Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Midification

Midification

[1] and [2] doesn't reveal much notability for this WP:NEOLOGISM with respect to the meaning given. Wisdom89 _{(_T / ^C)} 18:07, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure I think this topic (adding MIDI capabilities to a device) is proper for Wikipedia, but the article as currently written has minimal useful content. Some of it is talk page material, in fact. I would have preferred to give the author, who has been around on Wikipedia for a while, a chance to improve the article before taking it to AfD. Looie496 (talk) 18:23, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- I'^mperator 18:28, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From: original author of this page. Happy to take direction on improving this article, which is certainly short on content so far. I am well aware that I am not expert in the technology, and am planning via other forums to seek further input from those who are. Forgive me if it is considered inappropriate to gather such information by starting an admittedly incomplete page. (Aren't most of them?!) I think some parts of the music community would consider the term midification is both a useful and instantly understandable neologism. I would be pleased to learn what Looie496 considers "talk page material". NickSharp (talk) 18:45, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"There may well be a need for a disambiguation page for the word, as there appear to be other uses" is definitely talk page material, and other things in the "Introduction" as well. Looie496 (talk) 19:10, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Nick, also, I'd refrain from including the number of google hits the term receives in the article, as it's generally not considered encyclopedic. It really depends on what and who is using it, and in what context. To respond to your comment above Looie, AfD is a perfect venue to discuss the merits of a potential deletion candidate since I didn't nominate it for its lack of content, tone, style or worthiness. That would have been a misuse of the process. Rather, it was a good faith nomination on the basis of the neologism/protologism's pervasiveness and significance. Wisdom89 _{(_T / ^C)} 21:55, 23 April 2009 (UTC) Wisdom89 _{(_T / ^C)} 21:55, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. -- — LinguistAtLarge • Talk 22:29, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge~~Delete~~ I couldn't find much about this use of the word. There is apparently another use of it though. ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:33, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Per Daniel Christensen's and Hexachord's comments, I think redirecting and merging to the midi article would be best. There's not enough independent notability for a stand alone article. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:03, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: It certainly does not merit an article; maybe a section or mention in another MIDI-related article or MIDI itself. Daniel Christensen (talk) 04:36, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge what can be salvaged and redirect to MIDI, which would cover both potential meanings of the word. — Gwalla | Talk 17:24, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - midification is no neologism. It is used since MIDI is around. Professionally manufactured "midification kits" for pre-MIDI synthesizers like the Roland Jupiter 8 ([3]) were available soon after the first MIDI synthesizers came out in the mid-1980s. The word is also used as "MIDIfikation" in German language: Google.de search. --Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord² 16:09, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge From original author: I thank Hexachord for support, but I actually now feel that this term does not warrant an article all to itself. It is interesting to know that the term is nearly as old as MIDI itself. I feel quite confident the term should have a place in Wikipedia, perhaps with "to midify" and "midifying"?. I am less sure there is a need for disambiguation, since all of the first few Google search results that had nothing to do with MIDI were simply spelling mistakes, as 'i' is next to 'o' on a QWERTYUIOP keyboard. Does ChildofMidnight have input on that? In any case, if the term is merged to the MIDI article, I guess it no longer needs a disambiguation page.

I thank wisdom89 for his notes. My feathers are smoother now! They were a little ruffled by a deletion nomination 3 minutes after the first 'Save page'!

I will take no action at this time myself, to let this discussion continue for a while.NickSharp (talk) 21:51, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]