Deletion of BTCJam

Comment: The Porter/Rousse chapter and the TechCrunch article are enough to satisfy . —&nbsp
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH)

Comment: only the book source meets , and one source is not enough to establish notability. The rest are trade press/blogs/crap like TechCrunch that we haven't accepted as proof of notability in at least two years
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NCORP)

Comment: There is significant coverage but it is all industry publications and most of it is general announcements. The only reliable source I found (https://www.forbes.com/sites/laurashin/2016/05/18/leaderless-company-rakes-in-133-million-new-crowdfunding-rules-allow-startups-to-raise-1-million/ Forbes) is simply a brief mention so would not count for notability. Agree that it fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH)

Comment: mdash; I've reviewed the citations in the current version and added a -type table to Talk:BTCJam.  ''As of this writing'', there are insufficient quality sources to support notability of the subject. --User:Ceyockey
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH)

Comment: striking previous !vote and changing to "Keep" as both book references provided by Ceyockey above appear to meet the criteria for establishing notabilty. Topic meets GNG and .  '''Delete''' Agree with above, references fails the criteria for establishing notability, topic fails GNG and 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NCORP||WP:NCORP)