Deletion of Jesse Waugh (2nd nomination)

Comment: Not enough coverage in sources. Note that I was |canvassed by Special:Contributions/81.44.32.50, who asked me to vote "keep". The person canvassed others in the same manner
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Canvassing (WP:CANVASS)

Comment: Fails  - having a short video played at Freewaves does not amount to being "a substantial part of a significant exhibition". Freewaves may well count as a significant exhibition, but the requirement includes that his work must have been a substantial part of Freewaves, and that would require more than what we have here
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CREATIVE)

Comment: per Voceditenore's demolishment of the "sources"; what appears at first site to be a solid collection turns out to possess neither the |breadth or |persistence of coverage in third-party, independent reliable sources to pass the absolute minimum requirements placed on it by 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:DEPTH||WP:PERSISTENCE||WP:ANYBIO)

Comment: He was a featured exhibit at LA Freewaves, and yes, the opening exhibit (of which Waugh was part) that year was held at the MOCA in LA. Satisfies criteria 4(b) of , which is a key guideline of notability. Using primary sources to confirm uncontroversial facts isn't a reason to delete an article and doesn't negate the subjects notability under CREATIVE 4(b). The comments about sourcing are not a legitimate reason to delete an article about a notable subject and the comments about Waugh's self promotion elsewhere aren't relevant here
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CREATIVE)

Comment: The references contain trivial references or are sourced from the subject's own website, which is inappropriate.   notability criteria are not met
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CREATIVE)

Comment: Per my comments at the previous AfD and because nominator's rationale is invalid. Attempting to rewrite the article to support your attempts to delete it do not seem to be in good faith (Freewaves was held at the Museum, per the sources cited, please stop deleting accurately sourced content). The subject satisfies the GNG and  (as having exhibited at a major exhibition, as established at the prior AfD), and nothing has changed since then. The other comments about LinkedIn are irrelevant as LinkedIn has not been used as a source and the self-published books were not used to establish notability
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CREATIVE)

Comment: mostly per {{u|Voceditenore}}. Does not look to pass GNG (as much as anyone wants to argue the details of , the lead-in to the criteria is important -- meeting them means the subject would be ''likely'' to be notable; a subject isn't simply autonotable upon meeting those subjective criteria because notability is about sources and a guideline like that is just an indication that sources should exist). Also, this whole page is a mess. Kind of an interesting mess, though. I will have to ponder the social and historical implications of the phrasing "unjust witch hunt of anything male". To be clear, though, the sketchiness on this page is not entirely on the side of the keeps. &mdash
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CREATIVE)

Comment: Notable as per   —&nbsp;Preceding Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned comment added by Special:Contributions/81.44.32.50|81.44.32.50
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CREATIVE)

Comment: His work is mentioned in a https://books.google.com/books?id=nu5YoI8GbsQC&printsec=frontcover&dq=The+Sons+and+Daughters+of+Los:+Culture+and+Community+in+L.+A.&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj3lOCa1bvMAhUNy2MKHTAwBFcQ6AEIHzAA#v=onepage&q=Waugh&f=false book. I wish I had access to the Marie Claire article from 2002 as well as the video sources, but the information seems verifiable, and having his art displayed that many times is notable via  for "The person's work" has "been a substantial part of a significant exhibition". If those sources (which I don't have access to) contain significant discussion about him, he also passes . I don't see any evidence that those sources are fake, and even without them, I think this person is just notable enough for an entry
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ARTIST||WP:GNG)