Deletion of Munaf Kapadia

Comment: Effectively  from a google marketing executive, who won a reality series. The Forbes X of Y is non-RS. Introduced to advertise the book. The coverage, what is there, seems to come almost from a single source and simply due to the fact that he was Google guy, now he runs a shop. All of it is seems to startup fare
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Spam (WP:ADMASQ)

Comment: Forbes fails . more than one remaining references is PR or regurgitated PR. This feels very  though he has managed some RS coverage, eg from the BBC. I see a decent hardworking chap, either  or  at present. Perhaps his samosa business might be notable, but I don't see him as notable yet. There is nothing in the short text that says to me "''THIS'' is why he is notable."  So change my mind and tell me you have done so. If you succeed I will change my opinion here
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:TOOSOON||WP:ROTM||WP:BLP1E)

Comment: The weird thing about all of this: Forbes doesn't really matter considering the sources available. Cunard specifically identified enough sources over a long enough period of time that clearly meet , including coverage from the BBC and a book review (for a HarperCollins published book - not "constructed PR.") Passes 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NAUTHOR)