Deletion of Ashtar (extraterrestrial being)

Comment: the article is already the result of a major rewrite after a rename from Ashtar Galactic Command. The current article is not actually about the subject (Ashtar) but a list of UFO channellers based on their self published statements who have claimed to be in telepathic communication with Ashtar. Consequently the article is a misnamed unjustified |content fork of contactee. The original Ashtar contactee case is covered in sufficient detail in George Van Tassel
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Content forking (WP:CFORK)

Comment: The article needs improvement, certainly, but the topic certainly satisfies . Here are some sources in http://books.google.com/books?q=%22ashtar+galactic+command%22&btnG=Search+Books books, http://www.google.com/search?q=%22ashtar+galactic+command%22&sa=N&hl=en&tab=pw web, http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22ashtar+galactic+command%22&hl=en&btnG=Search scholarly sources, http://news.google.com/archivesearch?pz=1&cf=all&ned=us&hl=en&q=%22ashtar+galactic+command%22&cf=all news. I could make it into a -rated article but it is not a focus of mine right now
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTE||WP:GA)

Comment: What isn't made clear however, is that Helland's treatment of the subject in the chapter goes beyond "collating" primary materials as you're contending on /N, it extends into synthesis and commentary on the topic as well. What remains unanswered on the talk page, is despite the fact that Helland is cited by his peers in reliably published books as an authority on this specific subjecthttp://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=%22Christopher+Helland%22+%2B%22Ashtar%22&btnG=Search&meta= you believe that his chapter in this book somehow exceeds the parameters of any authoritative secondary source author to collate, synthesize and comment on primary documents. Although it may be regarded as heavy handed by some, I believe that it is contextually relevant to point out that Ash has already maintained a position on the article's talk page that they regard the entire subject area itself as "rubbish" that should be "deleted from Wikipedia" and that "cconsequently I'm probably not the right person to address POV"http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AAshtar_%28extraterrestrial_being%29&diff=315359634&oldid=315348089. When challenged on the issue of the appropriateness, in terms of neutrality, of any editor actively working on material for an article while holding a position like this beforehand, I was told that I was "free to speculate, though I suggest you judge my edits instead." I offer this as an indication of how much of an 'uphill battle' this has been, in some instances, from the onset.  cheers
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)