Deletion of Azimo (4th nomination)

Comment: per  and the appearance of . Article has just been kept after a comprehensive and very precise discussion of sources that isn't addressed in the nomination. Instead we're back at generalizations so this nomination is a setback. Specifically, it does not deal with the TWO sources that were found to be in-depth even by one of Wikipedia's most critical and consistent delete sayers from twelve possibly valid sources. The only specific example now is an obvious one and is no longer relevant once valid sources for  were identified. Moreover it's a returning red herring in nominations of this company. The nomination is atypical for this nominator, who I especially appreciate for his quality contributions and superb work together spanning many many years
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:FORUMSHOP||WP:CORPDEPTH)