Deletion of Tzahi (Zack) Weisfeld

Comment: The focus of the '''deletion decision''' should be 1) is the topic notable?  '''If not notable''' then delete, '''if "possibly notable"''' (NOT "marginally notable, but no hope of finding sources to push it "over the line", but rather "there are likely sources that haven't turned up yet that will push it over the line" or "there is still debate over the quality of the sources"), soft delete, draftify (since there is obviously ongoing improvement, with hopes of finding suitable sources), userfy (ditto), or "no consensus."  '''If it IS notable, BUT low it up and start over applies,''' then salvage the references and userfy them and delete.  Obviously, if the topic is notable and the page can be salvaged, then "keep and improve
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Bots (WP:B)

Comment: I've removed the patents, the dodgy external links per elno and a dodgy ref. There is more than enough coverage to satisfy  to build a new article. It is a BLP article that reads like a company article and references are very poor. Reference 3 is only one amongst the lot that provides biographical information in a profile, which itself is very poor. GBooks has enough to support a new article. I think this should be slimmed right down, get rid of the . Changed from Delete to Comment
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SIGCOV||WP:PUFF)