Deletion of Jeff Berwick (2nd nomination)

Comment: coverage is significant, passes . (Note: is listed in Mexico deletion sorting, probably should be in Chile instead
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: which is "changing" from my ''Comment'' above, back when I was still neutral.  Passes  as presently defined.  Summarizing the extant sources wiki-neutrally should be possible, and I will give it a shot.  Special:Contributions/75.108.94.227|75.108.94.227
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: See list at Talk:Jeff_Berwick#WP:SOURCES, plus a couple in section below.  I am happy to work on the article-rewrite, but do agree there are some BLP-issues at play here (talkpage has some examples of negative commentary by editors who apparently have real-world very strong opinions).  I've never heard of this BLP-subject, but the sources are often glowly-positive and/or fiery-negative, from what I've seen; getting the NPOV balance right, of reflecting what the wiki-reliable sources say, with due weight, will be a bit tricky.  Still, I think this is a keep, easily passes WP:GNG, ''as long as'' there are enough long-haul wikipedians willing to watchlist the page going forward, and act as |long-term stewards of the rewritten version, to keep it from degenerating into a pro-Berwick puff-piece *or* an anti-Berwick hit-piece.  There are potential real-world-legal-repercussions, to either kind of degeneration-mistake.  p.s.  The first AfD mentions some kind of yacht-accident, covered in pre-2005 newspapers, so coverage bursts are stockhouse.com (hypothetical), yacht-sinking, guests on podcast, chilean real estate, bitcoin ATMs, expat passports, and libertarian campaign, plus background-details like DOB and such. Special:Contributions/75.108.94.227|75.108.94.227
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Ownership of content (WP:OWN)