Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike Subritzky


 * 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.  Singu larity  07:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Mike Subritzky

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

Autobiography. Subject is possibly notable but it isn't clear from the article and I haven't found any reliable sources. All the top google hits are to sites in which the subject is involved. Note that mr Subritzky has removed Autobiography and COI templates placed on the page. dramatic (talk) 11:49, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions.  dramatic (talk) 11:53, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.   —dramatic (talk) 11:56, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - nearly all the books are published by 'Three Feathers', for which I have been able to find any reference - not even in the yellow pages - so I'd say these are actually self-published. Considering that writers who have been published by real publishers are not necessarily notable, Subritzky definitely isn't. --Helenalex (talk) 12:15, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Per nom. I'm weary of people making vanity articles about themselves on Wikipedia. Thanks for telling us that he removed the COI/AUTO tags, I'll place them back and give him a a warning.--CyberGhostface (talk) 14:10, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom as a vanity page. Vanity begone!   coccyx bloccyx  (toccyx)  16:42, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Vanity/COI deletions similar to this one are consistently overturned at DRV. Google books shows more then self-published work, regular google and googlenews supports. Plenty of book reviews here, and Three Feathers is not a self publishing service. I imagine more book reviews could be found via lexis-nexis and JSTOR, but I do not have access any more. MrPrada (talk) 16:57, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Most of the publications are in very small runs. They may not be self-published, but I'm not convinced that they're commercially published either. Two of the references given are not convincing - one to blogspot, one to geocities. The third ref, to the "International War Veterans Poetry Archives" I'm not sure about. The "Pangolin Times", which is quoted in the article and in the third, has absolutely no web presence other than for copies of this quote.- gadfium 21:02, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete if reliable and third-party sources can't be found. This editor has a history of using Wikipedia for self-promotion and a couple of years ago was adding huge blocks of unsuitable text to the Military history of New Zealand article with his works and personal records as the only source. Nick Dowling (talk) 00:25, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per vanity. Buckshot06(prof) 00:58, 24 May 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.