Deletion of VITAL (machine learning software)

Comment:  says: The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered.  Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject is not sufficient to establish notability. Deep or significant coverage provides an overview, description, commentary, survey, study, discussion, analysis, or evaluation of the product, company, or organization. Such coverage provides an organization with a level of attention that extends well beyond brief mentions and routine announcements, and makes it possible to write more than a Wikipedia:Permastub|very brief, incomplete stub about the organization.   I have provided examples #analysis|here of VITAL receiving "deep coverage" containing commentary and analysis about it. I am not able to determine from reviewing the "delete" comments why this depth of analysis is insufficient and what depth of coverage would convince them that VITAL passes 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH)

Comment: Passes 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Per the nom. Fails  and lacks sustained . Tangential mentions just don't cut it when it comes to notability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ONEEVENT||WP:SIGCOV)

Comment: I believe there are sufficient sources that meet the requirements for establishing notability. I'm not concerned over the title of this article. Topic meets 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)