Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Naum Koen
per {{u|Otr500}} and others. While the sourcing has improved since the original nomination, the fact remains that most of the coverage doesn't meet RS. (In that it is mainly reprints of interviews/press-releases/etc, and hence represent Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Questionable_and_self-published_sources|questionable/promotional sources. And also seems to be about the subject's company, rather than about the subject directly.) While an argument could be made that contributors to this EN project |might be better swayed by RS coverage in English, it would seem reasonable that, if the subject is well-known to UK and RU speakers, then perhaps we'd (organically) have expected to see an article about the subject on the UK and RU WP projects first. Which brings me to my final point. Namely that the PAID/PROMO overtones here are concerning. And while the more glaring promo issues are largely addressed, the promotional undertones remain. (And, frankly, if they are removed, I'm not sure what is left.) In short, delete as NN (with a side order or NOTPROMO
— User:Guliolopez, 15:22, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:BIAS (Wikipedia:Systemic bias)