Deletion of Travis Gordon (4th nomination)

Comment: per . We do not delete a notable topic simply because it has a less-in-depth-mention elsewhere in the encyclopdia.  As was pointed out in the AFD keep of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Travis_Gordon_(3rd_nomination) just last month, multiple independent sources offer significant coverage. And even if Gordon is not the main topic of the coverage,http://www.innsmouthfreepress.com/?p=1076 ''Innsmouth Free Press''  http://www.wired.com/underwire/2009/05/7-webotainers-worth-watching/#ixzz0pHYXDTNT ''Wired.com''  http://www.aintitcool.com/node/40616 ''AintItCoolNews''  http://news.tubefilter.tv/2009/07/08/spellfury-is-low-budget-high-fantasy/ ''Tubefilter News'' etal, give us citable information about the individiual.  Per guideline: "Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material". Since those articles (and there are others) speak of Gordon or his work, directly and in detail, even if not in great detail and even with Gordon not being the main topic of the source material, we have a meeting of . And toward the subject meeting ... Gordon's works are the recipient of "multiple independent articles or reviews" (IE: see the number of refs in the ''Spellfury'' article), and as the creator of the web series being so covered, he is notable per the applicable guidelines. And while the nominator has opined that he also feels ''Spellfury'' does not deserve an article, sources found there show its notability as well, |per guideline
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CREATIVE||WP:SIGCOV||WP:CREATIVE||WP:GNG)