Deletion of Kamau Kambon (2nd nomination)

Comment: Not notable enough. Based on a Google Scholar search and a few other searches in academic databases, I do not think he meets any of the  criteria. Nor does he meet any of the  criteria. A Google News search returned http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NmQ2NjA3MzRiZWY5ZDg2YWQxZTBhODMwN2ZiZTY0MjM= one single NRO article, where he is not featured. Just saying outrageous things does not make a person notable. As for possibly being a “despicable person”, that is not a reason for deletion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:BIO)

Comment: per  and #NEWS.  Wikipedia cannot cover ever single person whose name gets mentioned in every single news story or blog.  There does not appear to be any lasting significance of this person which would make them notable
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E||WP:NOT)

Comment: Subject is not notable.  Individual appears ''once'' on C-SPAN and makes outrageous comments.  See oatrack
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Copyrights (WP:C)

Comment: This guy sounds like a despicable person and a major dick, but that doesn't make him notable. Other than the incident at Howard Law School which was broadcast on CSPAN, Kambon is non-notable and per #NEWS the event should be covered, not the person. Content from this article could possibly be merged with Hurricane Katrina or related article since Kambon was hardly the only ethnocentric racist who had something to say then. (Kayne West, anyone
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: I changed my previous delete recommendation to a keep after a more thorough news search. While he does not qualify specifically under , he has http://news.google.com/archivesearch?tab=sn&num=10&as_allsubj=all&hl=en&ned=us&q=Kamau+Kambon&ie=UTF-8 enough independent media coverage to qualify under . Wikipedia is not a repository of articles only about nice topics and people. There are many Wikipedia articles about criminals
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:BIO)

Comment: This article does not harm the encyclopaedia, it is reasonably well referenced (or should I say it doesn't contain any "fact" tags). I can think of worse articles that we should trying to delete (i.e. ones that are Original Research). A warning for beginners; please don't respond to this by merely copy n pasting a "|It doesn't do any harm" link and somehow think that it makes my point any less valid. For a start, that's just an Wikipedia:Wikipedia essays|essay and it then goes on to explain that this is only for unreferenced articles
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOHARM)