Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OnStream Networks Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/OnStream_Networks

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 delete. Happy to temporarily restore to allow for merging, upon request. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 23:19, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OnStream Networks

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

Fails WP:ORG. No references. Unedited since 2009. Mr. Guye (talk) 03:25, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: There's no way this should be deleted. It was a real company that played a role in the communications industry in that era. It was purchased for a huge amount of money. Here is a link to a NYT article about the acquisition. http://www.nytimes.com/1996/10/08/business/3com-in-245-million-deal-for-onstream-networks.html Added four references and formatting to the article. ~Brholden

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 01:49, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 01:49, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:39, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 06:15, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:NCOMPANY -> WP:CORPSPAM. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:12, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Not spam, and the quarter-billion dollar valuation is not peanuts. However, it seems a flash in the Internet bubble. I would say merge to 3Com since the story needs to be told, but this will never reach a notability limit by itself. Also clearly nothing to do with solutions. W Nowicki (talk) 23:39, 14 April 2017 (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.