Deletion of CounterPath Corporation

Comment: on a  basis, I think there might be enough here to meet , but with signficant phrasings taken from press releases scattered throughout the article ("lets Canadians use their wireless numbers to enable single-number reachability by talk and text"), a copyright clean and removal of mild but consistent promotional non-encyclopedic language will fundamentally require a rewrite from scratch
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Blow it up and start over (WP:TNT||WP:CORP)

Comment: There are more than enough third party cites to be . Yes, it is too promotional, but that is something to fix, not a reason to delete
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: There are two s, not one, one of which (which I won't name...) has the same name as appears on the company's press releases.  is clear. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EyeBeam (software) was already nominated for deletion once, but oddly only on notability and not as clear corporate |advertising. It's also a mess of self-serving press releases and long lists of minor accolades from obscure trade publications which exist just to sell advertising to companies in this one narrow industry. Upon reading both articles, it isn't clear from the text why these are notable topics. There's too much fluff here to find any real substance. Furthermore, X-Lite and eyeBeam (software)|eyeBeam look to be built on the same code base (as of X-Lite 3.0) with X-Lite the lobotomised version. We don't need three pages about this company... I'm not confused; this isn't a useful product description, it's an advertisement
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Single-purpose account (WP:SPA||WP:COI||WP:ADV)

Comment: Notability is marginal, but the article is promotional enough to  anyway (which looks to be the deletion rationale rather than notability). The creator of the page is an SPA whose only edits were to create this promotional article, an article for one of CrossBeam's products, EyeBeam (software), and various edits to other pages to link to those two. The article has all the hallmarks of paid editing, too: content that would be just as at home on the company website, a long list of awards, long bulletpointed company history/accomplishments, and a massive spammy list of mostly horrible references (i.e. compiled for length). --&mdash
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Blow it up and start over (WP:TNT)

Comment: If one were to gut all of the non-encyclopedic material, we would be left with a tiny stub and still no indication of notability.  Does not meet , particularly CORPDEPTH
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NCORP)