Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Easiteach


 * 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. ( X! ·  talk )  · @199  · 03:46, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Easiteach

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Borderline nonsense, unclear exactly what this is supposed to be. This is a three sentence stub containing no valuable information. No prejudice against recreation of a sensible article with references. Drawn Some (talk) 05:31, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - yes, it exists. I don't really think it's notable within the teaching profession even. I'm sure wec an find references to it in places like the Times Ed, but it's not as if Wiki is even a good place to look for it. Blue Square Thing (talk) 05:59, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Although I'm tempted to say CSD A3 or G2, I think this can be made into a decent article. Gnews shows some significant coverage in The Guardian, Times, Detroit News, Khaleej Times etc. I'll take a first stab at this. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 06:04, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 13:37, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 13:37, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's not a great article, but there is sufficient indication the product is notable. Therefore the article should be tagged and developed, not deleted. I42 (talk) 20:03, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep on the basis of the Guardian quote: "M has built on the early success of the Easiteach Maths Software and the growing Easiteach Family has clearly become a standard by which other whiteboard software will be judged. Two new additions were launched at the show, Easiteach Games and Easiteach Science and both seem to have the same clear and flexible interface as the earlier titles" DGG (talk) 01:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Here's a stack of sources including one which explicitly says that it's notable. Colonel Warden (talk) 07:49, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * A bunch of trivial mentions don't make something notable. Certainly here at Wikipedia we have our own standards of notability and we don't just accept someone else saying something is notable. Looks like you have a fundamental misunderstanding of our notability requirements on this point, Colonel Warden, so I suggest you review WP:NOTE.  Drawn Some (talk) 23:31, 5 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Expanded the article with a few more non-trivial references; Easiteach is clearly notable, as anyone in the educational world will tell you; even if the original state of the article didn't make this clear, a small amount of research would have. Black Kite 23:25, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 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.