Deletion of Open smart grid protocol

Comment: and then merge to smart grid. - The source information available is mostly press releases (about 100, including republication of the press releases in different sources). Doesn't meet . A first mention of OSGP is on 8 Sept 2010,http://www.echelon.com/company/news-room/2010/controlpoint.htm so the topic hasn't been around that long and may not meet GNG for a while
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: to smart grid, per . A few further sources:http://www.pennenergy.com/index/power/display/9870819415/articles/electric-light-power/smart-grid/2012/January/ETSI_approves_open_smart_grid_protocol_for_grid_technologies.htmlhttp://magazine.appro.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1845&Itemid=44http://www.power-eetimes.com/en/open-smart-grid-protocol-osgp-for-grid-technologies-approved.html?cmp_id=7&news_id=222903972http://www.utilitydive.com/news/etsi-approves-open-smart-grid-protocol-for-grid-technologies-1/7383
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Press releases and their kin don't do anything for satisfying .  I'm not opposed to merging content, but I don't see anything really worth merging
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: and merge to smart grid as noted above. Independently, the article fails to meet 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: I am seeing variations on "|it's useful", "|it's notable", and "|but it's true!". Just a reminder: the threshold for inclusion is |verifiability, not truth. The article as it stands contains only primary sources on the nuts and bolts of the protocol. There is little context, and statements like "it is one of the most widely used smart meter and smart grid device networking standards" lack citations. What ''independent'' source said that
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:USEFUL||WP:ITSNOTABLE||WP:BIT||WP:V)