Deletion of Mark Famiglietti

Comment: Only source that is currently in the article that supports  is ''Connecticut Post''. The remaining (''Los Angeles Times'', ''Us Weekly'' and ''Entertainment Weekly'' are passing mentions of the subject and fail "significant coverage" required. His book and its subsequent play do not seem to have helped to garner any press. Five pages of my Google search resulted in nothing of significance. Searching Google News, I found a few more passing mentions related to ''Spy Intervention'' with https://deadline.com/2016/10/comedy-the-divorce-party-gets-production-start-date-lead-cast-1201844891/ diving in a bit deeper, but not enough to count as significant coverage. Maybe 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (:WP:GNG||:WP:TOOSOON)

Comment: easily passes #1 {{tq|Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NACTOR)

Comment: I was following the editor because of the problems I saw at Rick Beato that have most recently included :MOS:PUNCT, Wikipedia's copyright policy as shown {{diff|Talk:Rick Beato|983379066|983337357|here}}, and . With such a complete lack of understanding of :MOS:CAPS, :MOS:IMAGESIZE (as shown when I was reverted on this article), I won't engage further, but clearly we have a problem editor. Yes, my block log is longer, but so is my edit count. In the end, however, whether or not I followed the editor here the issue is whether or not Mark Famiglietti meets , and as I have show, the subject does not appear to. Oh, and we do not , another error that Lightburst continues to make
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Ownership of content (:WP:OWN||:WP:N||:WP:VOTE)

Comment: If those sources constitute in-depth coverage I'll eat my hat. World News Network is a news aggregator, not a producer of content. The page presented aggregates an interview by the subject (interviews are primary sources that don't back up notability claims; it's also an interview by the producer of the film he was making at that time which doubles down on it not being independent) as well as '''the Wikipedia article about Famiglietti'''. It is offensive to the intelligence of anyone reading this discussion that {{u|Dream Focus}} would try to pass that off as an in-depth reliable source. TVGuide is a listing of credits, not in-depth coverage. The CTPost interview linked by {{u|Lightburst}} is the exact same text as the Associated Press link that Dream Focus posted, so it's ''one'' source, and it's an interview, which again, gives little credibility to a claim of notability. Finally, Lightburst knows very well that simply writing a book doesn't make one notable, so it amazes me that that's being held up as an indicator of notability. What a load of rubbish. And oh, ''quelle surprise'' - it was posted at . &spades
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron (WP:ARS)