Deletion of Gurbaksh Chahal (2nd nomination)

Comment: I totally understand the reasons for the nomination and that this was done in good faith to hopefully encourage the UPE editors around this that this is a notable article.  With that out of the way, the sources easily pass .  The BusinessInsider article is a high-quality, in-depth article about Chahal.  Likewise, another strong article on Cahal from the San Francisco Chronicle that also highlights his fall after his convictions.  There are multiple sources highlighting the impact of his convictions on his companies at the time, showing why those convictions should remain in the article (impact to his career and impact to the companies).  Article is well sourced, decently written now and I suspect will be well written in a short period of time.  This should any notability questions to rest
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Can establish his inclusivity even using . AfD isn't for clean up and being written by a paid contributor doesn't mean automatic delete
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BASIC)

Comment: I agree that the article should be improved. There is enough in-depth coverage of the subject not involving the ordinary crime by independent reliable sources to meet 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)