Deletion of Sal LaBarbera

Comment: Source is sketchy at best, but even if it were immaculate, still fails the "significant coverage in multiple reliable sources" test (). And even if subject were to be seen as notable, it's only for .  Two grounds for deletion clearly established
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:ONEEVENT)

Comment: As far as I can tell this is  for the dead body tweet which created a little local notoriety, but not true notability. Just a  cop with a second career after retirement. Fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E||WP:ROTM||WP:BIO)

Comment: per . Disregarding the many mentions in the context of his job, (murders get a lot of press, and a homicide detective is often interviewed about the investigation), there are two long profiles on his retirementhttps://www.laweekly.com/the-best-and-worst-of-a-legendary-homicide-detectives-9800-days-at-lapd/https://www.latimes.com/local/crime/la-me-lopez-labarbera-20150114-column.html (the ''LA Weekly'' one has some decent bio details not in the article yet) and one shorter one.https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2015/01/10/homicide-detective-retiring-after-33-years-with-lapd/ Then a long profile on him two years after his retirement.https://www.kcet.org/shows/link-voices/south-bureau-homicide-detective-sal-labarbera On the one hand, these are local coverage; on the other hand, the greater Los Angeles area is larger than Delaware and Rhode Island combined, so I don't think "local" is necessarily disqualifying in this instance. '''adding''' Per a source posted at Talk:Sal LaBarbera, the ''LA Weekly'' profile is written by a friend of LaBarbera's, so is not independent for consideration of notability
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BASIC)