Deletion of Farmdrop (2nd nomination)

Comment: Passes  and , and the article does not have a promotional tone. Content restored in the article went through the DYK process and was a DYK entry entry on Wikipedia's Main Page (see the Template:Did you know nominations/Farmdrop|DYK nom page). Furthermore, neither the DYK reviewer, two other participants in the DYK discussion, nor the promoter interpreted this content as promotional. Below are some source examples
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:AUD)

Comment: the sources are essentially advertorials and |Wikipedia is not a platform for promotion or advertising. The sources listed are one sided, and cover only the company owner's perspective - these are testimonials, not third party coverage. Hence, based on the sources, this topic fails . The newspaper articles are in the business section, which is intended to speak to other business people, potential investors, and farmer-clients
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTPROMO||WP:CORPDEPTH)

Comment: I have repeatedly revisited this article over the last few days and revisited the sources and I am now convinced that this is advertising, but clever advertising. The lack of critical content, the constant references to "Ben  Pugh said...." has a strong connotation that all, or almost all the references are based on Press releases, probably personalised press releases adapted to its intended audience, but not independent sources. If he is that good at promoting his image, then no doubt the company will thrive and perhaps it will then become notable. At present it is an advertising piece that is |to early in the company's life to be notable. '''''&nbsp
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Too soon (WP:TOOSOON)