Deletion of Fuji Food

Comment: Note to closing admin. It appears that many editors do not understand the policies and guidelines on sources that meet the criteria to establish notability and many make the mistake of stating a source is "notable" (which it might well be) which is a completely different criteria for establishing notability for the "topic" in question. For example, {{u|Cunard}} above has stated that the article in the Los Angeles Business Journal is an "independent source" (correct, the "publisher" is independent) and substantial (OK, lets go along with that). What he fails to point out is that the article fails the criteria for establishing notability because the article almost completely relies on direct quotations from the president of Fuji Food or their owners or "anonymous" company employees and therefore fails both  and . Similarly, the Chicago Business article (sure, reliable, independent source) is a regurgitated Press Release from Fuji Foods and also contains quotes the company CEO - in fact the entire article relies exclusively on the company for facts and info and therefore that reference also fails both  and . In fact, *all* of the references provided fall foul of either one or the other policy or guideline for establishing notability. Not one is "intellectually independent" and meets the criteria
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:ORGIND||WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:ORGIND)

Comment: The sources existing, as well as the those provided in this discussion, do not provide the type of in-depth coverage to show , not to mention 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:CORPDEPTH)