Deletion of Aaron Saxton

Comment: I have tagged this article for |rescue
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron (WP:ARS)

Comment: This guy is at the centre of a political case unfolding in Australia which has received a level of worldwide attention, and has been the subject of significant published secondary source material which is reliable and independent of the subject. Therefore, meets 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: Do you all really think that a mention or two as being a letter writer in 10 articles in 10 papers on the same topic on the same day makes someone notable?  The topic of a politician accusing Scientology conducting torture is probably notable. I maintain that the whistleblower is not independently notable, and at best this should be merged/redirected to a more complete article on the Criticism of Scientology in Australia, Scientology_controversies#Allegations_of_criminality or a similar article.  Show me one article where Saxton's life is described as more than a letter writer?  As Pieter Kuiper said above... what is his occupation?  Of the links listed above and in the article, apart from the youtube interview and the 3news.co.nz (#14) I would not consider any of them significant coverage.  Focusing the article on the whistleblower in my mind is wrong - it should be on the the topic that he whistleblew.  And I think the |link bombing of the basically the same story in 30 references is overkill - number of references alone is no indication of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lelo Sejean|notabilty
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Citation overkill (WP:BOMBARD)

Comment: per ; this person is only in the news because Nick Xenophon had quoted him in a parliamentary session; the article was written to counter :commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Interview Aaron Saxton part 1 of 7.ogv|this deletion request on Commons
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO1E)

Comment: Satisfies . Subject of the article ''|has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject''. Secondary source coverage pertains to the significance of this individual coming forward as a major whistleblower, as well as to biographical details about his life, and media reactions, and subsequent reactions from the organization where he was a whistleblower. This is not simply "one event", but actually a significant amount of coverage from many different secondary sources relating to multiple different aspects of this individual's life and biography
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTE||WP:NOTE)