The result was delete. per cunard I have discarded the non-policy based keep arguments that leaves the contention that the sourcing here is inadequate for inclusion. I will undelete this if anyone can show me two decent reliable secondary sources. Spartaz Humbug! 03:29, 2 September 2010 (UTC) reply
Very few in-line notations, a lot of un-sourced material. Beeshoney ( talk) 09:41, 19 August 2010 (UTC) reply
Just because a person is notable doesn't mean the article must be kept - they need references. I find it surprising that John seems to ignore this fact considering he is an Administrator. I say delete. Beeshoney ( talk) 13:35, 19 August 2010 (UTC) reply
John ( talk · contribs) asserts that notability is established but does not explain why.
Hullaballoo Wolfowitz ( talk · contribs) asserts that there are sources that establish notability but has not provided any.
Erxnmedia ( talk · contribs)'s argument is not based on the notability guidelines and ignores the policy Wikipedia:Verifiability.
Spada2 ( talk · contribs)'s argument violates WP:GOOGLEHITS in that s/he has not pointed to specific sources that establish notability.
SilentBobxy2 ( talk · contribs) asserts that the subject is notable but then says that someone "needs to provide sources on the page". I have not been able to find sources, so I find this argument to be unpersuasive.
Chromancer ( talk · contribs) writes that "sources are necessary if we're going to be making all these assertions in a BLP", but s/he has not provided any to justify supporting retention.
KianTC ( talk · contribs) writes that the article "needs more info", and I do not see how that is a policy-based reason for keeping the article.
Because the subject of this article has not received the necessary coverage in reliable sources to pass Wikipedia:Verifiability or Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, and because no sources have been provided to demonstrate that the subject passes Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Notability (people), this article should be deleted. Cunard ( talk) 22:59, 1 September 2010 (UTC) reply