Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Multi-function display

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. There is certainly consensus that this should be kept, and there is certainly consensus that the article (in its current state) is not good. So I'm closing this AfD as keep with the hope that the article is improved, if it's not we can readdress merging and/or redirecting in the future (as was mentioned by some people here). (non-admin closure) Kharkiv07 (T) 22:42, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Multi-function display[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

To me this page looks like nothing but original research. There are better topics to place this content in. <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 18:13, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So are you arguing this is OR, or that the content should go somewhere else? If it is OR it should not be put anywhere else, and if it is not OR and moved the history must be retained for legal reasons and the page is therefore not a suitable candidate for deletion. In any case, I don't see that the claim of OR stands up to scrutiny. SpinningSpark 06:07, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:48, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:48, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Flight instruments which is a cute article with its miniature indicators but needs to be updated past the 1940s. Multifunction displays are what current flight instruments look like. The article isn't original research. It comes from the era when references weren't thought necessary in Wikipedia for info in standard books on the subject. I've added a reference to further reading. StarryGrandma (talk) 01:30, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment an automated teller machine is mostly MFD to the end user (customer), and that isn't a flight instrument; the infotainment display in a car is also an MFD -- 70.51.200.162 (talk) 04:39, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment this should be an industrial design and haptics article, since MFDs are so common with the previoius generation of electronic kiosks (before they were replaced by embedded Android tablets in kiosks) -- 70.51.200.162 (talk) 04:42, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Don't delete as this has lots of inlinks. Possibly redirect/merge. DexDor^(talk) 06:29, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is another nomination that has just looked at the current state of an article rather than what the article could be. Instead of asking how can I get this poor page deleted, ask instead, how can this page be improved. It is only deserving of deletion if it is beyond hope of improvement. I agree that MFDs are used beyond aviation and the article could be so expanded, but aviation is a major and important application so it is quite right that the article focuses on this. Book sources confirming this are easily found;

Development of a Synthetic Vision System for General Aviation has an eight page section on the subject
Advanced Avionics Handbook, 2009 has a half-page section and discusses the device on multiple other pages in the book
Aircraft Digital Electronic and Computer Systems has a short section describing them

Additionally, there are numerous journal papers on aviation MFDs; [1][2][3][4]. SpinningSpark 11:02, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:43, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The article looks fine apart from needing more references and possibly expanding a bit more. Stepho talk 22:13, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Not OR. (@Some Gadget Geek: what looks like OR?). Merging to Glass cockpit along PFD would be better suited than flight instruments, but not urgent either.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 08:56, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article as it is now states that "A multi-function display (MFD) is a small screen (CRT or LCD) surrounded by multiple soft keys (configurable buttons) that can be used to display information to the user in numerous configurable ways." It sounds completely like they made up the term and classified it (a display as multi-function) based on how it is designed. Technically, all touch-screens are multi-functional, so why not instead merge this page with Touchscreen instead? <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 22:41, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That makes no sense, since you do not touch the screen on a traditional MFD. Why not merge lightpen into touchscreen, while you're at it? That also isn't a touchscreen, but also gives a display additional functions. Lightpens touch the screen, but not in the way that "touchscreens" are touched. -- 70.51.200.162 (talk) 03:20, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@gadget geek : MFD is an usual term in avionics,[5] and is described OK in the article.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 19:53, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, since this is a useful article on a significant topic which simply needs expansion. Furthermore, it can't be merged/redirected to an existing aviation article because MFDs are widely used outside transport (pre-touchscreen ATMs being a common example). --pmj (talk) 13:41, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately the article currently describes MFDs as they are used exclusively in aviation. If you say so we might as well merge the pages Soft key and Screen-labeled function keys which essentially function as integral parts of MFDs as they are described here. <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 22:41, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

~~You are right, merging both of those pages into this one makes sense since they are even more specialised.~~ However, they are fine standing alone. There are better uses of our time. --pmj (talk) 23:01, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Softkeys are not necessarily paired with screens though. They can and are used with LED indicator lights and a printed (dead tree) key mapping. Our article on softkeys even mentions that the keyboard Function Keys are softkeys, and those are not labelled onto your screen, indeed they made dead tree templates to fit onto your keyboard for WordStar or WordPerfect back in the day to indicate their soft functions. -- 70.51.200.162 (talk) 03:22, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I withdraw that statement. --pmj (talk) 13:41, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Really don't care I came here to give an obvious keep for the topic, and any issues of OR should be fixed by editing. But then I read the article. WP:TNT. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:53, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.