Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TheReportOfTheWeek (2nd nomination)
I agree that the best sources we have are interviews, and those are problematic. I don't know why  doesn't mention them - the issue was discussed in the past many times (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=interview&prefix=Wikipedia+talk%3AIdentifying+reliable+sources%2F&fulltext=Search&fulltext=Search&searchToken=dpk3kdwkwzt59xzpdk7vxmud6). While Wikipedia:Interviews is classified as an essay, it represents to my knowledge the best consensus on what interviews are - and just as common sense suggests, they are primary sources, unless there's editorial commentary, which is very sparse in the sources provided. Overall, I don't see the subject as one who has received significant, independent, and reliable coverage: he has received passing mentions, and got to publish his own views about himself and some issues in forms of interviews in some reliable outlets - but that fails the independent requirement
— User:Piotrus, 06:03, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:RS (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)