Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Armand Morin

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. Consensus sonce the recent relist has only become clearer. Kevin (talk) 23:32, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Armand Morin[edit]

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

Article, along with article List of internet marketing gurus created by WP:SPA to promote Morin as an "internet guru". No neutral third party sources establishing notability. Drdisque (talk) 22:28, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Promotional. Keep pending rewrite with third party sources, per Phil Bridger's excellent point below. 99.149.84.135 (talk) 22:31, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this person. Joe Chill (talk) 23:01, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, no notability can be established from reliable sources. --Kinu ^t/_c 23:55, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, while the article creator is not a WP:SPA, there is no indication of notability. noq (talk) 00:46, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, not notable Alan - talk 05:10, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep pending improvment Andrewjlockley (talk) 09:22, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm still building it, please don't rush to delete. More material will be going up in a few days. Andrewjlockley (talk) 09:22, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Moved to correct position. Tim Song (talk) 09:47, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Did any of the delete !voters look at the Google Books search results helpfully linked at the top of this discussion, which include sources such as [1][2][3][4][5][6] amongst the first 40 or so hits? Let's not let personal distaste for the field in which the subject operates get in the way of judgements of notability. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:05, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone please add to the discussion page ideas about how to best introduce such sources into the article? Andrewjlockley (talk) 09:41, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would be willing to alter my recommendation if someone can be more explicit in indicating how the subject is mentioned in these books... it is hard to tell whether these are merely cursory mentions of who he is, interviews with him, etc., versus substantial content about his actual notability as an internet marketer. --Kinu ^t/_c 16:16, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All you have to do is follow the links that I provided above to see how the subject is mentioned in these books. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:20, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have looked at the links, of course, but I am still unsure. Some appear to be cursory mentions in that he is an example of the field as a whole (without qualifying his "greatness" explicitly), how others have approached marketing in ways similar to him and others in the field, and some appear to be interviews. None of these seem to actually be secondary sources about him or his marketing methods, per se, so I am still somewhat skeptical. Granted, the problem may be that Google Books isn't letting me see the entirety of the text which talks about him, so I'm going by what I can see in the books' previews. --Kinu ^t/_c 19:05, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:18, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting comment: I've relisted this debate to generate more discussion about the depth of coverage in the sources provided by Phil Bridger (talk · contribs). Cunard (talk) 00:18, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Vanity page. Sourced mostly to personal website equals non-notable. Phil Bridger's sources either 404 (for me) or inconsequential. Newt ^(winkle) 07:21, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I recognize that this man may be a successful entrepreneur and has talked about his experiences, but all in all he still fails WP:BIO in every criteria. None of these books are even truly written about him other than reference in a long list of names. Mkdw ^talk 22:47, 22 November 2009 (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.