Deletion of Steve Gilliard

Comment: to Biruitorul: Please review  and  and act accordingly
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No personal attacks (WP:NPA||WP:CIV)

Comment: WP:BIO is satisfied by his widespread notability and influence. He gets 1,020,000 Google hits, and editors above have noted there are dozens of print articles about his work found in searches of Google News and LexisNexus. Thus there is a basis for writing a substantial article based on independent substantial coverage in multiple reliable sources, satisfying . He appears to have had an especially notable web presence and influence on DailyKos
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: There does seem to be some level of mainstream media attention here, and not just because of his death; some of his Photoshop work was controversial enough to be discussed in The Washington Post. (See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/27/AR2005102702115_pf.html.) If a blogger receives a non-trivial reference in a major newspaper of record, that is enough notability in my opinion. There aren't all that many bloggers who meet that standard, and all of them who do should have articles, since  paper
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: While personally I think this chap seems quite non-notable, you can't argue with the multiple significant mainstream media sources.  Also suggest invoking  for a speedy keep
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW)

Comment: Fails . And finding "as much information on the internet as possible about Steve and add it to the article", as
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB)

Comment: per  and failure to show a presence in "multiple non-trivial published works
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB)