- 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. SorryGuy Talk 06:49, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- ClickStart (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
OK, there are four press references but I still think this is an advert for a non-notable product. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 08:39, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, weakly, not necessarily with prejudice; or stubbify. This is a tech product, but a consumer product. The problem with the current article is that the sources given do not support many of the assertions in the article, which instead contains self-laudatory description (an inventive learning tool that introduce(s) essential skills for school and basic computer literacy); the rest of the article is devoted to a feature list and supporting product list. The New York Times and USA Today stories do provide some independent third party coverage, though, so a neutral article on the subject would appear to meet the product notability guidelines. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep an obvious keep, given that it is featured in NYT, WSJ, and other national media articles. If the article needs POV improvement, improve it. DGG (talk) 01:49, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per DGG; AfD is not clean-up. Benjiboi 15:51, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.