Deletion of Allen Meadors (2nd nomination)

Comment: per the comments above. For a regular college professor, even a moderately notable one, I would have been inclined to go with the subject's wishes per . But a university president is a public figure, a fairly significant one, for college towns sort of similar to an important local politician. We should not delete an article about such an individual, even if he requests it, just because a negative event occured.  The 'Controversy' section is neutrally written and well sourced. It is not too long and doesn't overwhlelm the rest of the article. The BLP issues here have been handled properly. The subject is notable, and not just under #C6 but under / as well. With all due respect to the subject's wishes, the article should be kept
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE||WP:PROF||WP:BIO||WP:GNG)

Comment: I don't see any reason to disagree with the past consensus that he is notable, in particular, as the head of a university (#C6). This article illustrates exactly why one should not pay to have a Wikipedia article created about oneself: because one cannot then subsequently pay to have it removed when it becomes embarrassing
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: Passes #C6 at the very least. The article is not poorly sourced (a couple statements could stand to have their sourcing improved, but they're incidental enough that they could also just be removed
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)