Deletion of Aras Corp (4th nomination)

Comment: to closer - The still questionability of all of this is still not actually substantial as all sources have essentially been based from PR and PR-like sources. Commentd suggesting this should automatically be kept is not meeting , thus, as always, keep votes can be disregarded if not substantially convincing
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Consensus (WP:CCC)

Comment: per a handful of the sources found by posters above. I don't think all work, but there is some significant coverage here: http://www.bizjournals.com/boston/blog/mass-high-tech/2008/11/angel-investors-help-aras-expand-to-european.html, http://www.infoworld.com/article/2660551/application-development/soft-sell-for-open-source-apps.html, https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2012/09/23/software-companies-build-business-model-free/LzlgCjxhSR8Pp9k39MqGSO/story.html, and https://books.google.com/books?id=mVkxNbUVlmoC&pg=PA5&lpg=PA5&dq=%22Aras%22#v=onepage&q=%22Aras%22&f=false, and https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-33681823.html, which is enough on its own to pass , and I haven't even done a google search yet. I also don't quite understand the earlier argument against InfoWorld. Seems a fine and reputable trade publication to me
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Meets , although on a weaker level, per a review of |available sources. See source examples below
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:NEXIST)

Comment: WP:FOC|Focusing on the issues: , as well as  and , is satisfied by https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-33681823.html the Boston Globe, http://www.infoworld.com/article/2660551/application-development/soft-sell-for-open-source-apps.html InfoWorld, and https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-123853935.html MSI
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:AUD||WP:CORPIND)