Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/English for children

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. Joyous (talk) 18:19, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] English for children

Non-notable company advertisement. Reads like an ad brochure for the company. Searching on Google found very few links that can be attributed to this company. Recommend delete. —Cleared as filed. 14:53, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

KeepIt is not an advertisement, it is an information guide to the company. Wikipedia is designed to provide users with free information about a whole range of different topics; this is one such topic. The page does not, in any way, advance the goals of the firm through commercial usage, only affirming its existence. -80.120.190.34

• Delete. Use of the word 'we' throughout reveals its inner vanity nature.Nandesuka 18:41, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
• Not to mention "Please call us for a sample lesson free of charge!" Anyway, delete, non-notable company. Dcarrano 18:57, July 17, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - blatant advertising 82.44.213.192 19:52, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - advertising--Pold 00:19, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. NN, spam, mis-titled (s/b proper noun). --A D Monroe III 00:45, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

In response to the above criticisims, I firstly reformatted the page to make it more formal and remove any hint of an adverising tone. Next, the arguement proposed that the firm in question is non-notable has to be discussed from several viewpoints.

• Firstly, notability cannot simply be measured by how many internet hits and links one can find for it. Some companies, through either economical reasons or geographical inability, cannot be montioned or monitored on the internet regardless of how notable they may truely be.
• Secondly, the word non-notable is in itself a highly relative term and depends purely on the views and experiances of the individual in question who makes the assurtion. This is often the case with grocery stores(and in this case language accuistion programmes) in which the notabilty depends highly on the geographical location of whoever is claiming the firm to be notable/non-notable. Shopper's Warehouse is highly notable in America whereas in Germany, where the firm doesn't exist, anyone would calim the firm as non-notable.

Also, the definition of an encyclopedia according to the merriam-webster's dictionary is, " a work that contains information on all branches of knowledge." and from dictionary.com, "A comprehensive reference work containing articles on a wide range of subjects." Looking at the definitions, one can see that wikipedia, the proclaimed "online and free encyclopedia" should be held to that definition. "All branches of knowledge" and "wide range of sujects" dictates that wikipedia should allow this page to be left online as it constitutes to a widening of the available knowledge on this site. Lastly, according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia, wikipedia's own mission statement, " Its(wikipedia) purpose is to create and distribute a free international encyclopedia in as many languages as possible." The mission statement itself states that the authors on wikipedia are merely expending it to encompass all ranges of topics. I am merely one such author. Bringing new information to this site helps not only people understand and gain more knowledge themselves, but may spur other people to add their own comments and pages, another one of wikipedia's goals. I am merely trying to provide people who may not have known about this company information, in the same way all other pages due. This response should bring to light the true intentions of this page, so once again, Keep -80.120.190.34

• Comment. You can't vote twice. Looking at your revisions, it's just as much an advertisement for a non-notable company as it was, now it's merely not as much in the first person anymore (we do this, we do that). This is not a substantial enough revision for me to change my vote. —Cleared as filed. 19:45, July 18, 2005 (UTC)

• Comment. Still feels advert. Same material you've got in German in your promotional page. The entry was done clearly to promote business. No serious references to double-check (URL, printed ISBN, besides reports in the general press press of its activities), to prove it has a place in the teaching history as it hints. Stating that an encyclopedia must contain everything at all is no argument. I keep my delete vote. --Pold 19:50, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

• Delete - advertizing, as per Pold. - Introvert ^talk 00:28, 24 July 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.