467:). Some of Ehrmann's papers using the term have hundreds of cites, one has thousands. You are correct that the article needs work, but the concept has obviously seen consistent use since it's coinage in the 1980's. Just because you are unfamiliar with the educational software industry doesn't make the concept non-notable.
507:
I'd argue that most of the papers discuss the usage and benefits of the concept, and to me this fits your question of "why" the concept was developed and used. "How" the concept was developed, to me, is irrelevant. Sure, worldware might be a snazzy term for "multipurpose software" as you say, but
571:
458:
I again have to disagree with you about WP:GNG. Like I pointed out previously, there are dozens of papers on Google
Scholar published independently of Ehrmann discussing the concept of worldware in depth. These publications span fifteen years (I can see some from
493:"worldware"--e.g. how and why the concept was developed? I can't, but if you can, please improve the article with them. If it is possible to create a good encyclopedia article about this concept, I will gladly withdraw my AfD submission.
431:
which briefly defines "worldware" as "software that can be applied to many purposes, to many ends." The section on
Advantages is unreferenced OR. The section on its development also cites 0 sources but seems to be based on papers and
218:
348:
331:
171:
562:
266:
212:
440:
of Steve
Ehrmann. Once you remove the PROMO, what you have basically is a wiktionary entry for an obscure term once used to describe multipurpose software.
118:
249:
Non-notable antique failed attempt to create a techy buzzword. The article has been tagged as orphan since 2009, although the tag was recently removed.
103:
489:-- people using "worldware" and then explaining that it means "multipurpose software." But can one find sources (other than Ehrmann) that discuss the
428:
409:
63:
178:
591:
68:
98:
91:
17:
144:
139:
512:. And this is a very specific type anyway focusing on education - though honestly I'd encourage it to be a heading in a
233:
148:
200:
112:
108:
550:
391:
367:
131:
615:
40:
405:
58:
498:
445:
274:
254:
568:
513:
509:
194:
611:
378:
353:
336:
311:
since 2007. All the links are currently broken, but some may be salvageable using the
Internet Archive.
36:
190:
587:
598:
565:
529:
502:
476:
449:
413:
382:
357:
340:
320:
302:
278:
258:
73:
401:
226:
53:
433:
494:
441:
270:
250:
240:
427:. The only links that have been suggested for it are (broken, antique) course websites such as
87:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
610:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
574:
545:: Barely found any news article about it, but it has found lots of coverage in scholar, per
525:
472:
316:
298:
579:
308:
290:
206:
135:
520:
this as I don't really care for the subject, I just think it has the right to exist.
517:
424:
165:
553:
546:
521:
468:
312:
294:
464:
460:
127:
79:
559:
436:
by Steve
Ehrmann. GNG would require in-depth coverage in multiple RS
556:
606:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
394:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
370:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
549:. I even found some papers where the term is talked about:
161:
157:
153:
225:
516:article if one existed. Tbh, I'm not interested in
400:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
376:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
618:). No further edits should be made to this page.
347:Note: This discussion has been included in the
330:Note: This discussion has been included in the
307:Additional sourcing has also been listed on the
265:Note: This discussion has been included in the
349:list of Computing-related deletion discussions
332:list of Education-related deletion discussions
267:list of Internet-related deletion discussions
239:
8:
119:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
485:I agree one can find many mentions of the
346:
329:
264:
573:. I believe the article easily passes
7:
293:. I wouldn't call it failed at all.
24:
104:Introduction to deletion process
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
508:Knowledge has no article for
94:(AfD)? Read these primers!
635:
599:07:03, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
530:17:44, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
503:17:25, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
477:16:41, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
450:15:18, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
434:other personal statements
414:03:16, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
383:05:49, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
358:05:49, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
341:05:48, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
321:18:52, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
303:18:09, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
279:13:46, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
259:13:46, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
608:Please do not modify it.
74:22:13, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
32:Please do not modify it.
514:multipurpose software
510:multipurpose software
92:Articles for deletion
423:: It does not pass
463:all the way until
289:, lots of hits on
416:
385:
360:
343:
281:
109:Guide to deletion
99:How to contribute
626:
597:
595:
582:
399:
397:
395:
381:
375:
373:
371:
356:
339:
244:
243:
229:
181:
169:
151:
89:
34:
634:
633:
629:
628:
627:
625:
624:
623:
622:
616:deletion review
596:
585:
580:
578:
417:
390:
388:
386:
377:
366:
364:
352:
335:
186:
177:
142:
126:
123:
86:
83:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
632:
630:
621:
620:
602:
601:
584:
539:
538:
537:
536:
535:
534:
533:
532:
480:
479:
453:
452:
402:RandomCanadian
398:
387:
374:
363:
362:
361:
344:
326:
325:
324:
323:
283:
282:
247:
246:
183:
122:
121:
116:
106:
101:
84:
82:
77:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
631:
619:
617:
613:
609:
604:
603:
600:
593:
589:
583:
576:
572:
569:
566:
563:
560:
557:
554:
551:
548:
544:
541:
540:
531:
527:
523:
519:
515:
511:
506:
505:
504:
500:
496:
495:HouseOfChange
492:
488:
484:
483:
482:
481:
478:
474:
470:
466:
462:
457:
456:
455:
454:
451:
447:
443:
442:HouseOfChange
439:
435:
430:
426:
422:
419:
418:
415:
411:
407:
403:
396:
393:
384:
380:
379:North America
372:
369:
359:
355:
354:North America
350:
345:
342:
338:
337:North America
333:
328:
327:
322:
318:
314:
310:
306:
305:
304:
300:
296:
292:
288:
285:
284:
280:
276:
272:
271:HouseOfChange
268:
263:
262:
261:
260:
256:
252:
251:HouseOfChange
242:
238:
235:
232:
228:
224:
220:
217:
214:
211:
208:
205:
202:
199:
196:
192:
189:
188:Find sources:
184:
180:
176:
173:
167:
163:
159:
155:
150:
146:
141:
137:
133:
129:
125:
124:
120:
117:
114:
110:
107:
105:
102:
100:
97:
96:
95:
93:
88:
81:
78:
76:
75:
72:
71:
67:
66:
62:
61:
57:
56:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
607:
605:
542:
490:
486:
437:
420:
389:
365:
286:
248:
236:
230:
222:
215:
209:
203:
197:
187:
174:
85:
69:
64:
59:
54:
50:no consensus
49:
47:
31:
28:
438:independent
213:free images
612:talk page
575:WP:NEXIST
518:WP:HEYing
309:talk page
128:Worldware
80:Worldware
55:King of ♥
37:talk page
614:or in a
592:ICE CUBE
429:this one
410:contribs
392:Relisted
368:Relisted
172:View log
113:glossary
39:or in a
581:ASTIG😎
491:concept
421:Comment
291:Scholar
219:WP refs
207:scholar
145:protect
140:history
90:New to
547:Mbdfar
522:Mbdfar
469:Mbdfar
425:WP:GNG
313:Mbdfar
295:Mbdfar
191:Google
149:delete
588:ICE T
234:JSTOR
195:books
179:Stats
166:views
158:watch
154:links
16:<
570:and
543:Keep
526:talk
499:talk
487:word
473:talk
465:2013
461:1997
446:talk
406:talk
317:talk
299:talk
287:Keep
275:talk
255:talk
227:FENS
201:news
162:logs
136:talk
132:edit
412:)
241:TWL
170:– (
590:•
577:.
567:,
564:,
561:,
558:,
555:,
552:,
528:)
501:)
475:)
448:)
408:/
351:.
334:.
319:)
301:)
277:)
269:.
257:)
221:)
164:|
160:|
156:|
152:|
147:|
143:|
138:|
134:|
52:.
594:)
586:(
524:(
497:(
471:(
444:(
404:(
315:(
297:(
273:(
253:(
245:)
237:·
231:·
223:·
216:·
210:·
204:·
198:·
193:(
185:(
182:)
175:·
168:)
130:(
115:)
111:(
70:♠
65:♣
60:♦
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.