Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Instana
I appreciate that, despite attempts to codify  standards, judgment still needs to be made of identified sources. I have looked further at those proposed, to evaluate whether I stand by my original nomination. The SD Times text is copied from https://www.instana.com/press-releases/instana-integration-helps-accelerate-application-delivery-with-splunk/ company PR. The Techcrunch item is a light paraphrase of https://www.prweb.com/releases/instana_secures_30_million_series_c_investment_led_by_meritech_to_extend_automated_monitoring/prweb15787804.htm this PR with the same funding partner quotation. The Wirtschafts Woche item is the same PR funding announcement. The Solinger Tageblatt item appears to be similar, although it is paywalled local coverage. For me, these have to be set aside as falling under the ''"routine coverage … of a capital transaction"'' part of our criteria. However, there are the more substantial Gründerszene/Welt and Handelsblatt items.  Gründerszene followed https://www.gruenderszene.de/technologie/instana-series-c their coverage of the same funding announcement with their https://www.gruenderszene.de/technologie/software-startup-instana more detailed article/interview shortly afterwards.  Both this and the earlier Handelsblatt  article provide more detail but, for me, they remain propositional descriptions about where a start-up company sees its potential market position rather than critical evaluation, and insufficient to demonstrate that the firm has yet achieved lasting encyclopaedic notability
— User:AllyD, 13:53, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: :WP:NCORP (Wikipedia:Notability)