Deletion of Honestbee

Comment: Sources presented in article and at this AfD meet 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH)

Comment: based on the |significant sourcing available from |reliable sources such as the ''Straights Times'' and ''Forbes''. As far as I know, the number of employees or contractors has not been a ''per se'' requirement for WP:CORP. All start-ups engage in PR, although many will deny it
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SIGCOV||WP:RS)

Comment: It is definitely passing the frontiers of ...On lighter side...DGG and SwisterTwister have little high levels of standards when it comes to articles related to companies... I have never seen them vote keep
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH)

Comment: Non-trivial coverage from Forbes, TechCrunch, etc.  Easily passes .  Nominator appears to be using their own personal idea of what constitutes notability vs Wikipedia's policy
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: after reviewing the lists of sources in the !keep votes above, it is clear that enough significant coverage exists in independent reliable sources to pass .  The verbose commentary above is also acknowledged, however it is entirely unconvincing
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORP)

Comment: sources listed above by  North America demonstrate that company meets .  is not yet a policy
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:ALLBUSINESSCOVERAGEISPR)