Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jacob Kemp
I think both sides have been exaggerating the case for keeping/deleting. (Aside: There is no question that the page used to be very spammy/self-promotional, but that's mostly been fixed and besides should be independent of Notability.) Does the subject pass the ? Without question, yes: there are multiple articles devoted to the subject (significant coverage) in respected newspapers (independent, reliable sources), so it clearly passes the GNG. However, passing the GNG is not necessarily enough—does the subject meet Notability standards?  Here I think the applicable policy is  ...the subject doesn't meet ENT #3, I don't know about ENT #1 (it depends on how one defines "significant" and "multiple"), and it could be argued that he meets ENT #2. I'm philosophically an Inclusionist, so since this is a grey area (clearly meets GNG and at least partially meets ENT), I vote Keep. In any case, if the final consensus is to delete, I agree with
— User:SwisterTwister, 20:57, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:GNG||WP:ENT (Wikipedia:Notability)