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 is that the article does not meet the notability guidelines.
Davewild (
talk) 07:18, 15 June 2015 (UTC)reply
A non notable person failing
WP:BIO and
WP:NAUTHOR. Only claim to notability is a large collections of self published works where no independent reliable sources exist to back up the claim.
Winner 42Talk to me! 00:00, 8 June 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete Aurifera SA is a self-publishing house that can get a book on Amazon or other outlets "within days". I'm not finding any independent reviews or coverage of the subject or his books.
EricEnfermero (
Talk) 00:54, 8 June 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete - fails GNG; additionally it appears to be WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY as creator has the same names as one of his books (
Historia Nostra.
—МандичкаYO 😜 10:39, 8 June 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete - This person may, as the article claims, have written 486 books (dang that's a lot!) but I see no evidence that any of those books are widely read or notable. No coverage that would make the author himself notable.
Fyddlestix (
talk) 16:32, 8 June 2015 (UTC)reply
|Note: Look at Amazon.com to see all of the books. Self-publishing is the new way of publishing books. Old publishing companies are going to fade away in the next few decades. He also sold over 650 copies. 15:01, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
Delete No coverage in reliable secondary sources as far as I can tell.
Nwlaw63 (
talk) 19:09, 8 June 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete - Lack of nobility and no coverage in reliable secondary sources. While selling 650 copies is good for a self-publisher, it does not indicate a wide spread interest in the works of the author.
Prsaucer1958 (
talk) 21:29, 8 June 2015 (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.