Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ExploreLearning

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 no consensus. The second keep !vote was based on the lack of a rationale. The nominator later provided one. That leaves one keep !vote. Epastore makes a good argument but unfortunately, one !vote is not a consensus. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:53, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ExploreLearning

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

Originally tagged with db-corp, but the speedy was contested. Elevating to AFD. ~~with no opinion.~~ delete so a discussion will be had. UtherSRG (talk) 09:11, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

keep (from original author) – As noted in my objection to speedy deletion, this company is notable. Click on the scholar link above to see what impact they are having in academic circles. They are also very, very well recognized in educational circles, where they have been nominated for and won numerous awards (now noted in the article). This company doesn't appear much in regular Google searches or in top-line publications, but it still appears to be notable and worthy of inclusion in a 3+ million-article encyclopedia. This stub should be allowed to grow, as has that of a somewhat analogous company, BrainPOP. — Epastore (talk) 15:26, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:17, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep "No opinion" => no case to answer. Colonel Warden (talk) 19:31, 27 May 2010 (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.