Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Education Matrix


 * 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 delete. Based on the discussion here, this topic is missing the substantial coverage by multiple independent reliable secondary sources that notability guidelines require for an article to stand. The keep camp either has not provided any sources or they have been shown to be inadequate. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:52, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Education Matrix

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I searched multiple sources for Education Matrix and while I found a couple of different theories with that title non of them seemed independently notable. Once I search specifically for the theory with the theorists name the first three google results where the theorists websites or articles he had written. I was unable to find verifiable reliable independent sources showing notability of this theory. VViking Talk Edits 13:20, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep You can see people chiming in already in the Talk page of Education Matrix.  This is a topic of discussion in many of the education technology conference for K12 education in the US.  Admittedly it is a narrow field but that has NEVER been an issue in WIkipedia.  Apparently osme editor decided I had  such an overwhelming COI that they needed to move against this article even though I don't work for an organization associated with it, didn't author the term or the idea, and have no monetary or  official relationship.    I IN FACT tagged myself before even publishing the article as having some COI because I have presented at conferences with the author of the term.  This is clearly not a article that should be deleted and it should be allowed to be developed.   I personally am happy to pause editing it if the  community decides that is appropriate but this is clearly not a good candidate for deletion.  KEEP.  Alex Jackl (talk) 14:57, 13 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete All that matters is the sourcing, and this article has zero independent sources that are about the subject, so it should be deleted per WP:GNG. - MrOllie (talk) 15:12, 13 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep The EdMatrix was included in Appendix A of this iNACOL document published in May 2016. In that case it was labeled "An Education Standards Matrix". The underlying theory is Redd's "four layer framework for data standards" which has been more widely referenced. The EdMatrix builds on the four layer framework, adding a classification dimension. Perhaps there should also be a page for "four layer framework for data standards" or at least include that in a history section on the EdMatrix page. Jgoodell2 (talk) 16:06, 13 June 2019 (UTC) — Jgoodell2 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Stephen Coller wrote about Redd's "Four Layer Framework for Data Standards" in his forkingeducation blog on August 10, 2011 Jgoodell2 (talk) 16:06, 13 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Other references to and inclusion of the underlying Four Layer Framework by authoritative organizations (SETDA, CEDS, Ed-Fi) and people other than Redd are here:

Jgoodell2 (talk) 16:06, 13 June 2019 (UTC) — Jgoodell2 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * http://www.smarterapp.org/documents/Smarter_Balanced_Data_Format_Specification_Standards-v1.0.pdf
 * http://www.setda.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Data-to-Information.pdf
 * https://www.slideshare.net/FrankBWalsh/education-data-standards-overview
 * https://www.ed-fi.org/assets/2018/09/2017-Ed-Fi-Bootcamp-Introduction-101-Ed-Fi-Technology.pdf


 * Redd wrote the appendix of Iancol document, so that one is not independent. Your other sources are a collection of self published materials, so not usable for our purposes. I spot checked a couple and they don't seem to include the phrase 'Education Matrix.' We need independent sources from reputable publishers (like the academic press or newspapers), that are about this topic. - MrOllie (talk) 17:36, 13 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete Perhaps a case of TOOSOON but I do not find the kind of sourcing in general interest of education specific publications (including ed news sources or databases like ERIC) to suggest notability. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 03:18, 15 June 2019 (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.