Deletion of Paul Driessen (lobbyist)

Comment: The article makes him out to be a non-notable fossil-fuel apologist (note: those are two separate things — it is entirely possible to be a notable fossil-fuel apologist, but there is no evidence here that he is one). He is certainly not notable for the originality of his ideas — they appear to be whatever is most expedient for his corporate sponsors. The one source in the current version of the article (the Mother Jones piece) mentions him but is not sufficiently in-depth in its coverage of him for ; anyway that's only one and its neutrality on this subject is questionable. We also don't have evidence of sufficient academic impact (per Xxanthippe's comment above) nor the multiple published book reviews that might allow a pass of 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:AUTHOR)

Comment: Removing '(lobbyist)' with the above search tool produces maybe a dozen or so newspaper articles from around the US over a 30 yr period quoting him, at least one book review (''Moscow Daily News'', Idaho), and a column or two by him. Is this sufficient coverage to meet the notability criteria of ?  Thanks
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BASIC)

Comment: per W:V, , , and .  He's not http://atlasnetwork.org/blog/2010/11/senior-fellows/ an Atlas fellow, nor is he http://www.core-online.org/ anywhere on the CORE website.  He appears to be a consultant for http://www.cfact.org/about/staff/ two small http://www.cdfe.org/about-us/staff-and-advisors/ interest groups.  The other stuff appears to be |crufty resume filler.  —&nbsp;Preceding Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned comment added by
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Spam (WP:SPAM||WP:RESUME||WP:HOAX||WP:CRUFT)