Deletion of Rick McCrank

Comment: unless the sourcing can be improved. In terms of determining whether a person qualifies for an article or not, the test is not the things the article ''says'', but the amount of |reliable source coverage in real, unaffiliated media that can or cannot be shown to ''suppport'' the things it says. But the footnotes here are not reliable or notability-supporting sources — literally across the board, they're YouTube videos, directories and primary source profiles on the self-published websites of directly affiliated companies and organizations, with not even one source shown that represents professional third party journalism with him as its subject. No matter what notability claim a person can make, he has to have better sourcing to support it than this before he qualifies for a Wikipedia article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)