Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard La Ruina


 * 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. The consensus is that the game is most likely the notable thing here and covering that in an article about the author is outside our normal editing conventions. Spartaz Humbug! 18:02, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Richard La Ruina

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Overall the article has not improved much, reads a lot like an advertisement, one recent television appearance. Article does not meet WP:GNG in my view. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 03:29, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 03:46, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 03:46, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 19:44, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 19:44, 6 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment: found these Las Vegas Weekly - "Book Review: 'The Natural: How to Effortlessly Attract the Women You Want" (short review), The Guardian - "I took a class on how to pick up women. I learned more about male anxiety", Washington Independent Review of Books - "Author Q&A About Love: Richard La Ruina", Forbes - "How to Master the Art of Seducation in Business and Life", that may contribute to notability? Coolabahapple (talk) 20:06, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment: This smacks of discrimination. In just the past days there have been articles in BBC, The  Independent, The Times, The Verge, Vice, Forbes, Polygon, IGN, Gamespot, and hundreds more authority sites.  His new game Super Seducer is significant news.  WP:GNG is easily met. http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-43316676  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.57.172.38 (talk) 05:26, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: The WHOIS data on the above user, as well as the comment made on their only other edit, suggests the above editor is the subject of the article themselves. Macktheknifeau (talk) 13:43, 11 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete: Fails the requirement for "significant coverage". Existence does not equal notability. The sources listed include 100 word mini book reviews, short Q&A blog posts, minor television interviews and a smattering of short articles in mainstream media that concentrate more on his "pick up technique" and lessons than himself personally. Most of the sources already listed throw up 404 not found errors. The two books he's written don't appear to reach any of the criteria for book notability. I don't think his video game would qualify either as there isn't any significant detailed commentary on it. Macktheknifeau (talk) 13:43, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment:"not significant commentary?" Did you use google? Here is a little of the coverage from the past 2 weeks. , , , , , , , , , ,   and from November 2017: , , ,  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.57.172.38 (talk) 09:19, 12 March 2018 (UTC)


 * The Daily Mail is not a valid argument to present here. See WP:DAILYMAIL. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  10:54, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
 * What these references look to show is that Super Seducer may be notable. This article being deleted would not preclude the creation of that one (there is arguably a lower threshold for video game notability, and it looks to me that the game clearly meets that threshold). The sources would not simultaneously merit an article about La Ruina and his game. What we would need is significant coverage of the subject beyond coverage of the game in reliable sources (not blogs, not opinion columns, not generally others in the same business, etc.). That coverage would need to be in depth and over a period of time. &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 23:30, 12 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. Promotional article. The refs are mostly 404 with lots of social media and trivial mentions thrown in. Some recent news coverage about a game, not enough. Szzuk (talk) 15:48, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. Blatantly notable article. Why is the BBC, Guardian, Las Vegas Weekly, The Independent, The Times, The Verge, Vice, Forbes, Polygon, IGN, Gamespot, and half a dozen independent publishers not enough? There is even a interactive video game dedicated to him. There are also multiple sources describing his spat with feminists as well as the controversy with a Japanese conglomerate corporation. 79.67.65.52 (talk) 21:29, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment - the subject mentioned this on Twitter. Will likely be seeing a lot of activity from anonymous/new users. &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 23:27, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - He's a fairly well-known individual with multiple claims to fame, including a recent video game that has received a lot of publicity, a book, an appearance on Piers Morgan's show, etc. His article is just in desperate need of a rewrite. Kurtis (talk) 16:52, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete a promotional article about a "pick-up artist coach". Appearing on one TV interview doesn't meet GNG, and I don't see what else here would. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 05:43, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment:"Newsweek article yesterday with extensive quotes:, just because you don't like what he does for work doesn't mean there isn't notability. "One TV interview", no there are eleven others listed on this page , many of which are on YouTube, one more major Norwegian appearance , and very extensive coverage in Russian language where he has also starred in 2 TV series   .  The article needs to be seriously updated.  If you take it down it's discrimination and laziness.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.57.172.38 (talk) 06:54, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Neutral. Mr La Ruina has been condemned by Sony who have blocked his "super seducer" game from being released on the Playstation as it is offensive and misogynistic, and promotes stalking.  This is the main topic when searching for sources, so it should be the main focus of his article, not a small paragraph at the end. I've got no real issue if the article is deleted, but keeping it and rewriting it to a neutral point of view using proper sources will teach people that an article about yourself is nothing to be proud of. Ritchie333 (talk)  (cont)  10:51, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   12:23, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I am not convinced on the sources, I think this could just meet the WP:GNG guidelines, however much of the sourcing is tabloid-like and unreliable, and I am not going in-depth into every source to figure it out though. Prince of Thieves (talk) 16:12, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete: the minor controversy does not overcome the fact that the subject is non-notable, sources are passing mentions and / or SPIP, such as the "Q&A". The article is mostly promo 'cruft, and WP:NOTSPAM applies. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:12, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep If anything, he's more notable than ever considering the success of Super Seducer. That game is all over the media and Twitch. In fact, I hadn't even heard of him before the game was released and created a lot of buzz and controversy. It would make no sense to delete his page at the height of his popularity. "Clean up" the page if necessary, but deletion would be the wrong move. Aoa8212 (talk) 13:27, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment 86.57.172.38 if there is a WP:COI, as suspected by Macktheknifeau's WHOIS report, then the user should state it. Additionally, I don't see how removing this article would be "discrimination." Not to be too reading into the users motivations, people can establish their notability through controversy but they can also advertise through it as well. We should consider if this all for WP:PROMO. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 07:10, 19 March 2018 (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.