Deletion of Robert Trundle

Comment: I posted the above in full awareness of what policy says; that's why I didn't say anything even remotely close to "Policy says we should delete it." It's my opinion, and one I happen to hold strongly: A living person that doesn't want an article here should be allowed to request its removal. Take it or leave it. (The fact that it's not policy is also why I included the argument about him probably not meeting , so the closing admin will accept my vote on that basis rather than my opinion about requests from living persons
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: If he doesn't want an article about himself here, then it shouldn't be here, especially since it's questionable whether he passes  in the first place
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: The ''Fate Magazine'' and ''Cincinnati Post'' references are clearly independant coverage of his writings, whether those are self-published or not.  He probably doesn't meet  but those two articles ought to earn him the minimum level of notability needed for a keep under  as an author.  The remaining problem is the  concern that led to this administrative nomination.  Nothing in the article ''seems'' to fall within its demense, however.  The ufology material is potentially controversial, but it is strongly sourced.  The remaining material is not controversial, nor is it "details of his personal life."  Furthermore, the caveats of 's section on the "Presumption in favor of privacy" for "Non-public figures" seem to be met.  To wit, the article's content clearly exercises restraint, disincludes material from primary sources not covered in verifiable secondary sources, and is not "sensationalistic" or "titilating."   is designed to shield people against misinformation and attacks, but I do not believe it is meant as a blanket means to hide otherwise-notable material from the wider world, at least not as the policy currently is worded (cf. Talk: Angela Beesley
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:BIO||WP:BLP||WP:BLP||WP:BLP)

Comment: The AfD of a particular article, for better or worse, is not the appropriate place to debate whether policy (and consensus) should move in the direction of this opinion.  We |cannot appeal to opinion, but only to facts, verification, and policy. An "opt out" policy might (without comment on its merits here) be worth discussing on the BLP talk page or even as a central community issue
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV)