Deletion of Kuliza Technologies

Comment: I'll stand by my AfC decline.https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kuliza_Technologies&diff=501952824&oldid=501807218 Being among a crop of fast growing companies does not show notability. There are many ways to measure growth: revenue, capitalization, employees, .... The measure can be absolute or relative. Landing a $100,000 contract might increase revenue by 2000 percent. Even the Deloitte article implies the company is "small" (but pages are offline now). Also, restricting the sample to a small subset (particular technology in India) does not suggest significant impact on the community. Choose the measure that makes you look good. BusinessLine article says there were 371 startups; article is also an interview with the CEO rather than an independent analysis. Flinging buzzwords like "social networking" and "mobile platforms" does not make a company notable; the first paragraph is meaningless.  teaches that capitalizing a company or having employees does not make the company notable. The second paragraph does not show . The only stated claim in the article is it is a fast growing software development/business consulting firm (with only 70 employees, how big can it be?). There is absolutely nothing about what the company has done for its clients let alone something that would cause the public to take notice
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORP||WP:N)

Comment: I'm not sure where the Promo or Spam thing is coming from because I don't see anything like that in this article (at least, blatant promo or what we do normally observe in company related articles). It should be deleted because it fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORPDEPTH)