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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:34, 23 February 2018 (UTC) reply

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

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

relatively trivial company, with inadequate sources for notability -- basically noticesa nd press releases. DGG ( talk ) 18:32, 15 February 2018 (UTC) reply

• Quarterhill is the new name for Wi-LAN, although the Wi-LAN name continues to be used for the main Quarterhill subsidiary. Wi-LAN was certainly a notable company. The real question is how the pages for Quarterhill+Wi-LAN should be structured. I think there should be a single page for Quarterhill, which is primarily about its history as Wi-LAN - effectively, the Wi-LAN page should be merged into this one. I originally implemented this, but Ocrivski objected, so I decided to instead to create a page for Quarterhill, independent of the Wi-LAN page.

Most present coverage of Quarterhill/Wi-LAN is about Quarterhill, since Quarterhill is the publicly traded company. Having a page for Wi-LAN but not its publicly traded parent will thus be very confusing going forward. The best solution is to merge the Wi-LAN page into this one, as I originally did. - Mparrault ( talk) 22:16, 15 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. MT Train ^Discuss 00:04, 16 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. MT Train ^Discuss 00:04, 16 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. MT Train ^Discuss 00:04, 16 February 2018 (UTC) reply

• Keep : I've re-written the article to be about the company's entire history (including its history as WiLAN). There are 15 refs, none of which are primary sources. Most are medium-length pieces in national sources. - Mparrault ( talk) 17:54, 16 February 2018 (UTC) reply
• Keep: the inclusion of WiLAN's history on Quarterhill's page is fine. The point remains that both WiLAN and Quarterhill have their own independent notability and are deserving of their own separate pages. Ocrivski ( talk) 22:03, 16 February 2018 (UTC) reply

I'm not opposed to separate pages for Quarterhill+Wi-LAN, and I agree they are both independently notable. However, if the consensus is that only one page can survive, I think it should be the Quarterhill page. - Mparrault ( talk) 15:34, 20 February 2018 (UTC) reply

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

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.