The result was keep. Like I have said in some recent AFDs, I am somewhat sympathetic to the idea that a BLP subject's wishes be taken into account in a close AFD on a marginally notable person. However, after reviewing the article's talk page it seem to me that the subject does not want the article deleted, he wants to control it. Also, this is not a close AFD as the only editor advocating deletion is DanielRigal and it's based on the the subject's objection to the content of the article (not its existence). Everybody else says he's notable and not for just one event and nobody's buying the nominator's WP:NOTNEWS argument. This is a clear keep. Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:39, 30 July 2011 (UTC) reply
Article falls into the category of WP:BLP1E. Per guidelines, "Wikipedia is not news, or an indiscriminate collection of information. Being in the news does not in itself mean that someone should be the subject of a Wikipedia article." The subject's claim to fame is being convicted of fraud and extortion. The subject's movie roles do not amount to much and the subject lacks WP:NOTABILITY of Barry Minkow or Frank Abagnale. The article is looks to be more of a vanity piece that lacks WP:NOTABILITY than an article. reddogsix ( talk) 15:26, 16 July 2011 (UTC) reply