Deletion of Harry Braun, Democratic Presidential Candidate, 2016

Comment: changed from previous !vote for "Delete"). Kudos to 75.108.94.227 for a great job of digging up and adding some not-so-easy-to-find sources, and making what I find to be a convincing argument that the subject does indeed pass . Thanks to all those who've worked on the rewrite, great job of cutting out the promotional stuff and making it more encyclopedic
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: I'm not sure what you mean by this: ''MelanieN seems to have accomplished that attitude-adjustment already with the BLP themselves''. If you mean I have tried to improve the article, that's true. But if you are suggesting that I have changed my mind about deleting the article, you are mistaken. As a |scientist he is not notable: he has no academic position or advanced degree; his "research", actually advocacy, is sparsely published and is almost completely uncited by others; his book is self-published. And as a |political candidate he is not notable. Note that for an unsuccessful candidate for political office, election coverage is not enough to establish notability - because such coverage is routine and is not about them specifically. But election coverage is pretty much the only Reliable Source coverage the article has to offer. So, sorry, I still favor deletion. I know he pleads that he must have an article here if he is to be taken seriously as a presidential candidate, but IMO it's the other way round: since he is not taken seriously by reliable sources, should not have an article here
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ACADEMIC||WP:POLITICIAN)

Comment: U|75.108.94.227}} and {{U|MelanieN}} have done a great job cleaning up the mess this article originally was.  It now cites sources that clearly show he is |notable.  I still have a few concerns about the article; for example, although the overtly promotional tone and nature is gone it still seems to portray him in a more positive light than some of the sources do.  Also I don't trust the 4 sources I've mentioned on the talk page without seeing them.  However, those are clean-up concerns, not deletion concerns and AFD is not clean up.  At this point I think this article should be kept
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Per nomination and other comments above. Un-encyclopedic autobio of a |non-notable subject
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)