Deletion of EasyPHP

Comment: mdash; I found a single mention in google scholar and several mentions in a couple of O'Reilly Media books, but there's just not enough there to build an article.  Lots of pointers on how to install and use the software, but nothing discussing the software proper (particularly no reviews).  In my opinion, doesn't meet the guidelines in 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NSOFT)

Comment: failing that, '''Redirect''' to WAMP) at https://www.google.com/search?tbs=bks:1&q=%22EasyPHP%22 422 hits on G Books,  http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22EasyPHP%22 479 on GScholar & https://www.google.com/search?as_eq=wikipedia&q=%22EasyPHP%22&num=50 560,000 hits on Google it easily passes  IMO. Also note that one of its versions has been downloaded some http://download.cnet.com/EasyPHP/3000-2212_4-10079659.html 225,000 times on Cnet further indicative of popularity. Additionally, per therstuffexists, there is no reason to have articles on the Linux & MAC equivalents (cf. MAMP, DAMP (software bundle), Bitnami, Apache2Triad) and ignore EasyPHP being the popular Windows equivalent. It will be really absurd of Wikipedia to have a red link for something as popular. (note the number of people looking for it even as it has been deleted http://stats.grok.se/en/latest90/EasyPHP
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:O)

Comment: as per failing  and ; there simply isn't enough coverage to keep the article. The fact the article was written from scratch is enough for it to be "substantially different" and not G4-worthy, regardless of concerns in the prior AfD. Particularly as at least two admins have expressed the view that it ''is'' different enough
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NSOFT)