Deletion of Michael W. Nichols

Comment: is this a joke? Utterly fails notability requirements: , , and , and hasn't a single |reliable source (thus failing ), not to mention that the vast majority aren't even proper biographical references; most only mention him in passing, or mention the two films he was in (not even featured in). Being one of ''many'' in a documentary about recruit training and having a fitness video, along with a "published book" (available only as a Kindle eBook is a stretch, as it's only a step above self-publishing) is not enough to prove notability. Frankly, I'm offended by the shameless self-promotion, using the Eagle, Globe, and Anchor to fill his own pockets
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:BIO||WP:MILPEOPLE||WP:RS||WP:BLP)

Comment: per Whpq, lacks "significant independent coverage" in |reliable sources and therefore fails the |general notability guideline. Also fails /N
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:GNG||WP:MILMOS)

Comment: no indication that topic meets  or . No indication of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SOLDIER||WP:ENTERTAINER)

Comment: per analysis of the sources above.  Saying someone is "non-notable" is not an insult, it just means that they don't satisfy Wikipedia's |inclusion policies, which are based on |notability.  Not everyone in the military is notable, even drill sergeants who wrote an e-book and made an appearance on a tv show
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:N)