Deletion of Product Hunt

Comment: WP:TOOSOON; nn as either  nor . Sourcing is in passing ("...one of many such websites..." etc) and / or 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NCORP||WP:NWEB||WP:SPIP)

Comment: Some resources are good, Tech industry is wide and I think it's difficult to determine notability within the tech world. Could be  as well.  —&nbsp;Preceding Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned comment added by
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Too soon (WP:TOOSOON)

Comment: since subject fails  and . The former failing is trivial; as to the the latter, the guideline states that  {{tq|web-specific content may be notable based on meeting one of the following criteria: (1) The content itself has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works whose source is independent of the site itself. (2) The website or content has won a well-known and independent award from either a publication or organization.}} I see nothing of this sort for the contested subject. https://techcrunch.com/2015/02/05/product-hunt-wins-best-new-startup-of-2014/?guccounter=1 This is as close as it got, yet. So, generously, 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NCORP||WP:WEBSITE||WP:TOOSOON)

Comment: Corporations are actually often pretty irrelevant ... and sometimes quite transient.  Its the products/services they produce that matter.  This article falls under .  Global Alexa rank of 4,000 and article visits of 1,500 a month are not directly relevant ... this isn't exactly Ed Sheerin, but are an indicator this is likely to be of significant interest.  This indicates references are likely to exist ... and the site gains mentions in such places as https://academic.oup.com/inthealth/article/9/3/145/3861029 in International Health where it is suggested as a place to check out emerging technology
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEBSITE)