Deletion of Spigning

Comment: as 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Complete bollocks (WP:CB)

Comment: Fails to establish |notability. Far too many of the sources are just twitter feed links or user generated
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: but not for the reasons above. It may ''not'' be |madeup but rather a term that's obscure to the rest of us and known to a small group of people, and although the software ''does'' exist, it almost certainly shouldn't be in this article. To me, this seems like an article that's a "puff piece" praising the software, and using phony celebrity endorsement to give the appearance that it's reliably sourced. I did look it up on Google, and although there's few Ghits for such a thing, this certainly doesn't seem like patent nonsense, it's just in an inappropriate place. Whether this was |written by an employee of the firm or a fan of the software (which doesn't matter anyhow), this article doesn't meet Wikipedia's criteria. Not speedy delete-worthy, but for now it should be deleted, or at least moved offsite. It doesn't appear to be a spam campaign, more of an attempt to try and get free publicity for something, but it fails. My vote: delete
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up one day (WP:MADEUP||WP:COI)

Comment: as a |made-up, |neological |hoax
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up one day (WP:MADEUP||WP:NEO||WP:HOAX)