Deletion of Acumen learning

Comment: There is no doubt that the article fails the notability guidelines of , which states that an organisation is notable if ''"it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources."''  It goes on to say that ''"trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability."''  The references provided are primary (generated by the organisation itself) or trivial (don't actually relate to the organisation).  This is actually a candidate for '''speedy delete''', as it could easily be classified as advertising
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ORG)