Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Technological Artefacts for Learning

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 delete. Black Kite (talk) 11:25, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Technological Artefacts for Learning

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

This article appears to be positing the possible use of various technologies as a teaching tool. While it is clear that technology can be (and is) used in teaching all the time, the author appears to be drawing original conclusions from the given source, constituting original research, which is disallowed at Wikipedia. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 23:00, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Completely agree with the above, it appears to be original research. Also, WP:NOTESSAY. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:09, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi WikiDan61 & Joseph2302, many thanks for your advice. I do understand that not every sentence in my articles are coming from a reference source. However, all conclusions I have ever made are based on research, data and theories. Would you please provide some examples that you consider as original research? I have no intention to mess around, and have been trying hard to maintain a neutral tone. Yet neutral does not equal to not critical. Thank you. Keep Gytgyt1234 (talk) 00:00, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

— Note to closing admin: Gytgyt1234 (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD. This article and the others related to it are flagged for speedy deletion. They are opinion-based essays and all contain original research. The CSD criterion I used, however, is that the pages are duplicates of existing pages. The only factual information in any of the articles can be found elsewhere, for example in Raspberry Pi. Roches (talk) 00:34, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete under WP:IAR: Original concept and WP:NOTESSAY (personal essay masquerading as an article in an encyclopedia), I can't find any reliable source that directly cover this topic. See Wikipedia is not a scientific journal. Esquivalience ^t 02:24, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, essay, inappropriate for Wikipedia. NawlinWiki (talk) 02:41, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:29, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:29, 22 April 2015 (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.