Deletion of Safetray (2nd nomination)

Comment: spaced ndash}} Per , the topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: This article's subject doesn't pass |notability muster. If we keep it, I want an article on my cat. And my Dad's book. Heck, I want an article about the ten-pound tomato featured in our large, metropolitan newspaper but, just because it was written up doesn't mean it merits a WP article. My question: Do the authors/proponents of this product's article have ''any'' connection at all with the product or its inventor? The answer to that question would be telling, methinks. A more global stewardship question we should all answer: Should we allow Wikipedia--and the hours we invest therein--to be hijacked for some peoples' personal monetary gain? Posting "We're in Wikipedia" on Twitter or Facebook is rarely, if ever, an indicator of good faith. &mdash;&nbsp
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: The sources shown above are more than enough to represent the notability of the product, per . It seems that a prior version of the article had an issue with a promotional tone, but that it has been rewritten and better now. What the company does elsewhere is of no concern to us, all we need to focus on is whether it is a notable subject and that it is written neutrally
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORP)