...
This quote deserves a whole page.
If you care, then fix the page, if not, then let it be deleted.
In my view, the page is clear, and enough for an Internet access for references, and related material, to also continue a research of a reader.
Here, may I ask how would you like to see it? Or what you don't like to be improved?
That is, what do you actually want to be improved? I'll try modifying and achieving it!
Typically Wikipedia pages would include things such as the history of the topic, who named it the Polyanna principle and why (with sources), its references and application in modern things, etc. The formatting is also awful, they just plop a badly formatted quote block into the article at the end.
Thank you very much for the ideas! I'll try making it better in a week!
Nice. Hope it's still around by then 🫡