Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Avaya ERS 5500


 * 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. causa sui (talk) 17:18, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Avaya ERS 5500

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I am also nominating the following related pages for similar reasons:


 * Delete all. Non-notable product mostly referenced from its manufacturer. Also, WP is not a product catalogue. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 07:50, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Related articles are now listed. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 08:23, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Same as thousands of others. Just a quick check shows many other examples.
 * Cisco Products
 * Apple Products
 * Microsoft Products
 * IBM Products
 * Nokia Products   Geek2003 (talk) 13:19, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * WP:OTHERSTUFF is not a valid AfD argument. Not that I have listed a who bunch of other routers for deletion. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 10:13, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep all known internationally, WP:NOTABLE product, informative pages for research. 38.127.152.10 (talk) 14:34, 31 July 2011 (UTC)


 * If it is notable were are the third party refs? -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 10:13, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I added several third party refs. -- Geek2003 (talk) 21:10, 4 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge cut-n-paste from spec sheets does not add any value, and these products get out of date quickly. I would add the Avaya VSP-9000 System to the list too. Perhaps one article for each line, e.g. the ERS line, secure router line, etc. would make more sense, with just a general overview and narrative of its evolution instead of marketing bullets. W Nowicki (talk) 17:47, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep all or Merge per W Nowicki. Notable. Kittybrewster  &#9742;  22:07, 31 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep all   all of these products are used in various managed network offerings.  It would be helpful to individuals reseraching what has been installed at thier site to keep these entries.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reskelund (talk • contribs) 23:39, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * WP is not a service manual or technical manual, -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 10:13, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 *  Keep All  these products are used in network scenarios. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Machismo500 (talk • contribs) 01:20, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * So? Is that relevant in this discussion? -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 10:13, 1 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment. Hmmmm... Just as I had suspected. We have a clear case of systemic bias. Take two of these and call me in the morning. Dr Alan. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 10:13, 1 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge. The core products of Avaya are significant enough to merit discussion in the Avaya article, but I don't see much evidence that they are independently notable. Thparkth (talk) 14:30, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep all or merge - For reasons stated above...but feel free to comment as you have done above. --Kumioko (talk) 16:01, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 16:09, 1 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep All Tag with Primary Source LES 953 (talk) 22:55, 2 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment.systemic bias ? I am a just a 10 day old wikipedian.Moreover,If it wasn't me, this voting would not be happening in the first place. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Machismo500 (talk • contribs) 00:59, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 *  Keep  Avaya ERS5500 series are very widely deployed and used by governments, education, financial and healthcare etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ullapoolus (talk • contribs) 15:50, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep all Added more content and 3rd citations so the products should now be WP:NOTABLE, WP:RS, WP:VERIFY. If you do not agree please identify the page and specifically state what you think is wrong and please give me a detailed explanation of what I can do to help improve the page to meet the requirements. Geek2003 (talk) 03:11, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * None of the sources I looked at were anything other than routine coverage (product announcments, technical specifications, etc). There is currently no evidence that this satisfies the general notability guideline.  I also performed a google search of my own and found nothing. - Aaron Brenneman (talk) 04:26, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
 * OK I am going to take this one page at a time. The Avaya ERS 8600 page, in the Further reading section has 4 notable books that covers the product in detail, each are by a separate and independent authors.  The references are from the, Electronic Engineering Times, IT World, NetworkWorld, Network Computing, and Cloud Computing.  Specific and detailed 3rd party product evaluations were conducted by IPv6 and DISA of this product with detailed results.  Additionally a detailed evaluation of the product was accomplished by the 3rd party Tolly Group, and there are many more like it (should I add them also).  Please explain how this is just routine coverage.  Geek2003 (talk) 18:41, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
 * 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.