Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denis Katsyv

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Lourdes 05:27, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Denis Katsyv

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable businessman Arthistorian1977 (talk) 07:42, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep because of the sourcing available on the talk page. ~~Comment:~~ If notability is deemed to not exist, a redirect to Trump_campaign–Russian_meeting#Russian_lobbyists where he is mentioned, albeit briefly, (though given the refs on the nominated article's talk page, it could be expanded) may be an option.Anarchyte (work | talk) 07:52, 19 July 2017 (UTC) (updated: Anarchyte (work | talk) 02:09, 20 July 2017 (UTC) Anarchyte (work | talk) 06:31, 20 July 2017 (UTC))[reply]
Weak keep Katsyv has been in the news for some years prior to now due to his involvement in money laundering, lobbying, etc. See for instance https://www.rferl.org/a/us-money-laundering-case-russian-corruption-browder-magnitsky-prevezon-katsyv/27494612.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financial-crime/10311071/Sheriff-of-Wall-Street-pursues-case-linked-to-death-of-Russian-lawyer.html http://www.thedailybeast.com/russian-oligarch-or-fbi-rat https://newrepublic.com/article/126760/fighting-putin-doesnt-make-saint. I'm adding those links on the article talk page so it can be fleshed out. JamesG5 (talk) 08:12, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:20, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:20, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

STRONG KEEP A very key figure that anyone can easily google and find many, reputable sources that mention him. It seems absurd that those citations need to continue to be made in-order to extinguish the deletion candidacy tag. --Wikipietime (talk) 12:48, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Substantial in-depth coverage. Neutrality^talk 19:07, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.