Deletion of Frequency Therapeutics

Comment: A run-of-the-mill medical startup, no indications of notability (but a lot of aspiration), reference contents are not intellectually independent, relies extensively on PRIMARY data, fails  and/or . Topic fails GNG
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:ORGIND)

Comment: Bad faith nomination by an editor trying to avoid a content discussion. Coverage of this company in RS is fairly extensive. Clearly meets 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: sourcing does not meet . In general, : the company has not achieved anything significant just yet, apart from raising money
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:TOOSOON)

Comment: This article about a private corporation meets the |required criteria: it has been the "subject of significant coverage in secondary sources", per citations above (plus others one can find, such as https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20180215005602/en/Three-way-Collaboration-U.S.-Army-Harvard-University-Frequency here, http://news.mit.edu/2017/drug-treatment-combat-hearing-loss-0221 here, or https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2018/02/02/five-things-you-should-know-about-david-lucchino/jC4pXsXTB9sH2e4hwt3joK/story.html here), which go beyond "one regional, statewide, provincial, national, or international source";  coverage in sources evidently extends far "above routine announcements"; and so on. This is a keeper
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ORGCRIT)