Deletion of E3 Media (3rd nomination)

Comment: If you can paste the entire coverage here, it is not significant coverage whcih can satisfy . More important, I am amazed that so many of the sources use quotations by company employee as story sources (or are basically interviews)  - which doesn't satisfy . There is no way this satisfies 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:ORGIND||WP:NCORP)

Comment: Meets , although possibly on a weaker level (I am unable to access some of the sources posted by Cunard above; some of the pages are requiring a login). Any minor promotional tone can be addressed by |copy editing this stub-class article. Also, I agree with {{u|Cunard}}'s view about the BBC, which is a reputable news organization. For more information about BBC's journalistic objectivity, check out the BBC's http://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/guidelines/bbc-editorial-values/editorial-values Editorial Values and BBC Academy's http://www.bbc.co.uk/academy/journalism/values Journalism Values pages
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:COPYEDIT)

Comment: Has received enough substantial coverage in  to meet . See http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4115448.stm BBC, http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/bristol-firm-e3-helping-big-firms-set-online/story-21117311-detail/story.html Bristol Post, and https://www.theguardian.com/money/2005/jan/08/careers.graduates The Guardian
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:GNG)

Comment: As I said in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/E3 Media (2nd nomination)|a previous nomination I have trouble finding anything to demonstrate that the company meets Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) or |GNG.&mdash
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: an unremarkable digital marketing agency going about its business. I'm not finding the sources above to be ; these are rather trivial mentions and interviews with the founder
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SIGCOV)

Comment: The depth of coverage in  is very slight, and the only sources cited that are truly reliable are the BBC and the Bristol Post.  They each only profiled the company and didn't even really discuss what it did in any depth; the articles were more "Oh wow, a successful startup in Cornish!".  There's really nothing to say about this company right now; I don't think it's notable
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)