Deletion of Jed Brandt (activist)

Comment: There is an argument to be made around  applies here, but I am of the view that it is misapplied in this case. Having been in many AfDs and DRs etc (hell, one almost got me blocked for 24 hours! - and am a veteran of Epic ArbComs and never got blocks from that, so try to make the mental picture ;), I can say without a doubt the community's intent in supporting the  is based on the intent of trying to  because someone is hurt that their article was baleted, or cannot tolerate the existence of that article that was kept - that is, to keep AfD trolls at bay from arguing endlessly that *their article* got deleted or *that article* got kept. In this particular discussion,  doesn't apply because the comparison is one gauging current community consensus around what is notable and what isn't, which can only be reasonably done by looking at previous consensus. There is no attempt, that |that I can tell to be pointy. Quite the contrary, a reasoned argument was made for deletion and has been followed by reasoned arguments for keeping. Regardless of outcome, I ask the closing admin to concentrate on the cardinal point of notability keeping in mind the following
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS||WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS||WP:POINT||WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS||WP:DUCK)

Comment: Was not notable prior to the Glenn Beck shows, so notability stemming from the few shows is 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ONEEVENT)

Comment: Wikipedia is about more information not less. This has become a very notable subject, since he was given not just a few minutes, but almost an entire show (rant) by Glen Beck, who has a large audience following on Fox. There will be lots of traffic, as a result, looking for an entry about this published activist, who is now in Nepal covering the Communist movement there (which won the elections, btw). So, when people come to look for info, on someone who is now in the public eye, I'd hope Wikipedia will not let down those who come here expecting to find information. Notability for activists as Cerejota points out is rather general per , and this meets that criteria.Special:Contributions/76.14.42.191|76.14.42.191
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTE)

Comment: Blogo-buzz has little to do with , and Glenn Beck is practically the ''definition'' of "fringe news coverage." Things do not become notable just because a pundit talks about them; again, see 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTABILITY||WP:ONEEVENT)

Comment: if we can get some decent sourcing here from |reliable, |independent sources
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (:WP:RS||:WP:NPOV)

Comment: for one thing, . For another, some of your examples are clearly not comparable; Epstein is an editor at one major national publication and a frequent contributor to many others. And: ''a Twitter search?'' Really
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS)

Comment: pretty obvious case of . There is no coverage of this guy prior to the Glenn Beck thing. He is not a known political figure, even within radical left politics. He is just some guy who happened to say things that a TV host could showcase for his own questionable purposes
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ONEEVENT)

Comment: major national publication"? The largest publication Epstein has printed in has a circulation of 80,664.  Time magazine, the 14th largest publication in the US, has a circulation of over 3.3 million.  The 89th largest publication in the US, the New Yorker, has a circulation of over 1 million.  Those are major national publications.  A magazine with a circulation of 80,664 is not a major national publication.  Also you say .  Are you saying these people (other than Joey "80664" Epstein) are non-notable?  If so I will send them all to AFD and note that you agree they are non-notable.  If you think they are notable, then as I have said, Brandt is more notable than them
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS)

Comment: or '''Merge and Redirect into Brecht Forum''' The article needs cleanup, but political activists (left and right) do not have a specific notability criteria, and hence general notability  applies solely, and I think this subject meets the standard in his specific context of extra-parliamentarian political activism (in particular, he has been published by reliable third parties, who makes him an author who was attacked in the mainstream media - notability is a line in the sand, and I think this crosses it). There are some issue with sourcing that can be fixed (the subject does show up in google and has been involved in notable efforts as a notable, documented participant in these efforts). Certainly he is propelled to the forefront by Glenn Beck's attacks and I can understand the whiff of #NEWS Cobaltbluetony feels, because I also get it. But Glenn Beck attacking someone is not pedestrian, and there is reason why the attack happens: this subject is recognized as an influential person (one of the measures of notability) in his melieu, and while notability is not inherited, it is certainly contextual: of all the people who speak of communism in the Bretch Forum (I mean, the Forum is named for a card-carrying commie :D), Beck chose Brandt for a reason. Notability cannot be revoked, so even if Glenn Beck changes his mind, for better or for worse, he has made Jed Brandt wiki-notable. That said, even if my argument is not convincing, and the community feels this is not article-worthy, I offer that rather than deletion, a merger of the web available biographical information and the http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,587789,00.html FoxNews link be included in Bretch Forum as a section, because it would allow to access the information on this particular controversy, which based on the notability of both Glenn Beck and the Brecht Forum, its not a trivial matter as per #NEWS. There, I did my  job for the time being, where is my cookie? :P
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTE||WP:NOT||WP:NOT||WP:ARS)