Deletion of Arthur Kade (3rd nomination)

Comment: OT#NEWS.  That someone got himself mentioned in the daily "Hey, isn't that wacky" story a few times in a few publications doesn't rise to  when he doesn't meet the |entertainer criteria he strives for.  See also  and ; Wikipedia aspires to be more than a catalog of every newspaper story
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:ENT||WP:EFFECT||WP:PERSISTENCE)

Comment: Coverage from ''Philadelphia (magazine)'', ''Philadelphia Enquirer'', ''WPSG'' and the multiple pieces in ''Gawker'' are all significant.  The nom's "other than notoriety deriving from his blog" borders on .  People can be notable because of a blog or anything else.  I don't like this person either, but he passes  whether we like him or not
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:IDONTLIKEIT||WP:GNG)

Comment: Philadelphia Magazine doing a feature article on him is not "NOT#NEWS".  The dude now even has a bit on Da Ali G Show, http://www.brianphickey.com/blog/?p=804 here.  It is possible for a person to become notable because they don't shut up, precisely if people start giving him more and more attention.  That's the point of |notability -- significant coverage in multiple reliable sources.  -&nbsp
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTE)

Comment: the individual is plainly not notable.  Add some 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Protection policy (WP:SALT)

Comment: Sources in the article show the man meets the . Whether or not we |like the man is irrelevant to whether or not the man is notable
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:IDONTLIKEIT)