Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Educational Demonstration


 * 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   speedy delete. g11 Cirt (talk) 14:41, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Educational Demonstration

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

This is a contested PROD. Prod removed without edit summary by originator. Prod rationale: "This is an essay and original research, unless notability can be asserted with reliable secondary sources, this article should be deleted." The references do not mention the term at all. No notability asserted nor verified. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 22:08, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete As per nom.  Teapot  george Talk  22:39, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
 * comment While there are references out there which have the phrase Educational Demonstration in them, the context is not the context of this article. The phrase seems to be a pair of words used often in a conversation. I have not yet found the topic the article attempts to discuss in my researches so far using the tools above. The closest was a commons image file showing male ejaculation, and we can't be self referential! Additionally it wasn't particularly educational. Broadly half the population has had one, and much of the other half has seen or experienced one. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 23:08, 3 March 2010 (UTC)


 * the editor comment above appears completely inappropriate and seems to degrade the ability to have a meaningful conversation over the legitimacy of the article.Dgall87 (talk) 00:35, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment That is an interesting template you have used alongside my name. vandal has connotations of objectional conduct and is highly inappropriate to a deletion discussion. If you have something to say to assert and verify the notability of the article, then go ahead and say it. If you can improve the article to make it of sufficient quality to avoid deletion then do that. But do not spend your time and energy on people instead of the primary task which is to create a proper encyclopaedia. Please read WP:AGF.  Note that the person closing this discussion will read the article with care, will look at the references, and will take arguments about policy into full consideration, but will ignore personal remarks and rhetoric. Please put useful comments here based upon notability, verifiability and other aspects that will demonstrate to the community that the article should remain here. Please add relevant references to the article to demonstrate not only the notability of the topic but also the notability of the term, and use reliable sources. Also read the policy about assuming good faith where your fellow editors are concerned.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 08:06, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment since nominating this article for I have also nominated its sister article Promotional Demonstration for deletion here. Quoting from the rationale there: "Considering the two articles together they could be viewed as a WP:COATRACK style vehicle for promotion of the commercial and rather spammy reference to Redwoods Media, a reference which is present in each and which mentions the term in an entirely "buy this product from us" manner." Fiddle Faddle (talk) 08:24, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Exactly the same rationale as I offer on the Promotional Demonstration AfD - The term itself seems to be a generally-used phrase with no specific encyclopedic notability, and it doesn't seem to mean any more than the sum of its parts - an "educational demonstration" is a demonstration, and it's educational. The article just reads like an essay on one POV aspect of producing educational demonstrations (who says they have to be video, for example?). -- Boing!   said Zebedee  08:53, 4 March 2010 (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.