Deletion of Nairobi Sailcat

Comment: absent some attempt at a reasoned analysis of notability issues. Article has already been tag-bombed by one editor which the inexperienced new editor was still trying to write it, and this piling on without affording a decent opportunity to return to work on the article approached  territory. In the absence of any evidence that the nom has done the caliber of searching required to verify the non-notability of a 1970s session musician, this nomination shouldn't even be considered
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers (WP:BITE)

Comment: ping|kashmiri}} Why Userfy when you can't find Reliable Sources yourself after trying? If it's non-notable, which it seems to be then it's probably always going to be. The |burden is on the article creator to prove it's notability
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:BURDEN)

Comment: As one of those accused of tag-bombing the article, I cannot see any realistic prospect of finding notability here. Whatever searches are made they come up with very little, and if references are so hard to find it seems unlikely that they will be reputable, independent and reliable. I think the best course would be to userfy the current version and  persuade the originator to take the text and put it through fC|AfC both to allow time to assemble a reasonable looking draft and to allow considered reviews without the risk of imminent deletion. '''''&nbsp
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Attribution (WP:A)