Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Kapoustin
On the talk page, another editor and I have been assured that |reliable sources exist, and so there's been a lot of |benefit of the doubt given.  However, the original editors (one presumably Kapoustin himself) have so far failed to provide satisfactory copies of these (that pass ).  These editors also argue that the article is negative (and, at one point, libellous).  Any contentious material '''is sourced''' however, and so not a  violation.  Assuming a consensus of delete, I see no reason why these sources can't be added to a recreated article at a later date when they are suitably available.  The article and discussion have now turned to insulting editors' ability and professionalism, as well as notification of attorneys (no legal threats however).  This has gone far beyond productivity; I don't see any progress on the talk page anymore, and so perhaps the best option would be to wipe and start over &ndash; maybe the two other editors
— User:MKapoustin, 09:08, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:RS||WP:AGF||WP:V||WP:BLP (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)