Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frank E. Bittinger


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 02:38, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Frank E. Bittinger

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

Non-notable autobiography. The article was speedily deleted earlier today, but the subject restarted his article soon after. Google returns a minimal amount of hits (like less than 90). CyberGhostface (talk) 23:24, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:07, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article has enough references from reliable sources. -- Eastmain (talk) 00:36, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. It has two references from suburban newspapers and external links to websites.--Grahame (talk) 01:13, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 06:01, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep. Sufficient coverage from news media (the fact they're "suburban newspapers" is irrelevant as Wikipedia does not make a quantifiable judgement on acceptable printed news media). The article needs to be policed for WP:BLP (such as the claim he's a Scientologist -- needs to be source, along with the claim that he's a best-selling author). But the basic info regarding his profession and notability is covered by the sources (external links lists are mostly irrelevant these days under the current interpretations of Wiki's sourcing policy), though more are desired. 23skidoo (talk) 19:01, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete That he is not notable as an author is shown by his widest-held book being held in a total of 2 WorldCat libraries, and there being no actual reviews to cite. One is the local library, and a book held there is essentially the same as a local newspaper article--the reason that newspaper articles such as these do not demonstrate notability is that they are essentially public relations coverage, indiscriminately given to all local authors. They are simply not reliable as sources for notability for careers such as this. I would need very good evidence that his are among Amazon's best selling books.   DGG (talk) 03:30, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete A quick check at Amazon shows this author to be less than notable and the article appears to be nothing but self-promotion. Eeekster (talk) 05:51, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Eusebeus (talk) 22:59, 10 December 2008 (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.