Talk:Computer user satisfaction

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article was nominated for deletion on 12 June 2006. The result of the discussion was no consensus to delete.

Michael J. Mullany 02:36, 11 April 2006 (UTC) Michael J. Mullany

Michael J. Mullany 02:51, 11 April 2006 (UTC)Michael J. Mullany

[edit] AfD - arguments for

This article was previously Proposed for deletion, but the original author has removed the tag, as is his right. I'm therefore taking it to AfD, for the following reasons:

1. It's pushing the boundary of WP:OR. Specifically: "It introduces an analysis or synthesis of established facts, ideas, opinions, or arguments in a way that builds a particular case favored by the editor." The editor, admittedly, only advances his thesis indirectly, and that thesis might be summarised as "existing metrics of 'computer user satisfaction' are inadequate", but I still feel this is getting closer to the OR line than we should.
2. As the article stands, it's of very marginal interest - it just discusses various scholarly metrics for 'user satisfaction', without addressing the substance of those metrics.
3. No other articles link to it, and it's not, at present, categorized.
4. It needs a great deal of work to bring it in line with WP:1SP. In particular, it contains large numbers of weasel words - "according to several scholars", "some scholars suggest", etc., and generally has the tone of an essay rather than an encyclopedia article. This, admittedly, is something that could be fixed by radical editing, but I personally do not believe that it's worth it. See 2 above.

Tevildo 20:40, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AfD - arguments against

1. The supposition that the article is my own research is not supported in the light of the fact that nothing of mine appears in the article. As it so happens, I have published quite widely on the topic, and have excluded some very important new developments on the grounds that they are my research.
2. The claim that the article is of very marginal interest is certainly not true in the fields of computing and electronic apparatus. With respect to user Tevildo, Are you a computer system developer? If not, it is with little wonder you don't find this topic interesting. However, I would venture to say, it is very interesting to many readers.
3. Links: There are links to end-user and some of the authors, unless I have misunderstood what is meant by a link.
4. Weasel words - the examples you give typically abound in encyclopedia articles. Try Britannica.
5. Finally, may I ask what happened to the opinions of the Swiss user who supported this article? They seem to have been deleted from this page. May I ask that they be restored, please?

Michael J. MullanyMichael J. Mullany