Deletion of UFO Phil (3rd nomination)

Comment: for several reasons including that ''this article was deleted once before'' and since then, he hasn't gained any notability so he would fail  and all other notability guidelines for a fictional character. Nomination holds good points, as do most comments supporting delete. No reason not to, though the article does get a steady 15-25 views per day
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: The article currently looks extremely promotional and unclear and may qualify for , but notability seems to be available, and better then the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UFO Phil (2nd nomination)|previous nomination which ended in keep. I am not entirely convinced either way, but keeping in mind eletion is not cleanup and the recommendations in , it may be better to to rv to a old revision without the promotional content and start again from there
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Blow it up and start over (WP:TNT||WP:D||WP:TNT)

Comment: per .  Most of the hits that come up when I run news searches on "UFO Phil" are articles about a singer with the band "UFO (band)|UFO, Phil Mogg|Phil," Mogg.  Beyond that, the best I can find is this echo in a regional daily of a brief article from a local paper https://www.denverpost.com/2011/01/13/cyber-star-ufo-phil-moves-to-colorado-springs/  Cyber star “UFO Phil” moves to Colorado Springs.  It's not much, but there doesn't seem to be much  on this guy
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:PROMO||WP:SIGCOV)

Comment: The previous nomination ended up in a keep at a time when Wikipedia was working out some issues with regards to biographies that it has largely resolved in favor of erring on the side of caution rather than radical inclusion. To that end, I would argue that this ''is'' a biography rather than a character (though I acknowledge that the line is fine here), but there is clearly no room for an article about the actor playing this character. Moreover, the "character" fails our inclusion criteria as well. I want it to be clear that although sources can be found which ''mention'' this person/character, there are no in-depth biographical or analytical sources which have noticed him or his schtick. If he becomes famous enough to be noticed by mainstream media or commented upon by |independent sources, then we can think about re-creation
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fringe theories (WP:FRIND)