Deletion of Sandy Smith (British Army officer)

Comment: Might fall foul of  I s'pose, but Smith and his role in Operation Deadstick is well documented in reliable sources (books, not newspapers, so it isn't as if he was a one week story
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:oneevent)

Comment: WP:SOLDIER says (as it has to): "In general, an individual is presumed to be notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple verifiable independent, reliable sources."  Only considering the books in libraries of people active in Milhist, we probably have hundreds of books that devote significant, independent coverage to all the key Normandy officers.  There's a misreading of  here; we're not going to get rid of our article on Nathan Hale, who was only notable for one event.  The point of  is that multiple newspapers, all breathlessly dishing out the same drivel, don't make someone notable; but if the interest of multiple independent historians doesn't make someone notable, then "notability" doesn't mean anything. - Dank
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ONEEVENT||WP:ONEEVENT)

Comment: The subject has been mentioned in a lot of |reliable sources, but IMO that doesn't equal "sigificant coverage". To me these are passing mentions which are all about a single event. As such I do not believe the subject is notable under the . Without seeking to downplay the significance of his service in any way, the subject was a junior officer who was awarded a 3rd level gallantry award - both insufficient in themselves under the guidelines in 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:GNG||WP:SOLDIER)