Talk:List of finalists on American Inventor

This article was nominated for deletion on 13:32, 3 August 2007 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus for deletion.

This article was nominated for deletion on 13:32, 20 August 2007 (UTC). The result of the discussion was Re-name and list only the finalists .

So...now we have an article merged into a list of just one invention? Also, isn't the i in Inventions supposed to be lowercased due to naming conventions on here? Douglasr007 01:09, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well it's a starting article. We'll obviously incorporate more inventions into this article. I'm not sure about the naming conventions, if you think it goes that way, rename it. Slartibartfast1992 01:57, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added a few, and will continue to do so. Codelyoko193 _Talk 14:29, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to take the time to dig through these to find the info on the older inventions, but here are some recap links to help whoever wants to assemble this list. These recaps might also serve as references for some of this stuff:

Second Season (Last night's recap is not up yet)

• [1]
• [2]
• [3]
• [4]
• [5]

First Season

• [6]
• [7]
• [8]
• [9]
• [10]

Note that, for season one, I have only included the links to the preliminaries, as that at least shows most of the inventions covered. If you want the recaps of the semifinals and finals, you can find them the same way I found these: Go to the Article Archive (which is huge), and then do a text search on "American Inventor". Annoyingly, it appears that RNO, the site, never bothered to index up the first season, so you have to go throught the full archive to find them. - TexasAndroid 14:51, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That we should include the name of each inventor and pictures of the inventions if they are free to use? Codelyoko193 _Talk 23:08, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think only the most significant inventions should get pictures since it would take a whole lot of space if we didn't and it would hardly be in accordance with fair use policy. A few should get pictures, and the picture of the invention should, preferably, include the inventor in it (E.g.: Mark Griffin beside the Bulletball table) Slartibartfast (1992) 23:24, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suggested in the afd that this list of the judges' favorite rejected inventors could be used to clean up the season 2 article a bit. I suggest including entries from the entire list or just the top five and deleting all other rejected inventors. Keep the finalists, of course. I don't have time to do it myself. Here's the list: (10) Howard Batterman with "Finger Tunes", (9) Richard Dessert Jr. and Richard Dessert Sr. with "The Escape Suit", (8) Rose Feller with the "Love Test", (7) Rayfil Wong with "Sober Key", (6) Evan Balasuriya with "Double Chin Buster", (5) Steven Cousineau with "A.C.E. Cycle", (4) John Stark with "EZ Squeeze Ear Plugs", (3) David Le with "Helmet/Shoulder Pads", (2) Carlo Giancanti with "Copper Gear" and (1) Silvio DiSalvatore with "Black Cougar".--User101010 12:47, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I nominatied it for deletion again, and it was re-named. I put only the finalists- but we still need better descriptions in the Season 1 finalists. Codelyoko193 _TalkEditor Review 15:23, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Merging could bring us back to the point where we started with the BulletBall article that was redirected to List of inventions shown on American Inventor which was then redirected to List of finalists on American Inventor. By that I mean that merging might encourage future editors to create articles similar to Bulletball which would start the cycle all over again. --User101010 11:10, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per User101010 Codelyoko193 _Talk HHC! 12:16, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per User101010. Seems really ironic that bulletball started on the article American Inventor, was then placed in its own article, later made to redirect here and listed here, then to have this article deleted and everything back the way it started about two months ago. Slartibartfast (1992) 16:53, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I've actually changed my mind. What purpose does this article have if all of its contents can be easily placed on the American Inventor article? There's not that much information to go here, and this is starting to seem like one of those lists full of useless information that could be better listed in another article. --Slartibartfast (1992) 20:37, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support Hm, I'll change mine too, per Slartibartfan Thanks, Codelyoko193 _Talk 23:25, 25 September 2007 (UTC

Comment. Is there any way we can get more people to participate in this discussion? It'll never end if we don't get more opinions. --Slartibartfast (1992) 20:37, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Or can we just wrap this up and call it a merge? I'm not sure anybody else is gonna place their opinion here, this has been going on for months. --Slartibartfast (1992) 00:22, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perfectly fine with me. Thanks, Codelyoko193 _Talk 22:56, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right, I don't really know what part should be merged to American Inventor so I'll leave the whole merge business to you, Codelyoko. --Slartibartfast (1992) 23:02, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do, but I am not an expert on actually merging. Let's ask somebody to do it. Thanks, Codelyoko193 _Talk 16:55, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Um... what do you mean you're not an expert? Just copy the content you want to put in the other article, turn this article into a redirect (you know, delete all the stuff and in this case replace with "#REDIRECT [[American Inventor]]"), and paste the content you copied off this article into the other article in the appropriate section (and remove the merge template from the other article, duh). --Slartibartfast (1992) 22:41, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, thought it was more complicated, and you had to delete the article, blah, blah, blah... Ok, I will. Thanks, Codelyoko193 _Talk 22:50, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DOne Thanks, Codelyoko193 _Talk 21:59, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow... sort of feels empty now that the business that's been going on for months is over. And we're back exactly where we started. Now that's what I call good irony. They should have more stuff like this on TV. --Slartibartfast (1992) 22:43, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]