Talk:Gunderson Do-All Machine
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Notability
[edit]This article does list a few third-party sources that seem to provide nontrivial coverage of this machine, so on the face of it the subject appears to meet the notability guidelines. But something about it doesn't "feel" notable to me. The subject of the article is a mechanical contraption that a man put together, which he exhibits at county fairs and the like. I don't know what Gas Engine Magazine and the "Carter County Old-time Machinery and Antiques Annual Show" publication have to say about this machine, but the Daily Independent seems to treat it as a passing curiosity. The article was essentially written by just one user (User:Lyonessj), whose contributions have mostly been to this one article, and the first version of the article was full of phrases that seem overly enthusiastic ("artistically presented engineering marvel", "an amazing array of belts", "a mezmerizing kenetic sculpture", "a fun and educational tool"). This gives me an impression that the article was written by someone with a close connection to Mr. Gunderson in order to promote his machine, which does not improve my feeling about the machine's notability. But all of these feelings are just hunches—I don't have any solid evidence that the machine is not notable—so I'd like to hear what other editors think. Is it notable as machinery? Is it notable as art? —Bkell (talk) 08:34, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- Seems notable enough for an article based on the guidelines. Sure, it's not hugely notable, but that's not where the bar is set for inclusion. --Minderbinder (talk) 19:21, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- I agree. It gets a few hit on Google, which I know is not the official yardstick but it gives us some idea. Keep it. Martin Hogbin (talk) 22:36, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- The sources seem to be closer to the gee whiz side of news reporting than, say, Woodward and Bernstein, but it is not quite pure 'slow news day' stuff. Absent indication of other problems, I would assume that the promotional tone came from failing to tone down the hyperbole from some of the sources. Feel free to take it to AfD or WP:COI/N if you still have doubts. - Eldereft (cont.) 05:31, 10 January 2009 (UTC)