Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/High-end audio cables

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 no consensus, that is, not for really anything. –MuZemike 06:04, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That is, there is a stronger consensus for a rename or a merge/redirect, but there are other venues for that. –MuZemike 06:06, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

High-end audio cables

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

Confused mess of an article rife with original research. Is this an article about high-end audio? Well... no, it appears to be about a niche market in audio cables, but that niche is ill-defined and no clear standards are given. Besides which, the "high-end" audio market is already covered in the audiophile article. Is this an article about audio cables? Kind of. It reiterates information about speaker wire, coaxial cables, plenum cables and others, but again there's no clear definition of what exactly it is talking about. There's also some info on metallurgy, mentions of a few consumer products tests, etc. With no definitive subject there can be no article. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 14:50, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and rename to Audio cable, or merge with Speaker cable. There's a valid topic in here, and it can be saved. (Audio cable currently redirects to Audio and video connector, which isn't about cables at all.) Pburka (talk) 20:48, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Not at all. The audio and video connector article is about audio cables, namely RCA connectors and phono connectors that use coaxial and patch cables. Speaker wire may be terminated with a few different connectors, or simply threaded directly through a binding post. And what about the power cables discussed in this article, does anyone have an explanation of how these qualify as "high-end audio cables"? There's a lot of random info in this article, but no one topic, and not much worth salvaging. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 01:33, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/Redirect: to High-end audio which seems like a very similar article. Mattg82 (talk) 22:58, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - 'high end' is meaningless marketing speak. --Wtshymanski (talk) 01:14, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- This article is exactly about the controversy surrounding cables sold with such "meaningless marketing speak". Pcap ping 11:31, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but Rename to Premium audio cable. There is an established market for this sort of stuff and it's not going away. "High end" is a terrible term, since many of these cables perform identically to their more reasonably priced counterparts (e.g. a 6 foot Monster SPDIF cable) where as sometimes there is meaningful added value (particularly for analog signals in noise-sensitive environments - like electric guitar cables). But in all cases, these products are priced/overpriced - for which "premium" is an accurate term. Reswobslc (talk) 21:36, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- A better title would be Premium audiophile cables, because it also covers super duper mains power cables sold to those that believe such cables improve the audio quality of their equipment. Pcap ping 11:31, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 16:19, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect/Merge to High-end audio. As this article stands, it is a blatant POV fork. It looks like it's only intention is to disparage the high-end audio cable market, without discussing any of the positive arguments about it. However, there is some useful information in this article, and I recommend that the non-POV data gets merged into the parent article. (X! · talk) · @771 · 17:30, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- It's not a POV fork. The premium cables business, and the controversies surrounding it are sufficiently developed sub-topic, so a separate article is justified. Feel free to add a WP:SUMMARY to the main article. Pcap ping 11:31, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I see that High-end audio is surprisingly short article. A merge would be possible, although I'm worried that the cable controversy is longer than the rest of that parent article! Pcap ping 11:34, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's a well known controversial topic in audio circles as evidenced the many references. The article can be made NPOV by citing all relevant opinions and science. The topic is not inherently POV. Pcap ping 01:42, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Additional comment. The problem with the term is there are no objective standards for membership in the class. One can readily carry out measurements to identify a 50 ohm transmission cable, or test to see if something really is a 1000 amp cable...but the "high end" description is just written on the box. If I charge $100 for a roll of 14 AWG zip cord, is it a "high end" cable? --Wtshymanski (talk) 16:36, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - This is not a list, so you don't need "objective standards for membership in the class". You just need references discussing the topic. And there are plenty in the article. Pcap ping 11:15, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/Redirect to Audio cable (which is a redirect to Audio connector right now. The naming convention of this article right now is all wrong, and having these very similar articles separate is an administrative nightmare. It would be much easier for a reader to have it put together coherently in one article rather than spread out among three or four. Shadowjams (talk) 03:22, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- This article is not only about audio cables. It also has a section on super duper mains power cables sold to people that think those would make a difference to their audiophile experience. I suggested above it be renamed to Premium audiophile cables instead, which better describes the article's contents. Pcap ping 11:31, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - That just seems unnecessary. That's an uncommon phrasing. I would search for audio cable, maybe for high-end audio cable. I can never imagine searching for audiophile cable. Obviously redirects would be in place, but it still seems unnecessarily clunky. Shadowjams (talk) 23:17, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep/Rename This topic has been covered in many audiophile magazines (from both sides) and certainly needs its own article but the current article title doesn't suit the topic. Premium audiophile cables is a much better title and is more representative of this subject. I was surprised to see that the article currently doesn't mention the "cryogenically treated" power receptacles which have undergone a cryogenic treatment and are resold/marketed by some of the companies in this industry as I would have expected to see those noted along with the mains cables. (And where are the braided Cat-5 speaker cables?) --Tothwolf (talk) 20:05, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Proposal - What if we expanded it. High-end cable, for instance. There are going to be the same processes in creating them, similar price points, and there could be sub-sections of each. In the unlikely event one of those subsections grows too large, it can be forked under the traditional fork criteria. But I think right now it meets a lot of the merge criteria. What I don't want to see is lots of tiny articles overlapping each other, with contradictions and errors that overlap is prone to. Shadowjams (talk) 23:20, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'm really not sure what title we should give the eventual article but I don't think the term "High end" fits. Perhaps something like Premium cable assemblies? The origins of these type of cables are from the audiophile market, but it has indeed spread into computing as well. I doubt many people here have not seen the fancy gold flash-plated D-subminiature cables or the "mega-high-performance" USB and network cables, who's manufacturers make all sorts of interesting claims ;) --Tothwolf (talk) 19:41, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, possibly rename to Premium audio cable. I agree with the assertion above that this topic is notable and can be written from a neutral point of view. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 04:07, 4 January 2010 (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.