Deletion of Doug Batchelor

Comment: Please, I kindly request that we cordially continue to assume good faith, please? I would like to humbly request that everyone remove their comments that are off topic or directed at specific members, please? Let's make sure the WP admins know how much we care about Wikipedia and how much we value it as a resource, especially about topics we find important. This is not a war, it's not an argument, there are no winners or losers, just readers that are interested in topics, like Doug Batchelor, because they like (or dislike) him. Let's rally together to help WP make a better encyclopedia. I'm still holding my keep decision, and I've added more  that were previously undiscovered by all delete voters. I'd like to avoid any arguments, especially about tricky religious things on Batchelor's page
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: notability has not been established. The pastor is idolised and adored by his followers, but ignored by the mainstream media. The article has 10 refs, the first one in the ''Washington Post'' is a press release (carries the note "''Copyright: For copyright information, please check with the distributor of this item, Religion News Service LLC."'') and mentions Batchelor only in passing (one sentence, D. B. said...), he two NYT souces are obits of his parents and the other 7 refs are connected to the subject, or by the subject. The 122 refs cited here on the AfD pages are an array of unreliable sources, statements by people connected to the subject, trivial mentions, and ref-junk like links to Wikipedia articles and guideline pages. A clear case of  ombardment and LUDGEON. Better get rid of it
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Bots (WP:B||WP:BLUDGEON)