The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was DELETE. -Splashtalk 20:29, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Does not appear to be sufficiently notable. Delete. --Nlu (talk) 11:32, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. --Sleepyhead 12:26, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep it has many relevant Google hits, seems notable in its field, and is in the middle of a rewrite. Elfguy 14:54, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It wasn't really in the middle of a rewrite; the ((underconstruction)) tag was placed by the original editor on February 4; I nominated this for deletion on Feburary 9; since then, there has been no substantive edits. --Nlu (talk) 17:40, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or else I will email my cousin and tell him to put an ad for his software tools business (I won't actually, but delete this!!).Blnguyen 00:20, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This AfD is being relisted to generate a clearer consensus. Please add new discussion below this notice. Thanks! moink 19:51, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, no assertion of meeting WP:CORP.--Isotope23 20:29, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.