Deletion of David Firth (2nd nomination)

Comment: and yet, as with all the other keep votes, you don't say why or explain how he meets any of the guidelines. Or why a biographical article should remain when there isn't a single reliable source of information for any of the information in it. See . But hey, you know... David Firth and his half a dozen flash animations on newgrounds are as notable as Ricky Gervais. Oddly I can point to hundreds of reliable sources of information regarding Gervais, so we can write a nice interesting and informative biography. Unlike, say, the creator of a minor internet meme who's had his 15 mins of blog fame
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP)

Comment: I wasn't contradicting your reliability of sources issue. But now you mention it, I will. Expressly ruled out? More like expressly ruled in: from , "Neither online nor print sources deserve an automatic assumption of reliability by virtue of the medium they are printed in". Basically, take it on a case-by-case basis. In this case, I think the article should definitely stay. Although we can't quantify his fanbase, I'm sure you're underestimating it when you say 30 seconds of fame among a tiny section of newgrounds fans... I admit that I am a fan, but I've never been on newgrounds. And I certainly have been a fan for more than 30 seconds
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: it meets  because if fulfils all of the requirements therein - surely it should be you who is telling us why it doesn't meet it
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: Wikipedia is supposed to be a ''reliable'' source of information. This is why  and  exist, and why articles like this should be deleted. ''If an article topic has no reputable, reliable, third-party sources, Wikipedia should not have an article on that topic.'' -- , official policy
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:VERIFY)

Comment: my choice. Not one person has said why it meets , and there isn't a source of reliable information. NOTE: Should this dire article survive this AFD thanks to fan voting, I will still be taking an axe to it to remove all the bias, cruft and unreliable information. It will likely end up looking (as I said above) like this: "David Firth, Doncaster, flash animator responsible for Salad Fingers and x,y,z"... and that's it
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: very notable in his domain, meets io
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Bots (WP:B)

Comment: how many times would you like me to restate the same thing. Read this submission again... you know, that bit at the top where I explained the problem with this article. One of the requirements of Wikipedia is "reliable information". There isn't anyway in this case. Notable people generally have solid reliable sources for information about them. People whose flash animations have 30 seconds of fame among a tiny section of newgrounds fans... don't. This article is entirely populated with cruft from blogs, personal websites and web forum posts... all of which are expressly ruled out by 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)