Deletion of Harvey L. Bass (2nd nomination)

Comment: While I'm sure he was a fine person and is missed very much by those who created the article in his memory, there doens't seem to be any notability here and #MEMORIAL|Wikipedia is not a Memorial seems to apply to me
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: Not a single one of the deletion advocates has offered as their rationale "I don't know what this is about, but in my opinion this isn't worthy". So you're conveniently ignoring the arguments people have actually made, in favor of dismissing an argument that no one has made. Excellent example of a straw man, actually. The reason why this does not meet the standard is that the standard is "a topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject."  No one has offered any indication that this person has received significant coverage in any |reliable source that is independent of him.  That would pretty much be why
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: to DDB.  In addition, the subject of the article is mentioned essentially as a politician, creative professional (editor,) (and local businessman,) following the sections of |Notability (people).  There is nothing in the article or sources to indicate that the subject satisfies any of those criteria, nor has there been a keep contribution to suggest that they are.  "Local politician" does not meet , nor does having association with a local paper, nor does being a local businessman.  As to 'Cult Following,' there is nothing in the article that I saw that suggested he is an Entertainer, which is the relevant section of notability for that criteria, nor has there been any evidence that he has a large following.  The nom has stated one rationale: non-notability.  I have previously stated that this article in its present form, closely resembling an obituary, appears to be a memorial, #MEMORIAL|which Wikipedia is not.  Finally, I'd appreciate your trying to |assume good faith, which I'm not positive of in your last sentence
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:BIO||WP:NOT||WP:AGF)

Comment: No consensus in the first AfD, so trying again.  This article is sourced only by the subject's family-provided obituary in the local newspaper.  ''Lubbock Avalanche-Journal'' obituaries do not indicate notability, since anyone can have one; they don't indicate anyone other than the family found the subject to be notable.  And they also are not reliably fact-checked.  So they clearly are not .  Aside from that, this article has no other sources to verify its info about this man.  Neither other listed "reference" in the article mentions the man in any way.  Even if everything in the article is assumed to be correct, is the man notable?  Well, two of the "keep" arguments in the previous debate were .  So if an editor is convinced by , then I guess they can decided that yes, he's notable on that basis.  Aside from that, though, there is nothing in the article that meets .  Other "keep" votes in the first debate said he was notable "as a local individual".  But with no press coverage to go along with that, that seems to go very much against the standards of .  And even that aside, once again, the article offers no actual reliable sources for even such "local" notability.  Whatever local importance he may seem to have had (not that I agree that even that is very much), we apparently have to just take his family's word for it.  The author touts the subject having "won" a "major" Rotary award.  This is again unsourced (other than by his obituary), but this time it doesn't matter, because the Paul L. Harris Fellow is, in fact, no such thing.  Quoting from the http://www.rotary.org/foundation/development/recognition/paulharris.html Rotary International website: "Anyone who contributes &mdash; or in whose name is contributed &mdash; a gift of US$1,000 or more to the Annual Programs Fund may become a Paul Harris Fellow. . . . Donors are eligible for Paul Harris Fellow recognition when their cumulative giving reaches US$1,000."  The flowery language used by the author ("won the coveted Paul Harris Fellow designation for outstanding community service") isn't supported by the organization's own description of the designation.  There's no "winning" of the award and no "outstanding community service" necessary; just a check for $1000 will do
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:POKEMON||WP:POKEMON||WP:BIO||WP:BIO)