Deletion of Julius Dawkins

Comment: per |ignore all rules -- If the family is at risk (and I will assume good faith in his comments) then we can remove the article.  I'd rather keep it, but sometimes you just say "what the hey
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Ignore all rules (WP:IAR)

Comment: per  and WP:GNG
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NCOLLATH)

Comment: Clearly passes multiple notability standards, including  (played in NFL),  (first-team All-American), and  (significant coverage in multiple, reliable sources. Also, as noted above, I doubt he qualifies as a "non-public figure." More importantly, I fail to see how Wikipedia's publication of information about his football career which ended 34 years ago could threaten his safety or allow him to be traced.  This information is widely available from multiple on-line sources, including Pro-Football-Reference.com (https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/D/DawkJu00.htm here), SR/College Football (https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/players/julius-dawkins-1.html here), ArenaFan.com (http://www.arenafan.com/players/Julius_Dawkins-404/ here), and Pro Football Archives (http://www.profootballarchives.com/playerd/dawk00600.html here). Further, Dawkins' assertion that the NFL removed his "whole profile" from its web site is simply untrue.  His profile remains at nfl.com (http://www.nfl.com/player/juliusdawkins/2512650/careerstats here) though date and place of birth are absent. The concessions I would suggest are to (i) remove his date and place of birth from the article (as was done at nfl.com), as those pieces of data could be used for tracing purposes, (ii) prohibit adding information about his current details (which are presently absent and should not be added); and (iii) protecting the article so it can only be edited by registered users. With those caveats, I support keeping the article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NGRIDIRON||WP:NCOLLATH||WP:GNG)

Comment: per ; the subject has requested deletion and we should honour that. The article's subject is of marginal notability, while the article contains minimal encyclopedically relevant prose, enough to confirm that the subject exists. The presence of his article on Wikipedia does not add that much; its absence would not harm the project -- while it may harm the subject
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:BIODELETE)