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 merge to Accel-KKR.  Sandstein  17:48, 2 September 2016 (UTC) reply

Ektron (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

I certainly hope we can finally get a better consensus as this was actually kept 6 years ago but deleted the previous AfD, still none of this is actually convincing, no actual substance and my own searches are simply finding unacceptable links such as PR. SwisterTwister talk 21:25, 7 August 2016 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 21:27, 7 August 2016 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 21:27, 7 August 2016 (UTC) reply

• Keep  Best I can tell, this was kept at the previous AfD, and there is nothing new to consider here, except maybe that the company was merged.  As per WP:NTEMP, notability is not temporary.  Unscintillating ( talk) 22:53, 7 August 2016 (UTC) reply
• Note to Closer - This comment is not keeping to mind WP:CCC especially given the we have changed regarding advertorial and questionable articles since then, and this vote is also essentially WP:LASTTIME, not actually clarifying or stating how the article should be kept now. I will also note WP:ILIKEIT. SwisterTwister talk 03:21, 9 August 2016 (UTC) reply

• What is with the talking to the closer routine?  WP:CONSENSUS is a policy.  As for the substance of your argument, I suggest that you put more effort into preparing a high-quality nomination, rather than throwing up trial-balloon afterthoughts.  The nomination does not make an argument for deletion...is this a notability argument, a WP:NOT argument, or a WP:IAR argument?  The work of our content contributors, i.e., our articles, comes with an assumption of good faith, so no editor has a duty to prove the good faith of our content contributors.  Your being "convinced" is not a policy based argument, and is not associated with metrics to define the difference between being "convinced" and "not being convinced".  "No actual substance" is not a policy-based argument and is likewise not associated with metrics to define the difference between "substance" and "no substance".  I've cited WP:NTEMP, which is a part of WP:N.  You've looked at the point that your nomination incorrectly states the result of the last AfD, yet you've not responded.  You've been challenged before for the unsourced claims that something has changed at Wikipedia, yet we see no response here to the previous request.  Why are we here?  Unscintillating ( talk) 06:15, 9 August 2016 (UTC) reply

• Merge (from this version) to Accel-KKR, as one of the companies in its portfolio; if it ever gets sold, the content could be moved to the new company. Other than that, non-notable on its own. Coverage is not there to meet GNG and sustain an encyclopedia entry. Does not meet CORPDEPTH. K.e.coffman ( talk) 00:50, 8 August 2016 (UTC) reply

• I update my vote from "Delete or merge"; I believe the content that remains would be a good addition to the Accel-KKR article. I removed intricate detail and am thus proposing this latest version. K.e.coffman ( talk) 03:53, 10 August 2016 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America ¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:52, 8 August 2016 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Hampshire-related deletion discussions. North America ¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:52, 8 August 2016 (UTC) reply

• (Possibly) Merge to Accel-KKR, which acquired Ektron in 2014, yet the merge target article has no mention of Ektron whatsoever. This will improve the merge target article as a functional and appropriate WP:ATD. North America ¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:56, 8 August 2016 (UTC) reply

I'm not sure if Accel-KKR is the appropriate target. Their interest is purely financial; it's not like they would help to develop or market the product. The other companies mentioned at Accel-KKR do not have blurbs on them, so, if anything, only Ektron's name would appear there. K.e.coffman ( talk) 07:16, 8 August 2016 (UTC) reply

Accel-KKR is a rather undeveloped, start-class article, and as such, should be expanded, in my opinion. A merge would be a functional start to this expansion. Why keep it dumbed down when there's usable content that will improve it for Wikipedia's readers? I've added a mention of Ektron there, so that's a start. North America ¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:27, 8 August 2016 (UTC) reply

If you look at the website, Ektron is a product, but the parent company is now EPiServer. Accel-KKR is a private equity firm, and thus, essentially operates as a holding company. Merging the articles would not make sense, as EPiServer is still a completely standalone company, just financially owned (and board-operated) by Accel-KKR. Biggg10 ( talk) 00:27, 9 August 2016 (UTC) reply

I have updated my !vote above to read "(Possibly) Merge". It's the closest available target to merge to, as there is presently no EPiServer article. North America ¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:31, 9 August 2016 (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.