Deletion of Ashish Bhatia

Comment: has done some notable works. May pass 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: three | reliable sources quote him, and that's usually my standard for notability. However, there's nothing other than a single paragraph in each source, barely mentioning that he's an engineeer and quoting him, interview-style. Reasonable minds could differ whether this is , but for argument's sake, I accept that's enough
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:SIGCOV)

Comment: Per reasons and sources indicated above. A handful of primary sources in the article should be removed. Other than that, it's good enough to pass 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: His works have been covered by https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-25033172 BBC, https://finance.yahoo.com/news/google-wants-write-tweets-192747596.html Yahoo, https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/11/25/google-patent-social-media-automatic_n_4336741.html Huffpost and https://www.searchenginewatch.com/2013/11/27/google-wants-to-write-your-social-media-messages-for-you/ Search Engine Journal which makes him pass per . Also this segment from  is relevant here: "However, academics may also work outside academia and their primary job does not need to be academic if they are known for their academic achievements
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:THREE||WP:NACADEMICS)