Deletion of Daniel Bombardier

Comment: This is a significantly redacted version of a much longer article that was a gigantic , just for the record — but even the longer version didn't reliably source any particularly strong claim of notability under  either, but was highly advertorialized and referenced almost entirely to blogs and Facebook or Instagram posts. And no, one piece of local media coverage about a break-in at his studio is not, in and of itself, enough to claim that he passes GNG in ''lieu'' of failing creative, either: if you're going for "notable because media coverage exists", rather than "notable because he's accomplished something that objectively passes a subject-specific inclusion criterion", then it takes a lot ''more'' than just one or two pieces of media coverage to get there
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Copyright violations (WP:COPYVIO||WP:CREATIVE)

Comment: Fails   Missing substantive RS
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: not substantiated by third party reliable sources; not notable, failed 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Failing  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:CREATIVE)

Comment: Fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)