The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Although I can't say I quite understand the two olfactory comments, even without them there's a consensus that this doesn't meet notability. Olaf Davis (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Integrity Messenger

[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I can't find significant coverage for this software. Joe Chill (talk) 02:20, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- Pcap ping 08:01, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Some false positives in google news, but nothing about this software that I can find. Pcap ping 13:12, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 00:40, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:45, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The unsourced stub doesn't make any claims of notability and I found no signs of significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. — Rankiri (talk) 00:23, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It smells like shit, guys. So old, without infromation and significant coverage. *closed a nose* iorlas (talk) 02:26, 23 February 2010 (UTC) — Iorlas (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Delete. Bad smelling things happens when author forgets about his closed-source code and rests it for a long time. Gkrellm (talk) 02:51, 23 February 2010 (UTC) — Gkrellm (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.