Talk:Systematic inventive thinking: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 19:19, 10 May 2012

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Systematic inventive thinking article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

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

Articles for creation Start‑class

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article was accepted on 26 April 2012 by reviewer Callanecc (talk · contribs).

why I ask to remove deletion notice...

As notability guidelines specify: "… there must be verifiable, objective evidence that the subject has received significant attention from independent sources to support a claim of notability". In my case the topic is a well-known innovation methodology, derived from another (and better known) innovation methodology named TRIZ (which also has an article of its own, and mentioned SIT in it, long before this article has been created). This methodology has been developed by two Israeli academic figures, and is being taught in various academic institutions as a creative problem solving and NPD methodology. Furthermore, the content which I've cited is based on various journals (namely Harvard Business Review, Science magazine, Marketing Research, etc.), and I fail to see why the above isn't account as an evidence for "significant attention from independent sources". Please clarify if (and which) other actions are ought to be taken in order to verify notability. Thanks!

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{talkheader}}
 {{WikiProject Articles for creation|class=start|ts=20120426112056|reviewer=Callanecc}}
+== why I ask to remove deletion notice... ==
+As notability guidelines specify: "… there must be verifiable, objective evidence that the subject has received significant attention from independent sources to support a claim of notability". In my case the topic is a well-known innovation methodology, derived from another (and better known) innovation methodology named TRIZ (which also has an article of its own, and mentioned SIT in it, long before this article has been created). This methodology has been developed by two Israeli academic figures, and is being taught in various academic institutions as a creative problem solving and NPD methodology. Furthermore, the content which I've cited is based on various journals (namely Harvard Business Review, Science magazine, Marketing Research, etc.), and I fail to see why the above isn't account as an evidence for "significant attention from independent sources". Please clarify if (and which) other actions are ought to be taken in order to verify notability. Thanks!