Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mac Software for Learning and Research


 * 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. Withdrawn - moved to userspace. (non-admin closure) MJ94 (talk) 20:34, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Mac Software for Learning and Research

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Poorly written article that would need a substantial rewrite and layout cleanup to read less like an essay. At this time, the article is not written from a neutral point of view and promotes certain applications. The author mentioned to me on Commons that the article was written specifically for a school project. MJ94 (talk) 18:28, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

--- Leo, Yes, this article was written for a school project but I do not see this to be a reason for deletion. A lot of fellow students ask me about the software that I use for studying and I thought that it would benefit society to have an article written on it.

As for poor writing, I apologize if it may appear to look poor. Of course, to a proffesional wikidedian, a begginer's work may look poor. I humbly apoologize that my writing skills are not up to your standards. However, I tried very hard to make it look and sound professional. Please kindly do not delete the article, but instead encourage improvement.

I also tried to make it sound as neutral as possible. I never said that any piece of software "is the best". I merely stated their existence and what one can do with them. As for completion, the list may not be complete, but it is a start. I encourage anyone to add to the article.

Please kindly point out any parts of the article that are particularly poorly written or have a particular bad pov, and I will try my best to edit and improve it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LeoUfimtsev (talk • contribs) 19:22, 10 February 2013 (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.