Also sec-ed SecEd | Features | A short-sighted approach?
They're both good sources, but you need another source too - ie. a non-register source, and it can't be blogs either (unless that blog itself is notable and from a famous person who would justify their own wiki article). Or at least those were the rules last time I looked there.
EDIT: The Tes article, plus the register articles should provide enough evidence of notability for an article.
EDIT2: I've messaged the admin who deleted the article pointing out that he didn't give the user time to create the article, with sources.
Last edited by localzuk; 19th February 2011 at 02:04 PM.
Neither of them would be acceptable - as neither of those sites are themselves notable (one being a blog for an non-notable person, the other being a generic blog).
There are various mentions in the Guardian. They're a bit brief. Do they count?
Q&A | Resource | The Guardian
News in brief | Education | The Guardian
Don't miss out - Freebies at Bett 2010 | Resource | guardian.co.uk
I've posted these on the deleting admin's page - so that's 9 different independant and non-blog sources for the site. Hopefully they'll restore it!
FN-GM (19th February 2011)
Right, he's now restored it. Get editing peeps!
I've added a few bits - but they need a lot of work, and more needs to be added too.
Before we all go charging in can I point out the points raised a few posts ago, LittleMiss has been working on this behind the scenes with Dos_Box and has been since BETT, and this is quite a detailed draft of the article and I know Dos_box has sent her some more updates for it, its a good detailed draft and covers many key points and integrates sources etc... so no need to be rushing ahead here. More haste less speed otherwise it'll end up being rejected again
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)