This article was nominated for deletion on 2007-01-10. The result of the discussion was keep.

OK to add this link regarding notability? http://www.newscientisttech.com/article/dn10922-desktop-fabricator-may-kickstart-home-revolution.html Selkins 21:42, 11 January 2007 (UTC)Selkins 16:43 11 January 2007 (EST)[reply]

Please do. No need to ask. "Edit boldly" is the mantra at WP. Paul Beardsell 21:57, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved the page from Fabber to the name the article said this was a shortening of, and rewritten to match. The AfD appeared to note that the page should be moved; if anyone notices any errors I've introduced, please fix. Cheers, DWaterson 21:58, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DreamGuy, did you want to discuss your reasons for the merge, and ideas about which page should be kept? --GargoyleMT 16:11, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reasons for the merge tag is that people have created multiple pages on the exact same topic under different names and which would be better to have all the info in one place instead of small amounts of info spread out and being edited separately. I don't particularly care which one is kept, as long as we're edit that one, then later on if someone has a reason for one name over another it can be moved if necessary. DreamGuy 17:38, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This merge sounds good to me. Of Digital fabricator and Desktop manufacturing, I think the latter name should be kept (since it is not a neologism like "fabber"), though this article has more meat (and edit history) in it. Among the rapid prototyping themed pages, there are other similar ones (rapid manufacturing) that might collapse well to a single article. Most are pages about future developments, since the materials of prototyping aren't very close in function to production materials. --GargoyleMT 19:29, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that, in general, there are probably too many articles on this subject. However, I think there may be value in keeping the apparatus separate from the overall process. If you consider that Computer printer and Desktop Publishing are appropriately separate, this case may be similar. --Ymalaika 21:02, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Although many kinds of fabricators might fit on a desktop, not all of them do, such as the Candyfab, so I feel the distinction is useful. Milkfish 20:58, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]