Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Avaya ERS 2500

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 per consensus after 2 relists. However, since there was no comment on Geek2003's last comment about adding sources I'm userfying this to User:Geek2003/Avaya ERS 2500. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:38, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Avaya ERS 2500

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

~~Delete~~. Non-notable product. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 04:38, 18 February 2012 (UTC) -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 04:38, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Already counted in election for AFD. - Geek2003 (talk) 14:03, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Utterly fails WP:N (the only ref is WP:PRIMARY and therefore is not WP:RS). Ipsign (talk) 09:56, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Agree page needs work, and then re-evaluated if AFD is appropriate, also no reason given for not doing a merge. - Geek2003 (talk) 14:03, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I tagged page underconstruction to be expanded. - Geek2003 (talk) 14:59, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:14, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BusterD (talk) 19:21, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Notable company, non-notable product. Nwlaw63 (talk) 21:10, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The page is still under construction/expansion and was only last edited 20 hours before getting relisted. - Geek2003 (talk) 02:32, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep - Major additions and citations have been added to this article. - Geek2003 (talk) 17:50, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 19:00, 6 March 2012 (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.