Deletion of Texe Marrs (2nd nomination)

Comment: closest this topic comes to "significant coverage" is the NYT piece, which is ''primarily'' on taxpayer subsidisation of non-profit postage, ''secondarily'' on Marrs' newsletter as one of the more bizarre examples of this, and only ''tertiarily'' on Marrs himself. I would also suggest that the further out on the  a person is, the more careful we should be that we have solid coverage, not just a few sensationalised and bizarre claims
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fringe theories (WP:FRINGE)

Comment: Besides the fact that you're just being dishonest by underlining part of your rationale that was not underlined before without noting it in a comment, your interpretation of  is simply incorrect.  is a guideline for fringe and conspiracy theories, not for articles about people. The article in question is about Texe Marrs, not about any of his theories. If you wish to make the case this article is not notable, you must make the case Marrs himself is not notable based on otability (people), which is the appropriate notability guideline. Special:Contributions/81.23.57.177|81.23.57.177
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fringe theories (WP:FRINGE||WP:FRINGE||WP:N)