Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Developing Minds Software Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Developing_Minds_Software

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 merge to DDtrac. \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 01:08, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Developing Minds Software (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable small software company; speedy declined because it won a campus-wide business plan competition!? Orange Mike | Talk 19:18, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• • footnote - see also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DDtrac. --Orange Mike | Talk 22:26, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - I would disagree that this article be a suitable candidate for speedy deletion as there seems to be a fair amount of coverage on various websites through a simple Google search. However as for notability of the company itself, I'm not sure. Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 19:35, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - The only real coverage is about that $10,000 prize, and I don't think this meets the requirements of WP:CORP. Favonian (talk) 19:54, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:24, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:24, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - I disagree that this article be a suitable candidate for speedy deletion. A simple Google search reveals that this organization has contributed to a deeper understanding of the importance of special education data tracking. Additionally, the organization is mentioned in several publication for winning an the Business Plan Competition award as well as a University Sponsored Research Symposium.QuazyMike (talk • contribs) - 20:14, 23 September 2009 (UTC) — QuazyMike (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
• Delete - Not to diminish the accomplishments of these entrepreneurs, but these awards are rather minor. Coverage about the comoany in reliable sources is lacking. If the ability that generated these awards also propels the company forward to eh point where they are garnering significant coverage, then an article would be appropriate then. -- Whpq (talk) 16:25, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep / Merge with DDtrac - Between the company and the software product there does appear to be sufficient coverage to establish notability although each individually is probably borderline. |► ϋrбanяeneωaℓ • TALK ◄| 14:20, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NW (Talk) 03:38, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein  06:06, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Only trivial coverage. Even the awards weren't covered anywhere but by the place giving the award. If they really had "contributed to a deeper understanding of the importance of special education data tracking" there would be at least one journal or news article written about them. I can't find any. --Odie5533 (talk) 19:32, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge/redirect to DDtrac, which is the best alternative to deletion. Since this article is sourced, this useful content should be preserved. Cunard (talk) 20:04, 16 October 2009 (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.