Deletion of Persistent Systems (2nd nomination)

Comment: What the nominator totally fails to mention in a totally inaccurate rationale is that the company meets  by a big margin. http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-02-03/nagpur/28373743_1_persistent-systems-outsourced-software-product-development-infospectrum This and http://www.indianexpress.com/news/nasscom-award-for-persistent-systems/419463 this are already enough to meet the fundamental requirement of signficant coverage in non-local relialbe sources and are in no way press releases. The fully-sourced history section contains useful and relevant information, so the argument that the content isn't worth preserving (which goes against diting policy) doesn't hold water. More sources are easy to find, as a http://www.google.co.uk/#hl=en&q=%22persistent+systems%22&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=122216l127536l0l127864l20l19l0l0l0l0l687l4121l0.5.7.5-3l15l0&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbo=u&tbm=nws&source=og&sa=N&tab=wn&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=73faa5d00d7d194f&biw=1366&bih=562 simple GNews search shows
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORP||WP:E)