Deletion of Ed Winters (2nd nomination)

Comment: Nearly all of the sources on the article are not reliable including promotional YouTube videos. I have done a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ed_Winters commentary for some of them on the talk-page. There are self-published sources on the article owned by Ed Winters, most of the rest would fail . vegnews.com, vegansociety.com, www.plantbasednews.org, landofhopeandglory.org, theofficialanimalrightsmarch.org etc are not reliable sources. If you strip out all of the unreliable stuff the only sources that are left are two tabloid newspapers and an article by USA Today criticizing Winter's comments on the coronavirus. The article reads as promotion and should be deleted
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: as a "biased vegan" myself). My problem with the vegan sources is not that they express a certain ideology—after all, angling, haute-cuisine, or Christian publications express their own ideologies as well. The problem is that their coverage is ''fawning'', uniformly praising his accomplishments and describing them in y ways ("renowned", "prominent", "extremely popular"). As a result, it's hard to extract material that could conform to the strict standards of , or that doesn't sound likely to be exaggerated somehow (what exactly does "visited 1/3 of universities in the UK" mean
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipuffery (WP:PUFF||WP:BLPSTYLE)

Comment: Another user is now adding plantbasednews.org as a source to the article. This source is not reliable. It fails 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)