Deletion of E. Matthew Buckley (2nd nomination)

Comment: Subject has achieved non-notability in three separate fields - military service, acting, and as an executive at a non-notable firm - which does not add up to notability. The sole remaining claim to notability is as a "regular contributor" to a well-known financial e-zine. However, when examined, his writing samples lack the consistency and quality one would ordinarily expect from a notable columnist and indicate an informality in his relationship with TheStreet.com. Finally, the two main contributors to the article both have |conflict of interest issues and the possibility that the page was created as |paid |advertising for Mr. Buckley's consultancy cannot be ignored
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (WP:COI||WP:PAID||WP:ADVERT)

Comment: As Carrite pointed out, the prior version of this article was significantly different and I definitely do not support the changes made by Ronnotel as trimming of "spam" or lessening |undue weight, as the article did not read like a promotion to me whatsoever. And the references and EL's removed included news articles on the subject
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:UNDUE)

Comment: While the subject has engaged in various occupations including military pilot, actor, and businessman, it's not clear whether he has attained significant amounts of coverage in |reliable sources for these achievements
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: Article went from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=E._Matthew_Buckley&oldid=374789322 this to its current form. When all the spam gets removed, it's easier to evaluate. Now can see that claims of notability are weak and sourcing even weaker. Fails all people-specific guidelines (, , ), the GNG and V. Erase once and for all
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SOLDIER||WP:ENT||WP:AUTHOR)

Comment: sure as heck fails , even in the previous iteration. As to the other careers, they seem to be mostly puffery and self-promotional, but I'm not well versed in the notability of businessmen and actors. And in its current state, the article is just abysmal in terms of content and referencing
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:MILPEOPLE)