"

Well, thank you for your comprehensive answer. You certainly didn't need to provide an explanation and I'm sorry if I gave you that impression, but your comments explain a lot so there is some value there. Circumstances like yours can cause problems when we have guidelines like WP:QUACK; I'm sure you understand what I mean.

I'm not an admin and so can't (and wouldn't) really close the AFD, though as a non-admin I can re-list it to encourage more people to look at the article and did. My impression at this stage is that most editors seem to think Mr Roberts doesn't meet our general notability guideline because he hasn't received enough coverage in reliable sources. That he has won an award for his blog wouldn't normally make him notable unless it was a very significant award. Winning a notable award doesn't necessarily make someone notable either. But it's also possible that someone who isn't notable now, might very well be notable in the future. We call that WP:TOOSOON. In cases like that, the best bet would be to ask for the article to be userfied which means it is moved to your own user space until the subject is notable enough for the article to be published in the main article space. I have a couple of articles like that sitting in my own userspace. 

At the end of the day, it's not really about ""protecting"" an article from deletion, it's about the Wikipedia community protecting the encyclopaedia from the inclusion of everyone and everything, ever. So we set and adhere to particular standards and things that don't meet those standards (even things that might one day meet them) are deleted. My best suggestion would be that you spend some time editing the articles of some very obviously notable people before trying to create articles for people who might not be. That way, if one of your articles is taken to AFD, at least you'll have a much broader understanding of policy and deletion procedures. At the moment you seem to be fighting a losing battle and that can be very upsetting, especially if people are throwing all sorts of linked acronyms at you that you've never seen. 111 "