Deletion of BeLight Software

Comment: The company's article is an easy case: it's basically just a list of products, and that runs afoul of . The other articles, I'm torn on. Yes, there are reviews on MacUser, etc., but the reviews are not as glowing as the text makes them out to be. I think Miami's got a point right above me: more critical commentary and analysis would make it easier to see that the programs are notable and should be kept
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTDIR)

Comment: nothanks}}. One big article |without significant in depth independent coverage is no better than ten little ones. I also added {{tl|findsources}} to the rest of the nominees; several of them are not particularly useful, of course, but it saves people a little typing
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: per DGG. We're not here to judge ''why'' something is notable, but only ''if'' it is or not. If the articles have a promotional tone, this is something that can be solved with editing, and therefore has nothing to do with deletion, |per deletion policy. Several sources appear above for the softwares, and as such the articles have no reason to be deleted
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:ATD)