Deletion of BandLab Technologies (2nd nomination)

Comment: I'm going to have to say this definitely appears to pass , there are literally thousands of articles which talk about this company, at varying depth levels (and of course many are press-release types).  In the current sourcing, the ''Fortune'' piece and ''Techcrunch'' are solid.  While I agree with Scopecreep that some articles are routine announcements, ''Fortune'' rarely participates in that type of mill article. Searching turns up other articles which go beyond the simple announcement or brief mention type, https://www.musicweek.com/digital/read/bandcamp-rival-bandlab-launches-albums-tool-with-100-of-earnings-for-artists/080255 ''Musicweek'', https://www.bbc.com/news/business-54138180 BBC, their purchase of ''Rolling Stone'' was also covered in-depth in https://www.wsj.com/articles/rolling-stone-magazine-sells-49-stake-to-singapores-bandlab-technologies-1474812182 ''The Wall Street Journal
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH)

Comment: ping|P,TO 19104}} Possibly.  now applies to companies now per consensus. I hope your not planning on going against consensus are you?   When somebody is standing in his teeshirt smiling and direct quoting, it doesn't a leap of imagination to know it is an interview style article. Fortune, while different and paywalled, is all the name. It is a routine announcement of sale, which is trivial coverage. The variety ref is also interview style article, ''Said CEO Jay Penske in announcing the news: “In the 12 months since PMC’s initial investment into this incredible team and legendary brand, the need to consolidate the Rolling Stone business has become abundantly clear...''  The whole thing is a press-release, or are you going to tell me its not, particularly since entertainment paper like ''variety'' has been savaged by Facebook and Google and are now taking the advertising dollar as heavily as everybody else, to survive. They always did
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NCORP)

Comment: the company has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, and thus meets the criteria of . The company is known for its multiple notable brands, and also has coverage itself.   doesn't apply - the content isn't spam or advertising - all the information comes from independent third party sources.   is also not met since by meeting , the subject is suitable for the encyclopedia
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:DEL4||WP:DEL14||WP:GNG)

Comment: Since when does  apply when the consensus seems to be that  is more applicable in these instances. And I see somebody is still pushing Techcrunch likes its gold instead of lead
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NCORP)