Deletion of Ray Joseph Cormier 3

Comment: I am going by these policies for my iVote to delete  They are  though as stated below notability has to be shown in |reliable sources as a news article not in human interest stories, ,  & also if neede .  To me this article is not notable nor does it meet policies/guidelines.  I am i'Voting also per comments made by
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:RS||WP:ANYBIO||WP:VANITY||WP:IAR)

Comment: I think Cormier fails .  My reaction is the same as Atama's: the article itself -- the text, the claims made -- demonstrate ''lack'' of notability rather than the reverse.  I'd go even further -- I think the text itself shows that it is preposterous to have an article on him, to the point that it is a discredit to Wikipedia.  Even if we need to invoke IAR on this one, I think it should be deleted.  And if it isn't already apparent: the only (weak) keep vote here that is coming from someone who ''wasn't'' canvassed is Steve Smith's
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: When you say "invited," what you mean is "canvassed against policy due to your prior keep vote," correct? Should your !vote be disregarded, in your opinion, or are you going to warn Mr. Cormier to stop violating  ('''again''') and neutral messages out to a diverse pool of editors who may be interested in this AFD
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Canvassing (WP:CANVASS)

Comment: The opinion of the subject here is moot; there is a sizable number of reliable sources.  Many of them are 30 years old, and appear to be print-only, but they still exist.  The article itself has improved some since the last time it has been nominated, but overall it has been a terrible -magnet for its own subject, and still suffers from a lack of outside attention from people who are uninvolved with the subject.  That, however, is a cleanup issue, there is nothing with the ''tone'' of the article that cannot be cleaned up.  The sources exist, so the subject is likely notable.  In the interest of full disclosure, I was invited here by DoDaCanaDa
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (WP:COI)