Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bruce R. Booker


 * 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. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  00:55, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Bruce R. Booker

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Autobiography; unreferenced; fails WP:ACADEMIC and WP:BIO; orphan article, apart from links added by this article's author. OttoTheFish (talk) 09:54, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.   —OttoTheFish (talk) 09:56, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.   —David Eppstein (talk) 03:58, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - it's an apparent autobiography. --B (talk) 15:30, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note Being an autobiography is not a reason for deletion. Any COI should be edited out, that's all. --Crusio (talk) 16:44, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, actually, yes it is. WP:DP gives among its reasons, "any other content not suitable for an encyclopedia".  Autobiographies are certainly not suitable. --B (talk) 17:44, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I think you should read WP:AUTO again, it explicitly states that deletion is uncertain and that creating an autobio is discouraged (i.e., not forbidden). I know of several autobios that became acceptable articles on notable persons (not always without other editors battling problems with COI, though... :-) --Crusio (talk) 18:28, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I think you should read WP:AUTO again, it explicitly states that deletion is uncertain and that creating an autobio is discouraged (i.e., not forbidden). I know of several autobios that became acceptable articles on notable persons (not always without other editors battling problems with COI, though... :-) --Crusio (talk) 18:28, 4 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. And while being an autobiography by itself is hardly grounds for deletion, I have to wonder how notable a subject is when the subject himself is writing the article.--CyberGhostface (talk) 18:15, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. I have cleaned up the article a bit and checked the external links. I also did Google and Google Scholar searches. For the moment, I have found nothing that supports notability. --Crusio (talk) 18:29, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep as a prominent writer and teacher in his specialized field.DGG (talk) 21:50, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Could not find enough to establish notability under WP:PROF. Does not seem to pass WP:BIO either. His most widely held book, The lie, is listed by WorldCat as being in 2 (two) libraries worldwide.--Eric Yurken (talk) 02:02, 7 January 2009 (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.