Talk:Evesham Technology/Archive 1

Bias and POV
Article seems as though it has been written by someone biased towards the said company. I've removed some POV material and added appropriate tags. Recommend for clean-up. Scar ian Talk  13:02, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Aricle cleanup
I have made an attempt to clean this article up - still needs some work doing on it, but I hope better than it was Bods 11:15, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * An even closer look could awake the impression that  the entire article is a cleverly  contrived ad for Tewtech. It  may  not be, but  the fact  that  the suspicion  is raised, is an indication that  all is not we'll with  its compliance with  Wiki  policy, and as a company, it  might  lack  notability.--Kudpung (talk) 09:07, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Possible PROD or AfD
There is a slight possibility that  this could be a cleverly contrived ad for Tewtech.com. With the exception  of manteneace edits by  regular Wikipedians, all contributions to  this article have been made by  anonymous IP users. Tewtech in  their website claim  to  have "over 20 years experience in the IT market,  but according  to  an anonymous contribution to  the article: A group of staff from Evesham started their own company called Tewktech - which  is understood to  have been around 2007. In  his/her edit  summary, user Ubcle writes: Ubcule (talk | contribs) (3,865 bytes) (→Ex-employees provide support for Evesham customers: Reads way to much like an advert/press release; rewritten, and I'm still not too happy :/) The article was originally created by  a spammer IP 81.86.79.225 on Nov 2004 clearly  as an advert.

In Revision as of 05:27, 24 December 2008 (edit) (undo) User:92.2.67.16 adds: ''A group of staff from Evesham have started their own company called Tewktech. They offer free email support for all Evesham products while able to offering a Onsite and Return to Base services. For more details please Click Here. Tewktech features staff from many departments of Evesham so they have the ability to know all the products inside out. They also have links to all manufactures and distributors who are willing to help to get spare parts for your Evesham product''.

It is suggested that a pre PROD, pre AfD,  or pre Speedy discussion  should take place here before eventually  wasting  valuable Wiki  admin  time. Please leave your comments or suggestions here in the bulleted list, and remember to  sign  your name with  four  tildes.


 * Delete - see rationale above. --Kudpung (talk) 09:16, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Improve and keep. I don't doubt that the current article may well have been put together by employees of Tewktech, and it needs to be cleaned up to remove any COI.  However, Evesham was a major player in the UK domestic IT market (at least) from the 1980s and 90s, and in my view is sufficiently notable for a (better) article.  (My Evesham PC packed up this year after about 10 years - if that makes me have a COI, I'd better not edit the article...)  Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:05, 30 July 2009 (UTC)   ....Too late.... ;) Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:10, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I've now improved it quickly, without going out searching for new sources. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:35, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Reserve Judgement. Evesham were pretty big in their day, so I think maybe they warrant an article. The current article certainly needs work though. If somebody improves it, it woll be wroth keeping. If stays in it's current state I'll probably be convinced to vote to delete. BTW, Anonymous IP's are fully allowed to edit/write articles, that's not a problem (I and, I guess, a lot of other people started that way). Oh, and Ghmyrtle, that's certainly not a COI, feel free to edit :-) GyroMagician (talk) 10:16, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Tentative keep If Evesham were pretty big in their day, they deserve an article as notability isn't temporary. There are sources about the company – this one turned up pretty quickly in a google search – which I think establishes notability. Nev1 (talk) 19:33, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd err on the side of keep' and improve. Jeni  ( talk ) 19:43, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep and Improve For a few years Evesham was recommended by various consumer organisations. Indeed I bought my computer in the 1980s from them!. I believe that one of the values of Wikipedia is as an encylopedia of historical data and deletion would hinder future enquiries on the history of the UK domestic computer market. I tend to err on the side of caution on deletion policy contrary to what I perceive as the current trend of editors --DonBarton (talk) 23:37, 30 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Rewritten - The problem with this article was due to  its having  been compiled from  items copied and pasted from  various news web sites with  little concern for Wiki  article structure and prose style. Rewritten, neutral  tone, more refs.--Kudpung (talk) 03:52, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

It looks much better now - clearly worth keeping. Would it make sense to rename the page to 'Evesham Micros' rather than 'Evesham Technology'? I think the company were most widely known by their first name (although that could just be the name I remember!). GyroMagician (talk) 09:46, 31 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I've made a few changes - I've tried to shorten things a bit (but wasn't as successful as I'd hoped). I've re-added the reference to Tewktech. While wikipedia isn't meant for advertising, it is useful for owners of Evesham PCs to know where they can find help. Former staff offering free email support is also a slightly unusual twist, so I think it's worth a mention.


 * Kudpung - the history of the company has changed. From the previous version of the page, I understood that Evesham built themselves up in the 8-bit home computer market, and got into the PC game later. It now reads that the company made most of their trade with Amstrad PCs and then spread to home computing. Was this a deliberate change? Either way, it could do with a ref (although that is likely to be hard to find). GyroMagician (talk) 10:56, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * If that change resulted from my edits, it was inadvertent - I don't know the answer, so feel free (obviously) to change it back again. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:29, 31 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I didn't actually change or  cut anything. Essentially, I  removed redundant information  that  was the result of copying  from  different  sources reporting  on  the same things, put everything  into  chronological  order, gave the article a more sober tone of prose, verified all  the references -  and found more -  and even added some more bits of history. All  this took  about  six hours, with  preparing  most  of the rewrite offline before posting  it, so  it  was fairly  thorough. I checked out many  more sources than I  have cited, and I fully  understood from  them  that Evesham   began as an Amstrad and Atari  discounter, and went  into  their own production  on  the back of that  success. Personally, I  have been an exclusive Mac user for 20 years and wouldn't  know the difference between an 8-bit, a PC, or anything  else that  isn't  a Mac. Was an Amstrad a PC or an 8-bit? I  don't have the slightest  idea. In  1988 there were still  dozens of brands of computers all with proprietary  operating systems, before evything  boiled down basically  to  Windoze, Mac, and Linux. I  think the main  point  is that they  started up  as an end-of-line 'flogg-off' discounter, whatever it  was they  were selling, and later started manufacturing  (or probably  more correctly, assembling) their own  brand hardware. I'm not  a computer expert, I'm open to  any  suggestions that  stick  to  the best  interpretation  of the numerous press article,  although journalists are notorious for  getting  things wrong, particularly  when they  review my .  I'm  pretty sure I  never saw any  references to  Evesham  selling  the Commodore 64, and I  seem  to  remember that  Amstrad around that  time was not  an  IBM Compatibl (but  I  may  be wrong). Probably  one of the best solutions would be for someone else to  go  through  the references again, and see if I  got  everything  right. Beware though, because even some of those news reports have slightly different  information when reporting  the same events. The article need some photos. There are still  many  websites showing  photos of Evesham stuff, but  don't know which  of the dozens of  copyright  categories they  fall into. Apart from  watching what  others do  to  it  and reverting  any  spam  or vandalism, I won't  be spending any  more time on this article.--Kudpung (talk) 18:30, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

BTW: There is only one single appearance  of the words Evesham Technoogy on the Tewtech site (see: http://www.tewktech.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=49:welcome&catid=34:tewktech ). There is no mention whatsoever of any  services they  might  offer for the brand. Their website was last updated yesterday.--Kudpung (talk) 02:47, 1 August 2009 (UTC)


 * True, but the historical context is relevant - I've added a couple of refs which contain some editorial content, not just press releases. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:19, 1 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Looks good. Could you possibly  make a photo of your old machine and post  it  to  illustrate the article?--Kudpung (talk) 07:54, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, no can do. What's the policy on using logos of defunct companies, like this?  Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:41, 1 August 2009 (UTC)


 * The CBM 64 is (as far as I can tell) a slightly less common name for the Commodore 64. I initially searched for it because I'd never heard of a CBM 64, and wondered what it was. My bad with Amstrad - you're correct, the earlier ones weren't PC compatibles (so confusing, that a PC isn't always a PC!).
 * The history section is now far more detailed than it was, which is a good thing. I'm still a bit confused by it though - it's more of a feeling about the early computer market than anything that's actually written. Amstrad would put Evesham firmly in the business market. Hacking together cheat cartridges for the Spectrum is a very different market. Commodore did produce a range of business machines before the C64, so maybe that is what Evesham were initially selling, alongside Amstrads, before moving into the (newly created) home computer market? GyroMagician (talk) 10:09, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

'''
 * Comment -- I am not sure from the article if the company had a small factory or a shop. In either event, it is propbably only of very marginal notability.  On the other hand, it is well-sourced.  If we delete it, we probably lose for ever an article on the history of a small computer business.  On the whole, I would suggest that we keep it.  Peterkingiron (talk) 14:16, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Peter, please see the rewritten article. The company  had a large factory  in  Evesham  with  300 employees, 19 retail  shops in  key  locations around the UK, and was a major player in  the UK computer scene.--Kudpung (talk) 14:59, 1 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Gyro, I knew nothing  about  computers way  back then except  that  I  wrote my  thesis on  a Sinclair to  impress my  my  profs. I  knew about  the Amstrad because in  1988 or so  i  was looking  to  computerise the office of a language academy  I  had  founded in  Avignon, and it  was on  the list of possibles.  Fortunately, I discovered the MacPlus... --Kudpung (talk) 14:59, 1 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Ghmyrtle, Thanks - see article iinfobox.--Kudpung (talk) 14:59, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The level of cynicism in the original proposal is remarkable and sad. Glad to see it wasn't allowed to hold sway. Luwilt (talk) 20:26, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Nev1 (talk) 20:28, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Luwilt, have a look at the article history - you will see that Kudpung, who originally proposed AfD, is also the main contributor to the rewrite. Sometimes it's helpful to prod people into action ;-) I hope you agree the article is much better now - but if there is anything missing, please add it! GyroMagician (talk) 12:28, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Absolutely, and Kudpung was gauging the community's opinion before PRODing the article or taking it to AfD. And not only did Kudpung do most of the rewriting, but also asked others here to contribute. As a result of those efforts, Wikipedia now has quite a good article on the company. Still cynical? Nev1 (talk) 14:08, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

To do
The article now has an infobox and logo. It would be nice nevertheless if someone could come up  with  some product pics. therea re still a lot out there on  redundant on-line sales websites,, but  we have to  careful about  copyright. To find out more about copyright, just  click  the 'upload File' link  in  the navbar  on  the left. The only other enhancement  I  can  think  of would be a Products list  section. But this might  be too  much  research  to  worthwhile as their range was immense. maybe a short list of their major own production.--Kudpung (talk) 06:46, 2 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I have moved the bolding of alternative names (Evesham Micros and Evesham.com) back to the first paragraph because I have created redirects from these names to this page. I think a product listing would be huge, so probably not worth it! I think the page looks complete. GyroMagician (talk) 08:13, 2 August 2009 (UTC)