Deletion of Nik Richie

Comment: The nominators reasons are very poor  but I've picked through the most reliable sources (NY Times and BBC News) and while they substantiate the events being referenced in the article, they do ''not'' directly refer to Richie, so fail '''significant''' coverage in reliable sources. There are a handful of local news references that do seem to substantiate the website thedirty.com or its predecessors, but again they don't cover Richie as a person. To be honest, the easiest way to salvage this would be to start a thedirty.com article from scratch using whatever reliable sources pass muster
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:IDONTLIKEIT)

Comment: subject seems to be notable enough for an article, though most of the arguments supporting that position have used poor sources.  calls for multiple, published secondary sources with substantial depth of coverage. The subject has clearly received substantial coverage, but a week after AfD nomination I still don't see anyone making a solid argument for notability. I looked for myself and the article still has poor sources: I see primary sources (e.g. interviews), secondary sources that offer non-substantial coverage (e.g. they are about his wife), a source that is not independent of the subject (i.e. his website), and secondary sources that are unreliable or dubiously reliable (e.g. gossip sites). Those are fine for supporting certain claims, but not for establishing notability. ''However'', I found enough to satisfy my own evaluation of the subject with respect to . I would say the best sources I saw for establishing notability are these: http://www.flurtsite.com/2012/05/dirty-rotten-scoundrels/, http://www.azcentral.com/ent/calendar/articles/2009/01/09/20090109toparizonans-richie.html, http://www.azcentral.com/community/scottsdale/articles/0530sr-dirtyscottsdale0531-ON.html, http://vegasseven.com/news/2010/july/01/nik-richie. They are secondary sources (with the exception of the interview by Vegas Seven, but it does have a couple paragraphs of analysis that could be considered a secondary source), they are independent from the subject and each other, they all have Nik Richie himself as the focus, and at a glance they seem to be reliable to me
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BASIC||WP:BIO)

Comment: One other thing, name calling is unhelpful here, but it's worth noting that this AFD was initiated by user Damon Killian who has been vandalizing many Richie-related pages for a while now; i.e., by removing "notable alumni" reference from Nik Richie's high school page (Mission Viejo High School) and by including false and offensive Non-eutral point of view commentary/advocacy in other Richie-related pages such as Jones v. Dirty World Entertainment Recordings LLC.  This conduct suggests a personal agenda, not a good faith concern
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: as a notable public personality. @nominator, please see 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:IDONTLIKEIT)