Deletion of Farmdrop

Comment: Meets  per a source review, and the article does not have a promotional tone. News sources that provide neutral or positive coverage about companies are not automatically promotional as a default, and some of the quotes in the nomination serve to demonstrate that the topic has received significant coverage. In addition to the sources in the article, there's also significant coverage in the book listed below
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: per {{u|Ritchie333}} and others. This article clearly meets -- just because an article is promotional in tone doesn't mean that it deserves to be deleted if the sources are there for a proper article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Why repeat what others have said, DGG, Steve Quinn, and Swister have nailed it on the head. OSE is definitely not an argument I would use, and is in direct contradiction to 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH)

Comment: the company is notable given sufficient media coverage. The wording is factual and information presented is appropriate for a company at this kind of stage in its lifecycle. I know  is not a criteria, but closest rival HelloFresh seem sufficient to have an article. They are at a similar development stage. This should be considered for a fair and balanced view. pseudonym
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OSE)

Comment: I see detailed coverage in ''The Guardian'' and ''The Independent'', among others. Meets  as far as I'm concerned. Any promotional writing can be fixed outside of the scope of AfD
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)