Deletion of Masta wong

Comment: Unfortunately, New York Times and CNN has written about him, fairly extensively actually, as the primary subject in their articles, and it's not just a passing mention, so he gets by .  I'm not sure "esotericness" = "nonnotability" (just as "famous" != "notability").  See the essay
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: I've fleshed out the reference section somewhat.  The CNN article originated from Associated Press|AP, so many other newspapers carried the identical story.  Meets  and 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:BIO)