- 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. AfD is not a venue for request updates to articles, and articles are not deleted when editing is all that is needed -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 02:29, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- SiteScreen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This article ist not is not correct anymore SiteScreen now belogs to the company Emediate. On behalf of the companies involved: Please delete this whole article Delete --Alt_Muc 11:27, Dec 3rd 2010 (CET)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- Jclemens-public (talk) 17:27, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Under what policy do you propose deletion? If the article is factually incorrect, the preferred solution is to update it, not delete it. Jimmy Pitt talk 19:02, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and update as needed with referenced information about acquisition or merger. Cullen328 (talk) 21:02, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- If I could update the article I would. But I don’t have proper Information about how SiteScreen is used or marketed by Emediate and what they are doing with it. It very likely is not in accordance to the article. Furthermore Emediate is a separate DANISH enterprise. That means the new target market is very likely to be Denmark, so it’s not relevant for English speaking countries any more. The article is irrelevant because it is not correct anymore and, if nobody comes up with correct information how SiteScreen is used by Emediate, it should be deleted. After all, Wikipedia is all about to spread relevant and correct information.
There is no reason not to “reactivate” the article once the information written down is correct and has proper sources with it. Alt_Muc 14:13, 7 December 2010 (CET)
- Comment Alt_Muc, the company's website is still active and the Emediate name and a Copenhagen address appear at the bottom of the screen. There is no indication that the company intends to limit its marketing to Denmark. A notable company does not cease to become notable just because it is acquired by a Danish parent company. Wikipedia covers the whole world and many Danish companies operate throughout the world. Any changes to the article have to be based on reliable sources as references in the article, but nothing you have furnished so far justifies deleting the article. Cullen328 (talk) 16:06, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep unless someone wants to challenge whether the company was notable in the first place. If there is verifiable information that Sitecreen was bought by Emediate, all that warrants is changing from present tense to past tense. If neither SiteScreen nor Emediate can prove the sale took place, that's their problem. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 17:51, 8 December 2010 (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.