Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Integrated Systems Inc.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 10:32, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Integrated Systems Inc.[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Defunct company, all sources appear to be Primary or routine business. Fails WP:NCORP Slywriter (talk) 21:31, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Slywriter (talk) 21:31, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Software and California. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:34, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete with some caution, since the generic nature of the company's name makes it very hard to do a robust WP:BEFORE. But the references are very weak. Its parent Wind River Systems is notable, though the article needs substantial work. FalconK (talk) 08:32, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I have added a number of independent WP:RS discussing the company alongside its founder, giving enough insight into some of the up and downs of the company to further flesh out the article (there are many more sources out there, but they are somewhat difficult to find due to the "generic" name of the company). Among the sources easily spotted is an entry of the company in a printed encyclopedia and a Forbes article. While the company was never one of the really big players, it has been a developer of the pSOS (and later FlexOS) operating system(s), which both are notable on their own. pSOS was one of the most successful embedded OSes of their time, with lots of embedded devices ranging from cars to consumer equipment (like washing machines and digital cameras) to aircrafts running it. FlexOS was more focused on industrial controls, point of sale terminals and such - and it had, as a successor to Concurrent DOS, a long history going back to another industry veteran Digital Research (and Novell). There should also be many sources discussing Integrated Systems at some better detail at around the times it went public and when it was eventually bought by Wind River Systems, another significant player. ISI was founded by Narendra Gupta, a notable former Indian-American entrepreneur. While the Integrated Systems Inc. article was a redirect until recently, I applaud that someone started to write an article about it, because I considered this topic to be a missing "puzzle piece" in our network of links for long, naturally connecting many related articles, topics and loose ends. It is good to have a place where the various bits of company history can be collected and presented in congruent style, it helps to put the development of the products in (historical) context, and we are not doing our readers a service if we have to distribute the snippets over various other articles because the article about the company itself is missing. Also, with the added sources, I think, the topic has been demonstrated to be above the WP:GNG line and also meeting WP:NCORP. More sources can be added, but would need time. The article is only start class right now, but has potential for more. Give it time to grow, Rome wasn't built in a day. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 10:46, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I agree that WindRiver was better known for RTOS, but ISI were the first to push RTOS for embedded/networked devices which today we just take for granted. WindRiver has the advantage of existing more recently and having its product chosen for notable NASA missions. From my career experience, ISI was a major player, and widely used. My particular experience was with the MATRIXx product, the first of its kind CAD tool for complex engineered systems. MathWorks' Simulink now dominates but it wasn't always this way. Actually I would like to see an article about MATRIXx, there's one for Simulink, but given the issues with the notability and deletion that I seem to have started I'm not willing to do that. Bottom line, the article's subject is a company that drove significant innovation in two different technologies that have become mainstream and invisible -- a workable definition of success. Unfortunately, given the era in which it operated and its very generic name, it is challenging to find good sources. However that doesn't mean we can't start somewhere, and keep a decent nucleus that others can discover and build upon. How else can we record and explain technological history for posterity?Peter.corke (talk) 19:07, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Wired [1] in 1996 says they were the market leader. Notability doesn't fade. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 03:18, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:03, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The Wired coverage together with the Forbes coverage (both independent RS's, though the Forbes article verges on an interview it doesn't cross the line into being one) just about gets this over the line for WP:NCORP. FOARP (talk) 07:36, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Since this is a company, WP:NCORP guidelines apply. I agree that the Forbes reference meets the criteria for establishing notability. Although the author of the article is not visible on the linked webpage, I have viewed an archive of the magazine article and the author was David Churbuck who was a senior editor at that time. I agree that the Forbes reference contains sufficient "Independent Content" above the information provided in interview. I have also found a small article in Fortune magazine dated 26th December 1994 in the "Companies To Watch" section and it refers to an analysis performed by Michael Schmidt, a technology analyst at Mabon Securities available here (if you can access). Another reference which also verges on an interview but also contains sufficient "Independent Content" is an article entitled "Invisible Computers" by Srikumar S. Rao published on 9th May 1995 (ISSN: 0015-2064) available here (if you can access). Topic meets NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 12:47, 10 June 2022 (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.