Deletion of Mullvad

Comment: At a glance, I'm seeing three articles from ''PC World'' (all by the same author), an article from ''Tom's Guide'', and an article from ''TechRadar'' that are independent of Mullvad, which puts me on the fence about . I'm aware ''Tom's Guide'' and ''TechRadar'' are both owned by Future plc, but they seem to be editorially independent of each other. The biggest question I'm confronted with, however, is: "What does this article do that Comparison of virtual private network services doesn't or can't?" Because outside of a small bit of history, I'm seeing very little. '''Disclaimer''': I made an edit to the article about a year ago, and I'm enthusiastic about privacy software, but I'm in no way affiliated with Mullvad. '''Note''': If kept, the article should be improved, for example by removing the blatant advertisement from the lead section
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: I beleive cited coverage https://thatoneprivacysite.net/blog/mullvad-review/, https://thebestvpn.com/reviews/mullvad-vpn/, https://www.pcworld.com/article/3201724/mullvad-vpn-review.html, https://web.archive.org/web/20190627101220/https://www.techradar.com/uk/vpn/the-best-vpn-for-linux is sufficient, in sum, to meet 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: There are other  reviews beside PCworld.  https://thebestvpn.com/reviews/mullvad-vpn/ thebestvpn does hands on test reviews.  Unusually for a 14 eyes jurisdiction no information is required to register and using Bitcoin to pay you should be relatively anonymous.  A keep is possible given Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computing#Retention of VPN Products and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PureVPN.  Its important people check widely for sources not just what is in the article.  Thankyou
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: A single review in PCWorld doesn't qualify it for  notability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORP)