Deletion of NYDIG

Comment: Although there a decent number of RS on the subject, as pointed out here and from what I’ve seen in a quick google search, the subject doesn’t seem to have a sufficient level of significant coverage; all but one of the sources are focused on the same event related to a deal with Mass Mutual (see ). On top of that, all the sources cover an event from just last month. Unless there are earlier RS’s covering unrelated events involving the company, it would be hard to say this is notable because it is lacking in significant  coverage
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SBST||WP:SUSTAINED)

Comment: Company has one of only 24 regulatory Bitlicense licenses issued by the New York DFS,https://www.dfs.ny.gov/reports_and_publications/press_releases/pr1811141 which helps to establish notability. WSJ, Forbes, Bloomberg, Pensions and Investments and other top tier editorial coverage make it clear that the subject is past , and that   has been met. With institutional support, this is not some random ICO or blockchain effort, and we can expect more coverage soon enough
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Too soon (WP:TOOSOON||WP:CORP||WP:GNG)

Comment: I disagree that the Forbes "sites" reference is an acceptable reference, it is still spam. I am unable to locate any |significant coverage with |in-depth information on the company and containing |independent content, references to date fail the criteria for establishing notability, topic therefore fails GNG/
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SIGCOV||WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:ORGIND||WP:NCORP)

Comment: apart from the article being known to be blatant paid spam, I am unconvinced the remaining sources (after I removed the generally-unreliable crypto site) are in sufficient depth to pass the prongs of 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NCORP)

Comment: The ''Forbes'' article is by a staff member and not a "Forbes contributor" and so it passes the |usual test. The ''WSJ'' is lighter in terms of  in that it is mostly about Mass Mutual but the transaction itself is certainly significant and was the work product of this company  so that also satisfied the test from my point of view. Coindesk is not even to be considered but ''Business Insider'' is usually acceptable and I also found an article in https://www.americanbanker.com/news/quontic-bank-and-nydig-launch-bitcoin-rewards-checking ''American Banker''.  I'm satisfied that, whatever irregularities it took on the way to mainspace, it is a notable company according to 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything (WP:42||WP:SIGCOV||WP:NCORP||WP:42)