Deletion of ERP system selection methodology

Comment: to Enterprise resource planning, as stated above, the first reference is worth porting over to the other article, but everything else is basically just  and is not worth saving
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTH)

Comment: seems to be promoting an ERP software vendor's view on how to buy ERP software. Fails Wikipedia:NOTHOWTO and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:PROMO)

Comment: very selectively) to Enterprise resource planning, per reasons above. I think the lead is about all that could be merged based on the sources. Almost all of this article is OR/SYNTH, that is more of a |technical guide than an encyclopedic article. This is not an independently notable topic apart from the merge target. Even if sources did exist, this alone is not a reason to have a stand alone article; in this case the content would be better included in the target. This is an unneeded CFORK. {{ping|MarioGom|SailingInABathTub|XOR'easter}}, would you be amenable to a selective merge of the lead? &nbsp;//&nbsp
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTGUIDE)

Comment: The page cites sources by respectable publishers such as the Cambridge University Press and Harvard Business School.  And it is easy to find more books about the topic such as ''https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/The_Enterprise_Resource_Planning_Decade/dlAeqOOZ6WUC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=ERP+system+selection+methodology&pg=PA94&printsec=frontcover The Enterprise Resource Planning Decade'' which states that "''There are a number of ERP software selection methodologies documented in the literature...''".  The topic is therefore notable and the rest is a matter of development rather than deletion per our policy , "''If editing can improve the page, this should be done rather than deleting the page
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:ATD)