Deletion of Funding Circle

Comment: Did anyone check Google Books? There is https://books.google.com/books?id=4SNwDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA234&dq=%22Funding+Circle%22&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiK54uU-srmAhXeJzQIHVwmAs0Q6AEwBHoECAQQAg#v=onepage&q=%22Funding%20Circle%22&f=false this from what appears to be an education textbook and https://books.google.com/books?id=6SusDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT107&dq=%22Funding+Circle%22&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiK54uU-srmAhXeJzQIHVwmAs0Q6AEwAHoECAUQAg#v=onepage&q=%22Funding%20Circle%22&f=false this as well which includes a case study on the company. These are just two of several that I pulled. Not all of the press is positive either, including https://www.ft.com/content/21237c1a-ec3e-11e9-a240-3b065ef5fc55 this from the FTs. AfD is not cleanup and this can be taken to a stub very easy to alleviate any promotional tone. As it stands, I don't think  applies
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Blow it up and start over (WP:TNT)

Comment: The company has attracted coverage in multiple sources, not just the paywalled FT but also https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45900404 a BBC News article, a commentary item in https://www.theguardian.com/business/nils-pratley-on-finance/2019/jul/02/funding-circle-bins-the-boasts-as-brexit-bites The Guardian, as well as the "Funding for SMEs" case study identified above, which amounts to |substantial coverage
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (:WP:CORPDEPTH)

Comment: A major company with significant coverage. The concerns about  are justified, and vigilance is needed to keep the article |neutrally worded, but doesn't justify deleting it
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (WP:COI||WP:NPOV)

Comment: The subject received significant media coverage, so the issue was combined with 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NCORP)