Talk:Evesham Technology/Archive 1

Archive 1

Bias and POV

Article seems as though it has been written by someone biased towards the said company. I've removed some POV material and added appropriate tags. Recommend for clean-up. Scarian^Talk 13:02, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Aricle cleanup

I have made an attempt to clean this article up - still needs some work doing on it, but I hope better than it was Bods 11:15, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

An even closer look could awake the impression that the entire article is a cleverly contrived ad for Tewtech. It may not be, but the fact that the suspicion is raised, is an indication that all is not we'll with its compliance with Wiki policy, and as a company , it might lack notability.--Kudpung (talk) 09:07, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Possible PROD or AfD

There is a slight possibility that this could be a cleverly contrived ad for Tewtech.com. With the exception of manteneace edits by regular Wikipedians, all contributions to this article have been made by anonymous IP users.
Tewtech in their website claim to have "over 20 years experience in the IT market, but according to an anonymous contribution to the article: A group of staff from Evesham started their own company called Tewktech - which is understood to have been around 2007. In his/her edit summary, user Ubcle writes: Ubcule (talk | contribs) (3,865 bytes) (→Ex-employees provide support for Evesham customers: Reads way to much like an advert/press release; rewritten, and I'm still not too happy :/)
The article was originally created by a spammer IP 81.86.79.225 on Nov 2004 clearly as an advert.

In Revision as of 05:27, 24 December 2008 (edit) (undo) User:92.2.67.16 adds: A group of staff from Evesham have started their own company called Tewktech. They offer free email support for all Evesham products while able to offering a Onsite and Return to Base services. For more details please Click Here. Tewktech features staff from many departments of Evesham so they have the ability to know all the products inside out. They also have links to all manufactures and distributors who are willing to help to get spare parts for your Evesham product.

It is suggested that a pre PROD, pre AfD, or pre Speedy discussion should take place here before eventually wasting valuable Wiki admin time. Please leave your comments or suggestions here in the bulleted list, and remember to sign your name with four tildes.

• Delete - see rationale above. --Kudpung (talk) 09:16, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
• Improve and keep. I don't doubt that the current article may well have been put together by employees of Tewktech, and it needs to be cleaned up to remove any COI. However, Evesham was a major player in the UK domestic IT market (at least) from the 1980s and 90s, and in my view is sufficiently notable for a (better) article. (My Evesham PC packed up this year after about 10 years - if that makes me have a COI, I'd better not edit the article...) Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:05, 30 July 2009 (UTC) ....Too late.... ;) Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:10, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
  • I've now improved it quickly, without going out searching for new sources. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:35, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
• Reserve Judgement. Evesham were pretty big in their day, so I think maybe they warrant an article. The current article certainly needs work though. If somebody improves it, it woll be wroth keeping. If stays in it's current state I'll probably be convinced to vote to delete. BTW, Anonymous IP's are fully allowed to edit/write articles, that's not a problem (I and, I guess, a lot of other people started that way). Oh, and Ghmyrtle, that's certainly not a COI, feel free to edit :-) GyroMagician (talk) 10:16, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
• Tentative keep If Evesham were pretty big in their day, they deserve an article as notability isn't temporary. There are sources about the company – this one turned up pretty quickly in a google search – which I think establishes notability. Nev1 (talk) 19:33, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
• I'd err on the side of keep' and improve. Jeni ^(talk) 19:43, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
• Keep and Improve For a few years Evesham was recommended by various consumer organisations. Indeed I bought my computer in the 1980s from them!. I believe that one of the values of Wikipedia is as an encylopedia of historical data and deletion would hinder future enquiries on the history of the UK domestic computer market. I tend to err on the side of caution on deletion policy contrary to what I perceive as the current trend of editors --DonBarton (talk) 23:37, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

• Rewritten - The problem with this article was due to its having been compiled from items copied and pasted from various news web sites with little concern for Wiki article structure and prose style. Rewritten, neutral tone, more refs.--Kudpung (talk) 03:52, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

It looks much better now - clearly worth keeping. Would it make sense to rename the page to 'Evesham Micros' rather than 'Evesham Technology'? I think the company were most widely known by their first name (although that could just be the name I remember!). GyroMagician (talk) 09:46, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I've made a few changes - I've tried to shorten things a bit (but wasn't as successful as I'd hoped). I've re-added the reference to Tewktech. While wikipedia isn't meant for advertising, it is useful for owners of Evesham PCs to know where they can find help. Former staff offering free email support is also a slightly unusual twist, so I think it's worth a mention.

Kudpung - the history of the company has changed. From the previous version of the page, I understood that Evesham built themselves up in the 8-bit home computer market, and got into the PC game later. It now reads that the company made most of their trade with Amstrad PCs and then spread to home computing. Was this a deliberate change? Either way, it could do with a ref (although that is likely to be hard to find). GyroMagician (talk) 10:56, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

If that change resulted from my edits, it was inadvertent - I don't know the answer, so feel free (obviously) to change it back again. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:29, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I didn't actually change or cut anything. Essentially, I removed redundant information that was the result of copying from different sources reporting on the same things, put everything into chronological order, gave the article a more sober tone of prose, verified all the references - and found more - and even added some more bits of history. All this took about six hours, with preparing most of the rewrite offline before posting it, so it was fairly thorough. I checked out many more sources than I have cited, and I fully understood from them that Evesham began as an Amstrad and Atari discounter, and went into their own production on the back of that success. Personally, I have been an exclusive Mac user for 20 years and wouldn't know the difference between an 8-bit, a PC, or anything else that isn't a Mac. Was an Amstrad a PC or an 8-bit? I don't have the slightest idea. In 1988 there were still dozens of brands of computers all with proprietary operating systems, before evything boiled down basically to Windoze, Mac, and Linux.
I think the main point is that they started up as an end-of-line 'flogg-off' discounter, whatever it was they were selling, and later started manufacturing (or probably more correctly, assembling) their own brand hardware. I'm not a computer expert, I'm open to any suggestions that stick to the best interpretation of the numerous press article, although journalists are notorious for getting things wrong, particularly when they review my . I'm pretty sure I never saw any references to Evesham selling the Commodore 64, and I seem to remember that Amstrad around that time was not an IBM Compatibl (but I may be wrong). Probably one of the best solutions would be for someone else to go through the references again, and see if I got everything right. Beware though, because even some of those news reports have slightly different information when reporting the same events.
The article need some photos. There are still many websites showing photos of Evesham stuff, but don't know which of the dozens of copyright categories they fall into.
Apart from watching what others do to it and reverting any spam or vandalism, I won't be spending any more time on this article.--Kudpung (talk) 18:30, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

BTW: There is only one single appearance of the words Evesham Technoogy on the Tewtech site (see: http://www.tewktech.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=49:welcome&catid=34:tewktech ). There is no mention whatsoever of any services they might offer for the brand. Their website was last updated yesterday.--Kudpung (talk) 02:47, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

True, but the historical context is relevant - I've added a couple of refs which contain some editorial content, not just press releases. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:19, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Looks good. Could you possibly make a photo of your old machine and post it to illustrate the article?--Kudpung (talk) 07:54, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, no can do. What's the policy on using logos of defunct companies, like this? Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:41, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

The CBM 64 is (as far as I can tell) a slightly less common name for the Commodore 64. I initially searched for it because I'd never heard of a CBM 64, and wondered what it was. My bad with Amstrad - you're correct, the earlier ones weren't PC compatibles (so confusing, that a PC isn't always a PC!).

The history section is now far more detailed than it was, which is a good thing. I'm still a bit confused by it though - it's more of a feeling about the early computer market than anything that's actually written. Amstrad would put Evesham firmly in the business market. Hacking together cheat cartridges for the Spectrum is a very different market. Commodore did produce a range of business machines before the C64, so maybe that is what Evesham were initially selling, alongside Amstrads, before moving into the (newly created) home computer market? GyroMagician (talk) 10:09, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

• Comment -- I am not sure from the article if the company had a small factory or a shop. In either event, it is propbably only of very marginal notability. On the other hand, it is well-sourced. If we delete it, we probably lose for ever an article on the history of a small computer business. On the whole, I would suggest that we keep it. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:16, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Peter, please see the rewritten article. The company had a large factory in Evesham with 300 employees, 19 retail shops in key locations around the UK, and was a major player in the UK computer scene.--Kudpung (talk) 14:59, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Gyro, I knew nothing about computers way back then except that I wrote my thesis on a Sinclair to impress my my profs. I knew about the Amstrad because in 1988 or so i was looking to computerise the office of a language academy I had founded in Avignon, and it was on the list of possibles. Fortunately, I discovered the MacPlus... --Kudpung (talk) 14:59, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Ghmyrtle, Thanks - see article iinfobox.--Kudpung (talk) 14:59, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

The level of cynicism in the original proposal is remarkable and sad. Glad to see it wasn't allowed to hold sway. Luwilt (talk) 20:26, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Nev1 (talk) 20:28, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Luwilt, have a look at the article history - you will see that Kudpung, who originally proposed AfD, is also the main contributor to the rewrite. Sometimes it's helpful to prod people into action ;-) I hope you agree the article is much better now - but if there is anything missing, please add it! GyroMagician (talk) 12:28, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely, and Kudpung was gauging the community's opinion before PRODing the article or taking it to AfD. And not only did Kudpung do most of the rewriting, but also asked others here to contribute. As a result of those efforts, Wikipedia now has quite a good article on the company. Still cynical? Nev1 (talk) 14:08, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

To do

The article now has an infobox and logo. It would be nice nevertheless if someone could come up with some product pics. therea re still a lot out there on redundant on-line sales websites,, but we have to careful about copyright. To find out more about copyright, just click the 'upload File' link in the navbar on the left.
The only other enhancement I can think of would be a Products list section. But this might be too much research to worthwhile as their range was immense. maybe a short list of their major own production.--Kudpung (talk) 06:46, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

I have moved the bolding of alternative names (Evesham Micros and Evesham.com) back to the first paragraph because I have created redirects from these names to this page. I think a product listing would be huge, so probably not worth it! I think the page looks complete. GyroMagician (talk) 08:13, 2 August 2009 (UTC)