Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Time To Know
it comes down to whether the sources available are sufficient to meet . They must be significant, multiple, reliable, independent, secondary. Of the three sources currently in the article, two are actually about the founder and mention this company only in passing, so I argue they fail on depth and significance. The third is significant, probably reliable (I'm always a bit unsure how reliable these business puff-pieces are despite being in a reliable paper), independent and secondary. But what I'm not seeing is ''multiple'' sources to this level of quality, and my own search shows little else beyond what is already in the article. The article was also clearly, and openly, edited by the organisation's marketing team in the past, and I rather suspect continued  and possible  editing, although that doesn't in itself make the article non-notable
— User:Hugsyrup, 08:36, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:ORGCRIT||WP:COI||WP:UPE (Wikipedia:Notability)