Deletion of Jonathan Lee Riches (2nd nomination)

Comment: Significan press coverage, meets  and . Nominator's rationale is invalid, too. &mdash
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:BIO)

Comment: I don't see anything here to suggest grounds for overturning the previous AFD keep decision. Plenty of good sources -- in fact perhaps more so than is needed for an article of this length, though there's no policy or guideline on that. The only concern I have is it goes without saying that  needs to be adhered to very closely due to the subject matter. I am curious how the nominator came to the conclusion he did nothing notable, even with all the sources showing to the contrary
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP)

Comment: The threshold of notability for a biographical article is widespread coverage in reliable sources. In addition to what the article already has, from 2008 alone Google News produces http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=13822665 this from NPR, http://www.madisonrecord.com/arguments/209924-the-lessons-of-mr.-riches this from Madison County Record, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,351956,00.html this from Fox News, http://www.courant.com/dp-now-quintillion.au15,0,6302938.story this from Hartford Courant, http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/apr/05/newmont-actors-conjure-cash-for-charity/?printer=1/ this from Rocky Mountain News, http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=PI&s_site=philly&p_multi=PI&p_theme=realcities&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=11E02A2333973AC8&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM this from {{subscription}}Philadelphia Inquirer, http://www.guardian.co.uk/theobserver/2008/feb/29/observermail this from The Observer, http://www.heraldtimesonline.com/stories/2008/04/17/scene.qp-7116117.sto this from {{subscription}} Herald Times, and http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/columnists/whispers/s_545962.html this from Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. His notability is not temporary; coverage in reliable news sources stretches back over several years beginning with coverage for the crime that actually got him incarcerated on CNN and The Houston Chronicle (both already in the article.) I don't believe |inherited applies here. I'm sure it's true that his being a celebrity stalker (of a highly unusual kind) is what gets him most of his press coverage, but doing something to celebrities can itself create notability. Not in the spirit of , but simply to call to mind some other people who have achieved notoriety because the people they did stuff to were well-known: Sirhan Sirhan, Mark David Chapman, John Hinckley, Jr., and Margaret Mary Ray(I can't believe we have an article on her! Tempted to AfD that one myself.) He easily meets the coverage criteria. The only reason I can see to delete the article would be following the spirit of |deny—not recognizing his actions for fear of encouraging more—but I think adopting such an approach could lead to our policing an awful lot of articles to govern social impact
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:INHERITED||WP:OTHERSTUFF||WP:DENY)