Deletion of BlueFocus Communication Group

Comment: I wrote this article because it's one of the largest, fastest-growing ad agencies in the world, with multiple sources discussing its growth. It is a relatively large publicly-traded company, and as Wikipedia notability for companies () explains, "Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in this (or any other) case. However, sufficient independent sources almost always exist for such companies", Of course I wasn't paid. I've been editing Wikipedia since 2007 across a wide range of topics and there's never been any evidence of paid promotion. I have never been paid or advertised such services, period. As I explained to {{User|Hatchens}}, if such baseless accusations persist, I will report them to  and pursue whatever remedies I can. Don't make Wikipedia a hostile work environment. CC {{User|Devokewater}}, !votes should include reasoning
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORP||WP:ANI)

Comment: I've looked at the article and the references in some detail since it is the focus of a brouhaha elsewhere that I am peripherally involved in, and I confess I am having difficulty with it. I'd expect more flesh and more in the way of referencing for an organisation where the references used suggest it to be fast growing. I acknowledge that it was created as a start and in a single edit. I hope further expansion is forthcoming and I shall see what I can find myself assuming it is kept and someone reminds me to look){{pb}}{{pb}}The references aren't what they first appear to be, and I can see why the nom came to the conclusions they did about them. A first look suggests them to be PR, but the advertising and agency world is peculiar in that this is what it generates. I'm used to the titles the references come from. My employment was as a user of this type of organisation, and I see these sources as passing . '''Context''' is important here. I also see significant coverage in them. That is is 'unusual'  style coverage is unimportant. This is what this style of source ''would'' say about a PR organisation. Based upon pure policy it passes 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:CORP)