Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Open-source 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. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:05, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Open-source learning[edit]

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

Advert for Preston and his brand. Orange Mike | Talk 02:55, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:32, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Highly promotional, reads more like an essay. Not established notability for a concept. Ajf773 (talk) 10:42, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete under G11, as an article which "in its current form it serves only to promote or publicise an entity, person, product, or idea, and would require a fundamental rewrite in order to become encyclopedic." MarginalCost (talk) 13:05, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest retaining the entry but using the new text now in place: Following Wikipedia guidelines (which I should have known when I wrote the original article five years ago), I have posted a completely revised entry and references about Open Source Learning, focusing entirely on the specifics of the methodology. This new entry summarizes educational practices in the United States and England in teaching a variety of subjects, and for several age groups, that make Open-Source Learning (or the same methods with other names) notable for their use in the conventional classroom as well as in lifelong learning programs. HleboHlebo (talk) 05:02, 19 April 2018 (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.