Deletion of Kanoah Tests

Comment: as per the above.  applies, of course - if the system gets more notice in independent, reliable sources (as defined by our policies), then perhaps an article might work. Unfortunately, we're not there yet
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Usual caveats (WP:USUAL)

Comment: unless better sources are found and included or presented here to establish |notability clearly. At presnet the StilSoft source is the only one that looks both reliable and in-depth. The  Favio Genovese source is a blog. The QuaTest.  source includes the phrase "As beta testers, we are working very closely the Kanoah team." It is not independent. The G2Crowd source looks to be user-generated content and hence not reliable for Wikipedia. The QA Testing Tools source is rather brief, and seems to be based on a press release. The Advandus  source includes the text "Advandus is available in an advisory capacity as an official partner of Kanoah for the success of your projects." and so is also not independent. We need |independent published |reliable sources to establish notability, with some depth of coverage
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:IS||WP:RS)