Deletion of Larry Wayne Sinclair

Comment: Looks like the previous version was salted for good reason. Someone is clearly desperate to get this onto Wikipedia, and that alone is good reason to treat it as highly suspect. Delete as attack page, non-notable, BLP violation, , etc etc etc
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: and move back to Larry Sinclair. IMO, there was insufficient reasoning to justify deleting and salting Larry Sinclair in the first place. BLP concerns? Remove anything potentially defamatory/libelous, and then protect the page if need be. Since when do we delete? The reasoning to salt Sinclair's article could be used on a lot of high profile and/or controversial BLPs. We don't do that. Sinclair passes 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: he seems notable at present but, I have to admit this strikes me more as an "In the News" thing than a bio. Honestly, I don't like it for a number of reasons (including the "work around".  really isn't a reason to keep it or delete it. It is reliably sourced (though more sources are better). I think if people are more likely to search for him -or- he is better known as Larry Sinclair than the article needs to be there and someone needs to ensure NPOV, etc. I note that significant work appears to be going on to sort the BLP concerns though I'm not sure whom precisely it attacks more/less, etc. If it's a one event thing though maybe it would more appropriately be included in a controversies article that covers all the "candidates
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS)

Comment: The previous article was deleted as an attack page. I disagree strongly with the way this page was recreated to bypass page protection, but the new version is not an attack page, and is well-sourced and well-written. As it stands it passes  and it passes . If this degenerates into an attack page by the end of the process the closing admin is asked to strike my vote
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP||WP:V)

Comment: per #NEWS and . The article is a blatant |coatrack
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT||WP:BLP1E||WP:COATRACK)

Comment: significant coverage in / secondary sources
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:V)

Comment: Per , , . I don't see this article as being "useful" (before someone asks why a road in Texas is useful and not this: because this is nearly certainly a fabricated lie, a publicity stunt by a probably random Obama-hater
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:BLP||WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: this was re-created at a different location to bypass protection. We might as well scrap the  policy otherwise
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP)