Deletion of LiquidSky

Comment: Time'' magazine is a pretty high level source. I can't imagine the nominator would have made this nomination |had they been aware of this sort of sourcing
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE)

Comment: This feels like an article about an announcement of the service, in other words,  and fails . It's all rehashed PR blurbs and quotes, basically a whole lot of . But the number of references from reputable sources, such as /RS and broader, is numerous. It feels , but I'm sure more sources actually dealing with the product itself will appear once it's released and reviewed. If it's a flop and no one ever comments on it again, I would revisit the AfD and argue for deletion due to failing . —&nbsp;&nbsp
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NEVENT||WP:LASTING||WP:PRIMARY||WP:VG||WP:TOOSOON||WP:LASTING)

Comment: I added two review references.  One from online Time Magazine and the other from PCWorld.  The way it's written about and the multitude of other 'not as prominent' sources leads me just on the side of |notable
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)