Deletion of Capstone publishers

Comment: even I can't find a reason this article should be kept. I can't see any way this could be recrafted to meet WP standards. Even a complete rewrite would hit half the  landmines
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: There are enough sources. The article as currently written does not comply with . It should be stubbed so that we can start from scratch to remove the promotional tone
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV)

Comment: There is no doubt that the company exists, but I couldn't find any reliable source which has commented upon the company in a significant manner. The main sources are press releases or the company's own websites. Does not meet the appropriate notability criteria - 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ORG)

Comment: After looking around, I can only find references on the company's own website or on a PR website.  There's no establishment of notability by the article and the website of the company offers little more than whitewash.  The only exception is http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/article/CA6536655.html this article which barely mentions the company.  While the nom may take no issue with , I respectfully do.  I do, however, agree with the nom's argument under , advertisement.  Either way you spin it, or however you rework the content, the article fails to meed WP standards for inclusion
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:ORG)