Deletion of Doug Peltz

Comment: The article and discussion on this page are obviously cluttered and messy, which makes it hard to see what the best case is for , , or . The best case I can see are mentions of Peltz in https://www.forbes.com/sites/alextaub/2017/08/17/mystery-science-helps-teachers-dazzle-their-students-with-interactive-science-classes/ Forbes (looks like an opinion piece, not journalistic), https://techcrunch.com/2017/08/03/mystery-science-partners-with-google-to-bring-eclipse-glasses-to-elementary-school-students/ TechCrunch 1 and https://techcrunch.com/2014/05/21/mystery-science-launches-a-program-aimed-at-inspiring-kids-to-love-science-not-just-learn-its-conclusions/ TechCrunch 2, https://mashable.com/2017/08/03/google-and-mystery-science-solar-eclipse-glasses/ Mashable, and https://www.businessinsider.com/google-giving-kids-glasses-solar-eclipse-2017-8 Business Insider. There is also a list mention of Mystery Science in https://www.wsj.com/articles/what-to-let-the-kids-watch-when-youre-all-stuck-at-home-11584387815 WSJ and coverage in niche outlets and regional news such as https://www.wpr.org/solve-science-mysteries-mystery-doug Wisconsin Public Radio. To me this meets the bar for . I can help clean up the article if we keep it
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BASIC||WP:ANYBIO||WP:CREATIVE||WP:BASIC)