Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MAME arcade cabinet


 * 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 Delete. Consensus is that the article is an improper content fork of MAME -- Jreferee    t / c  14:19, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

MAME arcade cabinet

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Purely prescriptive elaboration on something which warrants a sentence or two in MAME. It's been copied to Wikibooks, where it belongs. Chris Cunningham 08:17, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete If it's been transwikied to Wikibooks, no need to have it here. Perhaps worth a mention and a link in MAME.  NA SC AR Fan 24 (radio me!) 12:08, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per NASCAR Fan. STORMTRACKER   94  12:50, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, transwiki of how-to material complete. I've added a Wikibooks template to MAME in place of the See also entry. --Dhartung | Talk 13:53, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge to the MAME article, without any of the "how-to" guide material. I'm positive that this has been covered in multiple reliable sources.  Amazon.com confirms this.   Bur nt sau ce  17:40, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Case in point, an intentionally limited search string on books.google.com reveals a number of hits from books such as Hardware Hacking Projects for Geeks, Retro Gaming Hacks, The Medium of the Video Game, Make: Technology on Your Time, and Project Arcade: Build Your Own Arcade Machine.  So while I agree in principle we're not a how-to guide, we can still write a non-how-to article about them as they're notable beyond a shadow of a doubt.  By the way, I *love* the how-to imagery we're hosting in the Paper plane article.   Bur nt sau ce  21:42, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * So we can have a paragraph on emulator or MAME dealing with them. The concept of emulator cabinets really isn't complicated enough to warrant an article. The implementation has a lot of nuances, but discussing these without getting prescriptive is really difficult (check out accurizing, which is a perfect example of how to take a non-article and phrase it in such a way as to make a 60k guidebook seem like an article at first glance). Chris Cunningham 11:16, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Exactly. So you agree then, as nominator, that this subject can be dealt with in the MAME article?  I will perform the merge now.   Bur nt sau ce  20:18, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, but excise how-to material. Pranab 13:19, 9 October 2007 (UTC)


 * 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.