Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kidspiration

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 of the debate was keep. Johnleemk | Talk 16:30, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The story here is the same as with Inspiration for handhelds which is on its way to get deleted as spam/nn. Created by the same user who works at the producers marketing office. Producers website has alexa rank of about 65,000.

• Delete - Renata 05:00, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep This software is used in schools and, gosh, schools are automatically a speedy keep Ruby 05:39, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Just a comment: People use many things at schools. Like textbooks. Does every textbook deserve an article? And these two are blatant adverts. Renata 06:34, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Reads too much like an advertisement; I agree with Renata's points as well. OhNoitsJamie^Talk 08:10, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and rewrite if needed. Just because it was started by someone who self-identifies with the company does not mean the article is automatically invalid. Lots of relevant google hits for "kidspiration software" establishes notability. Turnstep 17:39, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Inspiration Software rings a bell, they're fairly notable. Passes google test as well. Englishrose 18:40, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. It's actually pretty notable in elementary schools in my area. SYCTHOS^talk 20:22, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• very very weak keep because in the end it probably is notable, but the creator 'does not self-identify as an employee, I tracked that information down (I think others have too), but the creator has never admitted it to my knowledge; the whole thing needs to be verified by an expert (which I am not) for subtle bias. Is there a template for articles created by agents of the subject which have not been externally verified? Incidentally, I'd be equally happy with a merge & redirect to Inspiraiton Software, as the software and the maker do not seem to be divisible in any meaningful sense. Just zis  Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 20:49, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge and Redirect to Inspiration Software. Alternatively, these two programs are pretty similar - perhaps find a way to merge the two together? -Rebelguys2 ^TALK 04:33, 29 January 2006 (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.