Deletion of Euratlas History Maps

Comment: I see a good argument for notability based on the citations of Euratlas in tons of scholarly works. Wikipedia doesn't have a specific notability guideline for non-book reference works, but it makes sense to me that notability for a reference work should take into account how widely cited it is, since  and other specialized notability guidelines include criteria about impact in their field. Euratlas functions in a similar way to an academic book, and the criteria at  even specifically includes "how widely the book is cited by other academic publications or in the media" and "how influential the book is considered to be in its specialty area
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BOOKCRIT||WP:TEXTBOOKS)

Comment: Subject isn't notable, per nom. Comte arnau wants us to believe we need an article about this because the subject {{tq|" is just so important"}} and Icewhiz claims . Both are discredited arguments
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:GHITS)

Comment: Hi! It's not true that this page fails  and . History mapping does not receive attention like a nationwide sports competition! As Notability for Webs says (quote) "Notability" is not synonymous with "fame" or "importance". In the history field, Euratlas represents the digital enterprise that sums up many years of research and paper/print publications (mainly Atlases). It is just so important. Considering only the name of the company, which is a compound noun, not included in the dictionary, google says over 100.000 results. That, in the history field is notable, indeed
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB||WP:RS)