Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stuart Wilde (2nd nomination)

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. --jonny-m t 04:11, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stuart Wilde

promotion, copyright violation, lack of valid sources, just a mess in general Rmhermen (talk) 00:20, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as the majority of the article is a WP:COPYVIO taken from subjects publications. Also as nom said, there is a WP:NOTABLE issue. Nk.sheridan Talk 00:50, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I have no opinion on notability of the subject at the moment but I have removed the apparent copyvio material from the article. Nsk92 (talk) 01:12, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I added some references, and found some other mentions of his works at http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=%22Stuart+Wilde%22+author Note that there are other people by this name, including a bus company executive. --Eastmain (talk) 03:23, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: no assertion of notability. Alexius08 is welcome to talk about his contributions. 10:07, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There is no question that the article needs considerable improvement and clean-up, but the subject is certainly notable. GoogleBooks alone gives 342 hits for hist name[1]. Not all are realted to him but a pretty substantial portion are. He is described there as "Stuart Wilde, known as a 'teacher of financial assertiveness and practical mysticism'"[2], "New Age guru Stuart Wilde"[3], "New Age spokesman Stuart Wilde"[4], "Stuart Wilde, a prolific and charismatic author and metaphysical teacher"[5], etc, many more examples of nontrivial coverage. There is a reasonable amount of newscoverage as well, [6]. Passes WP:BIO as a notable author and a New Age personality. Nsk92 (talk) 13:07, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Changed from "Very Weak Keep, Protected Cleanup." This is where the "Occasional Common Sense Exception" clauses come in. It doesn't look like there's really anything to write about this guy other than that he is a new age author who is widely cited by other new age authors. On the surface, Nsk92 seems to be right in that Wilde "is widely cited by [his] peers," though the references cited are dubious. The main problem is that nobody has taken any interest in genuinely improving the article since the last AfD, 3 years ago, because significant coverage of the author is virtually nonexistent (and, no, Eastmain, the local best seller list for Olympia, Washington is, IMHO, not significant). J293339 (talk) 21:40, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Unless, of course, some one can come up with coverage of this guy by some real newspapers or magazinesElan26 (talk) 00:03, 22 May 2008 (UTC)Elan26[reply]

Delete A "local best seller in Olympia Washington" is destructive to any claim of notability. If that's the best that can be said, there is no actual importance. DGG (talk) 02:00, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 21:22, 22 May 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.