Deletion of Epygi

Comment: per  and  According to history of this article, it was copied from a previously deleted article on July 8, 2007. Its most certainly advertising. A company officer placed this ad on this article's talk page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Epygi here titled 'Dear Wiki Users.' How sneaky and brazen is that
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:SPAM)

Comment: Discussions of editor education and specific edits aside, it looks like | other stuff exists is the primary (or maybe only) reason being advanced to keep this article. That seems to be trying to gloss over the appearance that the company is  |really not so notable: "trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability." I'm always willing to support an article if it can be shown there's a reason to keep it, but...I don't see it here. More independent sources (Infoworld reviews of one product aren't enough) would help
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OSE||WP:CORP)