Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kent Glowinski (2nd nomination)
We created this page on the subject years back when circumstances would have rendered him notable within meaning of ; however, those circumstances changed and subject remains relatively unknown PF. Keep in mind "profile" is dynamic . As for above comments about civil lawsuits: if Wikipedia is to retain articles on relatively unknown subjects solely because unproven allegations in civil lawsuits appear in the media through malice/pure interest or otherwise, almost anyone in a litigation (divorces, property disputes, etc.), which often become heated, would become notable and deserving of a page. Wikipedia is not here to parrot out relatively tenuous and unlinked data appearing in media here and there and pertaining to unknown individuals. If the criteria for being notable is (1) civic involvement at any point in life and (2) being involved in one or more legal disputes at any point in life, then 90% of the population is famous. There also seems to be a zeal to keep articles solely in spite of someone who wants them removed
— User:Tinytory, 13:56, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:N||WP:NPF||WP:LOWPROFILE (Wikipedia:Notability)