Deletion of Metaforic (2nd nomination)

Comment: subject has received passing mention from multiple non-primary reliable sources, and as I stated before in the previous AfD, the subject has received significant coverage from one reliable source (the ''BBC''), but one significant coverage article does not notability make. As mentioned above by MelanieN the vast majority of the passing mentions could be considered |routine coverage or press releases. Therefore, IMHO the subject has |not yet received sufficient |in-depth coverage to be considered notable as defined by 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ROUTINE||WP:TOOSOON||WP:INDEPTH||WP:GNG)

Comment: Fails . Lots of references are listed, but they are not from independent or reliable sources. They are things like press releases, routine profiles in trade magazines, and non-notable trade awards
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORP)