Deletion of George Meredith (sannyasin)

Comment: The article had two sources when it was nominated, and has 23 sources now, many of which are entirely about the subject of the article. This seems like a failure to do , part D
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE)

Comment: WP:Not inherited, at best  for poison attempt
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: What makes this person notable? He's described as Osho's handsome personal doctor who was almost assassinated and that's about it. I concur with the analysis of sources presented by Accesscrawl above. They do not constitute ''significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject''. The article satisfies all three conditions of  which states: we generally should avoid having an article on a person when each of three conditions is met: 1. if reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event.{{done|Yes}}, 2. If that person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual.{{done|Yes}}, 3, If the event is not significant or the individual's role was not substantial.{{done|Yes
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: per . Not enough references for meeting  and the sources that could be used for claiming notability are closely related with the subject
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:INHERITED||WP:GNG)

Comment: per discussion above, there is |insignificant coverage for notability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SIGCOV)

Comment: yo|Accesscrawl}} I object to your proposal in https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard&curid=11424955&diff=852530660&oldid=852527881 this diff on the RS Noticeboard, to remove the source, ''Who killed Osho?'' from the article. Not only do we NOT have consensus on this AfD yet, there is also the principle that https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources#Context_matters context matters. Are any of the statements in the article that are supported by ''Who Killed Osho?'' controversial? I listed the statements individually on the RS Noticeboard posting, and I would appreciate other editors' opinions on whether any of those statements are controversial, as we are enjoined to be especially careful in |BLPs. Cheers
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP)

Comment: Sources discuss him but nothing seems to be qualifying "in depth coverage" needed for 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: In the spirit of addressing the  issues, I've eliminated many of the references rejected in this discussion as "passing mentions". One of the difficulties in this research has been the four names the subject has used, meaning some articles refer to his as Meredith, others Devaraj, still others Amrito, and a few as John Andrews. Some use all four names, some two or three... so it's easy to miss some of the more in-depth coverage if you only find a passing mention in one section of a book, and miss entirely the sections where his life and work are discussed more thoroughly
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Citation overkill (WP:BOMBARDMENT)

Comment: per  "In my opinion, merely being true, or even verifiable, does not automatically make something suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia." Severe concerns with notability as well
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:INDISCRIMINATE)

Comment: As demonstrated above, the subject does not meet the criteria set forth in ; the sources cited in the article do not discuss him in detail, and notability is not inherited
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Fails  and  as the analysis of sources show. Would prefer merging important content somewhere
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:INHERITED)