Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard J. Novic, M.D.

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. Punkmorten (talk) 08:07, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Richard J. Novic, M.D.[edit]

Psychiatrist/author/blogger. One vanity-published book, which was nominated (but did not win) award. Very likely autobio, judging from creator's other contribs. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 15:32, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Possible autobio or not, he (she? sorry, couldn't resist) seems to fail notability guidelines in general; only book is vanity publishing. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 17:51, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a non-notable person failing WP:BIO. Of course, the self-promotional angle helps things not at all. Bfigura ^(talk) 22:35, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete. These vanity-press authors pay for publication then they come here and write vanity articles about their vanity books. I'm sick of it. No notability whatsoever, nothing but WP:SPAM. Get rid of it. Qworty (talk) 20:31, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Spam comment. He/she also went all around WP posting spam to the vanity-press book and now I'm going to have spend the next hour cleaning it up. God I hate the people who spam us! Example: [1]
- Comment Shouldn't you "assume good faith" and wait to see how the AfDs close? Links to a notable author or book may be relevant to the articles. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 21:04, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - With all due respect, I sadly don't know if there's ever "good faith" behind WP:SPAM. Qworty (talk) 21:26, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 23:32, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment it cartainly comes up a lot on google when serched for and not just from spam but genuine reviews some of them... Wikipedia:Search_engine_test might explain why a transgender book does not get the massive notable hits you would expect from book about computers???Flutterdance (talk) 16:35, 14 April 2008 (UTC) QWORDTY you make me want to weep for your poor soul having to do all that tidying up Flutterdance (talk) 16:36, 14 April 2008 (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.