Deletion of Virtual synchrony

Comment: My main complaint is when people CREATE articles on subjects where there is a clear conflict of interest and especially when they cite themselves as sources (the citing appears to be gone now, thanks for that much). However, you should always leave it to others to create an article if the topic is notable and contribute to it then (creating it and/or doing extensive POV-introducing edits just looks bad). I'm sure someone will be willing to save the article by going through it and conforming to |neutral point of view in a rewrite. There's no time limit on this discussion either...just when it reaches consensus. Right now the material just strikes me as having a bit too much POV to be ignored, but we'll see what some others (hopefully who are better informed on the topic than I) have to say. Remember, this is just my humble little concern and if the community wants it to stay, then it stays
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV)

Comment: Actually the deletion reason was as |original research, with the COI stuff being supporting/pointing out. I did this off the page, so here it is again: I think I jumped the gun a bit here on AfD, so sorry about that. I'm supporting '''Keep and rewrite''' at the moment since there seems to be plenty of salvageable material that falls outside of OR
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)