Deletion of Novavax, Inc.

Comment: the Hoovers source seems okay and the bits and pieces listed above probably tip it over the edge. The lack of newer coverage makes |verification of more recent activity difficult but  means that's not really a consideration
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:NOTTEMP)

Comment: There doesn't seem a real consensus to keep or delete. Please relist the AfD when it expires here. The sources being used here are being represented as if they are scientific, peer-reviewed studies of Novavax research, which they are not. Rather, they are simply public relations releases in multiple publications, some of which are very old. Even The New England Journal of Medicine source is not a research article but simply a letter to the editor from Novavax. There really isn't anything here that shows the company is |notable. As you can see, there are two SPA's here, as well. One hasn't edited anything but Novavax. It seems it could use another go at listing for others to weigh in. Thanks
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:notable)

Comment: I haven't done the research, but the fact that they're on the NYSE is a fairly certain sign that there will be enough sources out there. I know  says that being on an exchange doesn't itself confer notability, but it also says that experience has shown that in almost every case such companies easily pass  anyway. No comment on whether this violates  at this time, but I think if there's a significant problem it should be fixable. Worst case, stubbify it
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:LISTED||WP:GNG||WP:ADVERT)