Deletion of BRC Imagination Arts

Comment: lots of passing mentions, but can't find in-depth coverage. Meets neither  or 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:CORPDEPTH)

Comment: There's a carpet-bomb of references, so at first glance this looks like it passes .  But, as I started to review the references in the article, it became obvious that this was not the case.  I read three that looked particularly promissing, from the NY Times, Time, and The LA Times.  Unfortunately, all of them turned out to be about projects the firm had been involved in, and only mentioned the firm itself in passing.  To meet , we need sources which talk about the company itself, not just mention it as being involved in certain projects, when it's the project which is what's really notable
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:CORPDEPTH)

Comment: Blatant promotionalism. Fails . Has been tagged since Jan 2014 for reading like an advertisement and it appears to have only gotten worse since then. References mainly fail  as they're advertorials or interviews or use extensive quotations from company sources
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SPIP||WP:ORGIND)