The following are comments made about the tentative revival of the Stanley Style Go page made in September 2021.
bugcat: Some time ago I read an old Coffee Machine post in which Uberdude expressed regret that the Stanley Style Go pages had been deleted (in 2016 or early 2017).
I'd like to point out that snapshots of the pages exist in the Internet Archive.
I thought I'd link to them here and allow this page to function as a conversation space for discussion of whether or not to recreate the page(s), or to leave the article in this state as a Wayback Machine link container, or else to remove it again.
I'm fairly happy with the article being in this state. I don't think it should expand out to multiple pages again, but it's clear that there was some interest remaining in the topic after deletion, so I'd like to have something here.
tapir: I guess no one wants maintenance in this wiki when even deleted pages are brought back in this "oh i found it in the internet archive" style. Good luck, have fun.
Anon: Yes, maintenance is unnecessary. Perhaps tone down the passive-aggressive whining.
kmr - Detelting obvious spam, idiotic comments,improper ads and stuff like that is for sure necessery and needed, but this "Stanley Style" is perfect example of opening far from optimal. Many firts time go players comes with some strange ideas, and its not bad to have them on SL. Just need some proper commentary from experienced players and maybe some AI evaluation. Deleting it would be a move, when space on SL will become matter.
I am not sure if reviving such a articles is good idea, and definitely not in main space of SL. It should be moved to personal space like Stanley/StanleyFuseki?.
Dieter: I think I'm naturally on tapir's tidy side, which is what drove me to be a perennial librarian here. On the other hand, I also honor the spirit of Mortarno who wanted to be maximally inclusive. If someone finds value in something and it's related to Go, it deserves a place here, even if at a time it has been deleted because no one found value in it.
For a topic like Stanley Style Go the inclusion is harmless, because it is clearly idiosynchratic. For big "failed" projects like "systematic joseki" which are all over the place and suggesting a generic treatment of the topic, keeping it would clutter and harm the site. So, somewhat paradoxically, the easier it is to remove a part of this wiki, the less useful it is.
CD-2021-09-13: Someone edited this page the other day and then I spent almost an hour reviewing Stanley's games and both old and new discussion on it. This page is easily more entertaining and informative than 10% of articles here in SL. It's an interesting technique and obviously viable at some rank. Thanks everyone for sharing.
Dieter: Other than tidying up the space, people like Tapir and me (I'll speak for myself) might also get slightly annoyed with the usage of the word "style" for what is mostly bad go. If the "Stanley opening pattern" of enclosing one corner and leaving the other three for White is still interesting the first line descent in one of the "Stanley joseki" is downright bad. Understanding how bad these non-patterns are can be insightful, presenting them as a "style" is a little too much. On the other hand, a name makes things so much fancier.
But enough meta-speak: for those who want to revive some of it for analysis purposes, be my guest. I may even do so myself.
tapir: Hint for new editors: There are full monthly snapshots of SL available at SLSnapshot. Bye.