Deletion of Madis Eek

Comment: An architect is not notable by the mere merit of having co-created a building which passes notability as per . None of the sources covering those buildings cover the subject to a non-trivial degree. The https://static-pdf.aripaev.ee/XjH653_dwk-5kyJoXM5aFjomTzU.pdf three page article you mentioned is nearly entirely an interview piece, hence not an independent source, hence not a source for determining notability
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTINHERITED)

Comment: He has many indepth articles from non-primary sources written about him in the Estonian press: in a cursory look I found a lengthy article in https://www.aripaev.ee/uudised/2010/09/12/madis-eek-klaverihelide-saatel-arhitektiks ''Äripäev'' (a daily  Estonian financial newspaper), mentions in the largest daily newspaper in Estonia ''Postimees'' (https://www.postimees.ee/1750877/erafirma-rajab-koostoos-linnaga-moodsa-bussiterminali-ja-arihoone here), another major newspaper ''Eesti Päevaleht'' (https://epl.delfi.ee/artikkel/64924046/elanikud-protesteerivad-kultuurikula-rajamise-vastu here and https://epl.delfi.ee/artikkel/70277321/klaasmunaga-konkursil here), article about one of his buildings in ''Eesti Ekspress'' https://ekspress.delfi.ee/artikkel/69090805/liivalaia-pilvelohkuja here, a lengthy article (https://www.err.ee/924038/pealtnagija-arhitektid-avastasid-riigihangete-e-lahenduses-tobeda-vea here) for Eesti Rahvusringhääling (Estonian Public Broadcasting). He also has an entry at the Estonian Association of Architects (http://www.arhliit.ee/koosseis/liikmed/liige/313/ here). That was all from about 3 minutes of searching. Should always do a 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE)

Comment: Miscommunication here.  was used in reference to the articles covering his buildings. You linked several articles that have significant coverage of his buildings (look at my source assessment table) and my point was he is not notable just because buildings he designed have received coverage. And the ''Äripäev'' https://static-pdf.aripaev.ee/XjH653_dwk-5kyJoXM5aFjomTzU.pdf article is absolutely an interview piece. The entire article is 688 words long, with 472 words (68% of entire article) of direct citations by the subject. The remaining 32% of content is either regurgitation of said citations or a lead-up of what is to be said by the subject. This is, for all interests and purposes, a pure interview piece and not an independent article
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTINHERITED)

Comment: There is also a very indepth, three page article about Eek specifically in the September 2010 ''Oma Maja'' edition of ''Äripäev'' (pages 16&ndash;19, https://static-pdf.aripaev.ee/XjH653_dwk-5kyJoXM5aFjomTzU.pdf here). Also, disagree with a few of your assessments. The https://epl.delfi.ee/artikkel/64924046/elanikud-protesteerivad-kultuurikula-rajamise-vastu ''Eesti Päevaleht'' article:  can't be used, as the subject is the co-architect. The subject didn't "inherit" notabilty from someone else's sole abilities; the subject ''is'' the ''co-creator'' of the building. The https://www.err.ee/924038/pealtnagija-arhitektid-avastasid-riigihangete-e-lahenduses-tobeda-vea Eesti Rahvusringhääling article: the article is indepth. The fact that it quotes the subject in small "bits of interviews"...well, it would be sort of remiss as a journalistic piece if it didn't. Not sure how that is a strike against it. Agree that several sources are passing mentions, but they are mostly about his work or buildings
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTINHERITED)

Comment: The ''Äripäev'' https://static-pdf.aripaev.ee/XjH653_dwk-5kyJoXM5aFjomTzU.pdf article is absolutely not "nearly entirely an interview piece" whatsoever. It is a lengthy, featured profile of the subject, directly. He is quoted in the article. It is not merely some "interview" piece. https://www.aurumworld.net/about-the-building This is an interview piece. https://static-pdf.aripaev.ee/XjH653_dwk-5kyJoXM5aFjomTzU.pdf This is not.  You also still seem to not understand : "Inherited notability is the idea that something qualifies for an article merely because it was associated with some other, legitimately notable subjects." A co-creator, equally in partnership with another person, is not "inheriting" the notabilty of their associate when the weight of an article is given to both equally (or, minimally, as you suggest). I also never claimed that the subject was "notable by the mere merit of having co-created a building." It is the totality of his work
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTINHERITED)