Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Microteaching

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 keep‎. BusterD (talk) 03:59, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Microteaching[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

I couldn't find sources to show this is a clear and notable term. Boleyn (talk) 18:08, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:33, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 17:44, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Just a quick Google search turns up some sources.[1][2][3][4] The Wikipedia article is really light on sources and citations, but this appears to be an issue with article and not the topic. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 07:08, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TNT. It is rare in 2024 to find an article that is potentially notable, and written in standard English, yet is so terrible and lacking sources, and possibly in violation of WP:COPYVIO, that it must be started from scratch. I would not oppose a userfy process, if someone else is willing to adopt this article. Yet another case of a disaster of an article that is beyond normal editing processes discovered by Boleyn. Bearian (talk) 16:59, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:37, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:34, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -- Ridiculous nomination. There are hundreds of reliable sources. You find the article in poor shape? Edit it. That's what we do. Also, what does being "a clear and notable term" even mean? Central and Adams (talk) 02:47, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, despite my own cv-revdel tag, as the term obviously meets GNG. Mach61 (talk) 03:04, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep - Quotesearching "microteaching" on google gives "about 844,000 results." The term is notable, just the article needs work.DarmaniLink (talk) 22:39, 26 February 2024 (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.