Deletion of Jesse Waugh (2nd nomination)

Comment: Learn something every day. I have not seen Wikipedia:Vanispamcruftisement (VANISPAM) and can see it has sound reasoning. This AFD has become a circus of attacks and I have noticed several times where salted titles are re-created by adding a simple variation. I think when this becomes evident there should be a speedy delete option. This creative ability to hamper the Wikipedia process, effectively nullifying an reation protection|admins rights, is sometimes well-used. The protection, according to the policy: ''"This is useful for bad articles that have been deleted but repeatedly recreated."'', but seems woefully ineffective. Maybe we need an added  In my opinion a ban should be considered on an editor that barges into a Wikipedia process (especially the subject of the article), tries to steer it like a new Cadillac, and goes off the deep end against editors and Wikipedia. I would also think someone would consider sanctions against any editor that ''deletes the valid votes of other editors''. To me that is an egregious violation and personal attack. I commend editors and closers for starting to look more closely at these things
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Copyrights (WP:C||WP:DUMPTRUCKSALT)

Comment: Subject does not come close to clearing the bar for notability as detailed in  and  and as applied to other artist's bios in previous cases. I am thankful for the footwork other editors have done in the discussions above, but I do not find the arguments for the retention of the article, as presented in this and in the previous AfD, convincing
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:ARTIST)

Comment: The subject comprehensively fails  and passes ''none'' of the alternative criteria at 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:ARTIST)