Talk:Vega machine

It is requested that an image or photograph be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

This article was nominated for deletion on 13 February 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

Skepticism Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Alternative medicine

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative medicine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Alternative medicine related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Alternative medicineWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative medicineTemplate:WikiProject Alternative medicineAlternative medicine articles

Neutrality edit

Latest comment: 15 years ago5 comments5 people in discussion

This article appears to violate the WP:NPOV, though I don't know how to improve this with the information that is here. I don't know what should happen to this article. The topic I believe is sound, but I feel that as it is currently written it provides only limited useful information, and is almost exclusively about the controversy around the use of Vega Machines. Jigme Datse 03:50, 11 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

I run a small electronic design and manufacturing company, and was approached to manufacture a range of Vega type machines on subcontract. On analysis of the existing prototypes I refused the contract, as the design contained no more functioning parts than a £10 continuity tester that all our wiremen use, plus a whole lot of switches that did nothing and components that did nothing because they were only connected at one end. And different prototypes contained different values for components despite their front panel functions being labelled identically - mind you, they still wouldn't do anything because they were only connected at one end. There was no way we could write a production test schedule because there was nothing functional to test.

I have since seen the models I was approached about on sale for around £1500 ($3000).

So from an NPOV I can confirm that these machines are pure stage props and carry out no useful function whatsoever - except perhaps for checking out wiring!Designengineer (talk) 12:18, 6 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

If you've got a reliable source on that, please add it to the page, otherwise it's not really suitable. Too bad though, very interesting... WLU (talk) 16:56, 6 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

I'm about to go and get "tested" by one of these. After reading this article, and Designengineer's comments.. well, I'll definitely be paying attention to how many switches and knobs get turned, and try to figure out if they actually do anything. I was skeptical before, but now I'm just looking at this whole thing as a scam.. A scam I can't really get out of without paying a $125 cancellation fee. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.66.88.111 (talk) 20:04, 23 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

I've just responded to the POV-check request. I've removed some content, that you could readd once the articles a bit bigger. At the moment having it in there would be NPOV, as it would merely make the article a for and against type thing. Expand and then readd. -- Teen Sleepover Kid (talk) 20:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Add topic