Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crownpeak
rather than appealing to common sense, appealing to the |notability guidelines makes more sense.  I would discount the Gartner report.  I've had access to Gartner, and Gartner analysts, and even work with a consultant who has written Gartner analysis.  For the purposes of notability, it is key to understand that Gartner will research and publish information on any company if a client makes a query about it.  As such, there is no editorial oversight into the selection of companies by Gartner in these circumstances.  I would however trust them for facts about company that could establish notability such as a company being the market leader by sales volume for example.  Setting Gartner aside, there is http://www.publish.com/c/a/Web-Design/CrownPeak-Content-Management-Supports-Google-Open-Social/ this, and http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-14121983_ITM this.  The Age, a major Australian daily sees fit to http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/10/27/1067213196273.html mention them, but more importantly point to more http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Midmarket/Content-Services/ in-depth coverage
— User:Whpq, 19:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:N (Wikipedia:Notability)