Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erdas Imagine


 * 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 Hexagon AB. (non-admin closure) GeoffreyT2000  ( talk,  contribs ) 17:30, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Erdas Imagine

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Sources available from Google News are promotional; from Google Newspapers passing mention; article references appear to be closely affiliated with the product; other ASPRS references are inaccessible - unable to verify - therefore, these could be passing mentions or promotional. This product does not appear to be notable. Fails GNG, and ORGIND. Notability is not inherited WP:INHERITORG. Wikipedia is not a platform for promotion WP:PROMO. Steve Quinn (talk) 13:26, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 16:32, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 16:32, 10 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Merge into Hexagon AB which appears to be the entity who sells it now? Clearly this one product is not independently notable, but it is worth a mention of it, given the long history. The parent company article could stand some work to add more prose and remove the marketing, etc. anyway. Suspect sources might be in other languages than English. But would be more work of course than a quick death. W Nowicki (talk) 18:08, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge I agree with W Nowicki. Product with such long history deserves at least mention. Current sources have mostly ad-like quality, not sufficient for an article. Maybe there are some reviews in magazines specialized for this field of study, but this is certainly outside of my expertise. Pavlor (talk) 18:37, 12 September 2016 (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.