Deletion of Kasymbek (given name)

Comment: We have one article about someone with this name, so evidently it exists, but there is no evidence that the name is common. It is totally out of keeping with Wikipedia practice and policy to keep an article because someone "suspects" it could be a useful disambiguation page; that is, in fact, very similar to saying "'''Keep'''.|There must be sources" without actually providing any sources. All of the "keep" arguments are based on the idea that there are plural articles about people with this name (one of them explicitly mentions two articles, and the others suggest it could become a disambiguation page), but in fact there is only one, so all of those reasons fail. (I also see that the section |Articles of the page Wikipedia:WikiProject Anthroponymy/Standards casts doubt on whether an article about a name like this, with just one article about someone of that name, should exist. Personally I attach limited weight to pages on "WikiProjects", which are often read and edited by only a limited self-selecting group of editors, but it is further evidence that there is consensus at least among a range of editors against an article in this situation.) ''The editor who uses the pseudonym
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:MUST||WP:APONOTE)

Comment: As only one person with this name exists at en.wiki (the second article was deleted per #G5),  no longer applies. Further, the page's creator has been blocked as a sockpuppet (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Оразбаев Касымбек/Archive, so #G5 applies to this page as well (and has been applied). Finally, as there is no |verifiable evidence that "Kasymbek" and "Qasim bey" are, in fact, linguistically similar names, there does not appear to be a rationale for this page's existence that can't be chalked up to |original research
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion (WP:CSD||WP:APONOTE||WP:CSD||WP:V||WP:NOR)