Deletion of Nathan Bryan (scientist) (3rd nomination)

Comment: per all. Article's a bit of a mess, but deletion is . &ndash
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTCLEANUP)

Comment: who is going to |drive the snowplough and close this quickly
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW)

Comment: I don't believe anything has changed here from the findings of fact during the past two nominations - this guy has been cited a lot https://scholar.google.co.nz/scholar?as_q=&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=any&as_sauthors=NS+Bryan&as_publication=&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5, to the extent that he passes notability requirements on #C1 alone. Article clearly needs some love, but you can't argue with 4 articles with >500 cites, and a couple dozen with >100. That is "significant impact on the discipline
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)