Deletion of Bridgewater Systems

Comment: Company is notable, secondary reliable sources regarding the company have been produced (see above), and it passes  and . I agree that the article is not great, but this is completely irrelevant in the |AFD process. I would take some time and brush up on  , and  before nominating more articles - this article is a clear 'Keep
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NCOMPANY||WP:AFD||WP:N||WP:V||WP:AFD)

Comment: The article is not well-sourced at all, but notability and such attach to the topic of the article, not the article as it is now. As  reminds us: "The absence of citations in an article...does not indicate that a subject is not notable. " This was/is a public company with a ton of editorially independent discussion about it.--Special:Contributions/69.204.153.39|69.204.153.39
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPOSSIBLE)