Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Vitale

:{{la|Paul Vitale}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Paul Vitale}})

Delete as advert. Works are self-published and not reliable sources. Editor is sockpuppet. See COI thread and sockpuppet investigation ⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 18:09, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. This is indeed a case of WP:COI self-promotion. That in itself does not automatically prove the article subject is not notable. But he isn't. He's described as an "author", but all his books are published by own company, so that's out. What's left is his career as a motivational speaker. In this career, he appears to be reasonably successful but no more notable than millions of other persons are in their careers as accountants, executives, lawyers, or what have you. His profession is such that self-promotion is almost obligatory, and so he has a few writeups, and so passes WP:GNG I guess. But WP:GNG says that "Editors may reach a consensus that although a topic meets this criterion, it is not appropriate for a stand-alone article", and that would apply to Mr Vitale. Herostratus (talk) 19:37, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:36, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
• Delete. Fails as WP:AUTHOR and his manuscripts all fail WP:BK. All of the books are self-published through his own company. Also serious WP:AUTO and WP:COI and WP:SPA issues here. Qworty (talk) 05:17, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

: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.