Deletion of Zadara Storage

Comment: This is . The sources do not satisfy  or . In fact the vast majority of coverage are press releases. This is a fairly recent company which was started about 5 years ago and I think it has some way to go before it can be notable
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Too soon (WP:TOOSOON||WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:AUD)

Comment: Meets , although on a somewhat weaker level, and keep per . Notions herein about the company's age relative to notability are not guideline- or policy-based, and WP:TOOSOON is an opinion essay. See also, the opinion essay: . Here are some sources: http://www.zdnet.com/article/zadara-rolls-out-on-premise-pay-per-use-private-cloud-storage/, http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/08/07/whats_zadara_all_about/, http://www.crn.com/news/storage/300077276/zadara-storage-as-a-service-runs-docker-containers-directly-inside-storage.htm (be sure to view page 2), http://venturebeat.com/2012/03/08/zadara-storage/, http://www.techrepublic.com/article/two-startups-that-will-make-you-consider-hosting-cloud-storage-in-aws
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:HEY||WP:NEWCOMPANY)

Comment: A couple of sources for consideration are: a discussion of the firm in Gartner's Cool Vendors in Storage 2014 (http://learn.condusiv.com/rs/condusivtechnologies/images/Gartner_Cool_Vendors_in_Storage_Technologies_2014.pdf pages 5-6), and an October 2015 article in The Register which has the opinion that the company is " virtually competing in a field of one with its overall technology and business model" http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/10/09/storage_startups_rocketlike_growth_rates/. I am undecided whether these go beyond  to express attained notability so am just offering them as comment at the moment
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (:WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: yes, the history has been expanded, but there's still a sources problem. Per , ''Startupbeat'' and ''sramanamitra'' aren't independent and ''USPTO'' can't be used for notability.  ''Storagernewsletter'' is literally guessing (it uses "apparently" far too often). ''Socaltech'' is a press release, and that's on top of what K.e.coffman has indicated above.  Aside from the fact that I now have objective proof that the founder wrote the article in the first place, I'm just not seeing anything here that leaves me with the sense that notability is met - it's still just another tech company amongst a slew of tech companies, and I still have no idea why what they actually do is notable either
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NCORP)