Talk:Multimachine

This article was nominated for deletion on September 16, 2005. The result of the discussion was delete.

AfD[edit]

Note that an earlier version of this article was deleted by Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Multimachine. However, the entire content of that version was:

“

An inexpensive multi-purpose home-made machine that is built around engine blocks. most multimachines consist of 2 engine blocks,some pipe,import bearings, an import cross-feed table, a motor and scissors jacks.It can drill in 3 different ways, horizontal mill, chop-saw and surface grind and much more.Designed and marketed by Pat Delany at http://this.was.a.spam.link/ and perfected by the constant inflow of ideas at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/this.was.also.a.spam.link

”

So I am not going to delete this new version immediately.

But it needs considerable improvement. The main thing is "third party" references, ie. has any news medium commented on this project? How many of these machines have actually been produced? Is this article just spam for a Yahoo group? -- RHaworth 07:08, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Multimachine was mentioned in a Make Magazine website article on "open source" projects. That's how it came to my attention, as well as a lot of other peoples'. It's not the New York Times, but it's a reasonable citation.

Nils Davis 18:13, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Come on guys! Really! I'm so glad I found this article again. I would have had no chance in hell to find the pages it links to, if someone had deleted the article. What is it with you people who hold up some kind of artificial encyclopedic standard, but pay no heed to sacrifice any information that might be useful to someone. I just don't get it. Am I really the only one who used to love wikipedia especially because it held all kind of strange knowledge? I strongly feel this kind of behavior can only be detrimental to any collection of knowledge, and certainly it is anathema to the wiki paradigm. --BjKa (talk) 14:46, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Difficult to find sources[edit]

Unfortunately, it seems "multimachine" is a very common keyword. Let this be a lesson to anybody who comes up with a product name...

I've dug in all the sources to which I have access and have found nothing. But that may be because of filtering out bad results. Also, considering that ref is actually just a blog post, I'm wondering just how notable this really is. I won't contest that it's cool but its notability is very questionable. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 09:53, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

MultiMachine "accuracy" or "precision"[edit]

There's a difference between "accuracy" or "precision". Discuss?

Wikkrockiana (talk) 20:31, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes indeed. One way to state it simply is that precision is how close you can come to the same location twice, whereas accuracy is whether the location you got to is the place you meant to get to. It may sound goofy, but it's true. In engineering the difference can matter, although in daily life it may not. See "Accuracy and precision" for more info. — ¾-10 21:54, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Source note[edit]

"Information used by permission of Pat Delaney, the founder of the multimachine project." <- This was originally at the bottom of the article. Wizard191 (talk) 17:36, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]