Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seth Andrews
The nominator's statement that "Refs are from the subject's own book and website, routine coverage in college newspapers, and trivial mentions in state/national newspapers" neglects a number of references in national and international atheist / skeptical publications.   is a better match than  for this subject. In that case the article is close to meeting its burden of showing that he "is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers", and since it is such a new article I propose the best way is to allow some time to research further sources to close any small gap remaining, rather than deleting it prematurely, per Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Failure_to_explain_the_subject.27s_notability
— User:Gronk, 05:45, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:AUTHOR||WP:ENTERTAINER (Wikipedia:Notability)