Deletion of Steve Bartman (2nd nomination)

Comment: Bartman s  as a part of baseball history.  He had an important 15 minutes of fame for which he is encyclopedic
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: The reason the autobiographical stuff shouldn't be merged is because it's of absolutely no consequence to anything. Bartman tried to catch a foul ball. The fact that the media and bitter sports fans keep using his name as a "goat" doesn't make him notable. I can't see how this could be any more clearly a BLP1E issue. Most of my BLP concerns in this article have to do with the biographical information. For example, giving his hometown. All this does is tell people where he lives so they can continue to send him hate mail!  isn't a valid reason to keep this as an article by itself and many of the keeps above don't seem to indicate why this person is notable outside of the One Event. Is the event notable? Sure, I can see that. But Bartman himself is just some guy who was in the wrong place at the wrong time. The fact that he's a little league coach, was a good student, likes to drink lattes in the morning, etc. isn't notable. I could easily see the relevant information about the EVENT being merged to the relevant Cubs article. But Bartman himself is thoroughly non-notable outside of his One Event
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:ILIKEIT)

Comment: he is a clear-cut version of . The incident is notable, though it should be titled "Steve Bartman incident" or included on the Cubs season page for 2003. He as a person though, is not worthy of his own article
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: per Resolute. This definitely falls under . The information about the interference belongs in the target article; the biographical information doesn't belong at all, as Bartman is NN beyond this incident
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)