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 was delete. —Tom Morris (talk) 10:41, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PocketSensei (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject of the article appears to be a non-notable software company. The subject lacks significant coverage in reliable third party sources and fails to meet the notability guidelines for organizations. Alpha_Quadrant ^(talk) 20:40, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete quite a few passing mentions for products, but nothing in depth. Plus the wikilink for the company's CEO just redirects back to the article, which is punishable by death in some jurisdictions. As always, I'm happy to change my mind if something decent turns up.  Tigerboy1966  21:43, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
• Delete: I found no significant coverage. SL93 (talk) 00:02, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:14, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:14, 3 February 2012 (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.