Deletion of Mike Bivins

Comment: u|Pittsburghangelsforever}}, the article's creator, has blatantly ed https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Oregon&diff=769334868&oldid=768317164 here. I have no opinion on this AfD
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Canvassing (WP:CANVAS)

Comment: Like {{U|Hoary}}, I have not made a determination, yet, about the |notability of this subject. I, too, liked the writing style, a sober encyclopedic tone, well-cited from a few reasonable sources. The case for a |journalist’s bio is pretty thin, though, maybe  SOON|too soon, with the https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/11/10/not-my-president-thousand-protest-trump-in-rallies-across-the-u-s/ Washington Post article giving him 4 sentences, and the http://www.inlander.com/spokane/the-live-wire/Content?oid=2950780 Inlander describing his work filming and live streaming from different demonstrations. Strictly speaking, this coverage is not so much about the person as it is about his work with the relatively new phenomenon in journalism of live streaming, and its use by traditional news outlets. With connections to social media and infotainment, possibly the subject might qualify as having “made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment” under ? I am not aware of criteria specifically for internet celebrities, but maybe that is what is needed
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:JOURNALIST||WP:TOO||WP:ENT)

Comment: What {{U|Hoary}} said about Bivins possibly being notable for something other than being a journalist gets at what I was talking about when I say Bivins should be considered notable under the . How many times does someone have to be appear on TV or in print to be considered generally notable
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)