Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brett king

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:07, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brett king[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested prod. Previously deleted, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brett King (2nd nomination). Nothing has changed from that deletion discussion. GregJackP (talk) 15:02, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:01, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:01, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The previous AfD was in 2008. Some of the references in this article are more recent, including one in The Asian Banker Journal, which reportedly called him one of the top 3 most influential thinkers in banking for 2010. Access to the Asian Banker requires registration, but a seven-day trial registration is free. (If you register on the site, you may want to skim article titles there to see if you can create or expand other articles based on the references in the journal.) Eastmain (talk • contribs) 21:25, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When I went to the Asian Banker site, it requires subscription to view the article, and I cannot verify what it says. In the initial AfD, it was shown that King was the author of the article, violating WP:COI and WP:AB, and appearing to be promotional for the sales of his book which is apparently soon to be released in the U.S. - pretty much the same as when it was posted before, right after his book was published in Australia. The creator of the article claimed that I have a bias - no bias, except a general bias against people using Wikipedia for advertisement and puffery. (GregJackP (talk) 12:11, 15 March 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Comment - the creator of this article has a WP:COI. As the managing editor of the Asian Banker journal, he is moderating a conference break out session where the speaker is Brett King. The creator has denied any connection with either the journal or King - both of which can be proven to be false. This article is the same as before, with the exception of the Asian Journal reference - and they are sponsoring King as a speaker at their conference in just a few days. They have a vested interest in King's article now - he is one of the draws to the conference they are sponsoring. (GregJackP (talk) 13:17, 15 March 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Delete - self-promoting "experts" are not notable. They're rather dirt-common, actually. Rklawton (talk) 14:52, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.