Deletion of William Connolley (5th nomination)

Comment: per  (namely ). Represents non-notable academian. Being on a fairly popular blog is not something I see in the criteria. Not regarded as significant in his field (climate research or software engineer). Published research is not "well-known," given the lackluster citations from other academics. Has not contributed body of works or concepts that have been particularly meaningful to climate research or software engineering. Lacks notable awards or honors. The only real claim of support I've seen is "he's my friend" or "he's an expert on Wikipedia" or "ex-member of blog." People who point to previous AFDs refrain from discussing the issues of any relevance or importance
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:PROF)

Comment: This isn't really questionable for me, he's not just some academic - meets 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: The result of the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Connolley (4th nomination)|fourth nomination was speedy keep in accordance with .  It is not the case that the previous AfDs had insufficient community participation to say that there is clear consensus on this matter.  Nothing new is offered in this nomination that was not addressed and disposed of already
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW)