Deletion of Roy Sebag (2nd nomination)

Comment: I was notified about this discussion on my talk page, having earlier voted keep in the last no consensus AfD nomination.  My earlier keep vote was that there's enough coverage to pass , between the multiple companies that have gotten coverage, his investment activities and his patents (which seems to have disappeared - but I'm not going to spend time looking for it.)  I did some more cleanup and added some more recent coverage.  The broad coverage that's there discusses his roles in different companies. The sources I like include Bloomberg (not a primary source) https://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/person.asp?personId=225833892&privcapId=280530098&previousCapId=280530098&previousTitle=BitGold%20Inc., The New York Times https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/15/your-money/art-investing.html, The New York Post https://nypost.com/2017/06/15/heres-your-chance-to-finally-own-a-picasso/, CNBC https://www.cnbc.com/video/2016/09/08/will-gold-continue-to-shine.html, the US version of Israeli business paper Globes https://en.globes.co.il/en/article-roy-sebag-exits-cryptocurrency-market-1001277275 and Reuters https://www.reuters.com/article/us-blockchain-listing/israels-blockchain-mining-looks-at-nasdaq-toronto-listings-idUSKBN1FJ1MU. I think he just passes notability
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: it meets ,  and commentators must look to the previous articles for deletion nomination and see the Keep arguments  —&nbsp;Preceding Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned comment added by
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:THREE)

Comment: Lets examine the references, thirteen in total.  at least should show that the first three references should prove notability
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:THREE)