Talk:Power Macintosh 5200 LC

Proposed merge with Power Macintosh 5260

Not notable as a standalone. The main article, Power Macintosh 5000 series, needs this information as there is a void in the sequence of model #s. ^{Atsme📞📧} 18:01, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Oppose because

a) I'm literally in the middle of fleshing these articles out now; It will take several days and a lot more information is still coming.

b) Apple doesn't consider them to be exactly the same (their service manuals are grouped as follows: 5200/5300; 5260/5280; 5400; 5500). Why? Because the machines are different enough that they can't all be covered at once. You can see that here. If they group their 5000 series machines like this, so should we. And further to the point, all of our available sources -- ALL OF THEM, EVERY SINGLE ONE -- treats each machine as a distinct topic. (We're here to document the pre-existing reality, not to invent it.)

c) It's more challenging for users to navigate and read an article with several lengthy Infoboxes. Remember, these Infoboxes are incomplete! Look at Twentieth Anniversary Macintosh for an example of a fully-filled Infobox about a computer, and consider how ridiculous a single article would look with four of those.

d) It is standard for our pre-1998 Macintosh pages to have a series article, and individual articles for each machine in that series: Macintosh II, Macintosh LC, Compact Macintosh, Macintosh Quadra, PowerBook, Power Macintosh and so on. All those pages are, in effect, really fancy disambiguation pages. Why would we pick a couple of arbitrary lines of machines and treat them differently? Warren -talk- 20:15, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

When you say fleshing out, I hope you're referring to eliminating all the irrelevant information and lists of other models in the 5260 article. The 5260 has been long out of production, and I question its standalone notability since the only citations are to Apple references. The merge is indeed warranted as the 5260 is part of the 5000 series computers, and the only information necessary can be condensed into a summary of the computer itself, and not a detailed description of why Apple made its business decisions. Include what that model replaced and what replaced that model and it's tech specs. The 5000 article needs organization and trimming as well, so I hope that's what you're referring to regarding this merge. ^{Atsme📞📧} 12:56, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

What does "being out of production" have to do the topic's relevance? Wikipedia has articles on tons of things from the past. I mean, shoot, DEC built just twenty-three PDP-6s and sold them to some universities, 40 years ago, and we have an article on that!

I've been working on collecting resources and references for all early-mid 1990's Macintosh articles, which have been poorly serviced relative to the 1980s and 1999 Macintosh articles. Why? It isn't because Apple didn't sell millions of computers, because they did... it certainly isn't because they didn't receive press coverage, because they did. Certainly isn't because there isn't interest in the topic, either -- there are Youtube channels, physical museums, books, magazines, fan web sites and tons of other content devoted to this time period. The fact that a lot of it hasn't made it into Wikipedia has nothing to do with relevance and everything to do with "it just hasn't been done". That's what I'm trying to do here -- there are a couple dozen articles that collectively need a ton of help. What you're trying to do is hinder the continued development of the encyclopedia because you don't believe in a topic. Don't be that guy. Be useful instead.

On and hey, want another practical reason for splitting these articles? The 5200 and 5300 are part of the LC brand, but the 5260, 5400, and 5500 are not. Okay? But because they were all in one article, past Wikipedians with hearts of gold and literally no references whatsoever, created the idea out of thin air that all models were "LC" models in spirit, and people outside the encyclopedia have since picked up that idea! What a fucking mess. Warren -talk- 01:49, 24 September 2017 (UTC)