Deletion of Housejoy (2nd nomination)

Comment: per the previous AFD - This "Blatant misuse of Wikipedia" is infact a well sourced article that is backed up by |independent and  SOURCES|reliable sources and most certainly meets , In regards to "{{xt|Only interest is to build an online reputation and Luring customers in the name of Wikipedia.}}" - That may or may not be the case however the article is written in a neutral way and as I said is backed up by independent and reliable sources so at present I'm not seeing any valid reason to delete and  is ''not'' a valid reason
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:INDEPENDENT||WP:RELIABLE||WP:GNG||WP:IDHT)

Comment: This is the 2nd nomination and the previous one closed as Keep so I was expecting to see enough sources to meet the criteria for establishing notability. Unfortunately, none of the sources listed meet the criteria - they fail  and/or . The references are either relying almost exclusively on quotations from company sources and/or personnel, or are |run of the mill business and funding announcements
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:ORGIND||WP:RUNOFTHEMILL)