abstract
| - Previously a Prod on the rationale "No evidence that this software meets the notability guidelines." Prod was removed by the article creator. There is a published Official Guide, but I found no reliable 3rd party sources that would establish notability, so I am bringing the article to AfD on the original rationale. (Note: there are also Engineering and Real Estate firms with similar names.) AllyD (talk) 06:56, 3 June 2012 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 07:01, 3 June 2012 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
* keep The lack of forged sources is the evidence of notability for this years old software --Hiddenray (talk) 09:32, 12 June 2012 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, →Bmusician 02:48, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
* Wait, what? How is lack of sources evidence of notability? DarkAudit (talk) 06:14, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
|