The result was no consensus. Discussion leaned towards keep. Sources are lacking, but the prevailing view that sources to show notability typically are found for this type of program, giving it a pass this time seems reasonable. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 02:58, 20 June 2009 (UTC) reply
The article was double-Prodded. I prodded it myself, owing to an inability to track down sources. User Atama prodded as well earlier today, citing an editor COI as well as an inability to track down sources. Prod was contested shortly before it would have expired. Given that two users have been unable to find independent sources on the topic (partly, as I noted before, due to issues with the term) I feel that the article needs to go. Tyrenon ( talk) 02:19, 12 June 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. Discussion leaned towards keep. Sources are lacking, but the prevailing view that sources to show notability typically are found for this type of program, giving it a pass this time seems reasonable. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 02:58, 20 June 2009 (UTC) reply
The article was double-Prodded. I prodded it myself, owing to an inability to track down sources. User Atama prodded as well earlier today, citing an editor COI as well as an inability to track down sources. Prod was contested shortly before it would have expired. Given that two users have been unable to find independent sources on the topic (partly, as I noted before, due to issues with the term) I feel that the article needs to go. Tyrenon ( talk) 02:19, 12 June 2009 (UTC) reply