Deletion of Charles Carreon (2nd nomination)

Comment: We were considering deletion before The Oatmeal incident, and I don't see why we should change our decision. Just because he's an element in something that's currently news doesn't mean he's consistently of interest. He fails to meet the notability guidelines on  and his details should be merged in relevant articles.  — Preceding Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned comment added by
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: This guy has leaped into the limelight and has started to approach Jack Thompson (activist)|Jack Thompson-level notability.  I caution against deletion comments based on : just because it came from the web, doesn't mean it's non-notable
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:IDL)

Comment: There's no inherent notability to be gained from working as a lawyer; arguing on somebody's behalf is just part of the job, as Beyond My Ken wisely suggests. I see little sign that ''independent'' sources have lavished coverage on Carreon (as opposed to coverage of/by clients &c) so I don't think this article passes the |GNG right now. If Carreon gets substantial independent coverage in future, then he may be notable in future and we could write a decent article at that point
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: He's all over Ars Technica, and various other news sites. I certainly think he's |notable now if he wasn't at the beginning of this AfD
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: WP:NOTNEWSPAPER|Wikipedia is not a newspaper. The policy is just about as definitive as we can get in regards to this matter. He wasn't notable before this particular case, and "Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of persons and events. While news coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion." He may be notable after the case, but |Wikipedia is not a crystal ball either
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTALBALL)

Comment: and salt.  There is no material which warrants a merge.  It is irrelevant who this person sued or who this person is suing.  Our benchmarks for notability include  and the general notability guidelines, both of which this subject fails to meet.  It should also be reiterated that this article was deleted once before via consensus; little has changed to affect an outcome
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)