Deletion of DeepFuckingValue

Comment: Man, whenever a new article is created or someone gains fame out of nowhere, there's always at least one person that's just about ready to be like '''Oh mY gOd ! nOmInatIoN FOr dElEtIon!!?/1/''' yeah, calm down buddy. This doesn't need to be deleted, here: 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: per Elliot, seems to satisfy  and  as this person has seen much media coverage
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP||WP:GNG)

Comment: or '''Merge''' to GameStop short squeeze. A lot of people have very shallow understanding of notability rules.  and  apply here. Just because something grabs headlines doesn't mean it gets an article. However a lot of people, those who vote, often just see something as having sources and then say that's enough without considering other policies. And a lot of what people consider "notable" ends up being totally subjective.  applies here too because we have no idea how this will play out or if this guy will get more notability later on
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Recentism (WP:RECENTISM||WP:NOTNEWS||WP:TOOSOON)

Comment: to ''Keith Gill (investor)'': Per reasons above. Coverage goes beyond . Article seems good enough to pass 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E||WP:GNG)

Comment: per {{u|Elliot321}}. As the story develops, however, I would be open to reassessing at some point in the future whether a merge per  is desirable if the subject becomes but a footnote in the larger narrative. Special:Contributions/207.161.86.162|207.161.86.162
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOPAGE)

Comment: or GameStop short squeeze as second choice): it's absolutely . I've done my {{abbr|DD|due diligence}} as I hear the redditors are calling it and there's no coverage I could find of this man prior to the squeeze. ''If'' he testifies at Congress ''and'' is widely quoted and covered in news media then the situation has changed, but |we do not presume that something ''will'' happen even if today it looks likely to
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E||WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: Only meets one condition of , Gill seems likely to maintain his notoriety having stated in the past he wishes to continue posting to YouTube, his appearance in congress, and https://www.theguardian.com/film/2021/feb/01/rival-gamestop-movies-being-rushed-into-production films already being proposed on the GameStop situation. Many already view Gill as a notable value investor
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: to GameStop short squeeze per . We can't know right now whether or not Gill will have sustained coverage in the press () or whether or not he will remain low-profile (). I also disagree with the idea that he sought out media; from every indication, it seems to have happened the other way around
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTALBALL||WP:1E||WP:BLP1E)

Comment: per {{u|Elliot321}}'s clear reasoning on the application of  (3 cumulative conditions, only 1 is met
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)