Deletion of William Woodward (psychologist)

Comment: Not notable 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: Meets notability () and  guidelines for inclusion. &mdash
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:PROF)

Comment: Fails  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:PROF)

Comment:  says in part "Similarly, an academic involved in significant current events is likely to be notable as a person under the general  guidelines."  I don't see adequate evidence that he meets  without that sentence.  The relevant part of  is "The person has been the primary subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the person. (Multiple similar stories describing a single day's news event only count as one coverage.)"  While we have two reliable independent sources, they appear to be a single day's news event.  Thus,  is not met.  Failing both, deletion is appropriate
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:BIO||WP:BIO)

Comment: Does not pass  or 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:PROF)

Comment: I've had to put a bit more thought into this afd, than some of the other nn 9/11 truth articles.  I was the one that came up with most of the first paragraph, taking it from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=William_Woodward_%28psychologist%29&oldid=73238653 to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=William_Woodward_%28psychologist%29&oldid=73245937.  Pretty much the most notable thing I found was "In the Fall 2006 semester, he wants to teach a class that explores 9/11 "in psychological terms".  With this AFD, I've done more searching to try and find out what's come of this class he wants to teach?  But, it seems the news headlines have died down  since then (despite the 9/11 coming up soon).  This is evidenced by searching the Union Leader (NH) website http://www.google.com/search?q=%22william+woodward%22+site:unionleader.com&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&start=10&sa=N.  I also tried to find out this information by searching the UNH website, also to no avail.  Given the lack of sources following up on this story, I don't find this 9/11 controversy notable enough and as a prof, he doesn't meet  or the proposed  criteria
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:PROF)

Comment: He seems to be a more notable crank than most of Stiver's other recent contributions, but he doesn't pass 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: has recieved decent press coverage and has been published multiple times, I think that suits 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: as per nom. He may be a respected academic, but not a particularly notable one, and one academic book publication (perhaps a second one noted at Amazon about William James) does not meet the criteria of 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)