Deletion of Elika Associates

Comment: Obvious huge |COI here.  I think it would be better to delete and start over, rather than allowing someone who is being paid to advertise on Wikipedia to succeed.  If we allow these people to make money by creating spam articles, then we are setting ourselves up for ''a lot'' more spam articles to be created.  Also, sources are quite weak, most just passing mentions or regurgitated press releases
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (WP:COI)

Comment: Checking the references shows that almost every mention of the company has been added to the article, and the conclusion is that the company does not satisfy  since the only mentions are very minor, or appear in articles ''not'' about the company, or appear in places where it is standard that every similar company will be mentioned sooner or later. It is very hard for a small realtor started two years ago to become sufficiently |notable to warrant an encyclopedic article, and there is no evidence that this company has made that leap. Wikipedia is OTDIRECTORY|not a directory of all realtors, and if this article were accepted there would be no criterion to exclude any other realtor
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORP||WP:N||WP:NOTDIRECTORY)

Comment: I could just about be persuaded that the subject of this article could stand on its own two feet, but the coverage is rather trivial and |run-of-the-mill. But I have to agree with Snottywong- the damage we would do to Wikipedia by allowing it to be exploited by paid marketers and spammers far, far, far outweighs the minimal gain we'd have by including coverage on this borderline subject. Better to nuke it and start over
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Run-of-the-mill (WP:RUNOFTHEMILL)