Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Overdriven fluorescent light

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep and cleanup. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 12:23, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Overdriven fluorescent light

Delete - a how-to, and a pretty problematical one at that. - DavidWBrooks 18:36, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• Comment: This was apparently either never listed on vfd or removed out of process, so I'm bringing it to today's page for resolution. —Korath (Talk) 00:25, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep This article needs to be cleaned up and made encyclopedic. That can't happen if it gets deleted, and this is an encyclopedic topic. Klonimus 07:06, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Written in the wrong tone, but certainly not a how-to. Suggest it be offered to the Cleanup Taskforce if they have people specialized in this area. Mgm|^(talk) 08:06, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, cleanup and expand. Megan1967 10:53, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete I'm not anti-howto (I voted keep on the car wash one) but following this sounds like a bad idea to me. At the very least, not something that really needs to be in a general-interest encyclopedia. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:43, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)
  • Could you explain your reasoning? Klonimus 18:43, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • Yes, it sounds potentially dangerous. For example, The older magnetic ballasts will self-destruct if you try to rewire them. I know also that overdriven fluorescent lights also generate more heat, and can be a fire hazard or melt objects nearby. It's not something relatively safe, like overclocking a CPU. As mentioned, I don't see this being useful in a general-interest encyclopedia. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 19:45, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)
• Merge, possibly with fluorescent lamp, or keep. I've re-written in a more encyclopediac tone. --Carnildo
• Delete I'm not comfortable with the naked how-to tone of the article. Contrast it with overclocking which I think has a much better approach to a practical-knowledge article. Also... overclocking a processor is teraflops more notable/encyclopedic/useful than tampering with electricity. Feco 02:52, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • How to light your farts for an example of how-to-ism gone wild.Feco 03:01, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • I don't see any "how-to"-ism in the re-written version. It describes what is done in overdriving, but not how. --Carnildo 03:35, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, less how-to-like now, Wikipedia is neither paper nor censored for the protection of people who shouldn't be playing with electricity. Nickptar 14:39, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.