Deletion of Michael Kapoustin

Comment: As one of the editors that has been accused of libel and had my ability and professionalism maligned by the subject of the article, I shall only point out the subject has been given numerous opportunities to provide  | verifiable substance to the article to counter any statements that were believed to be inaccurate.  I am not sure how this would fit as a  violation since the current text appears to be adequately sourced.  As has been pointed out, the talk page has deteriorated to threats and borderline  |uncivil comments followed by some "interesting" further allegations in a RPP.  Unfortunately, the subject and the original creator have chosen to "attack a straw man" rather than providing  | verifiable substance
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:BLP||WP:CIVIL||WP:V)

Comment: On the talk page, another editor and I have been assured that |reliable sources exist, and so there's been a lot of |benefit of the doubt given.  However, the original editors (one presumably Kapoustin himself) have so far failed to provide satisfactory copies of these (that pass ).  These editors also argue that the article is negative (and, at one point, libellous).  Any contentious material '''is sourced''' however, and so not a  violation.  Assuming a consensus of delete, I see no reason why these sources can't be added to a recreated article at a later date when they are suitably available.  The article and discussion have now turned to insulting editors' ability and professionalism, as well as notification of attorneys (no legal threats however).  This has gone far beyond productivity; I don't see any progress on the talk page anymore, and so perhaps the best option would be to wipe and start over &ndash; maybe the two other editors
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:AGF||WP:V||WP:BLP)

Comment: there's enough coverage over a sustained period of time that he passes  and not simply as a .  Despite nominator's statement, this isn't a negative biography
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:BLP1E)

Comment: Talking about the same event over and over doesn't make it more than . What else was he notable for
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ONEVENT)