 | This page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past. |
| This article was nominated for deletion on 4 October 2010. The result of the discussion was nomination withdrawn. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
More sources edit
Sources found by User:ThaddeusB. 黒い白い (KuroiShiroi) 03:26, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
Requested move edit
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
No consensus to move. Note I did cleanup the location of the infobox so that it does not dominate the article. If more information becomes available about the company, a change can be considered at that time to included splitting the company out.Vegaswikian (talk) 17:39, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
InterMapper → Dartware — Per WP:NC and other guidelines, and just general common sense and normal WP editing practice, if one article is going to cover two topics, one subordinate to the other, then the article should be named for, and written principally to address, the main topic, not the subtopic. I.e., this article needs to move to Dartware and be rewritten to be (like its infobox) about the company, with InterMapper as a subsection, which InterMapper can redirect directly to, with Dartware#InterMapper. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 02:06, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
- I see what you mean about the current version covering two topics. My feeling is the software is more notable than the company, and that it would make more sense to delete the infobox material on dartware. I've poked around on google news archives, and I'm not really seeing much in the way of significant coverage about the company--there are the usual press releases, passing mention for charity work, and the majority of coverage is really centered on the intermapper product. If there are no objections, I'll proceed with that change. --Nuujinn (talk) 12:06, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.