Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rich Christiansen

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. Davewild (talk) 07:49, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rich Christiansen

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

Delete. Non notable person. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 02:43, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. His previous book wasn't notable and despite his next book being published through a more reputable publisher, there is no way of knowing if that book will make him notable. (See WP:CRYSTAL) I think that the article's creator (whomever he may be IRL) jumped the gun because at this time the author is not notable. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 06:05, 20 October 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:16, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:17, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - neither assertion nor evidence of notability. (There's a long history of what are clearly COI and may be autobiographical edits by an s.p.a. attempting to publicize this person and his book; but that in and of itself is not an argument for deletion.) --Orange Mike | Talk 15:00, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - There doesn't seem to be enough sources that show this person is notable. Inter rest (talk) 20:28, 26 October 2011 (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.