Deletion of Chris Alexander

Comment: Chris, I would like to warn you about making statements that accuse other editors of having a bias against you. The problem with this is that unless you can prove this beyond a reasonable doubt, you should absolutely refrain from saying that someone has an agenda against you and that this is the only reason your article is up for deletion. If you want to prove your notability, you must do so by showing coverage in reliable sources. Just telling us to do a Google search is not enough, as in most cases about 95% of any given Google search is absolutely unusable as far as proving notability goes. It doesn't mean that the remaining 5% might not be enough to show notability, but the fact is that  isn't a rationale that will keep an article. In the end, if you have enough notability to pass , then it'll come about. If not, then the article will be deleted. Accusing an editor that's been here for about 6 years of being a troll is not a good way to argue for your article to be kept. Rather than him having an agenda, he could be making a truly |good faith deletion nomination. I'll see what I can find, but attacking the credibility of a Wikipedia editor is not a good way to set the stage for an AfD. It just makes incoming editors tense up and be less likely to want to help you
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:GHITS||WP:BIO||WP:GOODFAITH)

Comment: I've gone through and found where there's just enough coverage for his Blood of Irina film to where I'd say Alexander merits his own page. I wouldn't say that there were thousands of sources, though. Many of the hits were to "junk" or basic database type articles that confirm Alexander's existence but are completely unusable as far as notability or sourcing goes. Of the remainder, many were blog sites that just can't be used to show notability either per . The problem with blogs is that even though some are well thought of within their community, it's very very difficult to prove that the blogger is someone that's so notable, so much of an authority that their blog would be the rare exception. Of the rest, many were , meaning that they were things that were released by Alexander, Fangoria, or one of the outlets that he has worked with or been associated with. However I still found enough to show that he passes notability guidelines. If his notability were only for achieving the status of EIC of Fangoria I'd recommend a redirect, but there's just enough here to warrant a keep
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:BLOG||WP:PRIMARY)