Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Dineen-Porter (2nd nomination)
The test of significant coverage doesn't call for a web harvest to find anything at all that mentions a subject. The sources must be |reliable. I see very few sources that would pass the test of reliability (I hardly think Eye Weekly crosses the reliability standard of "reputation for fact-checking and accuracy), and what's left is arguably not significant coverage. This is an important point and is not nit-picking. As a tertiary source, wikipedia essentially delegates its fact-checking and accuracy to secondary sources. We must therefore only use sources that are reliable, especially with BLPs. I don't see them here
— User:Mkativerata, 00:15, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:RS (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)